Premium
In Situ Chemical Oxidation: Permanganate Oxidant Volume Design Considerations
Author(s) -
Huling Scott G.,
Ross Randall R.,
Meeker Prestbo Kimberly
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
groundwater monitoring and remediation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.677
H-Index - 47
eISSN - 1745-6592
pISSN - 1069-3629
DOI - 10.1111/gwmr.12195
Subject(s) - volume (thermodynamics) , porosity , aquifer , groundwater , permanganate , environmental science , chemistry , environmental chemistry , soil science , materials science , geology , composite material , geotechnical engineering , inorganic chemistry , thermodynamics , physics
Contaminant rebound and low contaminant removal are reported more frequently with in situ chemical oxidation than other in situ technologies. Although there are multiple causes for these results, a critical analysis indicates that low oxidant volume delivery is a key issue. The volume of oxidant injected is critical and porosity of the aquifer matrix can be used to estimate the pore volume. The total porosity ( q T ) is the volume of voids relative to the total volume of aquifer material. The mobile porosity ( q M ) is the fraction of voids that readily contributes to fluid displacement, and is less than q T leading to smaller estimates of oxidant volume. Injecting low‐oxidant volume may result in inadequate oxidant distribution and postinjection dispersal within the radius of influence, insufficient oxidant contact and oxidant loading, and incomplete treatment; whereas, greater oxidant volume achieves a greater oxidant footprint and may involve risk that the injected oxidant may migrate into nontarget areas and displacement of contaminated groundwater. Design guidelines and recommendations are provided that could help achieve more effective technology deployment, reduce the role of heterogeneities in the subsurface, and result in greater probability the oxidant is delivered to the targeted treatment zone.