Proof-of-concept study of an aerobic vapor migration barrier beneath a building at a petroleum hydrocarbon-impacted site

Hong Luo, Paul Dahlen, Paul C. Johnson, Tom Peargin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A proof-of-concept study was conducted to evaluate an alternative to traditional extraction-based subslab vapor mitigation systems at sites with petroleum hydrocarbon and/or methane vapor impact concerns. The system utilizes the slow delivery of air beneath a foundation to attenuate vapor migration to the building via aerobic biodegradation. The study was conducted at a site having elevated hydrocarbon plus methane and depleted O2 vapor concentrations (160 mg/L and <1% v/v, respectively) beneath a building having a 195 m2 footprint and a basement extending 1.5 m below ground surface (BGS). Nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL)-impacted soils, first encountered at about 7.6 to 9.1 m BGS, were the source of hydrocarbon and methane vapors, with the latter being generated by anaerobic methanagenesis of the former. O2 concentrations beneath and around the building were monitored prior to and during air injection through a horizontal well installed about 1.5 m beneath the foundation. The air injection rate was increased from 1 to 5 to 10 L/min, with each held steady until the O2 distribution stabilized (46-60 d). The 10 L/min flow rate achieved >5% v/v soil gas O2 concentrations beneath the foundation and spanning a 1.5 m vertical interval. It was within 3× of the pretest stoichiometric requirement estimate of 3.8 L/min. This resulted in reductions in subslab hydrocarbon plus methane concentrations from 80 to <0.01 mg/L and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) reductions to below detection limits (0.5-0.74 ppbv). This air injection rate is <1% of flows for typical extraction-based mitigation systems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1977-1984
Number of pages8
JournalEnvironmental Science and Technology
Volume47
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 19 2013

Fingerprint

Petroleum
petroleum hydrocarbon
Hydrocarbons
Methane
methane
Vapors
mitigation
hydrocarbon
BTEX
soil gas
air
Xylenes
biodegradation
Toluene
Air
Biodegradation
Benzene
Gases
Soils

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Chemistry(all)
  • Environmental Chemistry

Cite this

Proof-of-concept study of an aerobic vapor migration barrier beneath a building at a petroleum hydrocarbon-impacted site. / Luo, Hong; Dahlen, Paul; Johnson, Paul C.; Peargin, Tom.

In: Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 47, No. 4, 19.02.2013, p. 1977-1984.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{547eafbb6a5048ceb84565379de2e0b7,
title = "Proof-of-concept study of an aerobic vapor migration barrier beneath a building at a petroleum hydrocarbon-impacted site",
abstract = "A proof-of-concept study was conducted to evaluate an alternative to traditional extraction-based subslab vapor mitigation systems at sites with petroleum hydrocarbon and/or methane vapor impact concerns. The system utilizes the slow delivery of air beneath a foundation to attenuate vapor migration to the building via aerobic biodegradation. The study was conducted at a site having elevated hydrocarbon plus methane and depleted O2 vapor concentrations (160 mg/L and <1{\%} v/v, respectively) beneath a building having a 195 m2 footprint and a basement extending 1.5 m below ground surface (BGS). Nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL)-impacted soils, first encountered at about 7.6 to 9.1 m BGS, were the source of hydrocarbon and methane vapors, with the latter being generated by anaerobic methanagenesis of the former. O2 concentrations beneath and around the building were monitored prior to and during air injection through a horizontal well installed about 1.5 m beneath the foundation. The air injection rate was increased from 1 to 5 to 10 L/min, with each held steady until the O2 distribution stabilized (46-60 d). The 10 L/min flow rate achieved >5{\%} v/v soil gas O2 concentrations beneath the foundation and spanning a 1.5 m vertical interval. It was within 3× of the pretest stoichiometric requirement estimate of 3.8 L/min. This resulted in reductions in subslab hydrocarbon plus methane concentrations from 80 to <0.01 mg/L and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) reductions to below detection limits (0.5-0.74 ppbv). This air injection rate is <1{\%} of flows for typical extraction-based mitigation systems.",
author = "Hong Luo and Paul Dahlen and Johnson, {Paul C.} and Tom Peargin",
year = "2013",
month = "2",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1021/es3045532",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "47",
pages = "1977--1984",
journal = "Environmental Science & Technology",
issn = "0013-936X",
publisher = "American Chemical Society",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Proof-of-concept study of an aerobic vapor migration barrier beneath a building at a petroleum hydrocarbon-impacted site

AU - Luo, Hong

AU - Dahlen, Paul

AU - Johnson, Paul C.

AU - Peargin, Tom

PY - 2013/2/19

Y1 - 2013/2/19

N2 - A proof-of-concept study was conducted to evaluate an alternative to traditional extraction-based subslab vapor mitigation systems at sites with petroleum hydrocarbon and/or methane vapor impact concerns. The system utilizes the slow delivery of air beneath a foundation to attenuate vapor migration to the building via aerobic biodegradation. The study was conducted at a site having elevated hydrocarbon plus methane and depleted O2 vapor concentrations (160 mg/L and <1% v/v, respectively) beneath a building having a 195 m2 footprint and a basement extending 1.5 m below ground surface (BGS). Nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL)-impacted soils, first encountered at about 7.6 to 9.1 m BGS, were the source of hydrocarbon and methane vapors, with the latter being generated by anaerobic methanagenesis of the former. O2 concentrations beneath and around the building were monitored prior to and during air injection through a horizontal well installed about 1.5 m beneath the foundation. The air injection rate was increased from 1 to 5 to 10 L/min, with each held steady until the O2 distribution stabilized (46-60 d). The 10 L/min flow rate achieved >5% v/v soil gas O2 concentrations beneath the foundation and spanning a 1.5 m vertical interval. It was within 3× of the pretest stoichiometric requirement estimate of 3.8 L/min. This resulted in reductions in subslab hydrocarbon plus methane concentrations from 80 to <0.01 mg/L and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) reductions to below detection limits (0.5-0.74 ppbv). This air injection rate is <1% of flows for typical extraction-based mitigation systems.

AB - A proof-of-concept study was conducted to evaluate an alternative to traditional extraction-based subslab vapor mitigation systems at sites with petroleum hydrocarbon and/or methane vapor impact concerns. The system utilizes the slow delivery of air beneath a foundation to attenuate vapor migration to the building via aerobic biodegradation. The study was conducted at a site having elevated hydrocarbon plus methane and depleted O2 vapor concentrations (160 mg/L and <1% v/v, respectively) beneath a building having a 195 m2 footprint and a basement extending 1.5 m below ground surface (BGS). Nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL)-impacted soils, first encountered at about 7.6 to 9.1 m BGS, were the source of hydrocarbon and methane vapors, with the latter being generated by anaerobic methanagenesis of the former. O2 concentrations beneath and around the building were monitored prior to and during air injection through a horizontal well installed about 1.5 m beneath the foundation. The air injection rate was increased from 1 to 5 to 10 L/min, with each held steady until the O2 distribution stabilized (46-60 d). The 10 L/min flow rate achieved >5% v/v soil gas O2 concentrations beneath the foundation and spanning a 1.5 m vertical interval. It was within 3× of the pretest stoichiometric requirement estimate of 3.8 L/min. This resulted in reductions in subslab hydrocarbon plus methane concentrations from 80 to <0.01 mg/L and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) reductions to below detection limits (0.5-0.74 ppbv). This air injection rate is <1% of flows for typical extraction-based mitigation systems.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84874102797&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84874102797&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1021/es3045532

DO - 10.1021/es3045532

M3 - Article

VL - 47

SP - 1977

EP - 1984

JO - Environmental Science & Technology

JF - Environmental Science & Technology

SN - 0013-936X

IS - 4

ER -