Application and energy efficiency analysis of in-situ thermal remediation technology for contaminated sites

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2022.1.42

Abstract

Abstract:

To address the difficulties associated with the effectiveness and efficiency assessments of in-situ thermal remediation (ISTR) technology, this study analyzed and revealed the principals of heat transfer and pollutant removal, the key influencing factors such as thermal conductivity and electrical conductivity, and the energy efficiency of ISTR. Based on the pilot-scale implementation of in-situ electrical resistance heating (ERH) remediation technology at a contaminated site, heating performance of the ERH system and the spatio-temporal distribution of the temperature field were analyzed. Further, the causes of spatial variation of temperature were investigated. According to the analysis, the site was heated primarily via electrical resistance heating and thermal conduction by the electrode well. The heating efficiency was affected by the electrode well distance and site lithological characteristics. Heat loss to the surface and around is a key factor for future energy efficiency assessment of ISTR technology.

Key words: contaminated sites, in-situ thermal remediation, electrical resistance heating, temperature distribution, assessment of energy efficiency

CLC Number:

ZHANG Xiaogang, ZHANG Fang, LI Shupeng, WEI Yunxiao, HOU Deyi, LI Guanghe. Application and energy efficiency analysis of in-situ thermal remediation technology for contaminated sites[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2022, 29(3): 200-206.

Figures/Tables 7

Fig.1 Trends in ISTR technology applications. Adapted from [8].

Fig.2 Four-phase partition of chlorinated solvents in formation media. Adapted from [27].

Fig.3 In-situ electrical resistance heating remediation system and well pattern designs. Adapted from [48].

Fig.4 Electrode well design profile. Adapted from [48].

Fig.5 Temperature field distribution in the ERH remediation system after 100-day continual operation

Fig.6 Heating rates at T1-T4 temperature monitoring points at different depths

Table 1 Stratigraphic lithology and average soil saturation at different depths

深度/m	地层岩性	平均土壤饱和度/%
3.5	粉土	93.1
5.5	黏土	94.4
7.5	粉质黏土	93.8

References 48

[1]	康绍果, 李书鹏, 范云. 污染地块原位加热处理技术研究现状与发展趋势[J]. 化工进展, 2017, 36(7): 2621-2631.
[2]	USEPA. Superfund remedy report, 16th Edition[R]. Washington: US Environmental Protection Agency, 2020: 1-85.
[3]	土壤与地下水修复行业2019年发展报告[R]. 北京: 中国环境保护产业协会, 2020: 211-246.
[4]	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.
[5]	王灿, 张雅欣. 碳中和愿景的实现路径与政策体系[J]. 中国环境管理, 2020, 12(6): 58-64.
[6]	侯德义, 李广贺. 污染土壤绿色可持续修复的内涵与发展方向分析[J]. 环境保护, 2016, 44(20): 16-19.
[7]	RAMEY H J Jr. Current review of oil recovery by steam injection[C]//7th World Petroleum Congress. Mexico, 1967: 471-476.
[8]	HORST J, MUNHOLLAND J, HEGELE P, et al. In situ thermal remediation for source areas: technology advances and a review of the market from 1988-2020[J]. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 2021, 41(1): 17-31. DOI URL
[9]	USEPA. In situ thermal treatment of chlorinated solvents: fundamentals and field[R]. Washington: US Environmental Protection Agency, 2004.
[10]	HILBERTS B, EIKELBOOM D H, VERHEUL J H A M, et al. In situ techniques[C]// First international TNO conference on contaminated soil. Utrecht: Springer, 1986: 679-698.
[11]	UDELL K S, SITAR N, HUNT J R, et al.Process for in situ decontamination of subsurface soil and groundwater: US5018576 A[P]. 1991-07-31.
[12]	中华人民共和国生态环境部.HJ 1165-2021污染土壤修复工程技术规范原位热脱附[S]. 北京: 中国环境出版集团, 2021.
[13]	DAVARZANI H, ZHANBOLAT S, COLOMBANO S, et al. Modelling of heat and mass transfer during in-situ microwave thermal treatment of polluted soils[C]//13th international conference on diffusion in solids and liquids. Vienne Austria: Archive ouverte HAL,2017:hal-01517391.
[14]	黄剑波, 万金忠, 龙涛. 原位热脱附技术的发展以及实际案例应用[C]// 2020中国环境科学学会科学技术年会论文集(第三卷). 北京: 中国环境科学学会, 2020: 3585-3589.
[15]	CHANG H O. Hazardous and Radioactive Waste Treatment Technologies Handbook[M]. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2001.
[16]	GAVASKAR A, BHARGAVA M, CONDIT W. Final report-cost and performance review of electrical resistance heating (ERH) for source treatment[R]. California: Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center, 2007: 1-132.
[17]	AZIZAN N A, KAMARUDDIN S A, CHELLIAPAN S. Steam-enhanced extraction experiments, simulations and field studies for dense non-aqueous phase liquid removal: a review[J]. MATEC Web of Conferences, 2016, 47: 05012. DOI URL
[18]	USACE. Design: In situ thermal remediation-engineering and design[M]. Washington: Department of The Army, US Army Corps of Engineers, 2009.
[19]	KINGSTON J T, DAHLEN P R, JOHNSON P C, et al. Critical evaluation of state-of-the-art in situ thermal treatment technologies for DNAPL source zone[R]. Virginia: US Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, 2010: 1-34.
[20]	FARES A, KINDT B T, LAPUMA P, et al. Desorption kinetics of trichloroethylene from powdered soils[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 1995, 29(6):1564-1568.
[21]	DAVIS E L. Ground water issue: how heat can enhance in-situ soil and aquifer remediation: important chemical properties and guidance on choosing the appropriate technique[R]. Washington: US Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Environmental Research Information, 1997: 1-18.
[22]	HERON G, BAKER R S, BIERSCHENK J M, et al. Heat it all the way-mechanisms and results achieved using in-situ thermal remediation[C]// Proceedings of the fifth international conference on remediation of chlorinated and recalcitrant compounds. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., 2006: 1-8.
[23]	REID R C, POLING B E, PRAUSNITZ J M. The Properties of Gases and Liquids, Vol. 5[M]. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987.
[24]	HERON G, CHRISTENSEN T H, ENFIELD C G. Henry’s law constant for trichloroethylene between 10 and 95℃[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 1998, 32(10): 1433-1437. DOI URL
[25]	BAHADUR N P, SHIU W Y, BOOCOCK D G B, et al. Temperature dependence of octanol water partition coefficient for selected chlorobenzenes[J]. Journal of Chemical and Engineering Data, 1997, 42(4): 685-688. DOI URL
[26]	BAKER R S, KUHLMAN M. A description of the mechanisms of in-situ thermal destruction (ISTD) reactions[C]// The 2nd international conference on oxidation and reduction technologies for soil and groundwater. Toronto, 2002: 1-10.
[27]	HULING S G, WEAVER J W. Ground water issue:dense nonaqueous phase liquids. EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Office of Research and Development[R]. Washington: Superfund Technology Support Center for Ground Water, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, 1991: 1-21.
[28]	张学良, 廖朋辉, 李群, 等. 复杂有机物污染地块原位热脱附修复技术的研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2018, 49(4): 993-1000.
[29]	赵中华, 李晓东, 陈彤, 等. 多氯联苯污染土壤热脱附研究综述[J]. 生态毒理学报, 2016, 11(2): 61-68.
[30]	SHI Y, LUO Z H, WANG Y X, et al. New advances in in situ thermal desorption technology for contaminated soil[J]. Science China Technological Sciences, 2019, 62(11): 2075-2076. DOI URL
[31]	傅海辉, 黄启飞, 朱晓华, 等. 温度和停留时间对十溴联苯醚在污染土壤中热脱附的影响[J]. 环境科学研究, 2012, 25(9): 981-986.
[32]	ARESTA M, DIBENEDETTO A, FRAGALE C, et al. Thermal desorption of polychlorobiphenyls from contaminated soils and their hydrodechlorination using Pd- and Rh-supported catalysts[J]. Chemosphere, 2008, 70(6):1052-1058. DOI URL
[33]	王瑛, 李扬, 黄启飞, 等. 温度和停留时间对DDT污染土壤热脱附效果的影响[J]. 环境工程, 2012, 30(1): 116-120.
[34]	HERON G, LACHANCE J, BAKER R. Removal of PCE DNAPL from tight clays using in situ thermal desorption[J]. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 2013, 33(4): 31-43.
[35]	HERON G, PARKER K, FOURNIER S, et al. World’s largest in situ thermal desorption project: challenges and solutions[J]. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 2015, 35(3):89-100. DOI URL
[36]	孙袭明. 有机污染土壤热脱附技术的影响因素研究及模拟系统开发[D]. 天津: 天津大学, 2018.
[37]	梁贤伟, 孙袭明, 吴晓霞. 原位热脱附土壤修复技术的关键影响因素研究[J]. 广州化工, 2020, 48(10): 79-82.
[38]	MERINO J, BUCALÁ V. Effect of temperature on the release of hexadecane from soil by thermal treatment[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2007, 143(1/2): 455-461. DOI URL
[39]	刘昊, 张峰, 马烈. 有机污染场地原位热修复: 技术与应用[J]. 工程建设与设计, 2017(16): 93-98.
[40]	李闯. 燃气热修复土壤过程中多场耦合热质传递及应用研究[D]. 郑州: 华北水利水电大学, 2020.
[41]	XU J, WANG F, SUN C, et al. Gas thermal remediation of an organic contaminated site: field trial[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 2019, 26(6): 6038-6047. DOI URL
[42]	刘凯, 张瑞环, 王世杰. 污染地块修复原位热脱附技术的研究及应用进展[J]. 中国氯碱, 2017(12): 31-37.
[43]	王熠. 地源热泵土壤热物性不确定因素特征分析[D]. 武汉: 华中科技大学, 2012.
[44]	FALCIGLIA P P, GIUSTRA M G, VAGLIASINDI F G A. Low-temperature thermal desorption of diesel polluted soil: influence of temperature and soil texture on contaminant removal kinetics[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2011, 185(1): 392-400. DOI URL
[45]	段妍, 晋华, 郑强. 含水率对黏土及沙土导热系数的影响[J]. 人民黄河, 2016, 38(2): 114-116, 120.
[46]	KENDALL S, WOLF J L. Six-phase heating^TM: the new power tool[J]. Remediation Journal, 1999, 9(4): 79-85.
[47]	孙宇瑞. 土壤含水率和盐分对土壤电导率的影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2000, 5(4): 39-41.
[48]	韦云霄, 李书鹏, 张芳, 等. 原位热修复技术在污染场地土壤修复中的应用[R]. 北京: 北京建工环境修复股份有限公司, 2021.