Possible catchment scale solutions to contaminated sediments in the Elbe River Ulrich Förstner...

Possible catchment scale solutions to contaminated sediments in the Elbe River

Ulrich Förstner

Department of Environmental Science and TechnologyUniverstiy of Technology, Hamburg-Harburg, Germany

curriculum in natural environmental science, 2005

Sediment Problem Solutions at Catchment Scale: Overview

Location of In-Place Pollutants in a River Basin (Förstner et al. 2004))

Air emissions

MineWet or dry fallout

City

Sewage treatment plant

Old chemical dump site

Floodplain soils and sediments

Landfill

Farm

Sm

all

Ha

rbo

rs –

e.g

. H

itza

cke

rS

ub

aq

ueo

us

De

po

t &

Ca

pp

ing

Min

e F

loo

din

g/W

aste

In-S

itu

Tre

atm

ent

Flo

od

pla

ins

– e

.g.

Sp

itte

lwas

ser

In-S

itu

Sta

bil

izat

ion

(P

lan

ts,

NA

)

Location of in-place pollutants

Lake

Siltation in reservoir

Dam

Confined dis-posal area for dredged spoils

Open dredge spoil disposal area

Mine drainage

Riv

er

Dam

– e

.g.

Mu

lde

Tem

po

ral

Ret

enti

on I

III

IV

IIHarbor basins


Substances and Areas of Concern in the Elbe River Catchment

Substance of Concern Historical Sources Areas of Concern

arsenic (As) browncoal mining Mulde

cadmium (Cd) browncoal mining, smelting processes,metal processing

Mulde (Havel)(Elbe downstream of Magdeburg)

copper (Cu) artificial silk productioncopper-processing industry

ElbeSaale

mercury (Hg) chlor-alkali electrolysis Saale, Mulde downstream of Bitterfeld

lead (Pb) mining, smelters Saale, Freiberger Mulde

zinc (Zn) industrial and municipal waste-water, mining industry, smelters

Saale, Mulde, Weiße Elster, Havel (Elbe downstream of Magdeburg)

haloginated organic compounds (AOX)

pulp and paper mills Mulde, Saale

insecticids, DDT, γ-HCH production facilities Bilina (CR), Mulde

hexachlorobenzene chemical industry Karlsberg & Luznice (disposal sites), Bilina (CR)

PCB chemical industry Bilina (CR), Mulde, Saale, Weiße Elster

PAH incomplete incineration Schwarze Elster, Mulde

Table 1 Examples of Historical Contamination (S. Heise after Spott & Becker, Prange et al. 2000)


Elbe River

Acid NeutralizingCapacity

SpecificSurface Area

Fly Ash 29 mMole/g 10,3 m2/g

Red Mud 3,25 mMole/g 27,8 m2/g

CalciumBentonite

0,56 mMole/g 55,1 m2/g

Zeolite 0,005 mMole/g 15,0 m2/g

Mulde-Reservoir

First Phase Second Phase

In-Situ Treatment of Mine Effluents with Reactive Materials

Upper Elbe Basin – Metal Mobilization from Mine Flooding (Zoumis et al., 2000)


Flooding ofDyke Foreshores

Mining Accidents

Usual MeasuresAnalysis of pollution load in soils, sediments and groundwater; temporal restrictions to use the sites for agriculture etc.

Flood Events

Guadiamar 1998, Baia Mare 2000

Floodplains and marshy lands as sinks for contaminated sediments

Rhine 1992, Odra 1997, Elbe 2002

Floodplain Soils and Sediments: Examples and Usual Measures

Spittelwasser Creek und Mulde River

Dioxins/Furans [ng PCDD/F / kg]

Village Greppin up to 5.590 ng/kg

Village Jessnitz up to 2.540 ng/kg

Mulde Floodplain up to 57.700 ng/kg

River Bank up to 27.600 ng/kg

Spittelwasser Floodplain (Chemical Triangle) –

Dioxins in Soils and Sediments


Proposed ProjectEstimatedCosts/Time

01 Monitoring System

Detection of the flood-dependent pollutant transport behaviour shall be monitored by hydromechanical methods and air-based systems

400,000 EURO1st – 48th month

02 Regulation Project

(1) Implementation of models for sediment and pollutant transport

(2) Installation and use of sediment traps; point excavation of soil

(3) Utilization of „natural attenuation“; promotion of plant growth

Projects (1) + (3) 530,000 EURO

12th – 30th month

03 Testing This refers notably to the functionality and the effects of sediment traps. The results shall be used for predicting the pollutant output

250,000 EURO

30th – 40th month

04 Permanent Operation

(a) Efficiency control of the complete implementation, e.g. by GIS

(b) Establishment of citizens‘ advice bureau (children, hunter, etc.)

770,000 EURO

24th – 48th month

05 Efficiency Control

The after-case shall be carried out continuously and long-term according to the example of other permanently observed areas

225,000 EURO

(15,000 EURO/a~ 15 years)

Floodplain Soils and Sediments: Interdisciplinary Approach

Table 2 Combination of Monitoring Systems, Mearures, Testing and Control (Anon., 2000)


Cause (Example) Effect

Compaction Reduction of Matrix.. .

Consolidation - Erodibility

Phytostabilization (Plant Roots) - Permeability

Penetration into Dead-End Pores - Reactivity

Interlayer Collapse of Clay Minerals Reduced Pollutant...

Coprecipitation (High-Energy Sites) - Mobility

Occlusion and Overcoating - Availability

Absorption/Diffusion - Toxicity

”Diagenesis“ ”Natural Attenuation“

Floodplain Soils and Sediments: Natural Attenuation Processes

Table 3 Demobilization of Pollutants in Solid Matrices by Natural Factors (Förstner, 2003)


Aqueous phase concentration (mg/L)

0,01

0,1

1

10

100

1,000

10.000

100,000

1,000,000

0,001 0,01 0,1 1 100 1000 100000,0001 10

Water quality criterion of1,4-dichlorobenzene(FCV*1000)

Predicted SQC withirreversible model

Predicted SQC withequilibrium model

So

lid p

ha

se c

on

cen

tra

tion

(µ

g/g

)

1.10-51.10-6

Natural Attenuation of Organic Pollutants – Example: 1,4-DCB

Implication of Irreversible Adsorption on Sediment Quality Criteria (Chen e al., 2000)


Implementing remedial actions: Contractors

Authorities:

Stakeholders:

Federal

Federal Environmental AgencyFed. Agency Nature Protection

BiosphereAdministration

EnvironmentalGroups (NGOs)

Communities

External Experts

County

Ministry of Environment

District Administration

Landowner

RegionalOrganisations

Organisations represented in a remediation working group

Large Scale Sediment Remediation: Organisational Aspects

Organisations Involved in the Bitterfeld Case (German Legislation; Anon., 2000)


Types and Characteristics of Subaqueous Depots (NL)

Type of depot Advantages Disadvantages

Excavation (pit)

type of depot

• reduced conditions

• not visible

• simple fill up

• less maintenance

• cost intensive dig off

• superfluous sand (?)

• contamination of surfacewaters

• special filling equipment

• no regulation of water level

Dike (ring wall)

type of depot

• reduced conditions

• less cost-intensive dig off

• less contamination ofsurface waters

• easy regulation of waterlevels

• easy management and control of emissions

• visible

• obstacles for navigation and fisheries

• more difficult fill up(compared with pit depot)

Table 4 Advantages and Disadvantages of Subaqueous Depots (after DEPOTEC, 2002)


contaminant mobilisation

chemical isolation layer

stabilisation layer

Sediment Capping Techniques: Active Barrier System

Combination of

Physical and chemical

Stabilisation Layers

on Sediment (Jacobs,

2003)


10 30 50m harbour

river E lbe

p iezom ete r

m u lti-level w e ll

tensiom eter

m obile gas sam p ler

test fie ld/enclosures

water leve lequalisation

sediment disposal

area

dam

sheetpiling

Active Barrier System – Demonstration Project Hitzacker (I)

Subaqueous Depot and Active Barrier System (Design: Josef Möbius, Hamburg)


gas emissionmonitoring

tensiometer

piezometer

test field/enclosuresclimatic

monitoring

sheet piling

deposit

bridge

relocatedsediment

sediment

meanwater level

Active Barrier System – Demonstration Project Hitzacker (II)

Subaqueous Depot and Active Barrier System (Testing Devices: Jacobs, 2003)


Possible catchment scale solutions to contaminated sediments in the Elbe River Ulrich Förstner...

Documents

Transcript of Possible catchment scale solutions to contaminated sediments in the Elbe River Ulrich Förstner...