Literature DB >> 24914523

Assessing contaminant-removal conditions and plume persistence through analysis of data from long-term pump-and-treat operations.

Mark L Brusseau1, Zhilin Guo2.   

Abstract

Historical groundwater-withdrawal and contaminant-concentration data collected from long-term pump-and-treat operations were analyzed and used to examine contaminant mass discharge (CMD) and mass-removal behavior for multiple sites. Differences in behavior were observed, and these differences were consistent with the nature of contaminant distributions and subsurface properties of the sites. For example, while CMD exhibited a relatively rapid decline during the initial stage of operation for all three sites, the rate of decline varied. The greatest rate was observed for the PGN site, whereas the lowest rate was observed for the MOT site. In addition, the MOT site exhibited the lowest relative reduction in CMD. These results are consistent with the actuality that the MOT site likely contains the greatest proportion of poorly accessible contaminant mass, given that it comprises a combined alluvium and fractured-bedrock system in which solvent and dissolved mass are present directly in the bedrock. The relative contributions of the source zones versus the plumes to total CMD were determined. Constrained contaminant mass removal was observed to influence the plumes for all three sites, and was attributed to a combination of uncontrolled (or imperfectly controlled) sources, back diffusion, and well-field hydraulics. The results presented herein illustrate that detailed analysis of operational pump-and-treat data can be a cost-effective method for providing value-added characterization of contaminated sites.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNAPL; Mass flux; Source depletion

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24914523      PMCID: PMC4117718          DOI: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2014.05.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Contam Hydrol        ISSN: 0169-7722            Impact factor:   3.188


  14 in total

1.  Assessing the impacts of partial mass depletion in DNAPL source zones I. Analytical modeling of source strength functions and plume response.

Authors:  Ronald W Falta; P Suresh Rao; Nandita Basu
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.188

2.  Source-zone characterization of a chlorinated-solvent contaminated Superfund site in Tucson, AZ.

Authors:  M L Brusseau; N T Nelson; Z Zhang; J E Blue; J Rohrer; T Allen
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2006-10-16       Impact factor: 3.188

3.  Mass-removal and mass-flux-reduction behavior for idealized source zones with hydraulically poorly-accessible immiscible liquid.

Authors:  M L Brusseau; E L Difilippo; J C Marble; M Oostrom
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 7.086

4.  Relationship between mass-flux reduction and source-zone mass removal: analysis of field data.

Authors:  Erica L Difilippo; Mark L Brusseau
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 3.188

5.  Plume persistence caused by back diffusion from thin clay layers in a sand aquifer following TCE source-zone hydraulic isolation.

Authors:  Beth L Parker; Steven W Chapman; Martin A Guilbeault
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2008-07-15       Impact factor: 3.188

6.  Impact of organic-liquid distribution and flow-field heterogeneity on reductions in mass flux.

Authors:  Erica L DiFilippo; Kenneth C Carroll; Mark L Brusseau
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 3.188

7.  Impact of in situ chemical oxidation on contaminant mass discharge: linking source-zone and plume-scale characterizations of remediation performance.

Authors:  M L Brusseau; K C Carroll; T Allen; J Baker; W Diguiseppi; J Hatton; C Morrison; A Russo; J Berkompas
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2011-05-26       Impact factor: 9.028

8.  Assessing the impact of source-zone remediation efforts at the contaminant-plume scale through analysis of contaminant mass discharge.

Authors:  M L Brusseau; J Hatton; W DiGuiseppi
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2011-08-26       Impact factor: 3.188

9.  Pump-and-treat remediation of chlorinated solvent contamination at a controlled field-experiment site.

Authors:  Michael O Rivett; Steven W Chapman; Richelle M Allen-King; Stanley Feenstra; John A Cherry
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2006-11-01       Impact factor: 9.028

10.  Integration of traditional and innovative characterization techniques for flux-based assessment of dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) sites.

Authors:  Nandita B Basu; P Suresh; C Rao; Irene C Poyer; Subhas Nandy; Megharaj Mallavarapu; Ravi Naidu; Greg B Davis; Bradley M Patterson; Michael D Annable; Kirk Hatfield
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2008-12-25       Impact factor: 3.188

View more
  5 in total

1.  The impact of well-field configuration and permeability heterogeneity on contaminant mass removal and plume persistence.

Authors:  Zhilin Guo; Mark L Brusseau
Journal:  J Hazard Mater       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 10.588

2.  Mathematical modeling of organic liquid dissolution in heterogeneous source zones.

Authors:  Zhilin Guo; Ann E Russo; Erica L DiFilippo; Zhihui Zhang; Chunmiao Zheng; Mark L Brusseau
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2020-09-17       Impact factor: 3.188

3.  Modeling groundwater contaminant transport in the presence of large heterogeneity: A case study comparing MT3D and RWhet.

Authors:  Zhilin Guo; Graham E Fogg; Mark L Brusseau; Eric M LaBolle; Jose Lopez
Journal:  Hydrogeol J       Date:  2019-02-15       Impact factor: 3.178

4.  Borehole Diffusive Flux Apparatus for Characterizing Diffusive Mass-transfer in Subsurface Systems.

Authors:  Mark L Brusseau; Kenneth C Carroll; Zhilin Guo; Jon Mainhagu
Journal:  Environ Earth Sci       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 2.784

5.  The Impact of Well-Field Configuration on Contaminant Mass Removal and Plume Persistence for Homogeneous versus Layered Systems.

Authors:  Zhilin Guo; Mark L Brusseau
Journal:  Hydrol Process       Date:  2017-11-07       Impact factor: 3.565

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.