这些情况有任何声音对你熟悉吗？
Gasoline floating on groundwater, vinyl chloride in saturated sands, hexavalent chromium leaching into a creek, perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) heading towards a drinking water well, trichlorethylene (TCE) dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) in weathered bedrock.
If so, you probably have been around a site with soil and/or groundwater contamination or you’ve picked a真unusual hobby. If you are a responsible party, a stakeholder, or an environmental manager responsible for handling the regulatory aspects of a contaminated site, the goal is generally to reach the cleanup finish line (closure) with the best possible results for the least possible cost.
Consider this analogy. We know three things about fingerprints. 1) They are found on fingers, 2) they are generally arranged on the surface of the fingertips, and 3) each fingerprint is different from all others in the fine detail. Remediation can be viewed much the same. We know there is an impact on soil and/or groundwater, the limits of the contamination are generally defined, and the source is generally known. The fine details may have many commonalities between sites; however, any single variant can eliminate a viable technology.
A preliminary screening process should be conducted with the stakeholders fully engaged. Contamination type, soil type, permeability, depth to impacted soil and groundwater, hydraulic conductivity, geochemical and physical subsurface conditions, source zone characterization, dissolved phase contamination delineation, site surface cover and structures, subgrade utility conflicts, access to utilities, available capital, risk tolerance, regulatory clean up levels, and regulatory mandates are just some of the variables that we can use to filter through available technologies.
从几乎emergin修复技术g to very mature and each has their place. We view each of the site-specific considerations as a filter and each technology as a possible solution. During technology selection, the filters are layered together and the technologies are poured across the filters. Most will be caught somewhere in the filter stack and a few will make it through. Deeper evaluations are made prior to pilot testing. Sometimes, one technology might not be the best solution. Part of that evaluation is to look at the specific shortcomings of each technology and determine if they can be technically and cost-effectively overcome with combinations of technologies. Combined technologies can open new options for stagnant sites and may offer significant synergistic improvements.
Example: DOD Portfolio, TX
良好的资助和风险耐受性的部位筛选出许多技术来解决残留但持续的低水平TCE和氯乙烯（VC）羽流，并最初选择乳化植物油产品。在试验试验期间，两件事变得清晰;柔软的塑料粘土不会接受注射足够的材料，并且产品在有限位置非常有效，其中成功施用了一半的设计体积。
知道这一点，制造了第二种评估，并确定了气动压裂作为可能的补充技术，以克服注射量和分配挑战。进行第二个试验试验，发现，从不可预测的最大七英尺到三十英尺的不可预测的最大值增加了喷射半径。注射体积从最多50加仑的产品中增加到最多6倍的产品，该体积少于没有夏令。另外，注射流量从大约1.5加仑的每分钟增加到每分钟大于150加仑。注射的缺点与气动压裂相结合，是每日承包商的成本高（平均注射机组人员的三倍）和线性开始/停止过程，其中不能同时进行任务。
However, in this instance, with all the site-specific conditions these disadvantages were outweighed by the significantly reduced number of injection points due to the increase in pumping speed and reach. The project was completed for roughly 25% of the cost of the next best method. Post-injection monitoring later indicated that site closure is imminent.
如果先前或当前技术关闭但不适合您的需求，则应评估类似的组合。
联系我们的环境顾问
如果您有任何疑问或想要纠正技术的帮助，请点击下面的链接填写我们的联系我们表格。