• A Pilot Study for Remediation of Groundwater by Surfactant -Enhanced Soil Flushing
  • Park, Jong Oh;Lee, Dal-Heui;
  • Youngin Industry Co. Ltd.;Department of Earth System Sciences, College of Sciences, Yonsei University;
Abstract
The removal of non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) from groundwater using pure water, via pump and treat, is quite ineffective due to their low solubility and hydrophobicity. Therefore, the objectives of pilot tests were to select potentially suitable surfactants that solubilize tetrachloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene (TCE) present as contaminants and to evaluate the optimal range of process parameters that can increase the removal efficiency in surfactant-enhanced soil flushing (SESF). Used experimental method for surfactant selection was batch experiments. The surfactant solution parameters for SESF pilot tests were surfactant solution concentration, surfactant solution pH, and the flow rate of surfactant solution in the SESF pilot system. Based on the batch experiments for surfactant selection, DOSL (an anionic surfactant) was selected as a suitable surfactant that solubilizes PCE and TCE present as contaminants. The highest recovery (95%) of the contaminants was obtained using a DOSL surfactant in the batch experiments. The pilot test results revealed that the optimum conditions were achieved with a surfactant solution concentration of 4% (v/v), a surfactant solution pH of 7.5, and a flow rate of 30 L/min of surfactant solution (Lee and Woo, 2015). The maximum removal of contaminants (89%) was obtained when optimum conditions were simultaneously met in pilot-scale SESF operations. These results confirm the viability of SESF for treating PCE and TCE-contaminated groundwater.

Keywords: PCE;TCE;Groundwater;Remediation;Surfactant-enhanced soil flushing;

References
  • 1. Adeel, Z. and Luthy, R.G.., 1995, Sorption and transport kinetics of a nonionic surfactant through an aquifer sediment, Environ. Sci. Technol., 29, 1032-1042.
  •  
  • 2. Cases, J.M., Mielczarska, E., Michot, L.J., and Thomas, F., 2002, Ionic surfactants adsorption on heterogeneous surfaces, Comptes Rendus Geosciences, 334, 675-688.
  •  
  • 3. Chang, D.L. and Rosano, H.L., 1984, Interaction of long chain dimethylamine oxide with sodium dodecyl sulfate in water, Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. Ser., 0097-6156/84/0253-0129, 129-140.
  •  
  • 4. Deshpande, S., Wesson, L., Wade, D., Sabatini, D.A., and Harwell, J.H., 2000, Dowfax surfactant components for enhancing contaminant solubilization, Water Research, 34, 1030-1036.
  •  
  • 5. Feng, D., Lorenzen, L., Adrich. C., and Mare, P.W., 2001, Exsitu diesel contaminated soil washing with mechanical methods, Miner. Eng., 14, 1093-1100.
  •  
  • 6. Harwell, J.H., 1992, Factors affecting surfactant performance in groundwater remediation application, Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. Ser., 491, 124-131.
  •  
  • 7. Heo, J.-H., Lee, D.-H., Koh, D.-C., and Chang, H.-W., 2007, The effect of ionic strength and hardness of trichloroethylene-contaminated synthetic groundwater on remediation using granular activated carbon, Geosci. J., 11, 229-239.
  •  
  • 8. Joshi, M.M. and Lee, S., 1996, Optimization of surfactant-aided remediation of industrially contaminated soils, Energy Sources, 18, 291-301.
  •  
  • 9. Kim, E.-S., Lee, D.-H., Yum, B.-W., and Chang, H.-W., 2005, The effect of ionic strength and hardness of water in non-ionic surfactant-enhanced remediation for removal of perchloroethylene, J. Hazard Mater., B119, 195-203.
  •  
  • 10. Knox, R.C., Sabatini, D.A., Harwell, J.H., Brown, R.E., West, C.C., and Griffin, C., 1997, Surfactant remediation field demonstration using a vertical circulation well, Ground Water, 35, 948-953.
  •  
  • 11. Lee, D.-H., Cody, R.D., and Hoyle, B.L., 2001a, Laboratory evaluation of the use of surfactants for ground water remediation and the potential for recycling them, Groundwater Monit. Rem., 21, 49-57.
  •  
  • 12. Lee, D.-H., Cody, R.D., and Hoyle, B.L., 2001b, Comparison of six surfactants in removing toluene and trichlorobenzene from a sandy soil under laboratory conditions, Can. Geotech. J., 38, 1329-1334.
  •  
  • 13. Lee, D.-H. and Cody, R.D., 2001c, Optimization of DOSL surfactant solution parameters on surfactant-enhanced remediation of soil columns contaminated by 1,2,4-trichlorobenzen, Geosci. J., 15, 281-286.
  •  
  • 14. Lee, D.-H., Cody, R.D., Kim, D.J., and Choi, S., 2002, Effect of soil texture on surfactant-based remediation of hydrophobic organic compound-contaminated soil, Environ. Int., 27, 681-688.
  •  
  • 15. Lee, D.-H., Chang, H.-W., and Kim, C., 2008, Mixing effect of NaCl and surfactant on the remediation of TCB contaminated soil, Geosci. J., 12, 63-68.
  •  
  • 16. Lee, D.-H. and Woo, NC., 2015, Effect of surfactant-enhanced soil flushing for PCE and TCE-contaminated groundwater remediation, Goldschmidt 2015, Annual Meeting Poster.
  •  
  • 17. Martel, R. and Gelinas, P.J., 1996, Surfactant solutions developed for NAPL recovery in contaminated aquifers, Ground Water, 34, 143-154.
  •  
  • 18. Paria, S. and Khilar, K.C., 2004, A review on experimental studies of surfactant adsorption at the hydrophilic solid water interface, Adv. Colloid Interface Sci., 110, 75-95.
  •  
  • 19. Rajput, V.S., Higgins, A.J., and Singley, M.E., 1994, Cleaning of excavated soil contaminated with hazardous organic compounds by washing, Water Environ. Res., 66, 819-827.
  •  
  • 20. Rouse, J.D., Sabatini, D.A., and Harwell, J.H., 1993, Minimizing surfactant losses using twin-head anionic surfactants in subsurface remediation, Environ. Sci. Technol., 27, 2072-2078.
  •  
  • 21. Shiau, B.J., Sabatini, D.A., and Harwell, J.H., 1995, Properties of food grade (edible) surfactants affecting subsurface remediation of chlorinated solvents, Environ. Sci. Technol., 29, 2929-2935.
  •  

This Article

  • 2016; 21(5): 1-7

    Published on Oct 31, 2016

  • 10.7857/JSGE.2016.21.5.001
  • Received on Oct 19, 2016
  • Revised on Oct 21, 2016
  • Accepted on Oct 24, 2016