con soil th s a12 geert wijn
TRANSCRIPT
Imagine the result
Using ISCO enhanced bioremediation for heavy oils
Geert Wijn, Tessa Pancras (ARCADIS, NL)
Jinlan Xu (Xian University of Architecture and Technology, China)
Tim Grotenhuis (Wageningen University Research, NL)
ConSoil, Salzburg 2010
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 20102 of 22
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 20103 of 22
ISCO and Bio
• Fenton’s combined with MNA
• Fenton’s combined with CaO2
• Fenton’s combined with biosparging
• Persulphate and ISB with molasses
4 of 22 © 2009 ARCADIS6 October 2010
Knowledge gaps
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 20105 of 22
Pros & cons of ISCO before Bio
• Pros
• > Temperature
• > Oxygen
• > Bioavailability (desorption of hydrocarbons)
• > Release of nutrients
• Cons
• Reduction of microbial population
• Longer recovery period for the microbial population
• Changing soil conditions
• Introducing competitive compounds
area of interest !
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 20106 of 22
volatile aliphatics
non-volatile aliphatics
volatile aromatics
non-volatile aromatics
2-ring PAH
3-ring PAH
>4 ring-pAH
volatile aliphatics
non-volatile aliphatics
volatile aromatics
non-volatile aromatics
2-ring PAH
3-ring PAH
>4 ring-pAH
Heavy oil
area of interest !
Before
After
7 of 22 © 2009 ARCADIS6 October 2010
Basic questionsWill a mild oxidation by using a stepwise
addition of Fenton's overcome the disadvantages of sterilization?
What is the effect of using Fenton’s on the capacity of indigenous micro-organisms to utilize TPH?
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 20108 of 22
The “Out of the box” Approach
Bio is a polishing step of ISCOBio is a polishing step of ISCO
ISCO as a pre-treatment of BioISCO as a pre-treatment of Bio
9 of 22 © 2009 ARCADIS6 October 2010
Research set-upand results
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201010 of 22
microcosms
• Bio
• Chemical oxidation
• Chemical oxidation + Bio
• Stepwise addition of oxidant
• Partial oxidation
• No inoculation
• O2, CO2 measurement
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201011 of 22
Soil sample
Sandy soil
6.000 mg TPH/kg.dm
1,5% Organic matter
52% Light fraction
48% Heavy fraction0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
C10-C12 C12-C16 C16-C20 C20-C24 C24-C40
Oil Fraction
TP
H C
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
(m
g/k
g.d
m)
Heavy oil fraction
Light oil fraction
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
C10-C12 C12-C16 C16-C20 C20-C24 C24-C40
Oil Fraction
TP
H C
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
(m
g/k
g.d
m)
Heavy oil fraction
Light oil fraction
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201012 of 22
O2 consumption
Increased by 20%
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time(d)
O2
cons
umpt
ion(
mm
ol)
bio
bio after ISCO
bio-control
bio after ISCO-control
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time(d)
O2
cons
umpt
ion(
mm
ol)
bio
bio after ISCO
bio-control
bio after ISCO-control
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201013 of 22
CO2 production
Increased by 30%
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time(d)
CO
2 p
rod
uctio
n(m
mo
l)
bio
bio after ISCO
bio-control
bio-control afterISCO
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time(d)
CO
2 p
rod
uctio
n(m
mo
l)
bio
bio after ISCO
bio-control
bio-control afterISCO
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201014 of 22
Residual oil
Bio 70% reduction TPH
Bio & ISCO 93% reduction TPH
Bio & ISCO Residual TPH 4x lower
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30Time (d)
resudia
l concentr
atio
n o
f
TP
H(m
g/k
g)
bio after ISCO
bio
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30Time (d)
resudia
l concentr
atio
n o
f
TP
H(m
g/k
g)
bio after ISCO
bio
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201015 of 22
Total efficiency after 26 days
Combination is more efficient
Higher oil fractions more efficient removed, up to 89%
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
C10-C12 C12-C16 C16-C20 C20-C24 C24-C40 Total TPH
oil fraction
rem
oval e
ffic
iency(%
)
bio
ISCO
bio af ter ISCO
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
C10-C12 C12-C16 C16-C20 C20-C24 C24-C40 Total TPH
oil fraction
rem
oval e
ffic
iency(%
)
bio
ISCO
bio after ISCO
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201016 of 22
Bio Effect on chain length
Bio
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time(d)
rela
tive c
oncenta
rion o
f
TPH
fra
ctio
ns
Bio
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time(d)
rela
tive c
oncenta
rion o
f
TPH
fra
ctio
ns
Fraction >C20 50% reduction and stable
Fraction <C16 rapid decrease, degradation proceeds
C10-C12
C12-C16
C16-C20
C20-C24
C24-C40
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201017 of 22
ISCO & BioEffect on chain length
ISCO effects efficiency of bio for C10-C40
ISCO increases degradation rate of bio (6 days!)
Bio after ISCO
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time(d)
rela
tive c
oncentratio
n o
f
TPH
fra
ctio
ns
C10-C12
C12-C16
C16-C20
C20-C24
C24-C40
Bio after ISCO
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time(d)
rela
tive c
oncentratio
n o
f
TPH
fra
ctio
ns
C10-C12
C12-C16
C16-C20
C20-C24
C24-C40
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201018 of 22
Effect on biodegradation rates
Average ~1.7 x increase
Heavy fraction >C16 >2.0 x increase
0,00
0,05
0,10
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30
0,35
0,40
0,45
C10-C12 C12-C16 C16-C20 C20-C24 C24-C40 TPH
fraction
k (d
-1)
Bio
Bio after ISCO
0,00
0,05
0,10
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30
0,35
0,40
0,45
C10-C12 C12-C16 C16-C20 C20-C24 C24-C40 TPH
fraction
k (d
-1)
Bio
Bio after ISCO
19 of 22 © 2009 ARCADIS6 October 2010
Conclusions
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201020 of 22
Using ISCO enhanced bioremediation for heavy oils
• Is very promising!
• ISCO as a pretreatment technology is feasible
• Stepwise addition overcomes sterilization effects on lab scale
• The effect of Fenton's on the capacity of indigenous micro-organisms is positive:
• Enhances microbial activity of indigenous micro-organisms
• Enhances removal of ‘recalcitrant’compounds by biodegradation
• Increases mass removal
• Decreases treatment time
• Lowers residual concentration of TPH
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201021 of 22
Field Application
• Applying less oxidant or using low concentrations
• Focusing on natural recovery (or using ground water for inoculation)
• Lower end concentrations
• Lower remedial costs
• Requires a more delicate and intelligent approach
• Accounting for adjustment of redoxconditions for stimulating regeneration of microbial activity
• Applying electron donors and/or acceptors
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201022 of 22
New developments
• How to implement lab results to the field
• Increase knowledge about processes:
• Implications of ISCO on nutrient dynamics in soil
• Optimizing ISCO for subsequent bioremediation
• Optimizing microbial regeneration following ISCO
• Focus on heavier oils (PAH) and weathered oils
• Searching for the limits of this approach
23 of 22 © 2009 ARCADIS6 October 2010
ISCO enhanced Bioremediation
…..creating possibilities and new challenges….
© 2009 ARCADIS6 October 201024 of 22
Imagine the result
Geert Wijn
ARCADIS
www.insitu.nl
+31 646647260
Thanks for your attention!Thanks for your attention!