PRESENTATION ON GRASSE RIVER, NY, ACTIVATED CARBON …Use of Activated Carbon Amendment as an In...
Transcript of PRESENTATION ON GRASSE RIVER, NY, ACTIVATED CARBON …Use of Activated Carbon Amendment as an In...
-
-
Use of Activated Carbon Amendment as an In situ Sediment Remedy at the Lower Duwamish Waterway
EPA Region 10 Sponsored Technical workshop 14 15 Feb 2012, Seattle, WA
Grasse River, NY Activated Carbon Pilot Study
Marc S. Greenberg, Ph.D. U.S. EPA – Office Of Superfund Remediation And Technology Innovation
Environmental Response Team 2890 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08837 732-452-6413
Grasse River, New York, USA
2006 Activated Carbon
Pilot Study Area
Massena, NY
Historic use & release of PCBs
Near Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe
Fish consumption advisory
Managed land sources at plant site
Past remedial action includes sediments—1995 NTCRA
2
Stanford Lab Bioaccumulation Study
95%86%
67%
Reduction from Untreated Grasse
River sediment
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
Corb
icu
la P
CB
con
cen
trati
on
(u
g/g
dry
Untreated 0.7% 1.3% 2.5%
AC AC AC
3
DELIVERY DEVICES USED AT GRASSE RIVER, NY
Tine injection system
Designed and built by Brennan
with inputs from collaborators
Injection and mixing in an enclosed rototiller Designed and built by Brennan with inputs from collaborators 4
4
.. , .. l
&. Ill- • .... II A l:l!
e N A C)' '-• A04 • • 7 II A • ... ~ 0!1 v. OJ ,.,.
• • ,.,li:. ... b.
~ ... , • u ~ •
0 VA • tl .. .. •
.... ., .. • ·:.
6.,,
UT.l t1
• A •111/i:. •
I •. I
• A ~ I I ___ J
5
\ \
Unmixed Initial Tine Sled
Tiller (50’ x 100’) (50’ x 60’)
(50’ x 50’) Mixed Tiller (75’ x 100’)
Target dose of activated carbon = 0.5x TOC in surficial sediments (+50% safety factor)
Grasse River ACPS
Baseline & Long-Term Monitoring
Parameter
Baseline
(Aug/Sep
‘06)
After
Placement
(Oct ‘06)
Year 1
(Fall ‘07)
Year 2
(Fall ‘08)
Year 3
(Fall ‘09)
Carbon in sediment
cores (BC)
Field PCB biouptake
Lab PCB biouptake
Equilibrium
Desorption
Benthic community
Erosion potential
Impact of AC on
aquatic plant growth
6
Fall 2006 Water Quality
Monitoring Results
• Water column PCB monitoring during construction
– No measurable changes in water column PCB concentrations
observed downstream of the study area during application
Data from Alcoa 7
Post-Application Core Sampling
8
c 2.0 0 -e ('0 1.8 (.,)
I • Measured AC dose ~ -
(.,) ·- 1.6 c ('0 C) ....
1.4 0
- --• Target AC dose of 0.5xTOC + '- t-
!"'"'- safety factor of 50% -- - - 1- -
(1)
> 1.2 ·-...., ('0
- -
c It- 1.0 0
f-
!"'"'-!"'"'-
c 0 0.8 :.c (.,)
!"'"'- r--1- 1- 1- I~ - -- - ~ - . I - I• - I ~ - • - ~ ~ -. - - - . I -I• - -
('0 .... 0.6 It-
('0
1- I~ 1~ - I~ 1-~
tn 0.4 ('0 ~ r-- 1- - - 1- 1-
"C (1)
0.2 "C - I- 1- - - 1- I~ . -
"C ('0
() 0.0 ~
< M1 M2 M3 1\114 M5 M3 UTA3 UTAS UTA9 UTA 14 UTA 15 UTA 17
• Measured AC addition achieved at sampling sites compared to the target dose of half of native TOC plus safety factor of 50°/o
Dose of AC achieved in sediment
2007 sampling data
Data from Alcoa 9
Carbon Profile with Time
Native TOC Avg. 6.13%
10
--------
tl
------------------------------------iD
~ • ~ ·Z;. ·Z;.
~ ~ ~ ·Z;.
-·Z;.
' ·Z;. ·Z;.
~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ·Z;.
I ·Z;.
·Z;. ·Z;.
~ ~ ~ i ~
ii ~ ~r ~ ·Z;. ., ·Z;.
r---- r----
I I I I I I I I I
-
I . I I
Aqueous Equilibrium
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
BG1
BG2
BG3
Mixed
Tiller
(M1)
Mixed
Tiller
(M2)
Mixed
Tiller
(M3)
Mixed
Tiller
(M4)
Mixed
Tiller
(M5)
Mixed
Tiller
(M6)
Tine
Sled
(UTA
3)
Tine
Sled
(UTA
5)
Tine
Sled
(UTA
9)
Unm
ixed
Tiller
(UTA
14)
Unm
ixed
Tiller
(UTA
15)
Unm
ixed
Tiller
(UTA
17)
PC
B c
on
ce
ntr
ati
on
in
wa
ter
(ng
/L)
2006 (baseline)
2007 (1-year post)
2008 (2-year post)
11
H
eig
ht
abo
ve s
ed
ime
nt
(cm
) PCB IN WATER BASED
ON IN-SITU PASSIVE
SAMPLERS
Reduced aqueous PCB on
sediment surface at AC treated
sites compared to overlying water
Data from UMBC, Beckham & Ghosh 12
Pore water – Surface water PCB Gradient in Grasse River, 2009
13
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Total freely-dissolved aqueous PCBs (ng/L)
Untreated
AC Treated
Surface water
Pore water at
the interface
Pore water in
deeper sediment
+ 1.6 µg/m2d
– 0.4 µg/m2d
Flux (µg/m2d) = kf(C – C )pw sw
Data from UMBC, Beckham & Ghosh 13
-4.5
- 4.0 i
• 2006 (baseline pre-amendment)
• 2007 (1 -year post) -Q) 3.5 ~ C) -
o 2008 (2-yrs post)
o 2009 (3-yrs post) C) 3.0 ::1. -tn Q)
2.5 :::J tn tn :;:.
E 2.0 L..
0 ~ 1.5 s::::::
tn m 1.0 u a.. n:s -~ 0.5
0.0 BG1 BG2 BG3 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 UTA 3 UTA 5 UTA 9 UTA 14UTA 15UTA 17
Background II ~--------M __ ix_ed __ T_ill_e_r ________ ~l~l ____ ln~j_ec_t_ed ____ ~II~ ___ L_a~ye_r_ed ____ ~ Site and Treatment Area
14
Laboratory Bioaccumulation in L. variegatus
Data from UMBC, Beckham & Ghosh 14
IN-SITU PCB MONITORING STUDIES
In-river deployment of field exposure cages with L.
variegatus for baseline study (method adapted from
Burton et al. 2005)
L. variegatus 15
Data from UMBC,
Beckham & Ghosh PCB IN L. VARIEGATUS IN-SITU EXPOSURE
0
1
2
3
4
BG1 BG2 BG3 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6
PC
Bs
in w
orm
s (u
g/g
wet
wt.
)
In situ Bioaccumulation 2006-20092006 (pre-amendment)
2007 (1-yr post)
2008 (2-yrs post)
2009 (3-yrs post)
Background sites Mixed treatment sites
• % reduction over 3 years: 46% in BG sites and 92% for Mixed Tiller sites 16
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
PCB IN WORMS AND WATER VS. CARBON DOSE 3.0
2.5
PC
Bs
in w
orm
s (
mg/
kg t
issu
e)
PC
Bs
in e
qu
ilib
rate
d w
ate
r (n
g/L)
P
CB
s in
wo
rms
(mg/
kg t
issu
e)
Background Background Background Background
Mixed Mixed Mixed Mixed
Injected Injected Injected Injected
Layered Layered Layered Layered
1-year after AC (2007)
2-years after AC (2008)
3-years after AC (2009)
63-99% reduction from background each year
A. Bioaccumulation—laboratory exposures
Before AC (2006)
62-93% reduction from background each year
B. Bioaccumulation—caged worms in river
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Activated carbon (% dry wt.)
• Reduced uptake in field plots with
increasing AC dose
• > 90% reduction for all treatment
sites by 2009 for AC dose >4%
• Little incremental benefit above 5%AC
• Tighter range in aqueous PCBs
compared to worms
Data from UMBC, Beckham & Ghosh
0.0
1,100
1,000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0 0
C. Aqueous equilibrium
95-100% reduction from background each year
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Activated carbon (% dry wt.)
17
Benthic Invertebrate Monitoring
Benthic communities continue to utilize amended areas
Slight community shifts in benthic order distributions
(dipterans to oligochaetes)
Similar trends at background and treatments, correlated with
temporal variability in grain size
Possible 2008 benthic community effect in Unmixed Tiller area Data from Alcoa 18
Moving forward
Carbon amendments appear to be promising enough for
serious consideration in remedies
AC can be applied to sediment at the field scale
AC remained in place 3 years after placement
Reductions in porewater PCB levels & desorption
Reductions in tissue PCB levels
No major changes to benthic community due to
amendment
Over time, the AC-amended sediment is covered with
new sediment deposits
Successful pilot scale demonstration of reduction in
bioavailable PCBs in the sediments 19
Acknowledgements
Young Chang, EPA Region 2,
Grasse River Study Area RPM
Larry McShea, Alcoa Project Manager
Drs. Upal Ghosh and Barbara Beckingham University of Maryland, Baltimore County
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TODAY
20