• Calculation of Radius of Influence and Evaluation of Applicability of Air Sparging/Soil Vapor Extraction system for the Remediation of Petroleum Contaminated Rail Site
  • Cho, Chang-Hwan;Park, Joung-Ku;Kim, Yong-Deok;Seo, Chang-Il;Jin, Hai-Jin;Choi, Sang-Il;
  • Department of Soil and Groundwater, Korea Environ. Corp.;Department of Soil and Groundwater, Korea Environ. Corp.;Department of Soil and Groundwater, Korea Environ. Corp.;Department of Soil and Groundwater, Korea Environ. Corp.;Department of Environmental Engineering, Kwangwoon University;Department of Environmental Engineering, Kwangwoon University;
  • 유류로 오염된 철로지역의 지중정화를 위한 영향반경 산정과 공기주입법/토양증기추출법의 적용성 평가
  • 조장환;박정구;김용덕;서창일;김해금;최상일;
  • 한국환경공단 토양지하수처;한국환경공단 토양지하수처;한국환경공단 토양지하수처;한국환경공단 토양지하수처;광운대학교 환경공학과;광운대학교 환경공학과;
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to calculate the radius of influence (ROI) of well for an air-sparging (AS)/soil vapor extraction (SVE) system and to evaluate the applicability of the system applied for the remediation of the petroleum contaminated rail site. For air permeability test, three monitoring wells were installed at a location of 1.3 m, 2.3 m, 3.0 m from the extraction well. And the pressure of each monitoring well was measured by extracting air from the extraction well with the pressure and flow of $(-)2,600mmH_2O$ and $1.58m^3/min$. The ROI for an extraction well was calculated as 4.31 m. Air was injected into the injection well with the pressure and flow of $3,500mmH_2O$ and $0.6m^3/min$ to estimate the radius of influence for oxygen transfer. Oxygen concentrations of air from three monitoring wells were measured. The ROI of an injection well for oxygen transfer was calculated as 3.46 m. The 28 extraction wells and 19 injection wells were installed according to the ROI calculated. The AS/SVE system was operated eight hours a day for five months. The rail site was contaminated with the petroleum and concentrations of benzene, toluene, and xylene were over the 'Worrisome Standard' of the 'Soil Environment Conservation Act'. The contaminated area was estimated as $732m^2$ and contaminants were dispersed up to (-)3 m from the ground. During the operation period, soil samples were collected from 5 points and analyzed periodically. With the AS/SVE system operation, concentrations of benzene, toluene, and xylene were decreased from 7.5 mg/kg to 2.0 mg/kg, from 32.0 mg/kg to 23.0 mg/kg, from 35.5 mg/kg to 23.0 mg/kg, respectively. The combined AS/SVE system applied to the rail site contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) exhibited a high applicability. But the concentration of contaminants in soil were fluctuated due to the heterogeneous of soil condition. Also the effect of the remediation mechanisms was not clearly identified.

Keywords: Radius of influence;Air-sparging;Soil vapor extraction;Rail site;Volatile organic compounds;

References
  • 1. Amin, M.M., Hatamipour, M.S., Momenbeik, F., Nourmoradi, H., Farhadkhani, M., and Mohammadi-Moghadam, F., 2014, Toluene removal from sandy soils via in situ technologies with an emphasis on factors influencing soil vapor extraction, ScientificWorld Journal, 23, 416752.
  •  
  • 2. Benner, M.L., Mohtar, R.H., and Lee, L.S., 2002, Factors affecting air sparging remediation systems using field data and numerical simulations, J. Hazard. Mater., 95(3), 305-329.
  •  
  • 3. Chai, J.C. and Miura, N., 2004, Field vapor extraction test and long-term monitoring at a PCE contaminated site, J. Hazard. Mater., 110(1-3), 85-92.
  •  
  • 4. Chu, Y., Werth, C.J., Valocchi, A.J., and Yoon, H.K., 2004, Andrew G. Webb, Magnetic resonance imaging of nonaqueous phase liquid during soil vapor extraction in heterogeneous porous media, J. Contam. Hydrol., 73(1-4), 15-37.
  •  
  • 5. EPA, 2004, How to Evaluate Alternative Cleanup Technologies for Underground Storage Tank Sites; A Guide for Corrective Action Plan Reviewers, EPA/510-R-04-002.
  •  
  • 6. Fan, W., Yang, Y.S., Lu, Y., Du, X.Q. and Zhang, G.X., 2013, Hydrogeo-chemical impacts of air sparging remediation on a semi-confined aquifer: Evidences from field monitoring and modeling, Chemosphere, 90(4) 1419-1426.
  •  
  • 7. Johnston, C.D., Rayner, J.L. and Briegel, D., 2002, Effectiveness of in situ air sparging for removing NAPL gasoline from a sandy aquifer near Perth, Western Australia, J. Contam. Hydrol., 59(1-2), 87-111.
  •  
  • 8. Kaleris, V. and Croisé, J., 1997, Estimation of cleanup time for continuous and pulsed soil vapor extraction, Journal of Hydrology, 194(1-4), 330-356.
  •  
  • 9. Kirtland, B.C. and C. Aelion M., 2000, Petroleum mass removal from low permeability sediment using air sparging/soil vapor extraction: impact of continuous or pulsed operation, J. Contam. Hydrol., 41(3-4), 367-383.
  •  
  • 10. McCray, J.E. and Falta, R.W., 1996, Defining the air sparging radius of influence for groundwater remediation, J. Contam. Hydrol., 24(1), 25-52.
  •  
  • 11. Nobre Manoel, M.M. and Nobre Rosane, C.M., 2004, Soil vapor extraction of chlorinated solvents at an industrial site in Brazil, J. Hazard. Mater., 110(1-3), 119-127.
  •  
  • 12. Tsai, Y.J., 2007, Air flow paths and porosity/permeability change in a saturated zone during in situ air sparging, J. Hazard. Mater., 142(1-2), 315-323.
  •  
  • 13. US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering and design; Soil vapor extraction and bioventing, EM 1001-1-4001, June 2002.
  •  

This Article

  • 2015; 20(1): 1-6

    Published on Feb 28, 2015

  • 10.7857/JSGE.2015.20.1.001
  • Received on Oct 31, 2014
  • Revised on Feb 25, 2015
  • Accepted on Feb 25, 2015