2004
DOI: 10.1007/bf02910251
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Synergism effect of mixed surfactant solutions in remediation of soil contaminated with PCE

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
22
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Medias up to pore volume of 20 were washed by anionic surfactant, JBR425 and contaminant removal was 67% for this content of surfactant (Mulligan and Eftekhari, 2003). PCE removal efficiency in a sandy soil, with 15cm height, 5cm diameter and with 750 mL of surfactant solvent, was 44, 42 and 75% for anionic, no anionic and mixture of surfactant, respectively (Lee et al, 2004). Using surfactant for soil washing has been performed for several years, but because of problems such as soil blockage, reduction of permeability and hydraulic conductivity more investigations are needed yet.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Medias up to pore volume of 20 were washed by anionic surfactant, JBR425 and contaminant removal was 67% for this content of surfactant (Mulligan and Eftekhari, 2003). PCE removal efficiency in a sandy soil, with 15cm height, 5cm diameter and with 750 mL of surfactant solvent, was 44, 42 and 75% for anionic, no anionic and mixture of surfactant, respectively (Lee et al, 2004). Using surfactant for soil washing has been performed for several years, but because of problems such as soil blockage, reduction of permeability and hydraulic conductivity more investigations are needed yet.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Remediation of soils contaminated with oil products with less content of pollution and larger particle sizes, in same conditions, gives more removal efficiency than soils with higher pollution and smaller particle sizes (Urum et al, 2004). Soils contaminated with oil products had the efficiency of 90-98% in ex-situ remediation using enhanced washing compounds (Lee et al, 2004). There is not enough information about full scale projects of in-situ soil remediation, but the principles are that after obtaining above information, some wells are used to pass the surfactants and according to soil permeability, gravity force or pumping is used to pass the surfactant through the soil.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Field-scale tests, however, showed that some surfactants can only remove 50-60% of the contaminants in typical DNAPL source zones [4]. Among the most commonly used surfactants for soil and groundwater remediation, polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate (Tween 80) is regarded as a promising remediation agent for chlorinated solvents because it is not only effective, but also biodegradable under aerobic and anaerobic conditions [16][17][18]. Laboratory tests of Tween 80 flushing showed that it can potentially recover more than 70% PCE [19].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the in-situ remediation process should been applied if the excavation of the contaminated site is impossible. Recently, the pilot scale feasibility test for the in-situ soil flushing with surfactant solution for fuel oil contaminated sites in Korea has been successfully conducted (Lee et al, 2004;Kim, 2010;Lee et al, 2011;Lee et al, 2012). Results showed that the soil flushing has a short recovery time in comparison with the conventional pump and treat process and it does not destroy the ground structure such as a storage facility, rail road and the gas pipe arrangement around the site (Kim and Lee, 1999;Lee et al, 2002).…”
Section: *Corresponding Author : Heelee@pknuackrmentioning
confidence: 99%