1 / 29

In-Situ Fenton Oxidation: A Critical Analysis Fundamental Chemistry

In-Situ Treatment of Groundwater with Non-aqueous Phase Liquids December 10-12, 2002, Chicago, IL Scott G. Huling, Ph.D., P.E. USEPA Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center, Ada OK. In-Situ Fenton Oxidation: A Critical Analysis Fundamental Chemistry Bench-scale Treatability Studies

zephania-houston
Download Presentation

In-Situ Fenton Oxidation: A Critical Analysis Fundamental Chemistry

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. In-Situ Treatment of Groundwater with Non-aqueous Phase LiquidsDecember 10-12, 2002, Chicago, ILScott G. Huling, Ph.D., P.E.USEPA Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center, Ada OK In-Situ Fenton Oxidation: A Critical Analysis Fundamental Chemistry Bench-scale Treatability Studies Field-scale Applications (pilot- or full-scale) Fate and Transport Issues 1

  2. Fenton and Related Reactions • H2O2 + Fe+2ÿ Fe+3 + OH- + ·OH (1) • H2O2 + Fe+3ÿ Fe+2 + ·O2- + 2 H+ (2) • ·O2- + Fe+3ÿ Fe+2 + O2 (3) • ·OH + Contaminant ÿ Products (CO2, Cl-, etc.) (4) • Scavenging reactions • Eni=1 ki • ·OH + Eni=1 Siÿ products of scavenging rxn (5) • Nonproductive reactions • 2 H2O2 + reactants ÿ O2 + 2 H2O(6) • Miscellaneous optimum pH 3-4; metals mobility; exothermic; stabilizers

  3. Potential Limitations of Fenton Oxidation • 1. Non-productive reactions • 2. Scavenging • 3. Low reaction rates • 4. Insufficient Fe • 5. pH adjustment • 6. Oxidant, iron, acid, stabilizer transport • 7. O2(g) production • 8. Undesirable reaction byproducts • 9. Enhanced volatilization and transport • 10. Unreactive target compounds

  4. Bench-scale Treatability Study Objectives High Priority 1. Proof of concept – quantify extent of oxidation given potential limitations 2. Determine reaction byproducts 3. Metals mobility

  5. Bench-scale Study Guidelines 1. Components: soil, ground water, reagents 2. Capture and quantify losses from the reactor 3. pH change 4. Monitoring parameters: target, byproducts, metals 5. Control 6. Establish pre-, post-oxidation concentrations 7. Perform pre-, post-oxidation mass balance

  6. Field-Scale Application Guidelines 1. Injectate volume vs. pore volume target area 2. H2O2 concentration 3. pH adjustment 4. Pulse injection of Fe(II) and H2O2 5. Injection strategy

  7. H2O2 Reaction, Subsurface Transport [H2O2(t)] / [H2O2]O = exp(–KH2O2 R2 π Z η / Q) (After, Clayton, 1998) Flow, well spacing, pH kH2O2 = -0.91/hr 12 L/min C (t) / C0 4 L/min Radial Distance (m)

  8. Other Chemical Reagents Reactions/interactions Fe(II) - precipitation, complexation, oxidation Acid - consumed by acid neutralizing capacity Stabilizers (H2O2, Fe(II)) - precipitation, complexation, oxidation

  9. Avg. K = 10 ft/day Diffusion K = .0001 ft/day Advection K = .01 ft/day K = 0.1 ft/day K = 100 ft/day

  10. Non-ideal Conditions Need to be Considered Preferential pathways - greater rate of transport and oxidant delivery occurs through high conductive zones Lower permeability zones - diffusion dominated transport << H2O2 reaction Multiple applications

  11. Transport Issues Representative volume Heat and O2(g) released - impact Pneumatic transport of ground water Decreased DNAPL visc., increased mobility DNAPL evaporation Volatilization of DNAPL components Thermal desorption from the solid phase Enhanced H2O2 decomposition

  12. 16

  13. Ground water flow

  14. SVE is a Complimentary Technology to Fenton Oxidation Capture/treat/dispose volatiles SVE may already be part of the remedy Minimize the transport/uncontrolled loss Minimize potential exposure pathways Vent wells for deeper systems

  15. Performance Monitoring Preferred monitoring parameters: target compound - aqueous (rebound: long term vs. immediate), solid reaction byproducts - aqueous Metals - aqueous H2O2 - aqueous Off-gas, soil gas samples Establish sentry wells

  16. … performance monitoring Ground water monitoring Low priority - limited value for performance evaluation CO2 DO TOC COD Conductivity ORP Temperature

  17. Effects of ISFO on Natural Attenuation? 1. H2O2 - antiseptic, heat 2. Heterogeneity - microniches, preferential pathways 3. Improvement in post-oxidation biodegradation 4. Microbial sensitivity 5. Population changes 6. Toxicity response

  18. Health and Safety Heat released O2(g) released + Flammable vapors Enhanced volatilization Accumulation of vapors (buildings, utilities)

  19. Conclusions Hydroxyl radical – strong oxidant Potential limitations Numerous parameters influence success/failure Monitoring parameters/approach – key to successful performance evaluation Enhanced transport processes Recognize/capture volatile emissions 25

  20. Scavenging Analysis Target contaminant oxidation reaction: k @OH + C ÿ reaction byproducts Scavenger oxidation reaction: ki @OH + Siÿ reaction byproducts Reaction rate equations: D[C]/dt = k @OH [C] D[Si]/dt = 3iki@OH [Si]

  21. Relative Reaction Rates Relative rate of reaction (RR) between @OH and Si, and @OH and C RR = (3iki [@OH] [Si]) / (k [@OH] [C])

  22. Example 1 [TCE ] = 450 :g/L (3.42×10-6 M); k = 4.2×109 L/mol-s [Cl-] = 1250 mg/L (3.52×10-2 M); k = 4.3×109 L/mol-s [CO32- ] = 150 mg/L (2.5×10-3 M); k = 3.9×108 L/mol-s [·OH] assume 10-15 M RR = 10,600

  23. Example 2 [PCE ] = 4.15 mg/L (2.5×10-5M); k = 2.6×109 L/mol-s [Cl-] = 45 mg/L (1.27×10-3M); k = 4.3×109 L/mol-s [H2O2]= 50% , 500,000 mg/L (1.47×101M); k = 2.7×107 L/mol-s [·OH] assume 10-15 mol/L RR = 6,180

More Related