Abstract
The pump-and-treat (P&T) method is a common remediation approach that is used to mitigate occurrences of hydrocarbon contamination. In a well-studied site that had been contaminated by a large volume of jet fuel, continuous monitoring of the water table and floating phase thickness revealed the most significant process governing the effectiveness of the site’s active remediation system. The floating phase thickness recorded in the wells monitored varied greatly (> 0.50 m) and was negatively correlated with the water table level. Although the dependence of light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) thickness on water table fluctuations is widely recognized, LNAPL recovery, which is governed by alternating cycles of LNAPL release and entrapment in pore spaces, has been poorly described. Thus, we present a specific case in which LNAPL recovery is expected only episodically, when the water table falls sufficiently. In the period spanning from 2006 to 2008, LNAPL remediation recovered nearly 180 m3 of oil. In later years, the volume of recovered LNAPL declined and ceased between 2010 and 2014, when the water table rose. Importantly, our research demonstrates that the P&T remediation approach is solely effective during a period of 4 months in dry years. Thus, cleanup methods and contaminated site management strategies should be reconsidered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahmed W, Palmier C, Atteia O, Class H (2019) Multiphase simulation model for validating the estimate of light non-aqueous phase liquids (LNAPL) transmissivity using bail-down test. Arab J Sci Eng 44:6099–6107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-018-3663-7
Alfaro MAS, Lenhard R, Chang HK, van Genuchten MT (2019) Determination of specific LNAPL volumes in soils having a multimodal pore-size distribution. J Environ Manag 237:576–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.02.077
ASTM D445 (2008) Standard test method for kinematic viscosity of transparent and opaque liquids (and calculation of dynamic viscosity)—ASTM D445. West Conshohocken
ASTM D971 (2012) Standard test method for interfacial tension of oil against water by the ring method. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA
Baciocchi R, Berardi S, Verginelli I (2010) Human health risk assessment: models for predicting the effective exposure duration of on-site receptors exposed to contaminated groundwater. J Hazard Mater 181:226–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.05.001
Beckett GD, Huntley D (2015) Lnapl transmissivity: a twisted parameter. Groundw Monit Remediat 35:20–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12116
Beyke G, Fleming D (2005) In situ thermal remediation of DNAPL and LNAPL using electrical resistance heating. Remediat J 15:5–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.20047
Bordignon R, Teramoto EH, Chang KH (2015) Caracterização isotópica de CO2 dissolvido em águas subterrâneas em área contaminada por querosene de aviação, município de Paulínia, SP. Águas Subterrâneas 29:301–314. https://doi.org/10.14295/ras.v29i3.27979(in Portuguese)
Charbeneau RJ (2007) LNAPL Distribution and recovery model. Distribution and recovery of petroleum hydrocarbon liquids in porous media, vol 1. API Publication 4760
Charbeneau RJ, Johns RT, Lake LW, McAdams MJ (2000) Free-product recovery of petroleum hydrocarbon liquids. Groundw Monit Remediat 20:147–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6592.2000.tb00280.x
Chesnaux R (2008) Analytical closed-form solutions for assessing pumping cycles, times, and costs required for NAPL remediation. Environ Geol 55:1381–1388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-007-1088-9
Coelho CA, Cardoso DH, Firpo MA (2016) Precipitation diagnostics of an exceptionally dry event in São Paulo, Brazil. Theoret Appl Climatol 125:769–784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1540-9
Delin GN, Healy RW, Lorenz DL, Nimmo JR (2007) Comparison of local-to regional-scale estimates of ground-water recharge in Minnesota, USA. J Hydrol 334:231–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.10.010
Dudley B (2018) BP statistical review of world energy. BP Statistical Review, London
Eichert J, McAlexander B, Lyverse M, Michalski P, Sihota N (2017) Spatial and temporal variation in natural source zone depletion rates at a former oil refinery. Vadose Zone J. https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2016.12.0131
Falciglia PP, Giustra MG, Vagliasindi FGA (2011) Low-temperature thermal desorption of diesel polluted soil: influence of temperature and soil texture on contaminant removal kinetics. J Hazard Mater 185:392–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.09.046
Flores G, Katsumi T, Eua-Apiwatch S, Lautua S, Inui T (2016) Migration of different LNAPLs in subsurface under groundwater fluctuating conditions by the simplified image analysis method. J Geoeng Sci 3:15–30. https://doi.org/10.3233/JGS-150033
Garg S, Newell CJ, Kulkarni PR, King DC, Adamson DT, Renno MI, Sale T (2017) Overview of natural source zone depletion: processes, controlling factors, and composition change. Groundw Monit Remediat 37:62–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12219
Gatsios E, García-Rincón J, Rayner JL, McLaughlan RG, Davis GB (2018) LNAPL transmissivity as a remediation metric in complex sites under water table fluctuations. J Environ Manag 215:40–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.026
Gonçalves RD, Teramoto EH, Engelbrecht BZ, Alfaro MAS, Chang HK, van Genuchten MT (2020) Quasi-saturated layer: Implications for estimating recharge and groundwater modeling. Groundwater 58:432–440. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwat.12916
Healy RW, Cook PG (2002) Using groundwater levels to estimate recharge. Hydrogeol J 10:91–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-001-0178-0
Hegele PR, Mumford KG (2014) Gas production and transport during bench-scale electrical resistance heating of water and trichloroethene. J Contam Hydrol 165:24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2014.07.002
Huntley D (2000) Analytic determination of hydrocarbon transmissivity from baildown tests. Ground Water 38:46–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2000.tb00201.x
Huntley D, Beckett GD (2002) Persistence of LNAPL sources: relationship between risk reduction and LNAPL recovery. J Contam Hydrol 59:3–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7722(02)00073-6
Isler E, Teramoto EH, Baessa MPM, Pede MAZ, Kiang CH (2018) Trapeamento de LNAPL observado por meio da técnica de fluorescência induzida por laser (LIF). Águas Subterrâneas 32:315–324. https://doi.org/10.14295/ras.v32i3.29137(in Portuguese)
ITRC (Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council) (2009) Evaluating LNAPL remedial technologies for achieving project goals. In: https://www.itrcweb.org (ed) LNAPL-2. Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council, Washington DC
Jeong J, Charbeneau RJ (2014) An analytical model for predicting LNAPL distribution and recovery from multi-layered soils. J Contam Hydrol 156:52–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2013.09.008
Johnson P, Lundegard P, Liu Z (2006) Source zone natural attenuation at petroleum hydrocarbon spill sites—I: site-specific assessment approach. Groundw Monit Remediat 26:82–92
Johnston CD (2010) Selecting and assessing strategies for remediating LNAPL in soils and aquifers. CRC for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment. CRC Care Technical Report No.18. http://www.crccare.com/files/dmfile/CRCCARETechReport18-SelectingandassessingstrategiesforremediatingLNAPLinsoilsandaquifers2.pdf
Johnston CD, Adamski M (2005) Relationship between initial and residual LNAPL saturation for different soil types. In: Proceedings of the 2005 petroleum hydrocarbons and organic chemicals in Groundwater®: prevention, assessment, and remediation conference, pp 29–42. Assessment approach. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 26(4), 82–92
Kaluarachchi JJ (1996) Effect of subsurface heterogeneity on free-product recovery from unconfined aquifers. J Contam Hydrol 22:19–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-7722(95)00063-1
Kemblowski MW, Chiang CY (1990) Hydrocarbon thickness fluctuations in monitoring wells. Groundwater 28:244–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1990.tb02252.x
Kulkarni PR, McHugh TE, Newell CJ, Garg S (2015) Evaluation of source-zone attenuation at LUFT sites with mobile LNAPL. Soil Sediment Contam Int J 24:917–929. https://doi.org/10.1080/15320383.2015.1071778
Kuo T, Chen Y, Lin C, Chen J (2016) Oil recovery from a fluctuating water table. Pet Sci Technol 34:1562–1567
Lari KS, Rayner JL, Davis GB (2018) Towards characterizing LNAPL remediation endpoints. J Environ Manag 224:97–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.07.041
Lari KS, Davis GB, Rayner JL, Bastow TP, Puzon GJ (2019) Natural source zone depletion of LNAPL: a critical review supporting modelling approaches. Water Res 157:630–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.04.001
Lenhard RJ, Rayner JL, Davis GB (2017) A practical tool for estimating subsurface LNAPL distributions and transmissivity using current and historical fluid levels in groundwater wells: effects of entrapped and residual LNAPL. J Contam Hydrol 205:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2017.06.002
Lenhard RJ, Lari SK, Rayner JL, Davis GB (2018) Evaluating an analytical model to predict subsurface LNAPL distributions and transmissivity from current and historic fluid levels in groundwater wells: comparing results to numerical simulations. Groundw Monit Remediat 38:75–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12254
MacDonald JA, Kavanaugh MC (1994) Restoring contaminated groundwater: an achievable goal? Environ Sci Technol 28:362A–368A. https://doi.org/10.1021/es00057a001
Maréchal JC, Dewandel B, Ahmed S, Galeazzi L, Zaidi FK (2006) Combined estimation of specific yield and natural recharge in a semi-arid groundwater basin with irrigated agriculture. J Hydrol 329:281–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.02.022
Marinelli F, Durnford DS (1996) LNAPL thickness in monitoring wells considering hysteresis and entrapment. Groundwater 34:405–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1996.tb02021.x
McCoy K, Zimbron J, Sale T, Lyverse M (2015) Measurement of natural losses of LNAPL using CO2 traps. Groundwater 53:658–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwat.12240
McCray JE, Tick GR, Jawitz JW, Gierke JS, Brusseau ML, Falta RW, Wood AL (2011) Remediation of NAPL source zones: lessons learned from field studies at Hill and Dover AFB. Groundwater 49:727–744. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2010.00783.x
McGuire TM, McDade JM, Newell CJ (2006) Performance of DNAPL source depletion technologies at 59 chlorinated solvent-impacted sites. Groundw Monit Remediat 26:73–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6592.2006.00054.x
Mercer JW (1990) Basics of pump-and-treat ground-water remediation technology. Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency
Mercer JW, Cohen RM (1990) A review of immiscible fluids in the subsurface: Properties, models, characterization and remediation. J Contaminant Hydrol 6:107–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-7722(90)90043-G
Mualem Y (1976) A new model for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated porous media. Water Resour Res 12:513–522. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR012i003p00513
Neto DC, Chang HK, van Genuchten MT (2016) A mathematical view of water table fluctuations in a shallow aquifer in Brazil. Groundwater 54:82–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwat.12329
Palmier C, Dodt M, Atteia O (2016) Comparison of oil transmissivity methods using bail-down test data. Groundw Monit Remediat 36:73–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12173
Parcher MA, Johnson JA, Parker JC (1995) Effects of soil type on separate phase hydrocarbon recovery under fluctuating water conditions. In: Proceedings of the 1995 petroleum hydrocarbons and organic chemicals in ground water: prevention, detection, and remediation conference and exhibition, pp 439–451
Peters CA, Knightes CD, Brown DG (1999) Long-term composition dynamics of PAH-containing NAPLs and implications for risk assessment. Environ Sci Technol 33:4499–4507
Saenton S, Illangasekare TH (2013) Effects of incomplete remediation of NAPL-contaminated aquifers: experimental and numerical modeling investigations. Appl Water Sci 3(2):401–414
Sleep BE, Sehayek L, Chien CC (2000) A modeling and experimental study of light nonaqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) accumulation in wells and LNAPL recovery from wells. Water Resour Res 36:3535–3545
St. Germain R, Martin T (2008) North American environmental field conference and exposition—LIF workshop slides, Tampa, FL. https://clu-in.org/download/char/lif/Dakota-Technologies-LIF-Workshop.pdf
Steffy DA, Johnston CD, Barry DA (1998) Numerical simulations and long-column tests of LNAPL displacement and trapping by a fluctuating water table. J Soil Contam 7:325–356
Suthersan S, Koons B, Schnobrich M (2015) Contemporary management of sites with petroleum LNAPL presence. Groundw Monit Remediat 35:23–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12099
Teramoto EH, Chang HK (2017) Field data and numerical simulation of btex concentration trends under water table fluctuations: example of a jet fuel-contaminated site in Brazil. J Contam Hydrol 198:37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2017.01.002
Teramoto EH, Chang HK (2018) Métodos WTF e simulação numérica de fluxo para estimativa de recarga–exemplo Aquífero Rio Claro em Paulínia/SP. Águas Subterrâneas 32:173–180. https://doi.org/10.14295/ras.v32i2.28943(in Portuguese)
Teramoto EH, Chang HK (2019) Geochemical conceptual model of BTEX biodegradation in an iron-rich aquifer. Appl Geochem 100:293–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2018.11.019
Thornton SF, Tobin K, Smith JW (2013) Comparison of constant and transient-source zones on simulated contaminant plume evolution in groundwater: Implications for hydrogeological risk assessment. Groundw Monit Remediat 33:78–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12008
Tomlinson DW, Rivett MO, Wealthall GP, Sweeney RE (2017) Understanding complex LNAPL sites: Illustrated handbook of LNAPL transport and fate in the subsurface. J Environ Manag 204:748–756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.08.015
van Genuchten MT (1980) A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils 1. Soil Sci Soc Am J 44:892–898. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002x
Waddill DW, Parker JC (1997) Simulated recovery of light, nonaqueous phase liquid from unconfined heterogeneous aquifers. Groundwater 35:938–947. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1997.tb00165.x
Wang W, Kuo T, Chen Y, Fan K, Liang H, Chen J (2014) Effect of precipitation on LNAPL recovery performance: an integration of laboratory and field results. J Petrol Sci Eng 116:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2014.03.001
Zhao C, Mumford KG, Kueper BH (2014) Laboratory study of non-aqueous phase liquid and water co-boiling during thermal treatment. J Contam Hydrol 164:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2014.05.008
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge support for this study from the Basin Studies Laboratory (LEBAC) of the Department of Applied Geology, associated with the Center for Environmental Studies (CEA) of UNESP and the Foundation for Development of UNESP (FUNDUNESP), the National Counsel for Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq), and CAPES-Brazil. We also acknowledge the anonymous reviewers for critical suggestions used to improve the work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Teramoto, E.H., Pede, M.A.Z. & Chang, H.K. Impact of water table fluctuations on the seasonal effectiveness of the pump-and-treat remediation in wet–dry tropical regions. Environ Earth Sci 79, 435 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-09182-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-09182-1