| Literature DB >> 28892859 |
Julien Maire1, Antoine Joubert2, Delphine Kaifas3, Thomas Invernizzi2, Julien Marduel2, Stéfan Colombano4, David Cazaux5, Cédric Marion5, Pierre-Yves Klein3, Alain Dumestre2, Nicolas Fatin-Rouge6.
Abstract
Immiscible mobilization and foam flushing were assessed as low surfactant consuming technologies, for the enhanced recovery of dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) residual at a site contaminated by heavy chlorinated compounds. Preliminary experiments in well-controlled conditions demonstrated the phenomena involved in these remediation technologies and their limitations. Furthermore, we characterized the technologies according to by their surfactant consumption (per kg of DNAPL recovered) and the final DNAPL saturation reached. Surfactant foam flushing (SFF) produced lower DNAPL saturation than immiscible mobilization, thanks to its higher viscosity. However, its efficiency is strongly correlated to the pressure gradient (▽P) used during injection, and that is limited by risks of soil fracturing. The two technologies were tested in field cells (10m×10m×10m) delimited by cement/bentonite walls anchored in the clayey substratum. The deepest soil layer was the most contaminated. It was composed of silt-sandy soil and had an average hydraulic conductivity of 10-4ms-1. Field results show that we should now model flushing fluid propagation to design efficient set-ups for recovering the displaced DNAPL.Entities:
Keywords: Heavy chlorinated compounds; Immiscible mobilization; In situ DNAPL remediation; Surfactant foam flushing
Year: 2017 PMID: 28892859 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.309
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Total Environ ISSN: 0048-9697 Impact factor: 7.963