• Pilot Scale Feasibility Test of In-situ Soil Flushing by using 'Tween 80' Solution at Low Concentration for the Xylene Contaminated Site
  • Um, Jae-Yeon;Lee, Gyusang;Song, Sung-Ho;Hong, Sunwook;Lee, Minhee;
  • Rural Research Institute, Korea Rural Community Corporation;Rural Research Institute, Korea Rural Community Corporation;Rural Research Institute, Korea Rural Community Corporation;Office of Environmental Geology, Korea Rural Community Corporation;Dept. of Earth Environmental Sciences, Pukyong National University;
Abstract
This study was performed to identify the optimal operating conditions and to evaluate the xylene removal efficiency, applying in-situ soil flushing with the low concentrated solution of 'Tween 80' at the xylene contaminated site. The pilot scale test site ($5m{\times}5m{\times}3m$), was mainly composed of 'sandy loam', with the average hydraulic conductivity of $9.1{\times}10^{-4}cm\;s^{-1}$. The average xylene concentration of the site was 42.1 mg $kg^{-1}$, which was more than 2.5 times higher than Korea soil pollution warning limit (15 mg $kg^{-1}$). For the soil flushing, 7,800 L of 0.1~0.2% surfactant solution was injected into three injection wells at the average injection time of 9 hr $d^{-1}$ for 10 days, followed by the additional only groundwater injection of 6,000 L. The same amount of the effluent solution was extracted from three extraction wells. From the analysis for xylene concentration of all effluent at 3 extraction wells, total 166 g of xylene was removed by in-situ surfactant flushing. Even though the residual xylene concentrations of 7 soil sampling locations in the test site were different due to the soil heterogeneity, from the comparison of xylene concentration at 7 locations before/after the feasibility test, 53.9% of the initial xylene in the site was removed from three extraction wells (mainly Ext-N and Ext-M well). The results showed that the in-situ soil flushing by using low concentrated 'Tween 80' solution had a great potential to remediate the xylene contaminated site.

Keywords: NAPL;Surfactant flushing;Tween 80;In-situ soil flushing;Xylene;Soil remediation;

References
  • 1. Ahn, C.K., Kim, Y.M., Woo, S.H., and Park, J.M., 2006, A study on selective adsorption of phenanthrene dissolved in Triton X-100 solution activated carbons, J. KoSSGE, 11(2), 13-21.
  •  
  • 2. Anderson, W.C., 1993, Innovative site remediation technology: Soil Washing/Soil Flushing, Vol. 3, American Academy of Environmental Engineers, p. 1-57.
  •  
  • 3. Cline, P.V., Delfino, J.J., and Rao, P.S.C., 1991, Partitioning of aromatic constituents into water from gasoline and other complex solvent mixtures, Environ. Sci. Technol., 25(5), 914-920.
  •  
  • 4. Clint, J.H., 1992, Surfactant aggregation. Blackie, Chaman Hall, New York, p. 116-126.
  •  
  • 5. Edwards, D.A., Liu, Z., and Luthy, R.G., 1991, Solubilization of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in micellar nonionic surfactant solutions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 25(1), 127-133.
  •  
  • 6. EPA., 1997, Technology Overview Report: In Situ Flushing. United States Environmental Protection Agency. TO-97-02.
  •  
  • 7. Eve, R.A., 1998, Remediation of petroleum contaminated soils. Lewis Publishers.
  •  
  • 8. Heo, J.H. and Jeong, S.H., 2011, Simulation removal of heavy metals and diesel-fuel from a soil column by surfactant foam flushing, J, KoSSGE, 16(5), 90-96
  •  
  • 9. Khalladi, R., Bentahar, F., and Moulai, M.N., 2009, Surfactant remediation of diesel fuel polluted soil, J. Hazard. Mater., 164, 1179-1184.
  •  
  • 10. Khan, F.I., Husain, T., and Hejazi, R., 2004, An overview and analysis of site remediation technologies, J. Environ. Manage., 71, 95-122.
  •  
  • 11. KIGAM., 2012, Geological map of Siheung-city.
  •  
  • 12. Kim, D.H., 2010, Flushing of petroleum-contaminated soil using mixed surfactants, Master's thesis, Kyungsung university.
  •  
  • 13. Kim, J.S. and Lee, K.S., 1999, Effects of hydrophobic chain structure of nonionic surfactants on surfactant adsorption and diesel removal from kaolin soil, J. KoSES., 4, 17-24.
  •  
  • 14. Knox, R.C., Shau, B.J., Sabatini, D.A., and Harwell, J.H., 1999, field demonstration of surfactant-enhanced sulubilization and mobilization at Hill air force Base, TU. In: Brusseau, M.L., Sabatini, D.A., Gierke, J.S. and Annable, M.D. (Eds), Innovative Subsurface Remediation: Field Testing of Physical, Chemical, and Characterization Technologies, ACS Symposium Series 725, 49-63.
  •  
  • 15. Korea Rural Community Corporation, 2005, LPP (land partnership plan) by base scrutiny survey report.
  •  
  • 16. Korea Rural Community Corporation, 2007, Bucheon-Siheung region groundwater basic survey report. No.3, p. 6-8.
  •  
  • 17. Korea Rural Community Corporation, 2010, OOO Oil military camp soil.groundwater scrutiny report. p. 2-5.
  •  
  • 18. Korea Rural Community Corporation, 2011, A study on the soil and groundwater remediation technique using surfactant foam technology (final), p. 3.
  •  
  • 19. Korean Society of Soil and Groundwater Environment (KOSSGE), 2001, Soil Environmental Engineering, Hangmunsa, Seoul, 394 p.
  •  
  • 20. Korean Society of Soil and Groundwater Environment (KOSSGE), 2006, Soil-Groundwater Environmental Dictionary, Hanrimwon, Seoul, 474 p.
  •  
  • 21. Lee, D.H., Chang, H.W., and Cody, R.D., 2004, Synergism effect of mixed surfactant solutions in remediation of soil contaminated with PCE, Geosci. J., 8(3), 319-323.
  •  
  • 22. Lee, G.S., Kim, Y.B., Jang, J.S., Um, J.Y., Song, S.H., and Kim, E.Y., 2012, A field study of surfactant enhanced in-situ remediation using injection wells and recovery trench at a jet oil contaminated site, J. KoSSGE, 17(1), 13-21.
  •  
  • 23. Lee, M., Kang, H., and Do, W., 2005, Application of nonionic surfactant-enhanced in situ flushing to a diesel contaminated site, Water. Res., 39, 139-146.
  •  
  • 24. Lee, M., Kim, J., and Kim, I., 2011, In-situ biosurfactant flushing, coupled with a highly pressurized air injection, to remediate the bunker oil contaminated site, Geosci. J., 15(3), 313-321.
  •  
  • 25. Lee, M., Chung, S.Y., Kang, D.H., Choi, S.I., and Kim, M.C., 2002, Surfactant enhanced in-situ soil flushing pilot test for the soil and groundwater remediation in an oil contaminated site, J. KoSSGE, 7(4), 77-86.
  •  
  • 26. Lowe, D.F., Oubre, C.L., and Ward C.H., 1999, Surfactant and cosolvents for NAPL remediation, Lewis Publishers, New York, p. 403.
  •  
  • 27. Mackay, D.M. and Cherry, J.A., 1989, Groundwater contamination: Pump and treat remediation, Environ. Sci. Technol.,, 23, 630-636.
  •  
  • 28. Paria, S., 2008, Surfactant-enhanced remediation of organic contaminated soil and water, Adv. Colloid and Interface Sci., 138, 24-58.
  •  
  • 29. Roberts, P.V., 1998, Remediation of petroleum contaminated soils Lewis Publishers, Florida, p. 542.
  •  
  • 30. Rosen, M.J., 1989, Surfactant and interfacial phenomena, John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 170-202.
  •  
  • 31. Santanu, P., 2008, surfactant-enhanced remediation of organic contaminated soil and water, Adv. Colloid Interface Sci., 138, 24-58.
  •  
  • 32. Yang, S.K., Shin, S.Y., and Kim, H.K., 2010, Removal of nonvolatile contaminant from aquifer using surfactant-enhanced ozone sparging, J. KoSSGE, 15(6), 37-45.
  •  
  • 33. Zhao, B., Zhu, L., Li, W., and Chen, B., 2005, Solubilization and biodegradation of phenanthrene in mixed anionic-nonionic surfactant solutions, Chemosphere, 58, 33-40.
  •  

This Article

  • 2013; 18(6): 38-47

    Published on Nov 30, 2013

  • 10.7857/JSGE.2013.18.6.038
  • Received on Sep 23, 2013
  • Revised on Nov 19, 2013
  • Accepted on Nov 19, 2013