有机污染场地原位修复过程的地球物理动态监测与分析

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2023.3.1

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

有机污染场地原位修复过程的动态监测是评估修复进程和效果的重要环节,监测方法的选择直接影响修复效率及费用。本研究利用高密度电阻率法,结合常规监测井数据,全面刻画了原位热强化氧化耦合修复过程。结果显示,场地内电阻率与水化学、地下水位、污染物含量和温度数据相互验证,实现了点面信息结合。研究发现,在原位热修复过程中,场地内地层电阻率会随温度升高而降低。基于温度与电阻率的经验关系,本文提出了污染物含量变化对电阻率的影响系数,得出影响系数随污染物含量的不断减小而增加。本研究还推算出原位热修复过程中温度及污染物含量的分布,即浓度随温度的不断升高而降低。针对原位氧化修复过程,电阻率变化有效刻画了原位氧化修复中过硫酸钠及水的动态注入过程。研究充分体现了地球物理方法在原位修复监测中的优势,可为有机污染场地原位修复过程精准、高效及低成本的动态监测提供重要参考。

关键词: 地球物理, 有机污染场地, 原位热修复, 原位化学氧化, 动态监测

Abstract:

Real-time monitoring of in-situ remediation processes is crucial for evaluating the progress and effectiveness of addressing organic contamination at sites. Electrical resistivity tomography, in conjunction with sampling analysis, is utilized to monitor in-situ thermal oxidation remediation procedures. The findings demonstrate that changes in resistivity align with variations in hydrochemistry, groundwater levels, contaminant concentrations, and temperature. Specifically, resistivity decreases as temperature rises during in-situ thermal remediation. By establishing an empirical link between temperature and resistivity, an influence coefficient of concentration on resistivity is proposed, with the coefficient increasing as contamination concentration decreases. Furthermore, the distributions of temperature and contaminant concentrations during the heating phase are inferred, showing a decrease in concentration with increasing temperature. Additionally, variations in resistivity effectively map out the dynamic injection process of persulfate and water during in-situ chemical oxidation remediation. In summary, geophysical methods offer an effective means to dynamically monitor in-situ remediation processes at organic contaminated sites.

Key words: geophysics, organic contaminated site, in-situ thermal desorption, in-situ chemical oxidation, dynamic monitoring

中图分类号:

夏腾, 张家铭, 李书鹏, 郭丽莉, 王祺, 毛德强. 有机污染场地原位修复过程的地球物理动态监测与分析[J]. 地学前缘, 2024, 31(3): 432-442.

XIA Teng, ZHANG Jiaming, LI Shupeng, GUO Lili, WANG Qi, MAO Deqiang. Geophysical dynamic monitoring and analysis of in-situ remediation process at organic contaminated sites[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2024, 31(3): 432-442.

图/表 11

图1 污染场地概况

Fig.1 Overview of contaminated sites

图2 场地原位修复进程时间轴

Fig.2 Timeline of in-situ remediation process at contaminated site

图3 化学参数、地下水位及污染物含量监测结果

Fig.3 Monitoring results of chemical parameters, groundwater level and contaminant concentration

表1 土壤取样及污染物含量信息

Table 1 Soil sampling and contaminant concentration information

取样点号	深度/m	初始(第3天) 含量/(mg·kg^-1)			原位热脱附处理后(第36天) 含量/(mg·kg^-1)			注入过硫酸盐后(第44天) 含量/(mg·kg^-1)			去除率/ %
取样点号	深度/m	多环芳烃	石油烃	总含量	多环芳烃	石油烃	总含量	多环芳烃	石油烃	总含量	去除率/ %
S1-01	1.5~2	102.87	1 290	1 392.87	63.91	295	358.91	28.16	203	231.16	83.4
S1-02	1.5~2	155.60	1 840	1 995.60	45.71	285	330.71	21.17	124	145.17	92.8
S1-03	0.5~1	83.11	1 110	1 193.11	35.60	274	309.60	7.20	190	197.20	83.5
S2-01	1.5~2	3 851	24 600	28 451	56.95	800	856.95	30.88	189	219.88	99.3
S2-02	0.5~1	51.02	796	847.02	25.94	348	373.94	7.10	204	211.10	75.1
S2-03	1.5~2	97.99	1 130	1 227.99	17.86	357	374.86	3.60	210	213.60	82.6
S3-01	0.5~1	64.51	717	781.51	10.98	297	307.98	4.50	206	210.50	73.1
S3-02	2~3	51.19	631	682.19	19.80	304	323.80	10.54	214	224.54	67.1
S3-03	0.5~1	47.90	991	1 038.90	22.95	358	380.95	1.19	120	121.19	88.3
检出限		48	4 500		48	4 500		48	4 500

图4 L1修复过程(第2~50天)测线电阻率变化结果

Fig.4 Resistivity monitoring results of survey line L1 during remediation process (day 2-day 50)

图5 L2修复过程(第2~50天)测线电阻率变化结果

Fig.5 Resistivity monitoring results of survey line L2 during remediation process (day 2-day 50)

图6 监测过程不同深度电阻率与温度的变化结果

Fig.6 The results of resistivity and temperature changes at different depths during monitoring process

表2 加热阶段污染物含量对电阻率的影响系数k

Table 2 Influence coefficient (k) of contaminant concentration on resistivity during heating stage

时间	污染物含量影响系数k/%
时间	1 m处	2 m处	3 m处
第3天(开始加热)	-3.99	-5.66	-1.08
第4天	-3.62	-5.89	-1.01
第5天	-4.52	-7.22	-2.06
第24天	-11.86	-15.47	-5.24
第26天	-13.77	-15.98	-8.91
第27天	-14.57	-16.48	-9.14
第28天	-17.99	-17.80	-9.06
第29天	-18.06	-18.65	-8.66
第30天	-16.34	-19.44	-11.33
第31天	-18.87	-19.41	-10.22
第32天	-19.38	-20.82	-12.27
第35天	-18.82	-19.19	-13.27
第36天(停止加热)	-19.70	-20.70	-13.97

图7 污染物含量与电阻率的关系 a—同一温度条件下的电阻率变化结果;b—污染物含量与校正电阻率的拟合结果。

Fig.7 Relationship between contaminant concentration and soil resistivity (a) Results of resistivity change under the same temperature; (b) Fitting results of contaminant concentration and corrected resistivity values.

图8 不同深度的温度和污染物含量变化结果

Fig.8 Results of temperature and concentration changes at different depths

图9 温度及污染物含量测量值与计算值的差异

Fig.9 Differences between measured and calculated values of temperature and contaminant concentration

参考文献 34

[1]	何宝南, 何江涛, 孙继朝, 等. 区域地下水污染综合评价研究现状与建议[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(3): 51-63. DOI
[2]	LU Y L, SONG S, WANG R S, et al. Impacts of soil and water pollution on food safety and health risks in China[J]. Environment International, 2015, 77: 5-15. DOI PMID
[3]	生态环境部. 2021中国生态环境状况公报[M]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 2022.
[4]	孙兴凯, 黄海, 王海东, 等. 大型污染场地修复过程中的问题探讨与工程实践[J]. 环境工程技术学报, 2020, 10(5): 883-890.
[5]	朱辉, 叶淑君, 吴吉春, 等. 中国典型有机污染场地土层岩性和污染物特征分析[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(5): 26-34. DOI
[6]	白利平, 罗云, 刘俐, 等. 污染场地修复技术筛选方法及应用[J]. 环境科学, 2015, 36(11): 4218-4224.
[7]	钟毅, 李广贺, 张旭, 等. 污染土壤石油生物降解与调控效应研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2006, 13(1): 128-133.
[8]	生态环境部. 建设用地土壤污染风险管控和修复监测技术导则[S]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 2019.
[9]	刘兆平, 杨进, 罗水余. 地球物理方法对垃圾填埋场探测的有效性试验研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2010, 17(3): 250-258.
[10]	张振宇, 许伟伟, 邓亚平, 等. 三氯乙烯污染土壤的复电阻率特征和频谱参数研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(5): 114-124. DOI
[11]	BORDING T, KUHL A K, FIANDACA G, et al. Cross-borehole geoelectrical time-lapse monitoring of in situ chemical oxidation and permeability estimation through induced polarization[J]. Near Surface Geophysics, 2020, 19: 43-58.
[12]	TITOV K, TARASOV A, ILYIN Y, et al. Relationships between induced polarization relaxation time and hydraulic properties of sandstone[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 2010, 180(3): 1095-1106.
[13]	姜勇, 徐刚, 杨洁, 等. 高密度电法在原位修复土壤过程中的监控研究[J]. 环境监测管理与技术, 2020, 32(6): 18-22.
[14]	杨迪琨, 刘兴昌, 祝福荣, 等. 土壤污染原位热脱附修复过程的电场监测方法[C]//中国地球科学联合学术年会论文集. 北京: 中国地球物理学会, 2019: 116-118.
[15]	万金忠, 范婷婷, 靳德成, 等. 复合有机污染场地原位热强化化学氧化还原耦合修复方: CN202210171994.8[P]. 2022-05-27.
[16]	张小刚, 张芳, 李书鹏, 等. 污染场地原位热修复技术与能效分析[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(3): 200-206. DOI
[17]	生态环境部. 污染土壤修复工程技术规范: 原位热脱附[S]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 2021.
[18]	蒋梦迪, 张清越, 季跃飞, 等. 热活化过硫酸盐降解三氯生[J]. 环境科学, 2018, 39(4): 1661-1667.
[19]	ARATO A, WEHRER M, BIRÓ B, et al. Integration of geophysical, geochemical and microbiological data for a comprehensive small-scale characterization of an aged LNAPL-contaminated site[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2014, 21: 8948-8963.
[20]	吴昊. 大连某TPH污染场地原位强化过硫酸钠修复技术研究[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳大学, 2017.
[21]	LIU H Z, BRUTON T A, LI W, et al. Oxidation of benzene by persulfate in the presence of Fe(Ⅲ)- and Mn(Ⅳ)-containing oxides: stoichiometric efficiency and transformation products[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2016, 50(2): 890-898.
[22]	李金铭. 地电场与电法勘探[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 2005.
[23]	王玉玲, 能昌信, 王彦文, 等. 重金属污染场地电阻率法探测数值模拟及应用研究[J]. 环境科学, 2013, 35(5): 1908-1914.
[24]	LOKE M H, BARKER R D. Rapid least squares inversion of apparent resistivity pseudosections by a quasi-Newton method[J]. Geophysical Prospecting, 1996, 44: 131-152.
[25]	苏鹏, 杨进. 时移电阻率反演模拟研究[J]. 物探与化探, 2021, 45(1): 159-164.
[26]	环境保护部. 土壤和沉积物多环芳烃的测定: 高效液相色谱法[S]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 2016.
[27]	生态环境部. 土壤和沉积物石油烃(C₁₀-C₄₀)的测定: 气相色谱法[S]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 2019.
[28]	ICE G G. Stream temperature and dissolved oxygen[M]. New York: Springer, 2008.
[29]	TSITONAKI A, PETRI B, CRIMI M, et al. In situ chemical oxidation of contaminated soil and groundwater using persulfate: a review[J]. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 2010, 40(1): 55-91.
[30]	生态环境部, 国际市场监督管理总局. 土壤环境质量建设用地土壤污染风险管控标准[S]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 2018.
[31]	BASS B, CARDENAS M B, BEFUS K M. Seasonal shifts in soil moisture throughout a semiarid hillslope ecotone during drought: a geoelectrical view[J]. Vadose Zone Journal, 2017, 16(2): 1-17.
[32]	KELLER G V, FRISCHKNECT F C. Electrical methods in geophysical prospecting[M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1966.
[33]	XIA T, DONG Y, MAO D, et al. Delineation of LNAPL contaminant plumes at a former perfumery plant using electrical resistivity tomography[J]. Hydrogeology Journal, 2021, 29(3): 1189-1201.
[34]	HARTE P T, SMITH T E, WILLIAMS J H, et al. Time series geophysical monitoring of permanganate injections and in situ chemical oxidation of PCE, OU1 area, Savage Superfund Site, Milford, NH, USA[J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2012, 132: 58-74. DOI PMID