Design, installation and preliminary testing of a permeable reactive barrier for diesel fuel remediation at Casey Station, Antarctica

Mumford, Kathryn A.; Rayner, J. C. W.; Snape, Ian; Stark, Scott C.; Stevens, Geoffrey W.; Gore, Damian B.

doi:10.1016/j.coldregions.2013.06.002

Cited by 46 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mumford et al (2013) demonstrated the removal of diesel-range light non-aqueous phase liquids by adsorption onto granular activated carbon (GAC) in a sequenced ''funnel and gate'' PRB at Casey Station, Antarctica. While not directly addressing petroleum hydrocarbons, Kalinovich et al (2008) and Kalinovich et al (2012) also successfully utilized GAC as an adsorbent for polychlorinated biphenyl contamination at Resolution Island, Canadian Arctic.…”

Section: Permeable Reactive Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Selecting the most appropriate material or sequence of materials for a PRB is vital for effective management of petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated groundwater (Gore 2009;Camenzuli et al 2013;Gupta & Saleh 2013;Mumford et al 2013). Mumford et al (2013) demonstrated the removal of diesel-range light non-aqueous phase liquids by adsorption onto granular activated carbon (GAC) in a sequenced ''funnel and gate'' PRB at Casey Station, Antarctica.…”

Section: Permeable Reactive Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PRBs are one of the most practical technologies for onsite or in situ groundwater remediation in cold regions on account of their minimal energy, monitoring and maintenance requirements (Snape et al 2001;Mumford et al 2013;Mumford et al 2014). In a PRB, contaminated groundwater passively flows through a single or multiple compartments of reactive material wherein the contaminants are physically adsorbed or degraded by chemical or biological processes (Gore 2009;Yeh et al 2010;Camenzuli et al 2013).…”

Section: Permeable Reactive Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) are also reviewed in their potential to capture and remove petroleum hydrocarbons from groundwater in the Antarctic and Arctic. These six technologies were selected because of their suitability to cold regions and because of the high level of interest in the applicability of these technologies to the Antarctic and Arctic, as demonstrated by recent research (Aislabie et al 2004;Filler et al 2006;Camenzuli et al 2013;Leewis et al 2013;Mair et al 2013;Mumford et al 2013). Current research surrounding the aforementioned technologies is reviewed with respect to their purpose, advantages, limitations and potential for long-term management at petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated sites in the Antarctic and Arctic.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

On-site and in situ remediation technologies applicable to petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated sites in the Antarctic and Arctic

Camenzuli

Freidman

2015

Polar Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Permeable Reactive Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Permeable Reactive Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Permeable Reactive Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

On-site and in situ remediation technologies applicable to petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated sites in the Antarctic and Arctic

Camenzuli

Freidman

2015

Polar Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This contrasts with the 38 slow rates often reported for hydrocarbons in situ and suggests that relatively simple 39 remediation techniques can be effective even in Antarctica. 40 working in remote locations (Mumford et al, 2013). 55…”

Section: Abstract 24mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fate and transport of petroleum hydrocarbons in engineered biopiles in polar regions

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

24A dynamic multi-media model that includes temperature-dependency for partitioning 25 and degradation was developed to predict the behaviour of petroleum hydrocarbons 26 during biopiling at low temperature. The activation energy (Ea) for degradation was 27 derived by fitting the Arrhenius equation to hydrocarbon concentrations from 28 temperature-controlled soil mesocosms contaminated with crude oil and diesel. The 29 model was then applied to field-scale biopiles containing soil contaminated with 30 diesel and kerosene at Casey Station, Antarctica. Temporal changes of total petroleum 31 hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations were very well described and predictions for 32 individual hydrocarbon fractions were generally acceptable (disparity between 33 measured and predicted concentrations was less than a factor two for most fractions). 34Biodegradation was predicted to be the dominant loss mechanism for all but the 35 lightest aliphatic fractions, for which volatilisation was most important. Summertime 36 losses were significant, resulting in TPH concentrations which were about 25% of 37 initial concentrations just one year after the start of treatment. This contrasts with the 38 slow rates often reported for hydrocarbons in situ and suggests that relatively simple 39 remediation techniques can be effective even in Antarctica. 40 41

show abstract

Effects of Freeze–Thaw Phenomena on Controlled Nutrient Release: Application to Bioremediation

Freidman

Gras

Snape

et al. 2016

CLEAN Soil Air Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cold region soils are often devoid of sufficient nutrients essential for timely bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbon contaminants. While materials that release nutrients in a controlled manner have been shown to stimulate biodegradation over extended time periods, the physical and chemical response of these materials to repetitive freeze-thaw stresses typical of cold regions remains poorly understood. This study reports the performance of four controlled release materials in water (Osmocote TM , Nutricote TM , Polyon TM , Zeopro TM ) exposed to freeze-thaw cycling or control temperature of 4°C. Additionally Zeopro TM -activated carbon mixtures are investigated for application to permeable reactive barriers. Osmocote TM experienced higher nutrient release under control conditions compared with samples exposed to freeze-thaw after 20 days. Nutrient release from Nutricote TM and Polyon TM was similar under freeze-thaw and control conditions. Zeopro TM delivered low nutrient concentrations into solution in both freeze-thaw and control samples with calcium phosphate dissolution accelerated in the presence of activated carbon. Osmocote TM , Nutricote TM and Polyon TM revealed strong resistance to breakdown under freeze-thaw. Zeopro TM experienced only partial disintegration, while significant break-up of activated carbon occurred under freezethaw. A physical and chemical understanding of the response of multiple fertilisers can guide the selection of materials for biostimulation and biodegradation of petroleum hydrocarbons in environments exposed to freeze-thaw cycling.Abbreviations: CRN, controlled release nutrient; FESEM, field emission scanning electron microscopy; GAC, granular activated carbon; ICP-OES, inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry; PHC, petroleum hydrocarbon; PRB, permeable reactive barrier.

show abstract

Design, installation and preliminary testing of a permeable reactive barrier for diesel fuel remediation at Casey Station, Antarctica

Cited by 46 publications

References 24 publications

On-site and in situ remediation technologies applicable to petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated sites in the Antarctic and Arctic

On-site and in situ remediation technologies applicable to petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated sites in the Antarctic and Arctic

Fate and transport of petroleum hydrocarbons in engineered biopiles in polar regions

Effects of Freeze–Thaw Phenomena on Controlled Nutrient Release: Application to Bioremediation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About