1 / 31

Steam Enhanced Remediation In Fractured Rock (and a little about the other sites)

Steam Enhanced Remediation In Fractured Rock (and a little about the other sites) Gorm Heron, Scientist/Engineer Hank Sowers, CEO/Chief Operator Dacre Bush, Geologist/Program Manager Gregg Crisp, Site manager SteamTech Environmental Services Bakersfield, CA. Visalia Pole Yard.

denna
Download Presentation

Steam Enhanced Remediation In Fractured Rock (and a little about the other sites)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Steam Enhanced Remediation In Fractured Rock (and a little about the other sites) Gorm Heron, Scientist/Engineer Hank Sowers, CEO/Chief Operator Dacre Bush, Geologist/Program Manager Gregg Crisp, Site manager SteamTech Environmental Services Bakersfield, CA

  2. Visalia Pole Yard 160,000 gallons removed from subsurface In-situ destruction significant UC Berkeley – LLNL - SCE Creosote DNAPL to +140 ft depth Alluvial sands and gravels with clays Both LNAPL and DNAPL Approaching MCLs in 2002 Craig Eaker, SCE

  3. Alameda Point (Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center) Alameda Point

  4. Edwards AFB Site 61

  5. Beale AFB 5

  6. Loring: Fractured limestone

  7. Florida site • Full-scale clean-up with performance guarantee • Steam enhanced remediation and electrical heating • Tight pneumatic and hydraulic control • Stimulated oxidation reactions for reduction of TPH concentrations in oily areas • Detailed subsurface monitoring (temperature and electrical resistance tomography)

  8. Well types Perimeter steam injection wells (SI) Extraction well with Hawthorn electrode (EE) Area A steam injection well with Hawthorn electrode (SE) Deep electrode (DE) Steam Electrode Sand Clay Electrode

  9. Preliminary results, Edwards AFB • Acknowledgments to: • Stephen Watts, Edwards AFB project manager • Dave Leeson, AFCEE • Scott Palmer, Earth Tech project manager • Gregg Crisp, site manager and operator • Layi Oyelowo, Edwards AFB • Results are preliminary, conclusions have not been published or confirmed by the above persons

  10. Fractured granite (quartz monzonite)

  11. Objectives/questions • Will SER be effective for removal of VOCs from fractured rock at Edwards AFB? • How is the DNAPL mobilized and extracted? • What are the ultimate VOC cleanup levels that can be expected at Edwards AFB using SER? • How rapidly will the steam heat Site 61 at Edwards AFB? • How should steam injection and extraction well-fields be designed for optimum performance at Edwards AFB? • What is the optimal steam injection and extraction strategy for DNAPL in fractured rock at Edwards AFB? • How long will the site stay hot after completion of the steaming?

  12. Hydrogeology Weathered zone 30 ft Fractured granite

  13. TCE distribution ? ? ?

  14. Vertical distribution of contaminants before operations: PID readings on cores

  15. Extraction and steam injection wells

  16. 0 High-temperature grout (9 ft) #1/20 Fine sand (3 ft) 9 10 12 Coarse sand/gravel (11 ft) Weathered zone (approximately 35 ft) Top injection screen (18 to 20 ft) 20 #1/20 Fine sand (3 ft) 23 26 High-temperature grout (5 ft) 30 Fine sand (3 ft) 31 Depth below grade (ft) 34 Middle injection screen (38 to 40 ft) Coarse sand/gravel (9 ft) 40 Fresh bedrock Fine sand (2 ft) 43 High-temperature grout (5 ft) 45 Fine sand (2 ft) 50 50 52 Deep injection screen (58 to 60 ft) Coarse sand/gravel (13 ft) 60 Note: Thermocouples were attached at 5 ft intervals from 5 ft below grade to 45 ft below grade, and at 49 ft, 52 ft, 55 ft and 60 ft. 65 Injection well design

  17. 17

  18. 18

  19. Strategy Vacuum test: Vapor capture radius ~ 80 ft Initially steam injection deep only, extraction shallow Air co-injection Extract 25 to 50 % more than injected Monitor carefully and adjust strategy

  20. Subsurface monitoring network VEA-2 VEA-4 EW-3 TMA-D EW-4 TMA-C IW-1 VEA-5 TMA-B EW-1 EW-2 TMA-A VEA-3 VEA-1

  21. ERT data planes ERT data planes VEA-2 VEA-4 VEA-5 VEA-3 VEA-1

  22. Example ERT data plane 6/23 6/27 6/10 7/6 7/10

  23. Thermocouple data Depth below grade (ft)

  24. Depth below grade (ft)

  25. Depth below grade (ft)

  26. Water balance

  27. Energy balance

  28. Vapor flow rate and PID readings

  29. Headspace PID data

  30. Recovery of NAPL

  31. Results • Successful treatability study - great data • Steam heated site partially, and accelerated mass removal • More than 700 lbs of VOCs removed • NAPL recovered where no NAPL was expected • Air injection promising for opening fractures to steam flow, and potentially for reducing risk of NAPL condensation • ERT apparently valuable at Edwards: Heated zones showed large changes in electrical resistivity • Very uneven steam distribution: Increased focus on temperature monitoring, also in extraction wells

More Related