Full-Scale Permanganate Remediation of a Solvent DNAPL Source Zone in a Sand Aquifer

Transcription

1 Full-Scale Permanganate Remediation of a Solvent DNAPL Source Zone in a Sand Aquifer Beth L. Parker, Ph.D. University of Waterloo 1 Presented at the EPA Seminar: In Situ Treatment of Groundwater Contaminated With Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids Chicago December 11,

2 Collaborators Tom Al, University of New Brunswick Inorganic Geochemistry Ramon Aravena, University of Waterloo Isotope Geochemistry John Cherry, University of Waterloo 2 2

3 This Case Study Will Show: Density driven distribution of KMnO 4 in sand Performance assessment with minimal uncertainty Nearly complete destruction of TCE and 1,1,1-TCA 3 3

4 Two General Approaches for In Situ Oxidation Inject-and-withdraw (active) Flushing Inject-and-leave (passive) Episodic Injection 4 4

5 The Active Approach Addition of Treatment Chemicals Injection Withdrawal 5 B.L.Parker 5

6 The Waterloo Passive Approach Use density and dispersion effects to distribute permanganate solution Inject in a manner that minimizes groundwater displacement 6 6

7 The Waterloo Passive Approach Relies on density and dispersion effects KMnO ( high density ) Sand aquifer 7 B.L.Parker,

8 Evolution of a Single Disc in a Sand Aquifer no lateral groundwater flow 1 Concentration and Density Decrease 2 time B.L. Parker,

9 Initial Proof - of - Concept Inject-and-Leave Field Trial in Borden Aquifer Matthew Nelson M.Sc. Thesis (1999) Supervisors: Drs. Beth Parker and John Cherry University of Waterloo 9 9

10 Borden 9x9 m Sheet Pile Enclosure 10 10

11 System Set-up at 9m Cell Borden Site 11 11

12 Density of Dissolved KMnO 4 in Water 1.05 relative density Typical Range Used sea water 10 o C solubility 20 o C grams per liter KMnO 4 12

13 SETTING 0 ft 1 ft sand ft clay 13

14 Evidence for Density Induced Flow KMnO 4 (g/l) ML-1 First Injection Depth (m.b.g.s.) Day 65 Day 1 Day 3 Day 8 Day (Nelson, 1999) 14

15 The Waterloo Passive Approach Use density and dispersion effects to distribute permanganate solution Inject in a manner that minimizes groundwater displacement 15 15

16 Long-Screen Injection Causes Large Displacement of Contaminated Water KMnO 4 dispersion zone contaminated water displaced by injected fluid KMnO 4 16 Parker,

17 Injection of Discs Leaving Gaps Minimizes Displacement of Contaminated Water 1 2 KMnO 4 zone treated by density flow zone treated by density flow displaced contaminated water gap gap 3 17 Parker,

18 Injection of Multiple Discs Using Direct Push Device Stage 1 KMnO 4 Sand aquifer Initial disc 18 Parker,

19 Injection of Multiple Discs Using Direct Push Device Stage 2 KMnO 4 Injection 1 Injection 2 19 Parker,

20 Stage 1: Inject Disc Above DNAPL on Aquitard Stage 1 KMnO 4 sand aquifer Initial disc DNAPL 20 aquitard Parker,

21 Disc Sinks and Spreads Injector withdrawn Time 2 1 DNAPL 3 aquitard 21 Parker,

22 Case Study in Florida TCE and TCA source zone Site 22 22

23 Ft. Lauderdale Site 23 Picture

24 24 Contamination Occurred Recently late 1996 to early 1997 TCA used: Switch from TCA to TCE: Nov April 1997 Conventional monitoring wells installed: 1997 Fenton s treatment pilot study: UW bundle multi-levels installed: 1999 Fenton s performance assessment Permanganate selected as source removal action for permanent remedy 24

25 Water table Site Geology Fine and medium grained beach sand with no visible layering 25 Increased frequency of gravel size carbonate rock fragments inch coarse sand layer 57 ft bgs Carbonate bedrock 85 ft bgs 25

26 Monitoring Methods Focus on depth-discrete methods Continuous Cores Bundle tube samplers Waterloo Profiler Conventional Monitoring Wells Micro-monitoring Wells 26 26

27 Core Being Removed from Piston Core Barrel Aluminum core tube inside core barrel 27 27

28 Cutting the Aluminum Core Tube 28 28

29 Subsampling Sand for VOC Analysis 29 29

30 Installation of Bundle Tube Sampler:

31 Bundle Tube Sampler STEEL WELL COVER w/concrete PAD CONCRETE PAD 1/4 OD TEFLON TUBING IN 1/2 OD POLYETHYLENE TUBING 2-4 NITEX SCREENS 1/2 OD POLYETHYLENE or 1/4 OD TEFLON TUBING SET IN NATURAL FORMATION NO SAND PACK ¾ ID SCH 40 PVC PIPE CENTER STOCK NITEX SCREEN OVER PIPE PERFORATIONS 31

32 TCE Concentration Profile CW-L 0 Depth (ft) Before Injection (February 2000) 625,500 µg/l TCE Concentration (µg/l) 32

33 TCE Concentration Profile CW-K 0 Depth (ft) Before Injection (February 2000) 21,574 ug/l TCE Concentration (µg/l)

34 Conceptual Model of DNAPL Distribution Suspected Release Area Building 10 DNAPL Residual Trail 20 Depth (Feet) DNAPL Zone? DNAPL Plume? 60? 70 34??? 34

35 Before Remediation Building CW-L TCE Source Zone >10,000 µg/l 100 TCE Plume > 100 µg/l Monitoring well Multilevel system GeoProbe sampling N 0 10 ft 35

36 The Waterloo Passive Approach for Permanganate 1. Pre-injection delineation 2. Permanganate injection in targeted zones 3. Monitor results and design subsequent injection 4. Repeat steps until attain desired endpoint 36 36

37 Full-Scale Permanganate Remediation in Ft. Lauderdale, FL 37 37

38 KMnO 4 Mixing Tank 38 38

39 39 39

40 Stage 1: KMnO 4 Injection at Several Depths Direct Push Drill Rig KMnO 4 Feed Tank Scaffolding Pressure Tank #1 Pressure Tank #2 NO 2 Tank Asphalt Ground Surface Drill Rods Sand Aquifer 40 Parker,

41 Stage 2: Spreading and Sinking by Density Direct Push Drill Rig KMnO 4 Feed Tank Scaffolding Pressure Tank #1 Pressure Tank #2 NO 2 Tank Asphalt Ground Surface Sand Aquifer 41 Parker,

42 Conceptual Model of DNAPL Distribution Suspected Release Area Building 10 DNAPL Residual Trail 20 Depth (Feet) DNAPL Zone?? DNAPL Plume 60? 70 42??? Parker,

43 KMnO 4 Target Treatment Zone Building CW-B Cluster Well Monitoring Well CW-C CW-K CW-D MW-3 MW-2 MW-10D MMW-6D CW-J CW-M CW-L CW-H MW-1 CW-I MW-7D CW-F CW-G Target Zone N Feet 43

44 Source Zone Wells 44 Picture

45 KMnO 4 Injection Coverage Episode 1 KMnO 4 Injection Location Building CW-B Cluster Well New Cluster Well Location Monitoring Well CW-C UW-3 CW-K UW-4 CW-D MMW-6D CW-J UW-6 CW-M MW-3 UW-5 MW-2 CW-L UW-2 Estimated Coverage Determined from Sampling CW-F CW-G UW-1 CW-H MW-1 MW-7D Minimum Injection Radius Estimated from Injection Volumes based on an ellipsoid with 3:1 spherical shape CW-I N Feet 45

46 KMnO 4 Injection at Multiple Depths Ground UW-4 UW-5 UW-1 7.5' 6.5' Depth (feet) Horizontal Exaggeration 2x Ellipsoid size based on 30% porosity and a height to width ratio of 3:1. 46

47 Passive Crew 47 47

48 Effects of Density and Diffusion on Injected KMnO 4 Ellipsoids Ground UW-4 UW-5 UW-1 7.5' 6.5' Depth (feet) Horizontal Exaggeration 2x Ellipsoid size based on 30% porosity and a height to width ratio of 3:1. 48

49 Project Timeline UW Site Pre-Design Characterization 1 st Injection Episode 2 nd Injection Episode 3 rd Injection Episode 1 st Post- Treatment Monitoring 2 nd Post- Treatment Monitoring 3 rd Post- Treatment Monitoring 4 th Injection Episode February 2000 Time (months) October

50 Site Map X Sections Monitoring Well (MW, MMW) Cluster Well (CW) Profiles C CW-E MW-5D CW-A UWP2 D MMW-6D MW-8D CW-B B CW-F Building CW-K CW-D CW-C UWP3 MW-10D MW-3 MW-2 B CW-J CW-L CW-M CW-I CW-G CW-H MW-7D MMW-9D MMW-11D Spigots MW-1 KMnO 4 Treatment Zone N Feet C MW-4D D UWP1 MMW-13D MMW-12D Fence 50 50

51 TCE Distribution on B-B B B Feb 2000 Ground South B CW-B 20.5' KMnO 4 Treatment Zone CW-C MW-3 CW-K MW CW-D North B 0 TCE ug/l (July, 00) 3.4 (May, 00) Depth (feet) Parker et al.,

52 TCE Distribution on B-B B B Oct 2002 Ground South B 10 CW-B ' KMnO 4 Treatment Zone CW-C UWP3 MW-3 CW-K 1165 MW CW-D.5 North B 0 3 (MCL) 100 TCE ug/l Depth (feet) Parker et al.,

53 TCE Concentration Profile CW-K Feb 2000 May 2000 Jul 2000 Dec 2000 Oct 2002 Depth (ft) Concentration (ug/l) 53

54 TCE Concentration Profile CW-K Prior to 4 th Injection ug/l Oct 2002 Depth (ft) Concentration (ug/l) 54

55 Ground Surface TCE Distribution on C-C C C Feb 2000 C South KMnO Treatment Zone North C CW-E 7.3' MW-5D 12.5' CW-A MMW-6D CW-J CW-M ' 16.8' 7.6' ' 35.9' MW-10D CW-L CW-I MW-4D TCE ug/l Depth (feet) (May, 00) (May, 00) (May, 00) 55 Parker et al.,

56 Ground Surface TCE Distribution on C-C C C Oct 2002 C South KMnO Treatment Zone North C CW-E 7.3' MW-5D 12.5' CW-A MMW-6D CW-J CW-M ' 16.8' 7.6' ' 35.9' MW-10D CW-L CW-I MW-4D 10 TCE ug/l (MCL) Depth (feet) Parker et al.,

57 TCE Concentration Profile CW-L 0 Feb 2000 May Jul 2000 Dec Oct Depth (ft) Concentration (ug/l) 57

58 TCE Concentration Profile CW-L Prior to 4 th Injection Oct Depth (ft) , 480 ug/l Concentration (ug/l) 58

59 TCE Distribution on D-D D D Feb 2000 South D KMnO Treatment Zone D North Ground Surface 10 MW-8D 11.5' CW-F 18 16' CW-G 16 13' 4 CW-H MW-7D MW-1 9.2' CW-I 35.9 TCE ug/l 0 MW-4D (July, 00) Depth (feet) (March, 00) 3560 (March, 00) Parker et al., (May, 00) 59

60 TCE Distribution on D-D D D Oct 2002 South D KMnO Treatment Zone D North Ground Surface MW-8D UWP2 11.5' CW-F 16' CW-G 13' 4 CW-H MW-7D MW-1 9.2' CW-I 35.9 MW-4D 10.5 TCE ug/l 0 3 (MCL) Depth (feet) Parker et al.,

61 Ground Surface TCA Distribution on C-C C C Feb 2000 C South KMnO Treatment Zone North C CW-E 7.3' MW-5D 12.5' CW-A MMW-6D CW-J CW-M ' 16.8' 7.6' ' 35.9' MW-10D CW-L CW-I MW-4D ,1,1-TCA ug/l Depth (feet) (May, 00) (May, 00) (May, 00) 61 Parker et al.,

62 Ground Surface TCA Distribution on C-C C C Oct 2002 C South KMnO Treatment Zone North C CW-E 7.3' MW-5D 12.5' CW-A MMW-6D CW-J CW-M ' 16.8' 7.6' ' 35.9' MW-10D CW-L CW-I MW-4D 10 TCA ug/l Depth (feet) Parker et al.,

63 Before Remediation February 2000 TCE µg/l Building CW-L 100 TCE source zone >10,000 Plume Monitoring well Multilevel system GeoProbe sampling Parker, 2002 N 0 10 ft 63

64 After Remediation December 2000 TCE µg/l Building TCE source zones >10, Monitoring well Multilevel system GeoProbe sampling 100 N 0 10 ft 64 Parker,

65 After Remediation October 2002 TCE µg/l Building 1, Monitoring well Multilevel system GeoProbe sampling N 0 10 ft 65 Parker,

66 Specific Conclusions 99% reduction in contaminated volume Displacement avoided by limiting injection to <8% of treatment zone pore volume for each episode 1,1,1-TCA also disappeared No TCE or TCA rebound 66 66

67 General Conclusion This case study showed that permanganate can be successful for complete remediation of the source if : The site conditions are suitable The remedial design is tailored to the site 67 67

68 Final Stage Fourth injection occurred October 2002 to complete source zone remediation Performance assessment monitoring planned for February

69 Funding: Acknowledgements University Consortium Solvents-in-Groundwater Research Program Canadian Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Sun Belt Interplex, Inc. Staff: Matthew Nelson, MSc Hydrogeologist: Project Manager Colin Meldrum, BASc: Field Activities and Data Display Bob Ingleton, Paul Johnson, BSc: Injection System Design and Field Technical Assistance Martin Guilbeault, MSc, Matthew Whitney, BASc: Field Assistance Maria Gorecka, MSc: Lab Analysis of VOC 69 69

70 For information on this case study: Parker, B.L., J. A. Cherry and T. A. Al (2002). Passive permanganate remediation of a solvent DNAPL source zone. In proceedings for The Third International Conference on Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds, Monterey, California. Battelle 2002 Monterey Conference Proceedings 70 70