• Comparison of Land Farming and Chemical Oxidation based on Environmental Footprint Analysis
  • Kim, Yun-Soo;Lim, Hyung-Suk;Park, Jae-Woo;
  • Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hanyang University;Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hanyang University;Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hanyang University;
  • 환경적 footprint 분석을 통한 토양경작법과 화학적산화법의 비교
  • 김윤수;임형석;박재우;
  • 한양대학교 건설환경공학과;한양대학교 건설환경공학과;한양대학교 건설환경공학과;
Abstract
In this study, land farming and chemical oxidation of a diesel-contaminated site is compared to evaluate the environmental impact during soil remediation using the Spreadsheet for Environmental Footprint Analysis by U.S. EPA. Each remediation process is divided into four phases, consisting of soil excavation, backfill and transportation (Phase 0), construction of remediation facility (Phase 1), remediation operation (Phase 2), and restoration of site and waste disposal (Phase 3). Environmental footprints, such as material use, energy consumption, air emission, water use and waste generation, are analyzed to find the way to minimize the environmental impact. In material use and waste generation, land farming has more environmental effect than chemical oxidation due to the concrete and backfill material used to construct land farming facility in Phase 1. Also, in energy use, land farming use about six times more energy than chemical oxidation because of cement production and fuel use of heavy machinery, such as backhoe and truck. However, carbon dioxide, commonly considered as important factor of environmental impact due to global warming effect, is emitted more in chemical oxidation because of hydrogen peroxide production. Water use of chemical oxidation is also 2.1 times higher than land farming.

Keywords: Green remediation;Footprint analysis;Life cycle assessment;Land farming;Chemical oxidation;

This Article

  • 2015; 20(3): 7-14

    Published on Jun 30, 2015

  • 10.7857/JSGE.2015.20.3.007
  • Received on Aug 1, 2014
  • Revised on Dec 5, 2014
  • Accepted on Dec 6, 2014

Correspondence to

  • E-mail: