Notes
Slide Show
Outline
1
Enhanced Bioremediation for Treatment of Chlorinated Solvent Residual Source Areas –
Case Study and Implications
  • Kent S. Sorenson, Jr.
  • Ryan A. Wymore


2
Bioremediation Background
  • In Situ Bioremediation of chlorinated solvents:
    • Solvents utilized as electron acceptors by indigenous microorganisms
    • Chlorine atoms sequentially replaced with hydrogen through “reductive dechlorination”
3
Microbial Metabolism
4
Bioremediation Metabolism
5
 
6
A Paradigm Shift?
  • Conventional applications for in situ bioremediation limited to dissolved phase for two primary reasons:
    • Concerns about toxicity
    • Impact on nonaqueous sources thought to be no better than pump and treat
  • New research reveals that in situ bioremediation may be extremely effective for chlorinated solvent source areas
7
Enhanced Mass Transfer
  • In situ bioremediation can enhance mass transfer, addressing the concerns previously thought to limit bioremediation applications:
    • Many investigators have shown that dechlorinating bacteria actually have an ecological niche in high concentration areas
    • Several studies have shown that in situ bioremediation enhances mass transfer of contaminants through at least three mechanisms
8
Mechanisms of Enhanced
Mass Transfer
  • Mechanisms for enhanced mass transfer
    • Bioremediation removes contaminants from the aqueous phase, thereby increasing the driving force for mass transfer = k(Cs-C)
    • Increasing solubility of reductive dechlorination degradation products greatly increases the maximum aqueous contaminant loading
    • The electron donor solution can be used to decrease interfacial tension, thereby increasing the effective solubility
9
Enhanced Mass Transfer: Mechanisms 1 and 2
  • Enhanced mass transfer of chlorinated solvent NAPLs due to reductive dechlorination has been demonstrated in at least two laboratory batch studies:
    • Yang and McCarty (2000) showed enhanced PCE dissolution up to a factor of 5 higher than without reductive dechlorination
    • Carr et al. (2000) showed reductions in NAPL longevity of 83% due to reductive dechlorination in continuously stirred tank reactors
10
Enhanced Mass Transfer: Mechanisms 1 and 2
  • Enhanced mass transfer of chlorinated solvent NAPLs due to reductive dechlorination has been demonstrated in at least one laboratory column study:
    • Cope and Hughes (2001) demonstrated total chlorinated ethene removal was 5 to 6 times higher with reductive dechlorination as compared to abiotic washout
11
Enhanced Mass Transfer: Mechanisms 1 and 2
  • Enhanced chlorinated ethene removal due to reductive dechlorination in columns with PCE DNAPL (Courtesy of Joe Hughes)
12
Enhanced Mass Transfer: Mechanism 3
  • The impact of sodium lactate and other electron donor solutions on water-TCE interfacial tension was investigated in unpublished laboratory studies
  • The results supported a pending patent for the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory
  • The process is referred to as Bioavailability Enhancement TechnologyTM (B.E.T.TM)
13
Impact of Electron Donor Solutions on Interfacial Tension
14
Enhanced Mass Transfer: Mechanism 3
  • Enhanced mass transfer due to electron donor solution interaction with nonaqueous TCE, followed by complete reductive dechlorination has been observed in at least one field study:
    • Sorenson (2000, in press) showed that TCE concentrations were greatly enhanced due to facilitated transport associated with the electron donor solution (high concentration sodium lactate)
    • This work will serve as our case study
15
 
16
Test Area North (TAN) Background
  • Industrial wastewater (including solvents), low-level radioactive wastes, and sanitary sewage were injected directly to the Snake River Plain Aquifer from the late 1950s to 1972
  • TCE plume is nearly 2 miles long
  • Residual source area is about 100 ft in diameter
  • Contaminated aquifer is about 200-400 ft deep
  • Aquifer is comprised of fractured basalt
17
 
18
Record of Decision (1995)
  • Pump and treat selected as default remedy
  • Treatability studies established for alternative technologies:
    • zero-valent iron
    • monolithic confinement
    • in situ chemical oxidation
    • in situ bioremediation
    • natural attenuation
  • 100-year remedial time frame
19
Objectives for the 1-year In Situ Bioremediation Field Evaluation
  • Primary Objective: Demonstrate that biodegradation of TCE can be significantly enhanced through electron donor addition
  • Create hydraulic “treatment cell” to maintain hydraulic containment of the source area and control residence time
  • Determine controls on process efficiency through extensive monitoring
20
 
21
 
22
Electron Donor Distribution
23
 
24
Redox Conditions
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
31
 
32
 
33
Long-Term Dechlorination
34
Enhanced Mass Transfer from DNAPL Source Area
35
 
36
 
37
Status of Enhanced In Situ Bioremediation at TAN
  • Formal regulatory approval to implement bioremediation at the TAN DNAPL source area as a replacement for the default remedy has been granted.  A ROD amendment was signed in 2001.
38
Ft. Lewis ESTCP Demonstration
  • The project will use two in situ treatment cells to quantitatively demonstrate the enhanced mass transfer and degradation that occurs due to in situ bioremediation in a chlorinated solvent source area
  • One cell will be operated to test the first two mass transfer mechanisms, while the other will add the third mechanism
  • Project planning is underway; field work is scheduled to begin in January 2003