Premium
A method to compare groundwater cleanup technologies
Author(s) -
Quinton Gary E.,
Buchanan Ronald J.,
Ellis David E.,
Shoemaker Stephen H.
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
remediation journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.762
H-Index - 27
eISSN - 1520-6831
pISSN - 1051-5658
DOI - 10.1002/rem.3440070403
Subject(s) - bioremediation , environmental remediation , remedial action , environmental science , aquifer , groundwater remediation , soil vapor extraction , groundwater , waste management , permeable reactive barrier , groundwater pollution , environmental engineering , contamination , engineering , ecology , geotechnical engineering , biology
DuPont has developed a method to compare, on a consistent economic basis, in situ remediation technologies. The methodology employs a template site with a perchloroethylene plume 1000 ft long by 400 ft wide, and incorporates various aquifer thicknesses and depths. Variables considered in the methodology include duration of the remediation; estimated engineering and flow/transport modeling costs; equipment costs; and operation, maintenance, and monitoring costs. In this article, substrate‐enhanced anaerobic bioremediation, intrinsic bioremediation, in situ permeable reactive barriers, and pump‐and‐treat systems are evalutated. Cost metrics include present cost, cost per pound of contaminant removed, and cost per 1000 gals treated, using a discounted cash‐flow analysis. Costs of the remedial alternatives increase starting from intrinsic bioremediation, to substrate‐enhanced anaerobic bioremediation, to a biological substrate‐enhanced anaerobic barrier, to in situ permeable reactive barriers, to pump‐and‐treat systems with air stripping and carbon adsorption.