Design of a Surfactant Remediation Field Demonstration Based on Laboratory and Modeling Studies

Abstract

Surfactant‐enhanced subsurface remediation is being evaluated as an innovative technology for expediting ground‐water remediation. This paper reports on laboratory and modeling studies conducted in preparation for a pilot‐scale field test of surfactant‐enhanced subsurface remediation. Laboratory batch and column studies evaluated the surfactant‐contaminant ground‐water interactions in an effort to properly design the field‐scale demonstration. A series of laboratory tracer tests and numerical simulations were completed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the hydraulic system (a vertical circulation well—VCW) for capturing injected solutions in a shallow, highly conductive, unconfined ground‐water formation. The results of these studies were then used to optimize the performance of the VCW system during the subsequent field‐scale demonstration study which utilized the VCW for injecting and extracting a surfactant solution. Information from the simulation studies, combined with the results of the batch and column tests, was crucial for procuring regulatory approval for the field demonstration, and successful design of the field‐scale demonstration.

Mixing effect of NaCl and surfactant on the remediation of TCB contaminated soil

“…We should also point out that DOSL is considered as a low Na surfactant containing about 0.1 % -0.3 % NaCl (Rouse et al, 1993) so that counter-ion effects of Na + from the DOSL itself should be very minor. Effectiveness of DOSL without the added NaCl may be due to small adsorption of the double-head sulfate polar heads onto soil particles, or to small amounts of surfactant loss by precipitation with soil components (Rouse et al, 1993;Shiau et al, 1995;Sabatini et al, 1997;Lee et al, 2002). The cause of measured effectiveness with NaOH is not clear.…”

“…DOSL is a twin-head disulfonate surfactant. Previous studies have shown that sodium diphenyl oxide disulfonate (DOSL, trade name Dowfax 8390) is a good candidate for surfactant-aided remediation of soils contaminated with hydrophobic organic contaminants (Deshpande et al, 2000;Lee, 1999;Rouse et al, 1993;Sabatini et al, 1997). Disulfonates are less susceptible to precipitation and sorption than monosulfates, such as SLS, and are also less prone to sorption than nonionic surfactants (Rouse et al, 1993).…”

Combined decontamination processes for wastes containing PCBs

“…Different methods for the destruction of PCBs have been proposed and include wet-air oxidation [12,36], superor supra-critical oxidation [7,21], bioremediation [13][14][15], sodium metal-promoted dehalogenation [16][17][18][19][20][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51] reductive dehalogenation with a strong reductant (including ECOLOGIC [39] and Commodore Solution Na/NH 3 Technology [40] processes), photolysis in the presence of hydrogen donors and oxidants [28,29], base-catalyzed dehalogenation (BCD [33], KPEG (NaPEG) process [30][31][32]60,61]), electrolytic reduction [34], zero-valent ironpromoted dechlorination [35,36], catalytic dehalogenation with noble metals [37,38], extraction with solvents [52][53][54][55][56], and a number of other chemical methods, obviously based on laboratory experiments only [22]…”

Influence of Diphenyloxide Disulfonate Surfactants on Biodegradation of Hydrocarbons

“…The surfactants selected for this research have been well characterized with respect to CMC formation (Dimonie et al, 1990) and their potentials for low precipitation and sorption losses in soil environments (Rouse et al, 1993;Shiau et al, 1995;Deshpande et al, 2000). Furthermore, they have demonstrated success in the abiotic aspects of subsurface remediation Sabatini et al, 1997;Knox et al, 1999). A point of consideration in this study is the potential for in situ surfactant-enhanced bioremediation in a polishing phase following a surfactant-aided pumpand-treat operation.…”