Technologies and Solutions For Handling of Contaminated Sediments State of The Art Review

Technologies and Solutions for
Handling of Contaminated Sediments

State-of-the-art review
Project acronym: SMOCS

Title of project: Sustainable Management of Contaminated Sediments
Project No: Baltic Sea Region Programme Project No #39
Report status: Final

Date: 2012-11-06
Author/Organisation: Nerijus Blaauskas, CORPI

Lennart Larsson, SGI
Susanne Rostmark, LTU
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 5
2. UPTAKE TECHNOLOGY ............................................................................................ 5
2.1. Dry excavation..................................................................................................... 5
2.2. Dredging technologies ......................................................................................... 8
2.2.1. Mechanical dredging ....................................................................................... 9
2.2.1.1 Grab dredgers ............................................................................................. 10
2.2.1.2 Backhoe dredgers ....................................................................................... 12
2.2.1.3 Bucket (ladder) dredgers ............................................................................. 14
2.2.2. Hydraulic dredging ........................................................................................ 17
2.2.2.1 Cutter suction dredger ................................................................................. 17
2.2.2.2 Trailing suction hopper dredgers ................................................................. 20
2.2.3 Combined dredging technologies ................................................................... 22
2.2.4. Freeze dredging ............................................................................................ 23
2.2.5. Environmental dredging ................................................................................ 25
3. IN-SITU TREATMENT ............................................................................................... 26
3.1. Physical/chemical treatment .............................................................................. 26
3.1.1 In-situ Stabilisation/Solidification .................................................................... 27
3.1.2 Chemical oxidation ......................................................................................... 30
3.1.3 Electrokinetic separation ................................................................................ 33
3.1.4 In-situ Capping (ISC) ...................................................................................... 37
3.1.5 Soil flushing .................................................................................................... 40
3.2. Biological treatment ........................................................................................... 42
3.2.1 Monitored natural attenuation ......................................................................... 43
3.2.2 Enhanced natural attenuation ......................................................................... 45
3.2.3 Phytoremediation ........................................................................................... 48
2
3.3. Thermal treatment ............................................................................................. 51
3.3.1 Electrical resistance heating ........................................................................... 52
3.3.2 Steam injection and extraction ....................................................................... 54
3.3.3 Conductive heating......................................................................................... 56
3.3.4 Radio frequency heating ................................................................................ 58
3.3.5 In situ vitrification ............................................................................................ 61
4. EX SITU TREATMENT .............................................................................................. 64
4.1. Physical/chemical treatment .............................................................................. 64
4.1.1 Ex situ stabilisation/solidification..................................................................... 64
4.1.2 Gas-phase chemical reduction ....................................................................... 70
4.1.3 Liquefied gas solvent extraction ..................................................................... 72
4.1.4 Separation ...................................................................................................... 74
4.1.5 Dehalogenation .............................................................................................. 78
4.1.6 Soil washing ................................................................................................... 81
4.1.7 Solvent extraction ........................................................................................... 83
4.2 Biological treatment ............................................................................................ 85
4.2.1 Bioslurry ......................................................................................................... 86
4.2.2 Biopiles .......................................................................................................... 90
4.2.3 Landfarming ................................................................................................... 93
4.2.4 Composting .................................................................................................... 96
4.2.5 Phytoremediation ........................................................................................... 99
4.3 Thermal treatment ............................................................................................ 102
4.3.1 Thermal desorption ...................................................................................... 102
4.3.2 Hot gas decontamination .............................................................................. 106
4.3.3 Incineration .................................................................................................. 108
4.3.4 Pyrolysis ....................................................................................................... 111
3
5. DEWATERING TECHNOLOGIES ........................................................................... 114
5.1 Thermo chemical treatment .............................................................................. 115
5.2. Lagooning/drainage in settling ponds .............................................................. 118
5.3. Mechanical dewatering (MDW) ....................................................................... 120
5.4. Geotubes ......................................................................................................... 128
5.5. Combined technologies ................................................................................... 130
5.5.1. Thermally assisted dewatering .................................................................... 130
5.5.2. Electro-Dewatering (EDW) .......................................................................... 131
4
1. INTRODUCTION
Contaminated sediments are a significant problem in many harbours, fairways,
channels and industrial areas. Handling alternatives are few, costly and require
complicated technical methods to reduce environmental impacts. Dredged sediments
are normally deposited on land or at sea. The first is very costly and the latter is often
not possible due to environmental restrictions. Emerging treatment technologies
make it possible to consider beneficial use of contaminated sediments.
The aim of this report is to make a state-of-the-art review of existing and new
emerging technologies and solutions for handling alternatives of contaminated
sediments.
2. UPTAKE TECHNOLOGY
By Tommi Marjamaki, Ramboll Finland Oy
Dredging of sediments eliminate the risks by removing pollutants from the aquatic
environment. Removal of contaminated sediments can be done by excavation, in the
dry, mechanical or hydraulic dredging. When removing sediments and especially
polluted sediments many different stages in the process, including dewatering,
transport and treatment after removal, must be considered.
2.1. Dry excavation

Basic description of the technology
Dry excavation is a process of removal of sediment following significant dewatering
of the water body. Depending on the case, generally dry excavation includes two
steps:
1. Isolating the sediment by pumping or diverting water from the area
2. Sediment excavation by using conventional dry land equipment
Dry excavation may be also possible without water diversion in wetlands during dry
season or during the winter when sediment and water are frozen. Example of dry
excavation equipment is provided in figure below (Fig. 1):
5
Fig. 1. Dry excavation equipment
Work description
Typical process options for excavation in the dry area include dewatering achieved
via by-pass pumping, sheeting, coffer dam, water filled structures, and soil dams.
This makes access to the sediments easier permitting traditional excavation
techniques for removal. Removed sediment will require subsequent management. In
some cases in order to speed up drying sediment is blended with a drying agent.
After mixing the sediments are excavated with backhoes and loaded into trucks, then
staged for off-site transportation and disposal.
Applicability
Dry excavation is best suited to shallow waterways or near shorelines (streams,
shallow bonds, rivers, lagoons, small boat harbors etc.)
Limitations
Depending of dredging depth, location and expansion of project area, sets
limits for equipment (excavator).
might be necessary to use other machines on land to level the material
6
Implementation of excavation is usually complex and costly because of the
removal technologies themselves and the need for transport, staging,
treatment (where applicable), and disposal of the dredged sediment.
Costs
most of the cases no transportation by water savings
quantities quite minor (hundreds to some thousands cubes) unit prices high
compared major "offshore" dredging prices
suitable machines usually nearby mobilization costs are low
Status
a number of projects ongoing every year
development ongoing
Effectiveness
not special techniques required earthwork companies can make an offer
a number of potential construction candidates available creates good
competition
Advantages
Effective prevention of contaminate pollution of the water-column. The dry conditions
makes it easy to control that all contaminated sediments are excavated and
removed, the water content in the sediments removed is low.
Can be carried out winter time in ice conditions
depending of case, but usually easy to control spreading
Disadvantages
volumes per hour quite minor suitability for big quantity works doubtful
(costs comp. XXm3 )
might need temporary construction of embankments or/and work edge for
machines
7
2.2. Dredging technologies
Technically speaking, dredging is the relocation of underwater sediments. Dredging
can be divided into mechanical dredging and hydraulic dredging some of the
techniques are also considered as being environmental - low impact dredging
methods. Purposes of dredging projects could be divided as well to two different
categories:
- construction dredging
Aim to remove soft sediments under new infrastructure (stability purpose),
pipelines, quays, houses, terminal areas, roads, bridges etc. etc.
Deepening the channel, fairway or harbour basin for ship traffic. (demand of
deeper draft, create new fairway, expand existing fairway or carry out
maintenance dredging)
Goal is to reach certain depth or remove soft material etc.
- remediation dredging
removal of contaminated sediments as aim to create safe environment for
example recreation purpose (for instance new housing area)
remediation goals shall be set (reduction of risk, clean-up levels)
In remediation projects clean-up level shall not be set too tight (more certainty
to the process of cost estimating and bidding)
- material transport
via pipeline
offloading by cannon
emptying the barge directly to isolated basin
by excavator from barge to land over an embankment (Fig. 2)
8
Fig. 2. Example of material transport from barge to land over an embankment
There is a wide range of commercially available equipment applicable on hard and

soft sediment and varying depths. Effectiveness of dredging is site specific and it
depends on e.g.:
dredging method/equipment availability
volume to be dredged
site conditions
physical and chemical characteristics of the sediment
presence of debris
site limitations (bridges, width of the fairway etc.)
disposal site location
disposal and treatment methods
2.2.1. Mechanical dredging

Mechanical means are used for excavation - dislodging the material and then raising
it to the water surface - in a way similar to dry land excavation methods. Barges
generally transport mechanically dredged sediments. These dredgers are well suited
to removing hard-packed material or debris and to working in confined areas.
Cohesive sediments dredged and transported this way usually remain intact, with
9
large pieces retaining their in-situ density and structure through the whole dredging
and placement process.
Mechanical dredgers come in a variety of forms, each involving the use of grab or
bucket to loosen the in-situ material and raise and transport it to the surface. The
most popular are:
Grab (clamshell) dredgers

Backhoe dredgers
Bucket (ladder) dredgers (chain-type budget dredger)
2.2.1.1 Grab dredgers

Grab dredging is a dredging method which involves the collection of sediments in a
crane mounted bucket, the jaws of which are opened and closed (rope operated or
hydraulically) like a clamshell trapping sediments (Fig. 3).
Fig. 3. Grab dredger with closed upper structure and horizontal closing
There are various grab buckets designed for different types of material, such as mud
grab, sand grab and the heavy digging grab. The capacity of a grab dredger is
3
expressed in the volume of the grab. Grab sizes varies between less than 1 m up to
3
200 m .
10
Work description
The dredging process is discontinuously and cyclic.
1. Lowering of the grab to the bottom
2. Closing of the grab by pulling the hoisting wire
3. Hoisting starts when the bucket is complete closed
4. Swinging to the barge or hopper
5. Lowering the filled bucket into the barge or hopper
6. Opening the bucket by releasing the closing wire
Applicability
The large grab dredgers are used for bulk dredging. While the smaller ones are
mostly used for special jobs, such as:
Difficult accessible places in harbors
Small quantities with strongly varying depth.
Along quay walls where the soil is spoiled by wires and debris
Borrowing sand and gravel in deep pits
Etc.
The production of a grab depends strongly on the soil. Suitable materials are soft
clay, sand and gravel (except hard gravel). Though, boulder clay is dredged as well
by this type of dredger.
Limitations
The dredging depth depends only on the length of the wire on the winches. However
the accuracy decreases with depth.
Costs
Project specific
Status
The technology is proven and used on a regular basis
Effectiveness
11
Depends of capacity (volume of the grab), which varies between less than 1 m 3 up to
200 m3.
Advantages
Horizontal reaching distance (dumping directly to deposit area or empting the
barges)
Closing mechanism
Anchoring system allows some flexibility
Can remove debris
Availability on working in tight areas and in deep waters (> 100 m depth)
Disadvantages
Anchoring system
Difficulty to retain fine-grain loose material in conventional buckets
Sensitive to strong currents and waves
2.2.1.2 Backhoe dredgers

A backhoe dredger is basically a hydraulic excavator placed on a pontoon (Fig. 4).
Dredging is executed by the excavator which sits on a turntable at the front of the
pontoon. The sediments are removed with small addition of surrounding water. They
can dig a broad range of materials, from sand to moderately hard rock. The capacity
of the bucket can vary from 0.5 to 40 m3.
Work description
Dredging with a backhoe dredger is not a continuous process, but consists of a cycle
of operations. These operations are:
Dredging
The bucket is excavating soil by a combined back- and upward movement of boom,
stick and bucket.
Lifting
12
When the bucket is filled, a further upward movement of the boom and stick is
ensuring sufficient height above the water to start swinging.
Swinging filled
The bucket will be swung above the barge by turning the excavator on the turntable.
Unloading
Swinging empty
Upon completion of discharge the excavator will swing back empty to the dredging
area.
Lowering and positioning

The boom will be lowered and the stick and bucket will be moved to their starting
position. With aid of a dredge viewer the bucket penetrates the soil on the desired
location.
Relocating the pontoon

On each position of the pontoon an area as large as practically possible will be
dredged (effective dredging area). Upon completion of the dredging within this area,
the pontoon will relocate towards a new position adjacent to the previous one.
Fig. 4. Backhoe dredger Colbart (Source: Royal Boskalis Westminster Nv)
13
Applicability
A backhoe is suitable for dredging a wide range of materials, from soft material (like
soft silt) to hard material (like blasted or weathered rock and stiff boulder clay). Also
boulders or debris can be removed. Mainly used in harbors and other shallow waters.
It is especially suitable for working in narrow areas and in the near presence of
obstacles (like jetties, pipelines, etc.).
Limitations
Dredging depths up to 25 m can be achieved.
Costs
Project specific
Status
The technology is proven and used on a regular basis
Effectiveness
The effective dredging area depends on the swing angle and the forward step per
pontoon position.
Advantages
Depending on the soil conditions different grabs can be equipped
Good vertical and horizontal control
Disadvantages
Limited obstacle to shipping traffic (no anchor winches).
2.2.1.3 Bucket (ladder) dredgers

A bucket dredger is a stationary dredger, fixed on anchors and moved while dredging
along semi-arcs by winches. The bucket dredger is one of the oldest types of
14
dredging equipment. It has an endless chain of buckets that fill while scraping over
the bottom. The buckets are turned upside down and empty moving over the tumbler
at the top. The dredged material is loaded in barges (Fig. 5).
Work description
The dredging action starts when a bucket reaches the bottom of the ladder, where it
loosens and scoops up a quantity of material. This material is carried in the bucket to
the top of the ladder where, at the highest point of the chain, the bucket overturns
and the contents are offloaded. The material falls into drop chutes and into a barge
moored alongside the dredger. Each bucket then returns empty on the underside of
the chain to the bottom of the ladder where the cycle begins again. The size of a
bucket dredger is usually described by the capacity of the buckets, which is in the
range 100-900 liters.
Applicability
Can be applied in almost all soils, from soft silt and clays to soft rock depending on
the power on and the strength of the bucket chain. They are use in blasted rock as
well. Nowadays they are often used for dredging contaminated mud, because the
can dig the soil under in situ density conditions.
Fig. 5. Bucket dredger Rozgwiazta
15
Limitations
It is difficult to retain soft, semi suspended fine-grained materials in the buckets. Not
recommended for use in dredging contaminated sediments.
Costs
Expensive
Status
Although most bucket dredgers nowadays have been replaced with cutter-suction
dredgers, quite a few of these dredgers are still around.
Effectiveness
The maximum weekly output of a bucket dredger can vary between 10,000 and
100,000 m (in-situ) depending upon size, location and material. Maximum dredging
depths are normally around 20 m.
Advantages
Capability of dredging level bottom topography
Ability to work in narrow or restricted areas
Dredging to the required depth quite accurate
Handling a wide range of sediments
A minimal amount of water is added to the dredged material during careful use of the
buckets
Disadvantages
Cannot be applied under offshore conditions
Obstruction for shipping
High noise levels
Rather low production compared to hydraulic dredgers
16
2.2.2. Hydraulic dredging
The principal feature of all dredgers in this category is that the loosened material is
raised from its in-situ state in suspension through a pipe system connected to a
centrifugal pump. Various means can be employed to achieve the initial loosening of
the material. If it is naturally very loose, suction alone may be sufficient, but firmer
material may require mechanical loosening or the use of water jets. Hydraulic
dredging is most efficient when working with fine materials, because they can easily
be held in suspension. Coarser materials and even gravel can be worked but with
greater demand on pump power and with greater wear on pumps and pipes.
Hydraulic digging is mostly done in cohesion less soils such as silt, sand and gravel.
Hydraulic dredges remove large volumes of sediment quickly and accurately. They
are excellent for navigational dredging and environmental dredging. Disadvantages
of hydraulic dredges include the high water content of the removed material, a
minimum of 0,5-1 m water depth for cutter heads and more for hopper operation, and
the inability to remove debris.
2.2.2.1 Cutter suction dredger

Cutter-suction dredgers are among the most popular type of dredger, available in a
wide range of sizes ranging from the small portable units that fit on a large road
trailer to ocean-going vessels over 100 meters long. It is a stationary dredger
equipped with a cutter device (cutter head) which excavates the soil before it is
sucked up by the flow of the dredge pump(s) (Fig. 6; Fig. 7).
17
Fig. 6. Cutter suction dredger (http://www.damen.nl)
Fig. 7. Cutter suction dredger for dredging of hard material
Work description
Cutter suction dredgers operate by swinging about a central working spud using
moorings leading from the lower end of the ladder to anchors. By pulling on alternate
sides the dredger clears an arc of cut, and then moves forward by pushing against
18
the working spud using a spud carriage. A generally smooth bottom can be achieved,
and modern instrumentation allows profiles and side slopes to be dredged
accurately. Some of the larger cutter suction dredgers are self-propelled to allow
easy movement from site to site. The size of a cutter suction dredger is measured by
the diameter of the suction pipe and by the installed machinery power. Pipe
diameters are in the range 100 to 1,500 mm.
Applicability
This type of dredger is capable to dredge all kind of material, however mostly used in
cohesion less soils (e.g. silt, sand, gravel). The dredgers are accurate due to their
movement around the spud. Cutter suction dredgers are widely applied for dredging
harbours, channels, reclamation areas and so on.
Limitations
The transport distance of the mixture is limited to maximum 10 km.
Costs
Project specific
Status
Widely applicable
Effectiveness
A modern highly automated cutter suction dredger is capable of achieving high
outputs over sustained periods and production rates of around 500,000 m/week are
possible under good conditions.
Advantages
Suitability for dredging in a wide range of sediments
Pumping directly and continuously to disposal site
19
Disadvantages
Cutter head blocking (cohesive material/debris)
In the presence of coralline limestone, the cutter head invariably generates
considerable fines in the 10 micron range that are difficult to settle;
Obstructions to navigation at the area (pipeline, anchor wires)
2.2.2.2 Trailing suction hopper dredgers

A Trailing Suction Hopper Dredger is a self-propelled ship which fills its hold or
hopper during dredging, while following a pre-set track. The hopper can be emptied
by opening bottom doors or valves (offloading) or by pumping its load off ashore.
This kind of dredger is mainly used in open water: rivers, canals, estuaries and the
open sea (Fig. 8).
Fig. 8. Trailing suction hopper dredgers (www.dcsc.tudelft.nl)
Work description
A trailing suction hopper dredger operates very much like a floating vacuum cleaner.
It sails slowly over the area to be dredged filling its hopper as it proceeds. On
completion of loading the dredger sails to the relocation site where the cargo can be
20
offloaded, either by opening the doors or valves in the hopper bottom, by using the
dredging pump to deliver to a shore pipeline, or directly to shore by using a special
bow jet. This last technique is known as rainbowing and is commonly used for
reclamation and beach nourishment.
Applicability
The THSD is ideal for dredging in ports and shipping channels inshore as well as
offshore. Suitable materials for the THSD to dredge are soft clays, silt, sand and
gravel. Firm and stiff clays are also possible but can give either blocking problem in
the drag head and/or track forming in the clay. Dredging rock with a TSHD is in most
cases not profitable. It requires very heavy drag heads with rippers and the
productions are rather low. The maximum dredging depth without intermediate
pumps is around 35 meters.
Limitations
Unable to get into corners and can be difficult to manoeuvre in confined spaces close
to quays and jetties.
Costs
Project specific
Status
Widely applicable
Effectiveness
The measure of size of a hopper or trailer dredger is the hopper capacity. This may
range from a few hundred cubic meters to over 40,000 m - increasingly larger
vessels have been constructed in recent years to allow economic transport of the
dredged material, especially for reclamation projects. Suitable materials for dredging
are soft clays, silt, sand and gravel. Not very effective on hard materials such as the
stiffer clays, but can dredge rock which has been blasted, or loosened by a cutter
dredger.
21
Advantages
Minimum interference to sea traffic;
Versatility in handling both cohesion less and cohesive sediments;
The dredged load may be pumped ashore as reclamation; and
Constructed in various sizes to suit most project sizes
Disadvantages
Difficult to man oeuvre in confined spaces close to quays and jetties;
The final dredged depth is less precise
Mobilization costs can be considerable
2.2.3 Combined dredging technologies

Dredging technologies that should be mentioned is a combination of suction dredging
and excavation dredging, removing the sediment is made with an excavator and a
suction nozzle that transport the sediments hydraulically. The dredger is displaced by
a combination of support legs and pontoons and is more or less independent of water
depth. The advantage of this type of dredger is a great accessibility in areas which
otherwise may be difficult to access. Dredging can be done selectively in areas with
obstacles (blocks, etc.). The downside of technology is the redistribution of
sediments during uptake. Another interesting technology in the context of dredging of
contaminated sediments is Mbius Sediment Pick-Up (MSA) with Mbius Pressing
and Feeding Unit (MPF). The technique is similar to suction dredging as the
excavation and transport of sediments takes place in a closed head. This limits the
redistribution in the same way as the suction dredging. Unlike suction dredging
adding of water is avoided. Instead of water bound transport sediments are pushed
through the system with large reciprocating pumps. As very little extra water is
added, the dredged sediments are a paste-like consistency instead of the slurry
obtained through suction dredging. The technology has been used in some projects
in Germany.
22
2.2.4. Freeze dredging
The Freeze Dredging technology is a development of traditional ground freezing and
thermally stabilises the contaminated sediment before removal.
Work description
When using Freeze Dredging, contaminated sediments are frozen under the water
surface and are removed while frozen. Brine conducting pipes or tubes are arranged
in a fashion that enables freezing, lifting and unloading of the frozen material, the
structure is called a freeze-cell (Fig. 9 and Fig. 10). The brine circulating in the
freeze-cells are kept at a temperature of 20 to 40 C, using a mobile freeze plant.
Freeze plant
freeze-cells
Fig. 9. Working principles of freeze dredging
Fig. 10. Freeze-Dredger
23
The freeze-cells are lifted and unloaded with a conventional crane placed on
pontoons. When the sediment has frozen, the cells are lifted one by one. To avoid
sediment suspension and erosion; a lifted cell is preferably surrounded by other
freeze-cells or by an area where the sediment already is removed. The freeze-cells
are then unloaded and replaced, starting another freeze cycle. The freezing process
alters the sediments. If the removed material thaws under drained conditions the
dewatering due to the freeze/thaw cycle reduce the water content. The built in
dewatering effect makes additional dewatering unnecessary.
Applicability
Artificial freezing is commercially available for dewatering of sludge. Freeze-dredging
has also proven to be suitable for salvation of objects, and was used during a
salvation operation of 130 m depth in 2004-2005.
Limitations
No information available
Costs
Status
Artificial ground freezing has been in the existence for over 100 years and is a
proven method used to provide earth support for excavations in the mining and
construction industry. Freeze dredging is a novel dredging technique developed at
Lule University of Technology in co-operation with industrial partners.
Effectiveness
Freeze Dredging is a dynamic method that can be adapted to the specific conditions
of the site. The high precision, built-in dewatering and minimal redistribution make
this technology a highly efficient savings of dose and time during decommissioning
projects.
24
Advantages
Preventing the redistribution of contaminated material during the lifting process
Minimal exposure for workers
Safe salvage of objects submerged in the material
Disadvantages
2.2.5. Environmental dredging

Use of the term environmental dredging has evolved in recent years to characterize
dredging performed specifically for the removal of contaminated sediment.
Environmental dredging is intended to remove sediment contaminated above certain
action levels while minimizing the spread of contaminants to the surrounding
environment during dredging [National Research Council (NRC 1997)]. During
dredging redistribution of sediment to the water column is a problem due to
environmental concerns, increased turbidity can harm the aquatic fauna in a large
area around the dredging site. If the sediment is polluted redistribution is risk also
because it can cause chemical pollution of the water column. When dealing with
contaminated sediments the cost of dewatering and disposal is high, overdredging is
therefore expensive while removal of to thin layers of sediment leaves exposed
contaminated material causing a continuous environmental risk.
Unlike navigational dredging, which stresses the quick removal of sediments,
environmental dredging is more precise and places greater emphasis on an
environmentally sound operation. To keep contaminated sediment from spreading
downstream during dredging, work areas can be enclosed or bordered with silt
curtains, specifically engineered barriers that float on the water surface and extend to
the bottom. Work areas can also incorporate multi-station real-time monitoring as an
early warning system to help gauge for any significant re-suspension of sediment or
spillage in the water during dredging activities. Categories of environmental dredging
include mechanical, hydraulic and hybrid dredging.
25
3. IN-SITU TREATMENT
The main advantage of in-situ treatment is that it allows soil and sediment to be
treated without being excavated and transported, resulting in potentially significant
cost savings. However, in-situ treatment generally requires longer time period, and
there is less certainty about the uniformity of treatment because of the variability in
soil and aquifer characteristics and because the efficiency of the process is more
difficult to verify. The in-situ treatment methods presented involve applying chemical,
biological or physical processes to the subsurface to degrade, remove, or immobilize
contaminants without removing the bulk soil/sediment. Additionally, several of these
methods have references to soil and to a much more limit extent to sediment.
Treatment methods can be categorized into three major groups: a) physical/chemical
treatment (stabilisation/solidification, chemical oxidation, electrokinetic separation,
soil flushing and sediment capping); b) biological treatment (phytoremediation,
monitored natural attenuation, enhanced natural attenuation); c) thermal treatment
(electrical resistance heating, steam injection and extraction, conductive heating,
radio-frequency heating, vitrification).
In-situ solutions, as the term indicates, aim at dealing with the contaminated material
at the location where it is present. Biological and chemical measures seek to
neutralize the harmfulness of the sediments by altering the polluting agent while
covering and stabilization techniques minimizes contact between water and polluted
sediments.
3.1. Physical/chemical treatment

Physical/chemical treatment uses the physical properties of the contaminants or the
contaminated medium to destroy (i.e., chemically convert), separate, or contain the
contamination. Physical/chemical treatment is typically cost effective and can be
completed in short time periods (in comparison with biological treatment). Equipment
is readily available and is not engineering or energy-intensive.
26
3.1.1 In-situ Stabilisation/Solidification

Stabilisation and solidification (s/s) refer to closely related technologies that use
chemical and/or physical processes to treat radioactive, hazardous and mixed
wastes. Solidification technologies encapsulate the waste to form a solid material.
The product of solidification may be a high-strength monolith-like product that
physically reduces the mobility and chemically binds hazardous contaminants in-situ.
When proper designed the final product can be used as construction material. In
short, stabilisation is chemical transformation of substances to less mobile forms and
solidification is physical entrapment by producing a monolith that gives reduced
permeability/mobility. Up to now most applications have been focused on soils but
the method has also potential for sediment.
Work description
Solidification involves mixing polluted soil with a substance, like cement, that via
chemical processes causes the soil to harden. The mixture dries to form a solid block
that can be left in place or removed to another location (Fig. 11).
Fig. 11. Solidification process
27
The solidification process prevents chemicals from spreading into the surrounding
environment. Rain or other water cannot pickup or dissolve the chemicals as it
moves through the ground. Solidification does not get rid of the harmful chemicals, it
simply traps them in place.
Applicability based on contaminants and site characteristics

Stabilisation and solidification (s/s) method proved to be good for treating soils and
sediments, contaminated with heavy metals, PAHs and PCBs of low-moderate
concentrations. Several studies to date has been testing and demonstrating
innovative, new methods for the treatment of contaminated sediments by introducing
modern mass and process stabilisation technologies (pilot demonstrations in the
ports of Turku and Vuosaari). During the implementation of STABLE project (LIFE06
ENV/FIN/000195) the pilot demonstration was carried out in port of Turku where
dredged sediments from Aurajoki river were stabilised and used for filling of Pansio
harbour lagoon (the future foundation for container storage area).
Limitations
Depth of contaminants may limit some types of application processes.
Future usage of the site may "weather" the materials and affect ability to
maintain immobilization of contaminants.
Some processes result in a significant increase in volume (up to double the
original volume).
Certain wastes are incompatible with variations of this process. Treatability
studies are generally required.
Reagent delivery and effective mixing are more difficult than for ex situ
applications.
Like all in situ treatments, confirmatory sampling can be more difficult than for
ex situ treatments.
The solidified material may hinder future site use.
Processing of contamination below the water table may require dewatering.
28
Costs
The costs are typical very site/project specific and can vary a lot. A significant part of
the total cost is coupled to how much of binder is needed per ton or m 3 of materials
that shall be s/s treated and which binder or mix of binders is chosen. For example,
for sediment the total amount of binders may vary from approx. 50 kg/m3 to 400-500
kg/m3. The cost interval of binders may vary from only transport cost of the binder to
approx. 0.5 EUR/kg binder + transport cost.
Status of the technology applications

s/s has been applied to the remediation of hazardous waste sites for more than 15
years. Experience with the technology is abundant.
Effectiveness
The most significant challenge in applying s/s in-situ for contaminated soils is
achieving complete and uniform mixing of the binder with the contaminated matrix.
Advantages
The product (treated material) has a potential to be used as construction
material.
Thoroughly selected mix, with still limited amount of added binders may result
in significantly lower leaching of constituents from the s/s treated soil/sediment
matrices, compared to the original soil/sediment as such.
Disadvantages
The method has limitations in aquifers containing high electric conductivities or

soil/sediments with high amount of polar organic constituents (for ex. gyttja
and sulphide rich matrices).
High concentrations of non-polar organics in soil/sediments may not suite the
method. Such sites may need extra amount of binders that may significantly
add to the total cost in case high geotechnical strength and low leachability
shall be maintained.
29
The vertical extent of the treated zone is limited to the working range of the
equipment injecting the binders.
3.1.2 Chemical oxidation

In-situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) involves the introduction of a chemical oxidant into
the subsurface for the purpose of transforming ground-water or soil contaminants into
less harmful chemical species. The chemical oxidants most commonly employed
include hydrogen peroxide, ozone, sodium permanganate and persulphate. These
oxidants have been able to cause rapid and complete chemical destruction of many
toxic organic chemicals; other organics are amenable to partial degradation as an aid
to subsequent bioremediation. Up to now most applications have been focused on
soils and the method has limited potential for sediment due to difficulties to get
approval for adding oxidation chemicals in situ to sediment.
Work description
Chemical oxidation in-situ does not involve digging up polluted soil or groundwater.
Instead, wells are drilled at different depths in the polluted area. The wells pump the
oxidant into the ground. The oxidant mixes with the harmful chemicals and causes
them to break down. When the process is complete, only water and other harmless
chemicals are left behind (Fig. 12)
Fig. 12. Process of chemical oxidation
30
Contaminants amenable to treatment by ISCO include the following: benzene,
toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX); methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE); total
petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH); chlorinated solvents (ethenes and ethanes);
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); chlorinated
benzenes (CBs); phenols; organic pesticides (insecticides and herbicides); munitions
constituents (RDX, TNT, HMX, etc.).
Limitations
Requirement for handling large quantities of hazardous oxidizing chemicals due to
the oxidant demand of the target organic chemicals and the unproductive oxidant
consumption of the formation. Some organic contaminants (COCs) are resistant to
oxidation. There is a potential for process-induced detrimental effects. Further
research and development is ongoing to advance the science and engineering of in-
situ chemical oxidation and to increase its overall cost effectiveness.
Costs
Cost estimates depend on the heterogeneity of the site subsurface, soil oxidation
demand, stability of the oxidant, and type and concentration of the contaminant.

In situ chemical oxidation is a viable remediation technology for mass reduction in
source areas as well as for plume treatment. The potential benefits of in-situ
oxidation include the rapid and extensive reactions with various COCs, applicability
to many bio-recalcitrant organics and subsurface environments. Also, in-situ
chemical oxidation can be tailored to a site and implemented with relatively simple,
readily available equipment. Some potential limitations exist including the
requirement for handling large quantities of hazardous oxidizing chemicals due to the
oxidant demand of the target organic chemicals and the unproductive oxidant
consumption of the formation; some COCs are resistant to oxidation; and there is a
potential for process-induced detrimental effects. Further research and development
31
is ongoing to advance the science and engineering of in-situ chemical oxidation and
to increase its overall cost effectiveness.
Effectiveness
The success of ISCO applications largely depends on several parameters
besides the oxidants ability to degrade the contaminant. Oxidants have
varying persistency in the subsurface.
Hydrogen peroxide at low concentrations (<0.1%) is not kinetically fast enough
to degrade many hazardous organic contaminants before decomposition
occurs. The oxidative strength of peroxide can be increased by adding the
ferrous salt iron (II) and producing Fentons Reagent.
Ozone is one of the strongest oxidants available for ISCO.
Permanganate-based ISCO is more fully developed than other oxidants.
Permanganate is not an effective oxidant for degradation of chlorinated
alkanes such as 1,1,1-trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA) (Gates, Siegrist, and Cline
1995; Tratnyek et al. 1998; Gates-Anderson, Siegrist, and Cline 2001) as well
as most aromatic compounds. Permanganate is also not an effective oxidant
for PCB degradation. However, permanganate oxidation of munition
constituents (e.g., HMX, RDX, TNT, etc.) has been more successful (IT
Corporation 2000). The viability of applying permanganate should be
determined on a case-by-case basis and depends on the extent of
contamination, the contaminant oxidant demand, the presence of competing
naturally reduced materials, and treatment goals.
Persulphates may be an alternative to permanganate with focus on for ex.
chlorinated alkanes.
Advantages
Rapid remediation
May completely transform organic contaminants to non-toxic inorganic ditto
Large variation of contaminants may be targeted, including some that
otherwise are difficult to remediate (i.e. heavy PAH).
32
Can be performed with no, or only minimal, affect on ongoing activity above
ground.
When normal bioactivity in the soil is back to normal this method can be part
of treatment train (i.e. some forms of Bio Treatment).
Disadvantages
Potential gas generation/volatilization of contaminants.
May be difficult to handle large volumes of oxidants and toxic or explosive
gases may be produced.
May take time until the soil is back to biological normality.
Some organic contaminants not well susceptible to remediation with this
method (i.e. saturated hydrocarbons). The oxidation may produce toxic
substances (Phenols, Cr3+ => Cr6+, etc.).
Limited amount of experienced contractors and equipment available in
Europe.
Availability and usage of some type of oxidants may be restricted by law.
3.1.3 Electrokinetic separation

Electrokinetic separation is an emerging technology that relies on the application of a
low-voltage, direct current through the soil to separate and extract heavy metals,
radionuclides, and organic contaminants from unsaturated soil, sludge and sediment.
The latter has mostly been as an on-site application. Most applications have hitherto
been focused on soils and the method has limited potential for sediment due to
potential difficulties to distributing current only where needed.
Work description
The current is applied across electrode pairs that have been implanted in the ground
on each side of the contaminated soil mass. During electromigration positively
charged chemical species, such as metals, ammonium ions and some organic
compounds, move toward the cathode and negatively charged chemicals, such as
33
chloride, cyanide, fluoride, nitrate and negatively-charged organic species, migrate
toward the anode (Fig. 13).
Fig. 13. Simple Electrokinetic Separation System
As a result of the application of this electric field, heavy metal contaminants may be
mobilized, concentrated at the electrodes, and extracted from the soil. The method
has been demonstrated in laboratory- and field scale and is hypothesised to be
possible to apply as an in-situ solution for sediments contaminated with metals or
chlorinated solvents.

Targeted contaminants for electrokinetics are heavy metals, anions, and polar
organics in soil, mud, sludge, and marine dredging. Concentrations that can be
treated range from a few parts per million (ppm) to tens of thousands ppm.
Electrokinetics is most applicable in low permeability soils. Such soils are typically
saturated and partially saturated clays and silt-clay mixtures, and are not readily
drained.
Limitations
Effectiveness is sharply reduced for wastes with a moisture content of less than 10%.
Maximum effectiveness occurs if the moisture content is between 14 and 18%.
34
The presence of buried metallic or insulating material can induce variability in the
electrical conductivity of the soil, therefore, the natural geologic spatial variability
should be delineated. Additionally, deposits that exhibit very high electrical
conductivity, such as ore deposits, cause the technique to be inefficient.
Inert electrodes, such as carbon, graphite, or platinum, must be used so that no

residue will be introduced into the treated soil mass. Metallic electrodes may dissolve
as a result of electrolysis and introduce corrosive products into the soil mass.
Electrokinetics is most effective in clays because of the negative surface charge of

clay particles. However, the surface charge of the clay is altered by both charges in
the pH of the pore fluid and the adsorption of contaminants. Extreme pH at the
electrodes and reduction-oxidation changes induced by the process electrode
reactions many inhibit ERs effectiveness, although acidic conditions (i.e., low pH)
may help to remove metals.
Oxidation/reduction reactions can form undesirable products (e.g., chlorine gas).
Costs
Costs will vary with the amount of soil to be treated, the conductivity of the soil, the
type of contaminant, the spacing of electrodes and the type of process design
employed. Ongoing pilot-scale studies using "real-world" soils indicate that the
energy expenditures in extraction of metals from soils may be 500 kWh/m3 or more at
electrode spacing of 1.0 m to 1.5 m. Direct costs can be estimated to approx. 10-15
EUR/m3 for a suggested energy expenditure of 0.02 EUR/kWh, together with the cost
of enhancement, could result in direct costs of 35-50 EUR/m3 or more. A recent study
estimated full scale costs at 82 EUR/m3. Other studies have indicated range of 50
200 EUR/m3 (excavation and transport to deposit not included). If no other efficient in
situ technology is available to remediate fine-grained and heterogeneous subsurface
deposits contaminated with metals, this technique would remain potentially
competitive.
35
Effectiveness
Studies showed that removal of heavy metals, radionuclides, and selected organics
by electrokinetics is feasible. Electrokinetic remediation is also effective for the
removal of organic pollutants such as phenol, gasoline hydrocarbons, and TCE from
contaminated soils. The process of electrokinetic treatment can be highly targetable
to the specific area to be cleaned, since treatment occurs between the electrodes. It
also allows decontamination without removing contaminated soil. Energy needs are
relatively small compared to excavation.
Advantages
There are currently no other viable in-situ methods for treating inorganic and
organic compounds in porous media simultaneously.
Ionic contaminants are absorbed to sediment particles and are often not
available for removal by the simple flushing action of water. The pH shift
produced by the electrolysis of the water effectively desorbs contaminating
ions.
In clayey sediments, hydraulic flow through pores can be extremely limited.
Electrokinetic remediation is an effective method of inducing movement of
water, ions, and colloids through fine-grained sediment.
The process is competitive in cost and remediation effectiveness to other
methods currently in use.
Disadvantages
In addition to above given limitations, non-polar contaminants may not be

treated by the adapted electrical current.
The economical competiveness of the method relies on the site specific cost
of electrical current.
The resulting contaminant-concentrated parts of the soil/sediment may need
excavation and transport to deposit, resulting in additional remediation cost.
36
3.1.4 In-situ Capping (ISC)

Contaminated sediment is isolated from the benthic environment by applying a low
permeable layer on the sediment surface, resulting in sediment stabilisation,
reduction in re-suspension/transport of contamination to the vicinity, and in flux of
dissolved contaminants into the water column (Fig. 14).
Work description
Mostly used for contaminant containment. Cap is placed on non-dredged sediment.
1/ Dredged non-contaminated sand is used as cap material and placed as a 0.5 m - 2
m thick layer on surface of contaminated sediment. 2/ The capping layer may include
armouring, constructed as a composite cap consisting of, for example A/ gravel and
geotextile or B/ gabions and geotextile or C/ sand, gravel and armour stones (each
layer 0.1 m 0.2 m), C/ only a thick plastic liner (to be used temporarily until other
remediation measures). In each case, the covered area can be several 1,000 m 2 -
several 100,000 m2.
Fig. 14. Sediment capping
Constructing a cap can be as simple as placing a single layer of asphalt on top of the
contaminated material. More often, however, caps are made of several layers. The
top layer at the ground surface is usually soil with grass or other plants. Plants take
37
up rainwater with their roots and help prevent it from soaking down into the next
layer. They also keep the topsoil from eroding. The second layer down drains any
water that comes through the first layer. It is usually constructed of gravel and pipes.
A third layer may be added to control gasses that come from the hazardous material.
The bottom layer lies directly on the contaminated material. It is usually made of clay.
The clay is covered by a sheet of strong synthetic material called a geomembrane.
Together the clay and the geomembrane help stop further flow of water downward.
Applicability
The technology may have good applicability for metals, semi-volatile organic
compounds such as PAH and PCB, volatile organic compounds, and some
pesticides. The hydrologic conditions may make the method less, or not, applicable,
for ex. in high current rivers. The containment of contaminants may further be
reduced by adding activated carbon between the contaminated material and the cap.
Limitations
The aim of the technology is to keep the contaminant masses in place which may
require long term monitoring and maintenance. Depositing and placing a cap over
contaminated sediment may generate suspended contaminants in the water column
(US EPA, 2008: Fact sheet Capping. http://www.epa.gov/research/npd/pdfs/lrp-
factsheet_capping.pdf). However, when cap in place, it may result in improved
aquatic habitat, reductions in flux (less bioturbation of contaminants) and improved
water quality. Method may not be sustainable in water with strong currents. Capping
in areas with shallow water table may restrict water traffic. The contaminants are not
destroyed, only moved from one place to another and contained.
Costs
No cost information is currently available. Information regarding the 1990th century
indicated costs in the range of approx. 5 EUR/m 3 approx. 100 EUR/m3 depending
on selected capping material (low limit corresponds to dredged non-contaminated
sediment used as cap material with dredging and transport cost not included),
38
amount of material to be capped, and excl. or incl. dredging and transport cost (US
EPA; http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/arcs/EPA-905-B94-003/gifs/tab3-4a.gif).

Experimental studies carried out by NIVA in Norway, with caps of sand, waste lime
and ash showed that the cap with ash did best to prevent to metal diffusion, probably
due to the anaerobic conditions developed in this layer, unlike the other two, and that
metals were adsorbed to carbon particles, and bound as sulphides in the sharply-
reduced environment.
Following materials may be considered to be added to list of active capping material
or as part of the cap material mix: Organo modified clay, Apatite, activated Carbon,
zero valent Iron, Aquablok (http://clu-in.org/download/contaminantfocus/pcb/
Aquablok-540R07008.pdf), Ambersorb, XAD-2, Bion soil, Coke (Reible, 20xx. Cost
and Feasibility of Conventional and Active Sediment Capping. http://www-
personal.umich.edu/~adriaens/Site/Dioxin_Remediation_files/Reible.pdf).
Effectiveness
Caps are best used in quite waters, unless extra protection is added. They are
typically used to cover low or mixed-level contamination. A variety of laboratory and
field investigations have confirmed that capping can be effective in isolating
contaminated material from the aquatic environment. The diffusion of pollutants
through a fine-grained soil cover is generally low and diffusion mechanisms can be
almost entirely eliminated.
Advantages
Has a relatively lower cost
Quickly reduce exposure to the contaminants with little disturbance
Does not require disposal site
ISC may have some potential to be an effective technique for medium-long-
term containment of contaminants. Sampling 15 years after capping has
shown no change in the contaminated sediment.
39
Disadvantages
Long-term effectiveness is still uncertain;
Potential for cap damage or leakage caused by erosion, boat traffic, ice or
contaminants moving upward through the cap;
Contaminated sediments remains in place;
Long term-monitoring and maintenance may be required;
Activities such as commercial and recreational boating may also be limited;
Existing piers, bridges and pipelines can limit cap construction.
3.1.5 Soil flushing

In situ flushing is a way to clean up harmful chemicals in polluted soil and
groundwater by pumping water or chemicals into the ground. This helps flush the
harmful chemicals from the ground by moving them toward wells that pump the
chemicals out of the ground. This method has mostly been used in situ for soils and
to a very limited extent for sediments. The principle of the method should however
has some potential also for sediments under specific conditions.
Work description
The process begins with the drilling of injection wells and extraction wells into the
ground where the contamination has been found. The number, location, and depth of
the injection and extraction wells depend on many geological factors and engineering
considerations. Wells may be installed either vertically or horizontally. In addition to
placing the wells, other equipment such as a wastewater treatment system must
be transported to or built on the site. Fig. 15 provides an illustration of one type of in
situ soil flushing process.
40
Fig. 15. The in situ soil flushing process
The soil flushing equipment pumps the flushing solution into the injection wells. The
solution passes through the soil, picking up contaminants along its way as it moves
toward the extraction wells. The extraction wells collect the elutriatethe flushing
solution mixed with the contaminants. The elutriate is pumped out of the ground
through the extraction wells. Here, the elutriate is typically treated by a wastewater
treatment system to remove the contaminants. The contaminants are treated or
disposed of, and the treated water can either be recycled for use in the flushing
solution or disposed of in another acceptable manner.

The target contaminant group for soil flushing is inorganics including radioactive
contaminants. The technology can be used to treat VOCs, SVOCs, fuels and
pesticides but it may be less cost-effective than alternative technologies for these
contaminant groups. The addition of environmentally compatible surfactants may be
used to increase the effective solubility of some organic compounds; however, the
flushing solution may alter the physical/chemical properties of the soil system. The
technology offers the potential for recovery of metals and can mobilize a wide range
of organic and inorganic contaminants from coarse-grained soils.
41
Limitations
Requires greater understanding of the sites geology than some other
technologies
Requires the drilling of injection and extraction wells on-site
The flow of the groundwater must be well understood
Costs
Depending on the number of wells and the amount of surfactant or cosolvent needed,
in-situ flushing can be expensive and difficult to use.
Effectiveness
This method is most effective on soils with low silt or clay content. Since in situ soil
flushing is tailored to treat specific contaminants, it is not highly effective with soils
contaminated with a mixture of hazardous substances, for example, metals and oils.
It would be difficult to prepare a flushing solution that would effectively remove
several different types of contaminants at the same time.
Advantages
Reduces the need for excavation, handling, or transportation of the hazardous
substances.
Disadvantages
Limited commercial success.
3.2. Biological treatment

Biological treatment involves the use of microorganisms or vegetation
(phytoremediation). Many naturally occurring microorganisms (typically, bacteria and
fungi) can transform hazardous chemicals to substances that may be less hazardous
than the original compounds. Microorganisms also have been used to alter the
valence of some hazardous metals (e.g. Cr(VI)), thereby making them less
hazardous and/or less mobile. Several plant species have the ability to
42
bioaccumulate heavy metals found in the soil, and some tree species can sequester,
destroy (usually in cooperation with degradative microorganisms in the root zone),
and/or evaporate/transpire various organic compounds.
3.2.1 Monitored natural attenuation

Natural attenuation (NA) relies on natural processes to reduce the concentration and
the amount of pollution in soil (primarily saturated zone) and groundwater. Natural
attenuation occur at most polluted sites. However, the right conditions must exist
underground to clean sites properly. If not, cleanup will not be quick enough or
complete enough. Scientists monitor or test these conditions to make sure natural
attenuation is working. This is called monitored natural attenuation or MNA. This
method has more or less only been used in situ for soils. No official publication on
sediment has been found. The principle of the method has severe limitations for
sediment due to that the method relies on monitoring and prognostication that may
be difficult to obtain for transport of contaminants in the sediments.
Work description
When the environment is polluted with chemicals, nature can work in four ways to
clean it up:
1. Tiny bugs or microbes that live in soil and groundwater use some chemicals for
food. When they completely digest the chemicals, they can change them into water
and harmless gases;
2. Chemicals can stick or sorb to soil, which holds them in place. This does not clean
up the chemicals, but it can keep them from polluting groundwater and leaving the
site;
3. As pollution moves through soil and groundwater, it can mix with clean water. This
reduces or dilutes the pollution;
4. Some chemicals, like oil and solvents, can evaporate, which means they change
from liquids to gases within the soil. If these gases escape to the air at the ground
surface, sunlight may destroy them.
43
Usually for organic contaminants, this method is only accepted if degradation of
contaminant (#1 above) can be shown as a significant part of the total NS activity.

Site contaminants most amenable to MNA include petroleum hydrocarbons, low-
molecular weight alcohols, ketones, esters, ethers, and iron and manganese. Under
a narrow range of conditions, MNA may be applicable to halogenated solvents, lightly
halogenated aromatics, polychlorinated biphenyls, nitro-aromatics, some pesticides,
and chromium, copper, cadmium, lead, zinc, and nickel.
Limitations
Need of regular monitoring. Before and during MNA it needs to be shown that the
reduction in contaminant concentration versus time is sufficiently high.
Costs
The Naval Facilities Engineering Command provides an estimate for implementing
MNA of between 35,000 EUR and 140,000 EUR per acre. This cost does not include
site characterization, which may be higher than that for a site not being considered
for MNA.
Effectiveness
Most effective in bodies of water that has advantageous geochemical, microbial and
geo-hydrological circumstances and interactions for reducing mass and
concentration of contaminants over time. NA may be recommended for sensitive
environments like wetlands, where removing or capping sediments might cause
irreversible damage.
Advantages
Takes advantage of natural processes, thereby reducing remediation costs;
Natural burial reduces long term risk and the short term disturbances and
removal are minimized;
44
This process poses no disturbance to existing biological communities,
moreover no disposal site is required.
Disadvantages
The process is slow and contaminants remain in place
Long-term extensive monitoring is required
High costs of environmental monitoring
Effectiveness is still unproven
Natural events like storms and/or human activities like boating may cause
resuspension of contaminated sediments
3.2.2 Enhanced natural attenuation

Enhanced natural attenuation (ENA), also called Enhanced attenuation (EA), relies,
as well as ordinary NA/MNA (see 3.2.1), on natural processes to reduce the
concentration and the amount of pollution in soil (only saturated zone) and
groundwater. However, in contrast to NA, EA enhances the degradation of
contaminants via injecting substances directly in-situ. The substances are usually
added in liquid forms and the degradation is mainly focusing on contaminants in pore
water and bulk water. EA is usually coupled to the MNA process and introduced
when MNA shows it will take too long time for the NA-process to reach remediation
goals within acceptable time frame. Definition of EA has lately widened and it is
suggested that all in-situ amendment techniques in saturated zone that stimulates
the degradation process may be called EA. This means including also oxidative
reactions, for example amendments that stimulate oxidative degradation of petroleum
hydrocarbons. This method has more or less only been used in situ for soils. No
official publication on sediment has been found. However, in case the site specific
design of the method does not need to rely heavily on monitoring and
prognostication, the part of the method coupled to amendments for enhancing the
degradation of contaminants may be very well applicable for sediments.
45
Work description
A main part of EA is to directly in-situ stimulate the degradation process directly in-
situ. This is done by adding substances that enhance the degradation process. Such
substances may consist of food-grade organics (molasses, sugar, editable oil
emulsions etc). When such substances ferments microbially in-situ, other substances
are produced (i.e. hydrogen) that promotes the microbial degradation of the
contaminants (i.e. via reductive dechlorination). Other types of substances (nano
iron, etc) may be added alone, or in combination with organics, and via chemical
reactions produces substances (i.e. hydrogen) that enhance the reductive
degradation of the contaminants. If the reactions needed instead shall focuses on
oxidative reactions (high redox and high oxygen level best), for example aerobic
degradation of petroleum products, oxygen or oxygen producing compounds are
injected in-situ in the saturated zone. Frequency of adding is depending mostly on
type of substances to add which in turn is depending on site specific circumstances
(soil structure etc).

Site contaminants most amenable to EA are chlorinated solvents and other
chlorinated organics that are susceptible to reductive dechlorination. Also inorganic
compounds that are less toxic in anaerobic environments than in aerobic ditto (Cr3+
versus toxic Cr6+, etc) are susceptible to this method. If the suggested widening of
EA definition is accepted, also oxidative reactions such as amendments that
stimulate oxidative degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons may be included.
Limitations
As for MNA, EA need regular monitoring. Before, during and after EA it needs to be
shown that the reduction of contaminant mass is sufficiently.
Costs
The additional cost that EA may contribute is not major to the overall cost of
EA/MNA. The added substances are usually non-expensive. The major costs
46
(additional to cost for MNA) are coupled to drilling new wells, added substances and
secure (by for ex. monitoring) that the remediation goals within EA are reached.
Effectiveness
Most effective in pore-/bulk-/ground-water contaminated with chlorinated organics,
especially chlorinated solvents (via reductive dechlorination). EA has reached
remediation goals within 1-5 years in such contaminated groundwaters (that with
ordinary MNA would take > 50 years). Also oxygen enhancement (oxidative reactions
on petroleum hydrocarbons) has been proved to significantly reduce the total
remediation time, but the time reduction is far from as drastic as for chlorinated
solvents. As better the amended substances can be distributed in the contaminated
water column, as shorter remediation time.
Advantages
Takes advantage of natural processes, thereby reducing remediation costs;
Non-toxic food grade organics are used/injected in-situ;
As for all in-situ methods, can be performed with minimal disturbances above
ground;
The process poses no disturbance to existing biological communities,
moreover no disposal site is required.
Disadvantages
Extensive monitoring is required (significant cost)
Integration of several disciplines at high level of knowledge needed
(microbiology, chemistry, geotechnique, hydrogeology etc)
Method mostly proven on land, experience of usage of EA in sediment limited.
Method only focusing on saturated zones.
The mix of contaminants in sediment are usually significantly more complex
than in groundwater on land; may result in difficulties to apply the method in
one step properly for all contaminants in sediment (some may have the mass
reduced but other may be transformed into more toxic species).
47
3.2.3 Phytoremediation
Phytoremediation is a process that uses plants to remove, transfer, stabilize, and
destroy contaminants in soil and sediment. Contaminants may be either organic or
inorganic. This method has more or less only been used in situ for soils. No official
publication on in situ usage of this method in sediment has been found.
Hypothetically, it may be due to sparse numbers of tested phyto-remedial plants that
can be placed in situ in the sediment.
Work description
Plants remove harmful chemicals from the ground when their roots take in water and
nutrients from polluted soil, streams, and groundwater (Fig. 16). Plants can clean up
chemicals as deep as their roots can grow. Tree roots grow deeper than smaller
plants, so they are used to reach pollution deeper in the ground.
Once inside the plant, chemicals can be:
stored in the roots, stems, or leaves
changed into less harmful chemicals within the plant
changed into gases that are released into the air as the plant transpires (breathes).
In summary, phytoremediation of metals can be divided in Phytoextraction (also
called Phytoaccumulation) (uptake in roots from soil), Rhizofiltration uptake in roots
from water) and Phytostabilisation (absorption and accumulation by roots, adsorbed
onto the roots or precipitated in the rhizosphere). Phytoremediation of organics can
be divided in Phytodegradation (also called Phytotransformation) (degradation by
internal and/or external metabolic plant processes), Rhizodegradation (degradation in
soil by microbes in cooperation with the plant roots/rhizosphere) and
Phytovolatilization (uptake of soluble contaminants by root and release, mostly via
leafs or similiar, into the atmosphere as water is transpired; the contaminant may
become modified during transport in the plant). Additionally, plants can be used as
hydraulic controller of the transport of contaminants in the ground (by sorbing water).
48
Fig. 16. Phytoremediation process

Phytoremediation may be applicable for the remediation of metals, pesticides,
solvents, explosives, crude oil, PAHs and landfill leachates. Some plant species have
the ability to store metals in their roots. They can be transplanted to sites to filter
metals from wastewater. As the roots become saturated with metal contaminants,
they can be harvested. Hyper-accumulator plants may be able to remove and store
significant amount of metallic contaminants. Currently, trees are under investigation
to determine their ability to remove organic contaminants from ground water,
translocation and transpiration, and possibly metabolize them either to CO2 or plant
tissue.
Limitations
The depth of the treatment zone is determined by plants used in
phytoremediation. In most cases, it is limited to shallow soils.
High concentrations of hazardous materials can be toxic to plants.
It involves the same mass transfer limitations as other biotreatments.
It may be seasonal, depending on location.
It can transfer contamination across media, e.g., from soil to air.
It is not effective for strongly sorbed (e.g., PCBs) and weakly sorbed
contaminants.
49
The toxicity and bioavailability of biodegradation products is not always
known.
Products may be mobilized into ground water or bioaccumulated in animals.
It is still in the demonstration stage.
It is unfamiliar to regulators.
Costs
The cost has been estimated to between 25 EUR/ton 125 EUR/ton of soil and 2.5
EUR/m3 25 EUR/m3 of polluted water. Remediation of organics is cheaper than
remediation of metals.

In general, phytoremediation has been implemented at a number of sites at full-scale
(U.S. EPA 2006). Also, a wide range of site conditions, plants, and contaminants
have been studied under laboratory or field testing. As of this publication,
phytoemediation technologies have been selected 18 times by the US Superfund
program.
Effectiveness
Phytoremediation is best used to treat large areas of shallow contamination. Because
high levels of contaminants may be toxic to plants and inhibit their growth, the
method is best applied to low - moderate contaminant levels, used in conjunction with
other treatment methods, or used as a final polishing step in site remediation.
Advantages
Takes advantage of natural plant processes
Requires less equipment and labour than other methods since plants do most
of the work
The site can be cleaned up without removing polluted soil
Same tools and supplies as agriculture can be used
More likely to be accepted by public (aesthetic)
50
It can treat a site with more than one type of contaminant
Disadvantages
Dependant on plant growing conditions (i.e. geology, climate, temperature)

Remediation time far exceeds most of alternative remediation
Outcome depends on tolerance of the plant to the pollutant
Contaminants sorbed during spring may in autumn be released back to the
environment
High concentrations of sorbed contaminants may need plant transportation to
deposit or destruction at special energy producer.
3.3. Thermal treatment

Five technologies are grouped under the in situ thermal treatment classification:
electrical resistance heating, steam injection and extraction, conductive heating,
radio-frequency heating, and vitrification. With the exception of vitrification, all of
these treatment technologies rely on the addition of heat to the soil to increase the
removal efficiency of volatile and semi-volatile contaminants. Vapour extraction is an
integral part of these remediation systems to ensure the removal and treatment of
mobilized contaminants. Liquid extraction is also used during steam injection, and
sometimes with other thermal technologies when groundwater flow rates are high
and/or when the contaminant being recovered is semi-volatile. In case focusing at
areas below groundwater table, the heating cost for all thermal heating technologies
rapidly increases and may result in low competiveness. This is hypothetically one of
several reasons behind why it is very sparsely reported on using this group of
methods in situ in sediments (besides that part of sediment after electrical treatment
usually needs to be dredged and potential issues using electrical currents under
groundwater table only where the remediation shall take place). In situ vitrification is
unique among the thermal technologies in that the temperatures used will vitrify soil.
The stable glass that is formed by vitrification will immobilize any non-volatile
contaminants that are present, including metals and radioactive materials.
51
Some of these methods may have possibility to remediate contamination present
under structures where vertical drilling is prohibited. Heating can readily be done
using angled or horizontal borings, but the complexity and cost of the drilling and
installation increases significantly compared to vertical installations (Kingston J. et
al., 2010. Critical Evaluation of State-of-the-Art In Situ Thermal Treatment
Technologies for DNAPL Source Zone Treatment. ESTCP Project ER-0314).
3.3.1 Electrical resistance heating

Electrical resistance heating (ERH) involves passing electrical current through
moisture in the soil between an array of electrodes. As the current flows through the
moisture in soil pores, the resistance of the soil produces heat.
Work description
Electrodes are placed directly into the less permeable soil matrix and activated so
that electrical current passes through the soil, creating a resistance which then heats
the soil (Fig. 17). The heat dries out the soil causing it to fracture. These fractures
make the soil more permeable allowing the use of SVE to remove the contaminants.
The heat created by electrical resistance heating also forces trapped liquids to
vaporize and move to the steam zone for removal by SVE.
Fig. 17. Typical Six-Phase Soil Heating System
52
ERH is typically most effective on volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The
chlorinated compounds perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene, and cis or trans 1,2-
dichloroethylene are contaminants that are easily remediated with ERH. Less volatile
contaminants like xylene or diesel can also be remediated with ERH but energy
requirements increase as the volatility decreases.
Costs
The cost per m3 decreases as the total volume treated increases. U.S. EPA provides
remediation cost estimates of 22 EURO /m3 and 51 EURO/m3 at two full-scale ERH
sites. Beyke and Fleming (2005) estimate that ERH costs 140,000 EURO plus 28
EURO /m3 - 50 EURO/m3. Alternatively, 30 EURO/m3 (total 27.000 m3) up to 80
EURO/m3, (total 9.000 m3), excl. water treatment has been published (USACE; 2009:
EM 1110-1-4015).

The technology is proven and has been used at a number of sites. The number of
vendors offering the technology is limited.
Effectiveness
ERH is typically most effective on volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Because
electricity can and does travel through any lithology that contains some water, ERH
can be effective in any soil type.
Advantages
ERH is adaptable to all soil types and sedimentary bedrock.
ERH is not depth limited, only limited to how deep the boring can be drilled.
ERH is effective in fractured rock and porous sedimentary rock as the
electricity will follow the same fractures or pathways that the water and
contamination have followed.
Disadvantages
53
Heat losses on small sites
Co-contaminants like oil or grease make remediation more difficult (more
energy required).
Peat or high organic carbon in the subsurface will preferentially adsorb VOCs due to
van der Waals forces.
3.3.2 Steam injection and extraction

Steam injection and extraction (also known as steam enhanced extraction [SEE])
involves injection of steam into injection wells and the recovery of mobilized
groundwater, contaminants, and vapour from the recovery wells.
Work description
The steam is injected underground through wells drilled in the polluted area. The
steam heats the area and mobilizes, evaporates, and destroys the harmful chemicals
(Fig. 18).
Fig. 18. Example of typical steam injection system

The applicability of steam injection to a particular site is determined by the
permeability of the soil, the depth at which the contaminants reside, the type and
degree of heterogeneity as well as the contaminant type. The permeability of the soil
54
must be high enough to allow sufficient steam to be injected to heat the entire source
zone. Higher injection rates can be achieved by increasing the injection pressure;
however, in general, pressures should not be higher than 1.65 pounds per square
inch per meter of depth, or the overburden pressure will be exceeded, and fracturing
to the surface can be expected.
Limitations
The method is hardly applicable for treatment of shallow areas.
Costs
Cost data for steam injection and extraction are limited. Costs are very sensitive to
treatment rate as a function of site characteristics, contaminants present, and the
clean-up criteria. Older information indicated cost interval of 50 EUR/m 3 soil 500
EUR/m3 soil (US EPA 1998. EPA/540/S-97/505).

Steam is a well-documented technology for addressing NAPL source zones in
unconsolidated subsurfaces (Davis 1998).
Effectiveness
Several small scale, short duration demonstrations of steam injection in
fractured rock have shown the potential for this technology to be effective in
fractured rock settings (e.g., Loring Air Force Base, Davis et al. 2005), but
additional research and field demonstrations are needed to fully determine its
effectiveness.
In systems where low volatility of the contaminant exists or strong adsorption
onto a solid phase, the temperature of the system may determine the attained
clean-up level.
Advantages
55
Excavation is not required, potential contaminants are not injected to the
subsurface, and potentially rapid remediation is possible.
The accelerated removal rates can have positive impact on the total cleanup
cost by reducing the time required for the remediation.
The possibility to use high temperatures can increase the amount of semi-
volatile organics that are recovered and the removal efficiencies from clay
soils by increasing the volatilization and desorption from soil surfaces.
Disadvantages
Initial capital costs for steam injection are higher than for a system that relies
on removal of soil gases without heating, such as vacuum extraction.
Extensive characterization of the site is important in order to determine the
horizontal and vertical distribution of the contaminant, and the preferred flow
paths for the injected steam.
The method has potential to be expensive (but there may be trade-offs
between efficiency of the cleanup and the methods total cost).
3.3.3 Conductive heating

Conductive heating, sometimes called In Situ Thermal Desorption (ISTD), uses either
an array of vertical heater/vacuum wells or, when the treatment area is within about
0.15 m of the ground surface, surface heater blankets. While it is feasible to deploy
all the wells in a heater/vacuum mode, the typical deployment is to place six heater-
only wells in a hexagonal shape with a heater vacuum well occupying the centre of
each hexagon. The wells can be installed using conventional drilling techniques or
direct push. Heater wells are constructed of steel pipe with the base sealed. A
resistive heating unit is lowered into the well and current is supplied. The heating
o o
element typically operates at temperatures between 540 and 815 C.
56
Work description
The vacuum well contains the same steel pipe and heating element components as a
standard heater well, but it is placed within a larger screened well to which a vacuum
can be applied. Heat propagates in a cylindrical fashion from the well outward. The
heating element typically operates at temperatures between 540 and 815C. The
steel pipe is heated by radiant energy and the soil surrounding it by thermal
conductance. The heating is fairly even through all dry textures of soil. The hottest
o
soil (typically 590 C) is in the immediate vicinity of the wells, while the coolest soil is
at the midpoint between wells. When the vacuum is applied to the centre well,
volatilized organics are pulled through the high-temperature soil, where some of the
contaminants may be degraded. This vacuum design is similar to soil-vapor
extraction (SVE). Well spacing is chosen based on contaminant type and depth, soil
moisture content, the minimum required temperature between wells, and the time
desired to reach that temperature.
Limitations
If the treatment area contains saturated high-hydraulic conductivity soil, then a
dewatering system should be considered, or using a steam system to control water
influx, as well as sweeping the permeable areas.
Costs
Some vendor cost estimates cited range from 75 EURO/ton to 200 EURO/ton (upper
interval level or higher for PCB contaminated soils according to USACE, 2009. EM
1110-1-4015). Treating contaminants that generate highly corrosive conditions (for
ex. some halogenated organics) may generate higher cost/ton (high equipment costs
to withstand the corrosion).
Effectiveness
SVOCs, including high boiling components, such as PAHs or PCBs, generally need a
o
soil temperature of 325 C for adequate desorption, while VOCs require less heat
57
o
(usually 100 C). Conductive heating operates best in unsaturated soil; however, it
does find application in saturated soil with low hydraulic conductivity.
Advantages
Potentially shorter treatment time (weeks or months, rather than years for
many other technologies)
Potentially lower total operations and maintenance costs than many other
technologies (only energy, and in some cases water and air, are added to the
subsurface)
Many different contaminants may be treated simultaneously
Less sensitive to subsurface heterogeneities across a site.
Disadvantages
Few full-scale tests documented.
Thermal conductance systems can consume large quantities of power.
The soil will be sterile during and sometimes after the remediation.
The drying of soils, especially fine-grained silt and clay, at high temperatures
can result in shrinkage.
Difficult to apply near occupied/active sites
Require sophisticated design and operation
May enhance the potential for contaminant to migrate to previously non-
impacted areas
Post-treatment soil temperatures may remain elevated for prolonged periods
of time (months to years).
3.3.4 Radio frequency heating

Radio frequency heating (RFH) is an in situ process that uses electromagnetic
energy to heat soil and enhance soil vapour extraction.
Work description
58
A radio-frequency heating system usually consists of:
1. A three-phase power supply
2. A radio-frequency source with an oscillator that generates a low-power current at
the desired radio frequency, several serial amplifiers that increase the strength of the
oscillator current, and a final amplifier that delivers the current at the prescribed
output level.
3. An applicator system consisting of electrodes or antennae.
4. A monitoring control system.
5. A grounded metal shield over the treatment area.
6. A vapour collection and treatment system
Depending upon the vendor, a row or rows of applicator electrodes are placed in the
ground to the depth of the treatment zone. The electrodes can be placed with
conventional drilling equipment or direct push. In some designs, the electrodes
themselves are used to recover soil gas and heated vapours. In other designs, wells
are placed specifically for soil vapour extraction and to act as electromagnetic sinks
to prevent heating beyond the treatment zone (Fig. 19).
Fig. 19. Radio frequency heating with electrodes
Limitations
RFH is not applicable for treatment zones that contain metal or other conductive
objects.
59
The method can be used as a low-moderate temp., up to high-temp., application.
Low(-moderate) temp. may result in 20-25C within a soil column of up to ca 25 m.
Depending upon the chemicals of concern, RFH high-temp can obtain temperatures
over 250C with some vendors claiming temperatures to 400C near the electrodes
(Davis 1997 and U.S. EPA 1997). These temperatures allow the system to treat both
VOCs and many SVOCs. The temperatures decrease with the distance to the
electrodes. 100C has been reached up to 3 m from the electrodes. The method
needs complementary method/s to take care of generated gases (mostly of organic
contaminants). In general, temperature up to 40C may be coupled to enhanced
microbial degradation; 40C 100C to change in viscosity (PAH, heavy oils; capture
system needed); up to ca 100C to volatilisation (BTEX, PCE etc; SVE needed) and
100-400C to stabilisation/destruction (PCB, SVOC) (Kabir, 2010:
http://www.frtr.gov/pdf/meetings/nov10/presentations/kabir-presentation.pdf).
Costs
Key cost drivers are soil type (permeability) and depth to top/thickness of
contaminated area. For thermal treatment, soils of lower permeability (silts/silty-clays)
are less expensive to remediate as they require less gas flow. A deeper and thicker
region of contaminated soils has higher remedial costs. Sparsely public information
of cost exists. Interval of 40 -100 EURO/m3 has been indicated.
Status
Method in full-scale mode but few official reports from full-scale performances.
Effectiveness
Lower energy requirements/cost than other thermal methods that heat host and
target. Fewer heating locations (boreholes, waste, materials) than other thermal
methods.
Advantages
60
As for many other similar in situ technologies, this method has advantage at
SVOC sites where excavation is unpractical or expensive
Less monitoring than many other in situ treatment technologies fewer site
visits, reduced labour, consumables
Can enhance other methods such as soil vapor extraction (SVE)/air sparging,
not least in cold climates and where SVE is limited by high moisture content.
Moderate temp. application may parallel increase degradation of contaminants
Disadvantages
High temperatures only applicable in unoccupied or access-restricted locations. The

economy of the method is strongly coupled to the local cost of electricity.
3.3.5 In situ vitrification

Vitrification is a process that permanently traps harmful chemicals in a solid block of
glasslike material. This keeps them from leaving the site. Vitrification can be done
either in place or above ground. Precautions are needed when dealing with sites
containing large amounts of free water. Therefore, evaluation and selecting this
method for sediment in situ may be done after negative outcome of evaluation of
most other alternative methods.
Work description
Vitrification uses electric power to create the heat needed to melt soil. Four rods,
called electrodes, are drilled in the polluted area. An electric current is passed
between the electrodes, melting the soil between them. Melting starts near the
ground surface and moves down. As the soil melts, the electrodes sink further into
the ground causing deeper soil to melt. When the power is turned off, the melted soil
cools and vitrifies, which means it turns into a solid block of glass-like material. The
electrodes become part of the block. When vitrified, the original volume of soil
shrinks. This causes the ground surface in the area to sink slightly. To level it, the
sunken area is filled with clean soil (Fig. 20).
61
Fig. 20. In-situ vitrification
The heat used to melt the soil can also destroy some of the harmful chemicals and
cause others to evaporate. The evaporated chemicals rise through the melted soil to
the ground surface. Here, a hood, which covers the heated area, collects the
chemicals. These chemicals are sent to a treatment system where they are cleaned
up. Any harmful chemicals that remain underground become trapped in the vitrified
block, which is left in place. This prevents rainfall, groundwater flow, and wind from
transporting the chemicals offsite.

The conventional ISV process can destroy or remove organics and immobilize most
inorganics in contaminated soil, sludge, or other earthen materials. The process has
been used on a broad range of VOCs and SVOCs, other organics including dioxins
and PCBs, and on most priority pollutant metals and radionuclides. ISV is applicable
to sites with high clay and moisture content, although treatment costs increase with
increasing moisture content. Treatment of materials in a permeable aquifer may
require some type of dewatering (which is a significant obstacle for treating sediment
in situ), and if the treatment area is expected to contain large voids, dynamic
compaction is recommended.
62
Costs
Vitrification operations: 300 EURO/ton - 400 EURO/ton. Ancillary costs: treatability/
pilot testing 50K EURO - 150K EURO; mobilization 150K EURO - 200K EURO and
demobilisation 150K EURO - 200K EURO.

ISV, using the electrical resistance method, has been tested in the field several
times, including a SITE Program demonstration (U.S. EPA 1995), a demonstration at
the DOE Hanford Nuclear Reservation (http://www.frtr.gov/) and Superfund cleanups
at the Wasatch Chemical Company, Lot 6 site (U.S. EPA 1997b) and General
Electric Spokane Shop (U.S. EPA 2005).
Effectiveness
The majority (70 to 99.9% by weight) of heavy metals, such as arsenic, lead,
cadmium, and chromium, and radionuclides are entrained in the melt mass
(Thompson, Bates and Hansen 1992). SVOCs and VOCs can be treated with this
process, with about 97% or more of the VOCs destroyed and the remainder captured
by the offgas treatment system (U.S. EPA 1997a).
Advantages
ISV can treat mixtures of waste types, contaminated with organic and inorganic
compounds. Metals are bound within the vitrified product. Organics in soil may be
destroyed, encapsulated or driven of as gas, in total to a very high degree of risk
reduction.
Disadvantages
Treatment in situ of sediment includes significant extra cautions and cost due to its
potential high water content. Electrical current applied to electrodes in materials with
high free water content can generate explosive gas. In free water containing chloride
ions, toxic gas can be produced.
63
4. EX SITU TREATMENT
The main advantage of ex situ treatment is that it generally requires shorter time
periods than in situ treatment, and there is more certainty about the uniformity of
treatment because of the ability to homogenize, screen, and continuously mix the
soil. However, ex situ treatment requires excavation of soils, leading to increased
costs and engineering for equipment, possible permitting, and material
handling/worker exposure considerations.
4.1. Physical/chemical treatment

Physical/chemical treatment uses the physical properties of the contaminants or the
contaminated medium to destroy (i.e., chemically convert), separate, or immobilize
the contamination. Chemical reduction/oxidation and dehalogenation (APEG, BCD or
glycolate) are destruction technologies. Soil washing, separation and solvent
extraction are separation techniques, and Solidification/Stabilisation (s/s) is an
immobilization technique. Physical/chemical treatment may be cost effective
(depending on site specific conditions) and can often be completed in shorter time
periods than by biological treatment methods. Equipment is readily available and is
not engineering or energy-intensive. Treatment residuals from separation techniques
will require treatment or disposal, which will add to the total project costs and may
require permits.
4.1.1 Ex situ stabilisation/solidification

As for in situ solidification/stabilisation (s/s) ex situ s/s contaminants are physically
bound or enclosed within a stabilised mass (solidification), or chemical reactions are
induced between the stabilising agent and contaminants to reduce their mobility
(stabilisation). Ex situ s/s treated masses may be used as construction material (if
human and environmental impacts from the treated contaminated masses are
reduced enough) or requires disposal of the resultant materials. Typical ex situ s/s
process flow diagram is presented below (Fig. 21).
64
Fig. 21. Typical ex situ S/S process flow diagram
Work description
There are many innovations in the stabilisation and solidification technology. Most of
the innovations are modifications of proven processes and are directed to
encapsulation or immobilizing the harmful constituents and involve processing of the
waste or contaminated soil. Nine distinct innovative processes or groups of
processes include: (1) bituminization, (2) emulsified asphalt, (3) modified sulfur
cement, (4) polyethylene extrusion, (5) pozzolan/Portland cement, (6) radioactive
waste solidification, (7) sludge stabilisation, (8) soluble phosphates and (9)
vitrification/molten glass.
Bituminization. In the bituminization process, wastes are embedded in molten

bitumen and encapsulated when the bitumen cools. The process combines heated
bitumen and a concentrate of the waste material, usually in slurry form, in a heated
extruder containing screws that mix the bitumen and waste. Water is evaporated
from the mixture to about 0.5% moisture. The final product is a homogenous mixture
of extruded solids and bitumen.
Emulsified Asphalt. Asphalt emulsions are very fine droplets of asphalt dispersed in
water that are stabilised by chemical emulsifying agents. The emulsions are available
as either cationic or anionic emulsions. The emulsified asphalt process involves
65
adding emulsified asphalts having the appropriate charge to hydrophilic liquid or
semiliquid wastes at ambient temperature. After mixing, the emulsion breaks, the
water in the waste is released, and the organic phase forms a continuous matrix of
hydrophobic asphalt around the waste solids. In some cases, additional neutralizing
agents, such as lime or gypsum, may be required. After given sufficient time to set
and cure, the resulting solid asphalt has the waste uniformly distributed throughout it
and is impermeable to water.
Modified Sulfur Cement. Modified sulfur cement is a commercially-available

thermoplastic material. It is easily melted (130 to 150C) and then mixed with the
waste to form homogenous molten slurry which is discharged to suitable containers
for cooling, storage, and reuse or disposal. A variety of common mixing devices,
such as, paddle mixers and pug mills, can be used. The relatively low temperatures
used limit emissions of sulphur dioxide and hydrogen sulphide to allowable threshold
values.
Polyethylene Extrusion. The polyethylene extrusion process involves the mixing of

polyethylene binders and dry waste materials using a heated cylinder containing a
mixing/transport screw. The heated, homogenous mixture exits the cylinder through
an output die into a mould, where it cools and solidifies. Polyethylenes properties
produce a very stable, solidified product. The process has been tested on nitrate salt
wastes at plant-scale, thereby establishing its viability, and on various other wastes
at the bench and pilot scale.
Pozzolan/Portland Cement. Pozzolan/Portland cement process consists primarily of

silicates from pozzolanic-based materials like fly ash, kiln dust, pumice, or blast
furnace slag and cement-based materials like Portland cement. These materials
chemically react with water to form a solid cementious matrix which improves the
handling and physical characteristics of the waste. The hydraulic conductivity of the
final product is usually significantly reduced down to 10 -9 10-11 m/s. Production of
such monolithic structure may result in reduced leachability of both heavy metals and
organic contaminants of the encapsulated contaminated material. The cement
reactions may also chemically bind contaminants in the structure. Due to that the
66
process raise the pH of the water, some heavy metal contaminants may precipitate
and immobilize. Pozzolanic and cement-based binding agents are typically
appropriate for inorganic contaminants. The effectiveness of these binding agents
with organic contaminants varies. However, adding small amount of additives (e.g.
active carbon) to the mixture may significantly reduce the lechability of hydrophobic
organic contaminants. The s/s technique on non- and low-medium contaminated
soils and dredged sediments may result in products with geotechnical and
environmental properties suitable as construction material.
Radioactive waste solidification. In radioactive waste solidification

(Grouting/Other) treatment, solidification additives are used to form a uniform and
stable matrix to encapsulate radioactive waste materials. Assemblies include pumps
for liquids or slurries, conveyors for sludges or solids, storage silos, weigh feeders,
piping, mixers and disposal or storage.
Sludge stabilization. The sludge stabilisation process is the addition of a reagent,

either slags or cementitious materials, to sludge to transform the material so that the
hazardous constituents are in their least mobile or toxic form. Sludges which leach
heavy metals or other contaminants are often stabilised in order to obtain
immobilization of the hazardous constituents.
Soluble Phosphates. The soluble phosphates process involves the addition of

various forms of phosphate and alkali for control of pH as well as for formation of
complex metal molecules of low-solubility to immobilize (insolubilize) the metals over
a wide pH range. Unlike most other stabilisation processes, soluble phosphate
processes do not convert the waste into a hardened, monolithic mass. One
application of soluble phosphates and lime is in stabilizing fly ash by immobilizing the
lead and cadmium in the ash.
Vitrification/Molten Glass. Vitrification, or molten glass, processes are solidification

methods that employ heat up to 1200 C to melt and convert waste materials into
glass or other glass-crystalline products. The high temperatures destroy any organic
67
constituents with very few by-products. Materials, such as heavy metals and
radionuclides, are actually incorporated into the glass structure which is, generally, a
relatively strong, durable material that is resistant to leaching. In addition to solids,
the waste materials can be liquids, wet or dry sludges, or combustible materials.
Borosilicate and soda-lime are the principal glass formers and provide the basic
matrix of the vitrified product. No information available on this methods usage for
dredged sediments. Potential usage for sediment primarily on very high
contaminated or radioactive dredged ditto.

The target contaminant group for ex situ s/s is mainly inorganic, including
radionuclides. Most s/s technologies have limited effectiveness against organics and
pesticides, except vitrification which destroys most organic contaminants. However
the Pozzolan/Portland Cement method, in which new innovative forms of
binders/mixtures (other than, or in combination with, cement) with/without additives
have been tested in pilot and full scale in the last years, has shown significantly
reduced leachablilty of organics from stabilised contaminated sediment, compared to
the contaminated sediment itself.
Limitations
Environmental conditions may (theoretically) affect the long-term
immobilization of contaminants.
Some processes result in a significant increase in volume (up to double the
original volume).
Certain wastes are incompatible with different processes. Treatability studies
are generally required.
High-very high organic content (more/much more than 10 w-%) may reduce
the cementing/hardening process.
Long-term effectiveness (> ca 30 years) has not yet been demonstrated for
many contaminant/process combinations.
68
The bitumen- and vitrification based methods are used for radioactive
materials.
Costs
Cost varies between 90 EURO and 200 EURO per m3.
Advantages
Several methods, especially the cement-based, have found increased usage for
moderate contaminated sediment where the sediment may be used as construction
material (for ex. quay) after s/s treatment, instead of transportation of the sediment to
deposit.
Depending on s/s method, type and amount of binder, the mobility and thereby
environmental impact of several contaminants may be decreased. For example,
some heavy metals and hydrophobic organic contaminants in sediments may show
significantly decrease in leachability after treatment with cement-based mix of
binders.
The non-cement based methods gives, if possible to apply at the specific situation,
stronger containment for the method specific matrices and their contaminants,
compared to cement- based alternative. However they are usually more costly and
have more limited application.
Disadvantages
For some binders, especially cement-based, the pH will increase dramatically in the
leachate, resulting in that contaminants having increased leachability at high pH may
not be contained to sufficient degree.
Selection of optimal amount and mix of binders needs extensive laboratory tests, not
least if the final product shall be used as construction material.
69
Some methods may be less suitable for sediments with high organic content and
high water content.
Usually, as higher amount of binders as better containment of the contaminants and

as higher geotechnical strength but amount of binders per m3 treatable material have
upper levels above which the method is not economical competitive.
Volatile contaminants may evaporate due to temperature increase during treatment
4.1.2 Gas-phase chemical reduction

Gas Phase Chemical Reduction (GPCR) is a proven, non-incineration technology
for the destruction of hazardous organic chemicals (mostly halogenated) by hydrogen
and has been successfully applied to pesticides, dioxins, PCBs, CFCs, and chemical
warfare agents. Chlorinated hydrocarbons, such as pesticides are chemically
reduced to methane or natural gas and hydrogen chloride (HCl).
Work description
Solid and bulk waste materials are processed in a Thermal Reduction Batch
Processor (TRBP). This waste is placed in the TRBP, which is sealed and heated in
an oxygen-free atmosphere to about 600 C. Organic components are volatilised and
swept into the GPCR reactor, where complete reduction by hydrogen takes place at
850-900 C. Gas leaving the reactor is scrubbed to move particulate and acid and
then stored for reuse as a fuel (Fig. 22).
70
Fig. 22. Gas-phase chemical reduction process diagram

Pesticides such as Hexachlorobenzene, DDT, Aldrin, Dieldrin, HCBs, DDT, PCBs,
dioxins and furans and other POPs. The GPCR system is fully commercialised and
has been used to treat more than 3000 tons of PCB-, pesticide- and other organic-
contaminated material at sites. The method may also reduce the content of volatile
heavy metals (Hg and As) in soil/sediment (but special treatment of the off-gases
then needed).
Limitations
GPCR is limited in destroying only halogenated organic compounds.
In some cases transportation of large quantities of hydrogen may be needed
and may then present a risk of transportation-related accidents.
Limited amount of contaminated soil/sediment that can be processed/time (ca
5 000 ton/month).
Costs
71
Commercially the system has been working more than 5 year at Kwinana in Western
Australia, where it has been treating PCB.s, HCB.s and DDT.
Effectiveness
The GPCR has treated HCBs and PCBs and DDT, other chlorinated pesticides and
POPs related wastes such as dioxins and furans.
Advantages
Disadvantages
4.1.3 Liquefied gas solvent extraction

The liquefied gas solvent extraction technology uses liquefied gas solvents to extract
organics from soils, sludges, sediments, and wastewaters. Gases liquefied under
pressure, have unique physical properties that enhance their use as solvents. The
low viscosities, densities, and surface tensions of these gases result in significantly
higher rates of extraction compared to conventional liquid solvents. Due to their high
volatility, gases are also easily recovered from the suspended solids matrix,
minimizing solvent losses. Liquefied propane solvent is typically used to treat soils,
sludges, and sediments, while liquefied carbon dioxide is typically used to treat
wastewater.
Work description
Contaminated solids, slurries, or wastewaters are fed into the extraction system
along with solvent (Fig. 23).
72
Fig. 23. Liquefied Gas Solvent Extraction (LG-SX) Technology
Typically, more than 99% of the organics are extracted from the feed. After the
solvent and organics are separated from the treated feed, the solvent and organic
mixture passes to the solvent recovery system. Once in the solvent recovery system,
the solvent is vaporized and recycled as fresh solvent. The organics are drawn off
and either reused or disposed of. Treated feed is discharged from the extraction
system as slurry. The slurry is filtered and dewatered. The reclaimed water is
recycled to the extraction system and the filter cake is sent to disposal or reused.

The LG-SX technology can be applied to soils and sludges containing volatile and
semivolatile organic compounds and other higher boiling point complex organics,
such as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),
dioxins, and pentachlorophenol (PCP). This process can also treat refinery wastes
and wastewater contaminated with organics.
Limitations
Costs
100 500 EUR per ton of contaminated material
73
Status
The technology was accepted into the SITE Demonstration Program in 1988. Under
the SITE Program, a pilot-scale mobile demonstration unit was tested in September
1988 on PCB-laden sediments from the New Bedford Harbor Superfund site in
Massachusetts. PCB concentrations in the harbor sediment ranged from 300 parts
per million (ppm) to 2,500 ppm. The Technology Evaluation Report (EPA/540/5-
90/002) and the Applications Analysis Report (EPA/540/A5-90/002) are available
from EPA.
Effectiveness
During the demonstrational studies managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
extraction efficiencies reached 90 to 98 % percent for sediments containing PCBs
between 360 and 2,575 ppm. Volatile and semi-volatile organics in aqueous and
semisolid wastes were extracted with 99.9 % efficiency.
Advantages
Disadvantages
4.1.4 Separation
The separation processes are used for removing contaminated concentrates from
soils, to leave relatively uncontaminated fractions that can then be regarded as
treated soil. Physical separation techniques have been used commonly in the
chemical and mining industries for many years. These techniques involve the
physical separation of particles from each other based on particle characteristics
such as size, shape, density, or magnetism. Density differences may also be used for
74
separate immiscible oil phases from water. Chemical involves for example complex
binding and usage of detergents.
Work description
Separation can be performed by many processes. Gravity separation (a solid/liquid
separation process, which relies on a density difference between the phases) and
sieving/physical separation are two well-developed processes. Magnetic separation
uses particles magnetic qualities. These processes are sometimes preceded by
chemical coagulation and flocculation to increase particle size, thereby allowing
removal of fine particles.
Fig. 23. Typical gravity separation system
Gravity separation. Gravity separation is a solid/liquid separation process, which

relies on a density difference between the phases. Equipment size and effectiveness
of gravity separation depends on the solids settling velocity, which is a function of the
particles size, density difference, fluid viscosity and particle concentration (hindered
settling). An alternative to Fig. 23 is so called water cyclones (open pipes) in which
soil slurries are transported downwards by gravity in a circular manner. In the end of
the cyclones, finer particles have their exit in one part of the cyclone pipe and coarser
particles in the adjacent part. Diameter, inclination and length of the cyclones steer
particle size separation and several different cyclones are usually coupled in serial.
Separation by gravity principle may also be used for removing immiscible oil
75
phases. In some cases it can be preceded by coagulation and flocculation to
increase particle size, thereby allowing additional technique using particle separation.
Magnetic separation. Magnetic separation is used to extract more or less magnetic
particles (sometimes also radioactive) from host materials such as water and soil.
While the contaminated soil is transported on a conveyer band it passes a strong
electromagnet in the end of the band. Magnetic minerals or small metal scraps in the
soil will then fall slightly longer/further distance than the non-magnetic particles.
Nearly vertical under the end of the band, non-magnetic particles are sampled while
the magnetic parts are sample further out. Alternatively, the process may operate by
passing contaminated fluid or slurry through a magnetized volume. The magnetized
volume contains a magnetic matrix material such as steel wool that extracts the
slightly magnetic contamination particles from the slurry.
Sieving/Physical separation. Sieving and physical separation processes use

different size sieves and screens to effectively concentrate contaminants into smaller
volumes. Physical separation is based on the fact that most organic and inorganic
contaminants tend to bind, either chemically or physically, to the fine (i.e., clay and
silt) fraction of a soil. The clay and silt soil particles are, in turn, physically bound to
the coarser sand and gravel particles by compaction and adhesion. Thus, separating
the fine clay and silt particles from the coarser sand and gravel soil particles would
effectively concentrate the contaminants into a smaller volume of soil that could then
be further treated or disposed.

The target contaminant groups for ex situ separation processes are SVOCs, fuels
and inorganics. The technologies can be used on selected VOCs and pesticides.
Magnetic separation is specifically used for heavy metal particles (magnetical as
such) and for magnetic particles on which contaminants are attached or incorporated.
Physical separation often precedes chemical extraction treatment based on the
assumption that most of the contamination is tied to the finer soil fraction, which
alone may need to be treated. Separation is also useful when heavy metal
contaminants occur as particulates (e.g., in small-arms ranges). One advantage of
76
physical separation processes is that high throughputs can be achieved with
relatively small equipment.
Limitations
High clay and/or moisture content will increase treatment cost;
Gravity separation processes rely on a difference in the solids and liquid
phase densities. Specific gravity of particles will affect settling rate and
process efficiency. Additionally, settling velocity is dependent on the viscosity
of the suspending fluid, which must be known to estimate process efficiency
and to size equipment;
Special measures may be required to mitigate odour problems, resulting from
organic sludge that undergoes septic conditions.
Costs
Additional cost information can be found in the Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive
Wastes (HTRW) Historical Cost Analysis System (HCAS) developed by
Environmental Historical Cost Committee of Interagency Cost Estimation Group.
Status
Gravity separation and sieving/physical separation are full-scale, well-established
technologies used mostly for treatment of wastewater and contaminated soil,
sediment, and sludge. Magnetic separation is a promising new technique used to
remove radioactive contaminants from soils. It has recently been tested at the bench-
scale level at DOE sites.
Effectiveness
Advantages
High throughputs can be achieved with relatively small equipment
77
Disadvantages
Odor problems
4.1.5 Dehalogenation
Dehalogenation removes halogens, via chemical reactions, from harmful chemicals,
making them less toxic. Halogens are a class of chemical elements that includes
chlorine, bromine, iodine, and fluorine. Many harmful chemicals contain halogens.
The presence of halogens can be one of the main reasons such chemicals are toxic.
Chemical dehalogenation is most often used to remove chlorine from PCBs, dioxins
and chlorinated solvents contained in polluted soil, sludge, or sediment.
Work description
Before using chemical dehalogenation the soil is excavated from the polluted area to
be treated. The soil is sifted and crushed to remove large objects, like rocks and
debris. The sifted soil is then mixed with chemicals and heated in a large container
called a reactor. During mixing and heating, a chemical reaction occurs which
changes the harmful chemical. The reaction involves removing the halogens and
replacing them with less toxic chemicals (usually hydrogen). Chemical
dehalogenation may sometimes transform the chemical into gaseous forms (still
toxic) which then are treated in different ways.
There are two common types of chemical dehalogenation: glycolate
dehalogenation and base-catalyzed decomposition.
Glycolate dehalogenation adds a combination of two chemicals called APEG to

soil in the reactor. During mixing and heating, one chemical combines with the
halogens to form a nontoxic salt. The other replaces the halogens to form other non-
toxic chemicals. The heat in the reactor can cause some of the chemicals in the soil
to evaporate. The gases are treated by air pollution control equipment at the site. The
soil is then placed in a separator/washer where the excess APEG is removed from
the soil. Any remaining APEG is removed from the soil with water. The APEG can be
78
reused in the cleanup of more soil. The wash water is removed from the soil and
treated. When the soil is clean, it can be placed back on the site. If the soil still
contains chemicals in harmful amounts, it is placed back in the reactor to repeat the
process (Fig. 24).
Fig. 24. Schematic view dehalogenation
Base-catalyzed decomposition (BCD) adds a chemical called sodium bicarbonate

to soil in the reactor. The sodium bicarbonate allows the harmful chemicals in the soil
to evaporate at a low temperature. Once the chemicals evaporate, the cleaned soil
can be returned to the site. The gases produced during evaporation are changed into
liquids. These liquids are then mixed with other chemicals, such as sodium hydroxide
and heated again. A chemical reaction occurs that removes the halogens from some
of the chemical and replaces them with hydrogen. This produces a nontoxic salt and
a non-toxic chemical. The resulting mixture is then treated using other cleanup
methods and recycled.

The target contaminant groups for dehalogenation treatment are halogenated
SVOCs and pesticides. APEG dehalogenation is one of the few processes available
other than incineration that has been successfully field tested in treating PCBs. The
technology can be used but may be less effective against selected halogenated
VOCs. The technology is amenable to small-scale applications. The BCD can also be
79
used to treat halogenated VOCs but will generally be more expensive than other
alternative technologies.
Limitations
High clay and/or moisture content will increase treatment costs.
The APEG/KPEG technology is generally not cost-effective for large waste
volumes.
Concentrations of chlorinated organics greater than 5% require large volumes
of reagent.
With the BCD process, capture and treatment of residuals (volatilized
contaminants captured, dust, and other condensates) may be difficult,
especially when the soil contains high levels of fines and moisture.
Costs
The cost for full-scale operation is estimated to be in a range of EURO 150 to EURO
390 per metric ton and does not include excavation, refilling, residue disposal, or
analytical costs. Factors such as high clay or moisture content may raise the
treatment cost slightly.
Status
The technology is amenable to small-scale applications. There have been no

commercial applications of this technology to date.
Effectiveness
Glycolate process has been used to successfully treat contaminant concentrations of

PCBs from less than 2 ppm to reportedly as high as 45,000 ppm.
Advantages
80
Dehalogenation with glycol-based chemicals is one of the few processes available
other than incineration that has been successfully field tested in treating PCBs.
Disadvantages
The technology may be less effective against selected halogenated VOCs. The
technology is only amenable to small-scale applications. Few full scale
demonstrations. High clay and moisture content will increase treatment costs.
Concentrations of chlorinated organics greater than 5% require large volumes of
reagent. Capture and treatment of residuals (volatilized contaminants captured, dust,
and other condensates) may be difficult, especially when the soil contains high levels
of fines and moisture.
4.1.6 Soil washing

Soil washing is a water-based process for scrubbing soils to remove contaminants by
dissolving or suspending them in the wash solution (which can be sustained by
chemical manipulation of pH for a period of time) or by concentrating them into a
smaller volume of soil through particle size separation, gravity separation, and
attrition scrubbing (similar to those techniques used in sand and gravel operations).
Soil washing helps separate the silt and clay from the larger-grained, cleaner soils. It
works best when the soil contains a much bigger portion of the larger-grained soils
than the fine-grained ones.
Work description
Before using soil washing, soil dug from the polluted area is sifted to remove large
objects, like rocks and debris. The sifted soil is placed in a machine called a
scrubbing unit. Water, and sometimes detergents, are added to the polluted soil in
the scrubbing unit. The mixture of soil and water is passed through sieves, mixing
blades, and water sprays. This washes the silt and clay from the larger-grained soil
and separates them. Some of the pollution may dissolve in the water or float to the
top. The polluted wash water is removed and cleaned up at a treatment plant. The
clean water then can be reused in the scrubbing unit or discharged (Fig. 25).
81
Fig. 25. Schematic view Soil Washing

The target contaminant groups for soil washing are SVOCs, fuels, and heavy metals.
The technology can be used on selected VOCs and pesticides. The technology offers
the ability for recovery of metals and can clean a wide range of organic and inorganic
contaminants from coarse-grained soils.
Limitations
Soil washing does not clean the soil, but separates contaminated fraction from
the clean one, hence minimizing the amount of soil need to be cleaned
Complex waste mixtures (e.g., metals with organics) make formulating
washing fluid difficult.
High humic content in soil may require pretreatment.
The aqueous stream will require treatment at demobilization.
Additional treatment steps may be required to address hazardous levels of
washing solvent remaining in the treated residuals.
It may be difficult to remove organics adsorbed onto clay-size particles.
Costs
Cost estimates of EURO70 to EURO200 per m3 for washing.
82
At the present time, soil washing is used extensively in Europe but has had limited
use in the United States. During 1986-1989, the technology was one of the selected
source control remedies at eight Superfund sites.
Effectiveness
The effectiveness depends on the amount of silt, clay, and debris in the soil, type and
amount of pollution in the soil, size of scrubbing unit (the largest units can clean up to
100 m3 of soil per day). Cleanup usually takes weeks to months, depending on the
site.
Advantages
Reduces the amount of soil needing further cleanup
Works for very polluted soils
Relatively a low-cost alternative for separating waste and minimizing the
volume of waste requiring more treatment
Transportable technology that can be brought to the site
Disadvantages
No information
4.1.7 Solvent extraction

Solvent extraction (also known as chemical extraction) is a clean-up method that
uses solvents to extract harmful chemicals from polluted materials. Solvents dissolve
sorbed chemicals and remove them from polluted materials.
Work description
Before using solvent extraction, the soil must be dug from the polluted area to be
treated. The soil is sieved to remove large objects like rocks and debris. The sieved
83
soil is then placed in a machine called an extractor where it is mixed with a solvent
(Fig. 26). The type of solvent will depend on the harmful chemicals present and the
material being treated.
Fig. 26. Schematic view extraction
The cleaned soil is tested to make sure that the harmful chemicals have been
removed. If harmful chemicals remain, the soil is placed back in the extractor to
repeat the process. Once the solvent dissolves the sorbed chemicals, the solvent is
drained into a separator. This is where the chemicals are separated from the solvent.
The used solvent often can be recycled and reused to clean up more soil. Otherwise,
the solvents must be destroyed or disposed of in a landfill.

PCB, oil, grease.
Limitations
Costs
84
Fully applicable
Effectiveness
Solvent extraction has been shown to be effective in treating sediments, sludges and
soils containing primarily organic contaminants such as PCBs, VOCs, halogenated
solvents, and petroleum wastes. The technology is generally not used for extracting
inorganics (i.e., acids, bases, salts, or heavy metals).
Advantages
Cleanup using solvent extraction is generally quicker than methods that treat
the soil in place.
Solvent extraction is used to clean up many chemicals that are difficult to
remove from soil.
Can be done at the site to avoid trucking polluted soil to cleanup facilities
offsite.
The solvents can often be recycled and reused.
Disadvantages
The presence of detergents and emulsifiers can unfavourably influence the
extraction performance.
Solvent extraction is generally least effective on very high molecular weight
organic and very hydrophilic substances.
4.2 Biological treatment

Bioremediation techniques are destruction or transformation techniques directed
toward stimulating the microorganisms to grow and use the contaminants as a food
and energy source by creating a favourable environment for the microorganisms.
Generally, the reactions may be based on oxidation or reduction reactions. Oxidation
means providing some combination of electron acceptors (e.g. oxygen), nutrients,
85
and moisture, and controlling the temperature and pH. The contaminants act then as
electron donators. Reduction means that the contaminants themselves are acting as
electron acceptors, using for example hydrogen as electron donator. Oxidation
reactions are used for degrading and mineralising more or less all organic
contaminants not consisting of halogens (e.g. all hydrocarbons). Reduction reactions
involves heavily halogenated organics (e.g. mostly highly chlorinated solvents,
PCB:s). Oxidation reactions are most effective in high redox conditions, in contrary to
reduction reactions that need low - very low redox. Sometimes, microorganisms
adapted for degradation of the specific contaminants are applied to enhance the
process. Biological treatment of PAHs usually are non-effective on 5-ring PAHs and
larger. Several of these higher molecular PAHs are classified as carcinogens. As
indicated, an increase in weight percentage chlorine in the molecule leads to a
decrease in biodegradability via oxidation. By alternative reduction reactions some
compounds may be broken down into more toxic by-products during the
bioremediation process (e.g., TCE to vinyl chloride). It is then important to design the
treatment system so the reactions also involve degradation of vinyl chloride. An
advantage over the in situ applications is that in ex situ applications, these by-
products are contained in the treatment unit until non-hazardous end-products are
produced. New microbial in situ techniques have however been able to also destroy
vinyl chloride in situ (enhanced attenuation). Although not all organic compounds are
amenable to biodegradation, bioremediation techniques have been successfully used
to remediate soils, sludges, and ground water contaminated by petroleum
hydrocarbons, solvents, pesticides, wood preservatives, and other organic
chemicals. Bioremediation is not yet commonly applicable for treatment of inorganic
contaminants (except phytoremediation for reducing heavy metal contents in soils
and ground waters).
4.2.1 Bioslurry
An aqueous slurry is created by combining soil, sediment, or sludge with water and
other additives. The slurry is mixed to keep solids suspended and microorganisms in
contact with the soil contaminants. Upon completion of the process, the slurry is
86
dewatered and the treated soil is disposed of. This method has main focus on
microbial oxidation of the contaminants but can also use microbial reduction
reactions, however, not in same reactor.
Work description
Slurry phase biological treatment involves the controlled treatment of excavated
soil/sediment in a bioreactor. The excavated soil is first processed to physically
separate stones and rubble. The soil is then mixed with water to a predetermined
concentration dependent upon the concentration of the contaminants, the rate of
biodegradation, and the physical nature of the soils. Some processes pre-wash the
soil to concentrate the contaminants. Clean sand may then be discharged, leaving
only contaminated fines and washwater to biotreat. Typically, a slurry contains from
10 to 30% solids by weight. The typical bioreactor process is presented in below
scheme (Fig. 27).
Fig. 27. Schematic view bioslurry
The solids are maintained in suspension in a reactor vessel and mixed with nutrients
and oxygen. If necessary, an acid or alkali may be added to control pH.
Microorganisms also may be added if a suitable population is not present. When
biodegradation is complete, the soil slurry is dewatered. Dewatering devices that may
be used include clarifiers, pressure filters, vacuum filters, sand drying beds, or
centrifuges.
87
Bioreactors are favoured over in situ biological techniques for heterogeneous soils,
low permeability soils, areas where underlying ground water would be difficult to
capture, or when faster treatment times are required. Slurry-phase bioreactors are
used primarily to treat non-halogenated SVOCs and VOCs in excavated soils or
dredged sediments. Ordnance compounds may also be treated. Slurry-phase
bioreactors can alternatively work under low redox conditions and as such treat
halogenated VOCs and SVOCs, pesticides and PCBs in excavated soils and
dredged sediments. Sequential anaerobic/aerobic slurry-phase bioreactors are used
to treat both non-chlorinated and chlorinated hydrocarbons found in excavated soils
or dredged sediments.
Treatment effectiveness
Slurry biodegradation is effective in treating soils and sludges with contaminant
concentrations as high as 250.000 ppm. While light and medium weight
hydrocarbons can be efficiently removed, heavier weight petroleum products will be
more difficult to remediate and require longer time in the bioreactor vessel. For
optimum performance higher degree of scientific knowledge in chemical process
technology, microbiology and biochemistry is needed.
Limitations
Excavation of contaminated media is required, except for lagoon
implementation;
Sizing of materials prior to putting them into the reactor can be difficult and
expensive; Non-homogeneous soils and clayey soils can create serious
materials handling problems. In the case of free phase contaminant, precluded
removal is mandatory;
Dewatering soil fines after treatment can be expensive;
An acceptable method for disposing of non-recycled wastewaters is required.
Costs
88
Treatment costs using slurry reactors range from 150 to 250 per cubic meter.
Costs ranging from 150 to 300 per cubic meter are incurred when the
slurrybioreactor off-gas has to be further treated because of the presence of volatile
compounds.
This technology is field-tested. Demonstrations of three different bio-slurry processes

are underway.
Effectiveness
Slurry biodegradation is effective in treating soils and sludges with contaminant
concentrations as high as 250.000 ppm. While light and medium weight
hydrocarbons can be efficiently removed, heavier weight petroleum products will be
more difficult to remediate and require longer time in the bioreactor vessel. For
optimum performance higher degree of scientific knowledge in chemical process
technology, microbiology and biochemistry is needed.
Advantages
Slurry bioremediation allows for the control of all of the parameters, important to the
success of biodegradation. As a result it can be used to effectively remove a variety
of contaminants from many soil types.
Disadvantages
Excavation of contaminated media is required, except for lagoon
implementation.
Sizing of materials prior to putting them into the reactor can be difficult and
expensive (not included in costs above).
Non homogeneous soils and clayey soils can create serious materials
handling problems.
In the case of free phase contaminant, precluded removal is mandatory.
89
Bioreactor is a batch technique and the amount of treated soil per batch is
limited to the reactor size and time needed to treat one batch. Reactor size
usually limited to be transported on truck.
When significant volume of soil/sediment to be treated several reactors need
to be used in parallel.
Treated soil need to be dewatered and dewatering soil fines after treatment
can be expensive.
An acceptable method for disposing of non-recycled wastewaters is required.
4.2.2 Biopiles
Biopile treatment is a full-scale technology in which excavated soils are mixed with
soil amendments and placed on a treatment area that includes leachate collection
systems and some form of aeration. It is used to reduce concentrations of petroleum
constituents in excavated soils through the use of biodegradation. Moisture, heat,
nutrients, oxygen and pH can be controlled to enhance biodegradation.
Work description
The treatment area will generally be covered or contained with an impermeable liner
to minimize the risk of contaminants leaching into uncontaminated soil. The drainage
itself may be treated in a bioreactor before recycling. Vendors have developed
proprietary nutrient and additive formulations and methods for incorporating the
formulation into the soil to stimulate biodegradation. The formulations are usually
modified for site-specific conditions. If the soil is fine grained, mixing with bulking
material (hay etc.) may be needed before placing it as a pile. Soil piles and cells
commonly have an air distribution system buried in the soil to pass air through the
soil either by vacuum or by positive pressure. The soil piles in this case can be up to
6 meters high (generally not recommended, 2-3 meters maximum). Soil piles may be
covered with plastic to control runoff, evaporation, and volatilisation and to promote
solar heating. If there are VOCs in the soil that will volatilize into the air stream, the
air leaving the soil may be treated to remove or destroy the VOCs before they are
discharged to the atmosphere (Fig. 28).
90
Fig. 28. Typical biopile for solid phase bioremediation (www.dec.ny.gov)

Biopile treatment has been applied to treatment of nonhalogenated VOCs and fuel
hydrocarbons. Technology is appropriate for cleanup of sites contaminated with fresh
or weathered gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, kerosene, motor oil, heavy fuel oil, lubricating
oils and crude oils.
Removal efficiencies are site specific; it is not always possible to achieve low cleanup
standards. Concentration reductions > 95% and constituent concentrations < 0,1
ppm are very difficult to achieve.
Limitations
Effective in removing biodegradable constituents only;
The effectiveness of biopiles can be limited by extreme weather conditions;
Biopiles may require the placement of a bottom liner under the cell if there is a
concern about leaching from the pile;
91
Large areas of land are needed for the treatment of large quantities of
contaminated soils;
The volatile constituents in the soil will tend to evaporate during excavation
and soil pre-treatment;
Biopiles may release unpleasant odours
Costs
The cost of a biopile system is usually between 60 and 250 per m3 of
contaminated soil.

The technology is commercially available for treating fuel contamination. It is in the
pilot stage for other contaminants.
Effectiveness
Biopiles, like landfarms, have been proven effective in reducing concentrations of

nearly all the constituents of petroleum products typically found at underground
storage tank (UST) sites. The effectiveness of a biopile system depends on many
parameters which can be grouped into three categories:
- soil characteristics,
- constituent characteristics, and
- climatic conditions.
Advantages
Use of biopiles provides increased control over the parameters such as
aeration, moisture, nutrients and soil texture, which are important for the
success of biodegradation process;
Biopiles are relatively easy to design, construct and maintain;
Treated soil from biopiles may be approved and available for reuse as backfill
92
Disadvantages
- Concentration reductions > 95% and constituent concentrations < 0.1 ppm are
very difficult to achieve.
- May not be effective for high constituent concentrations (> 50,000 ppm total
petroleum hydrocarbons).
- Presence of significant heavy metal concentrations (> 2,500 ppm) may inhibit
microbial growth.
- Requires a large land area for treatment, although less than landfarming.
- Vapor generation during aeration may require treatment prior to discharge.
4.2.3 Landfarming
Landfarming is another process that removes biodegradable contaminants from soil
that has been excavated. Instead of construct a static aerated pile of contaminant soil
(biopile) the soil is actively treated and aerated in an ordinary farming/agriculture
way.
Work description
In landfarming the excavated soil is spread in a thin layer (ca 40-60 cm thick) over a
lined treatment area (Fig. 29). Nutrients are added to promote biodegradation and, if
necessary, hay/straws are added for increased air permeability. The method typically
involves periodically tilling the soil to enhance the natural release of volatile organic
compounds and the biodegradation of less volatile contaminants. In case the design
includes walls and roof, the method is usually called Biocell, and is used where
climate varies too much and when the volatiles need to be treated. The method is
appropriate for cleanup of sites contaminated with fresh or weathered gasoline,
diesel, jet fuel, kerosene, motor oil, heavy fuel oil, lubricating oils and crude oils. The
lighter, more volatile products like gasoline or chlorinated solvents tend to be
removed by evaporation during the landfarming aeration processes (tilling or
ploughing). Heavy petroleum products require a much longer period of time to
degrade than do the constituents in gasoline. Removal efficiencies are site specific; it
is not always possible to achieve low cleanup standards. In general, relatively rapid
93
rates of degradation can be expected in the first 60-90 days, with increasingly
diminishing rates thereafter. Concentration reductions > 95% and constituent
concentrations < 0,1 ppm are very difficult to achieve. Heavy petroleum products,
especially branched chain aliphatics and multi-ring aromatics, normally remain
untreated in the soil.
Fig. 29. Typical landfarming treatment unit (US EPA Report 510-R-04-002)

Appropriate for cleanup of sites contaminated with fresh or weathered gasoline,
diesel, jet fuel, kerosene, motor oil, heavy fuel oil, lubricating oils and crude oils. The
lighter, more volatile petroleum products like gasoline tend to be removed by
evaporation during the landfarming aeration processes (tilling or ploughing). Heavy
petroleum products require a much longer period of time to degrade than do the
constituents in gasoline.
Removal efficiencies are site specific; it is not always possible to achieve low cleanup
standards. In general, relatively rapid rates of degradation can be expected in the
first 60-90 days, with increasingly diminishing rates thereafter. Concentration
94
reductions > 95% and constituent concentrations < 0,1 ppm are very difficult to
achieve.
Limitations
Effective in removing biodegradable constituents only;
The effectiveness and practicality of landfarming can be limited by extreme
weather conditions (if not using Biocell design);
Landfarms may require the placement of a bottom liner under the cell if there
is a concern about leaching from the pile;
Landfarms require relatively large dedicated area for an extended period of
time, may be difficult to obtain a permit and find suitable location;
Dust and vapour generation during the aeration process may occur;
Possibility of unpleasant odours;
Need of extensive monitoring
Costs
Landfarming costs depend on the type and physical setup of the system (e.g. size
and number of treatment cells), the amount of equipment required, the nutrients
required, type and amount of contamination present and level of remediation
required. Treatment costs range (excluding design and construction of treatment
facility and eventual transport of non-treated/not enough degraded soil, and
depositing at ex situ landfill) from EURO 10 to EURO 100 per m3.

Numerous full-scale operations have been conducted, particularly for sludges
produced by the petroleum industry. Land farming is considered a commercial
technology.
Effectiveness
95
Landfarming has been proven effective in reducing concentrations of nearly all the
constituents of petroleum products typically found at underground storage tank (UST)
sites.
Advantages
- Use of landfarming provides increased control over the parameters such as
aeration, moisture, nutrients and soil texture, which are important for the
success of biodegradation process;
- Landfarms are relatively easy to design, construct and maintain.
- Treated soil from landfarms may be approved and available for reuse as
backfill.
Disadvantages
- Concentration reductions > 95% and constituent concentrations < 0.1 ppm are
very difficult to achieve.
- May not be effective for high constituent concentrations (> 50,000 ppm total
petroleum hydrocarbons).
- Presence of significant heavy metal concentrations (> 2,500 ppm) may inhibit
microbial growth.
- Requires a large land area for treatment.
- Dust and vapor generation during landfarm aeration may pose air quality
concerns.
4.2.4 Composting
Composting is a controlled biological process by which organic contaminants (e.g.,
PAHs) are converted by microorganisms (under aerobic and anaerobic conditions) to
innocuous, stabilized by-products. Typically, thermophilic conditions (54 to 65 C)
must be maintained to properly compost soil contaminated with hazardous organic
contaminants. The increased temperatures result from heat produced by
microorganisms during the degradation of the organic material in the waste. In most
cases, this is achieved by the use of indigenous microorganisms.
96
Work description
Soils are excavated and mixed with bulking agents and organic amendments, such
as wood chips, animal, and vegetative wastes, to enhance the porosity of the mixture
to be decomposed. Maximum degradation efficiency is achieved through maintaining
oxygenation (e.g., daily windrow turning), irrigation as necessary, and closely
monitoring moisture content, and temperature (Fig. 30).
Fig. 30. Typical windrow composting process
Several process designs may be defined as composting: mechanically agitated in-

vessel composting (compost is placed in a reactor vessel where it is mixed and
aerated), and windrow composting (compost is placed in long piles known as
windrows and periodically mixed with mobile equipment). Sometimes also aerated
static pile composting (compost is formed into piles and aerated with blowers or
vacuum pumps) is included in the definition (i.e. Biopile, in this document given
separate presentation). Windrow composting is usually considered to be the most
cost-effective composting alternative. Meanwhile, it may also have the highest
fugitive emissions. If VOC or SVOC contaminants are present in soils, off-gas control
may be required.
97
The composting process may be applied to soils and lagoon sediments contaminated
with biodegradable organic compounds. Aerobic, thermophilic composting is most
applicable to PAH-contaminated soil. Furthermore, pilot and full-scale projects have
demonstrated that aerobic, thermophilic composting is able to reduce the
concentration of explosives (TNT, RDX, and HMX), ammonium picrate (or yellow-D),
and associated toxicity to acceptable levels. All materials and equipment used for
composting are commercially available.
Limitations
Substantial space is required for composting.
Excavation of contaminated soils is required and may cause the uncontrolled
release of VOCs.
Composting results in a volumetric increase in material because of the
addition of amendment material.
Although levels of metals may be reduced via dilution, heavy metals are not
treated by this method. Also high levels of heavy metals can be toxic to the
microorganisms.
Costs
Costs vary with the amount of soil to be treated, the soil fraction in the compost,
availability of amendments (costs per unit and transport usually significant parts of
total cost), the type of contaminant, and the type of process design employed. Total
costs are usually less than 100/ton, but excluding cost for excavation, transport,
design and construction of treatment facility and eventual deposit fees for not-well
treated material.

Full scale
98
Effectiveness
Composting is mostly an aerobic method. Aerobic circumstances mean that only low-
chlorinated organic contaminants may be biologically degraded. But during this
aerobic treatment of chlorinated compounds there may be some % of all Volatile
Halogenated hydrocarbons that may be weathered. Herby, this method has been
given the evaluation Average for applicability for Volatile Halogenated hydrocarbons
and Lower than Average for Semi-Volatile Halogenated hydrocarbons. The latter is
also influenced by the possibility to bio-degrade PCP (highly chlorinated phenol)
aerobically with the help of with rot fungus.
Advantages
Composting takes into account semi-high temperature produced by
thermophilic microorganisms which can reduce the treatment time and
enhance microbial availability and degradation of semi heavy PAHs.
Treated soil may be re-used as filling material or bioactive base at plantages.
Disadvantages
Substantial space is required for composting.
Composting results in a volumetric increase in material because of the
addition of amendment material.
Sometimes the degradation process is inhibited due to different reasons (e.g.
microorganisms or chemical ingredients in the start mix can prohibit
thermophilic bioactivity), resulting in that no or limited remediation is obtained
which in turn my result in transportation to a landfill.
4.2.5 Phytoremediation
Phytoremediation is normally defined as an in situ method (see separate description).
However, this method can also be defined as ex situ method in cases where the
contaminated soil or sediment has been excavated/dredged and placed in a
treatment area, with subsequent plantation of rapid growing plants or trees in the
99
contaminated soil. Besides this, the basic description of the method is the same as
for in situ phytoremediation. This method is mainly focusing on remediation of heavy
metal contaminated soils and sediments, but can in same cases also be used for
organic contaminants.
Work description
By planting trees/plants in contaminated soil, heavy metals can be taken up/
concentrated in stem/root. Natural degradation of organics can be enhanced in the
root system. Additionally, soluble and volatile organics can be sorbed in their root
system, transported in the stem and evaporated from the leafs. Ex situ
phytoremediation (as well as for the in situ alternative) is mostly based on gardening
knowledge and performance. Soil and sediment are amended with substances
promoting grow of the selected plants or trees in the excavated/dredged medium.
This is done in a designated area with a type of plant that has the ability to 1/ grow
fast and 2/ mainly accumulate the contaminants (usually heavy metals) or can
degrade the contaminants (degradable organics) in the root zone in cooperation with
microorganisms (or alternatively taking up soluble and volatile organic contaminants
from the soil, via the plant/tree roots, and transport them to the leaves where they
vaporise). In case of accumulation, the used plants are usually transported to an
incineration facility for destruction and energy production. The plants/trees need
periodic watering, nutrients, good soil quality, etc. for optimum growth. The method is
applicable for soils and sediments in which trees/plants can grow (for finer materials,
bulking agents may be needed to add).

The method is applicable for coarser soils and sediments, primarily containing
soluble heavy metals. The method has though shown applicability for other types of
contaminants (see description in the In situ segment). For finer materials, bulking
agents are usually needed to be mixed in, for optimal growth of the selected
trees/plants. The soil/sediment shall not contain contaminants with too high
concentrations (method best: low and moderate levels of contamination) or other
factors that prohibit growth.
100
Limitations
The ex situ method is not extensively used for treatment of contaminated soils
and sediment (but may have the potential to be used more frequently).
The conditions and circumstances are limited for optimal growth of limited
types of useful threes/plants.
The used trees/plants need to be disposed (best to incinerate and gaining the
generated energy).
Costs
The method as such is coupled to low treatment costs (EURO10-EURO50),
excluding costs for transport and handling of the contaminated soil/sediment and
excluding transport for the used plats/trees to incineration and eventual cost for
construct the designated treatment area. The cost for incineration may be erased by
the gain in generated energy (prerequisite that the concentrations in the trees/plants
are not too high needing special incineration facility).

Full scale
Effectiveness
Method most suitable in large areas with low - moderate concentration of
contamination.
Advantages
The method is easy to use
Low maintenance
The primary advances of this method performed ex situ vs. in situ are that the
soil more easily can be pretreated for optimum growth and the selection of
trees/plants are more extensive.
Disadvantages
101
Method not suitable for highly contaminated soils
Mass reduction of contaminants seldom exceeds 50% - 60% and it takes time
to reach such targets.
Method limited to root depth.
Effect usually only in the vicinity of the root and during vegetative times in the
uptake area/volume of water.
Many trees may be needed in small area.
Method mostly used for uptake of heavy metals from soil, less used for
organic contaminants.
Method sparsely used for sediments.
The used trees/plants need to be disposed (best to incinerate and gaining the
generated energy).
After treatment, the roots may contain too high concentrations of contaminants
and they may be difficult to remove.
4.3 Thermal treatment

Thermal treatments offer quick cleanup times but are typically the most costly
treatment group. This difference, however, is less in ex situ applications than in in
situ applications. Cost is driven by energy and equipment costs and is both capital
and O&M-intensive. Thermal processes use heat to increase the volatility
(separation); burn, decompose, or detonate (destruction); or melt (immobilisation) the
contaminants. Separation technologies include thermal desorption and hot gas
decontamination. Destruction technologies include incineration, open burn/open
detonation and pyrolysis. Vitrification immobilizes inorganics and destroys some
organics.
4.3.1 Thermal desorption

Thermal desorption is a physical separation process and is not designed to destroy
organics. Wastes are heated to volatilize water and organic contaminants. A carrier
gas or vacuum system transports volatilized water and organics to the gas treatment
102
system (e.g. sorption, incineration). The bed temperatures and residence times
designed into these systems will volatilize selected contaminants but will typically not
oxidize them. A carrier gas or vacuum system transports volatilized water and
organics to the gas treatment system (e.g. sorption, incineration).
Work description
Thermal desorption uses equipment called a desorber to clean polluted soil. Soil is
excavated and placed in the desorber. The desorber works like a large oven. When
the soil gets hot enough, the harmful chemicals evaporate (Fig. 31). To get the soil
ready for the desorber, workers may need to crush it, dry it, blend it with sand, or
remove debris. This allows the desorber to clean the soil more evenly and easily.
Fig. 31. Schematic view thermal desorption
Three types of thermal desorption are available and briefly described as following:
Direct Fired: Fire is applied directly upon the surface of contaminated media. The
main purpose of the fire is to desorb contaminants from the soil though some
contaminants may be thermally oxidized.
Indirect Fired: A direct-fired rotary dryer heats an air stream which, by direct
contact, desorbs water and organic contaminants from the soil. The Low
Temperature Thermal Aeration (LTTA) developed by Canonie Environmental
103
Services Corporation is a good example of indirect fired system which has been
successfully used to remove DDT family compounds from soil.
Indirect Heated: An externally fired rotary dryer volatilizes the water and organics
from the contaminated media into an inert carrier gas stream. The carrier gas is later
treated to remove or recover the contaminants. XTRAX thermal Desorption System
is a process using indirect heated desorption followed by a high-energy scrubber gas
treatment, which successfully removed >99% of PCB from contaminated soil.
Based on the operating temperature of the desorber, thermal desorption processes

can be categorized into two groups: high temperature thermal desorption (HTTD) and
low temperature thermal desorption (LTTD).
High Temperature Thermal Desorption (HTTD); HTTD is a full-scale technology in

which wastes are heated to 320 to 560 C. HTTD is frequently used in combination
(treatment tree) with incineration, solidification/stabilisation, or dechlorination,
depending upon site-specific conditions. The technology has been proven to produce
a final contaminant concentration level below 5 mg/kg for the target contaminants
identified.
Low Temperature Thermal Desorption (LTTD); In LTTD wastes are heated to

between 90 and 320 C. LTTD is a full-scale technology that has been proven
successful for remediating petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in all types of soil.
Contaminant destruction efficiencies in the afterburners of these units are greater
than 95%. The same equipment could probably meet stricter requirements with minor
modifications, if necessary. Decontaminated soil retains its physical properties.
Unless being heated to the higher end of the LTTD temperature range, organic
components in the soil are not damaged, which enables treated soil to retain the
ability to support future biological activity.

Thermal desorption systems have varying degrees of effectiveness against the full
spectrum of organic contaminants. The target contaminant groups for LTTD systems
104
are nonhalogenated VOCs and fuels. The technology can be used to treat SVOCs at
reduced effectiveness. The target contaminants for HTTD are SVOCs, PAHs, PCBs,
and pesticides; however, VOCs and fuels also may be treated, but treatment may be
less cost-effective. Volatile metals may be removed by HTTD systems. The presence
of chlorine can affect the volatilisation of some metals (e.g. lead, mercury). The
process is applicable for the separation of organics from refinery wastes, coal tar
wastes, wood-treating wastes, creosote-contaminated soils, hydrocarbon-
contaminated soils, mixed (radioactive and hazardous) wastes, synthetic rubber
processing waste, pesticides and paint wastes.
Limitations
There are specific particle size and materials handling requirements that can
impact applicability or cost at specific sites;
Dewatering may be necessary to achieve acceptable soil moisture content
levels;
Highly abrasive feed potentially can damage the processor unit;
Heavy metals in the feed may produce a treated solid residue that requires
stabilisation;
Clay and silty soils and high humic content soils increase reaction time as a
result of binding of contaminants.
Costs
Total cost: 75/m3 - 400/m3, excl. dioxin contaminated soils (up to 800).

Full scale
Effectiveness
LTTD has been proven successful for remediating petroleum hydrocarbon
contamination in all types of soil. Contaminant destruction efficiencies in the
afterburners of these units are greater than 95%. The technology has been proven to
105
produce a final contaminant concentration level below 5 mg/kg for the target
contaminants identified. The target contaminants for HTTD are SVOCs, PAHs,
PCBs, and pesticides; however, VOCs and fuels also may be treated, but treatment
may be less cost-effective.
Advantages
High to very high efficiency (high % reduction) of contaminant mass.
A wide range of contaminants and soils can be treated.
Disadvantages
There are specific particle size and materials handling requirements that can
impact applicability or cost at specific sites.
Dewatering may be necessary to achieve acceptable soil moisture content
levels.
Highly abrasive feed potentially can damage the processor unit.
Heavy metals in the feed may produce a treated solid residue that requires
stabilisation.
Clay and silty soils and high humic content soils increase reaction time as a
result of binding of contaminants.
HTTD may be very energy consuming.
4.3.2 Hot gas decontamination

The process involves raising the temperature of the contaminated equipment or
material to 260 C for a specified period of time. The gas effluent from the material is
treated in an afterburner system to destroy all volatilised contaminants.
Work description
The method eliminates a waste that currently is stockpiled and requires disposal as a
hazardous material. This method will permit reuse or disposal of scrap as
nonhazardous material. Hot gas decontamination can also be used for
106
decontamination of explosives-contaminated masonry or metallic structures. The
method involves sealing and insulating the structures, heating with hot gas stream to
260 C for a prescribed period of time, volatilizing the explosive contaminants, and
destroying them in an afterburner. Operating conditions are site-specific.
Contaminants are completely destroyed (Fig. 32).
Fig. 32. Typical process flow diagram for hot gas decontamination of explosives
contaminated equipment

The method is applicable for process equipment requiring decontamination for reuse.
It is also applicable for explosive items, such as mines and shells, being demilitarized
(after removal of explosives) or scrap material contaminated with explosives. The
method can also be used for buildings or structures associated with ammunition
plants, arsenals, and depots involved in the manufacture, processing, loading, and
storage of pyrotechnics, explosives, and propellants.
Limitations
The costs of this method are higher than open burning;
Flash chamber design must take into consideration possible explosions from
improperly demilitarized mines or shells;
107
The rate at which equipment or material can be decontaminated is slower than
that for open burning.
Costs
The cost of the decontamination will vary with the application, depending upon the
size and geometry of the equipment or material to be decontaminated and the
temperature and holding time required for the decontamination. No specific cost
analysis has been completed.

Full scale
Effectiveness
Completely destroys contaminants
Advantages
Contaminants are completely destroyed
Disadvantages
The costs of this method are higher than open burning.

Flash chamber design must take into consideration possible explosions from
improperly demilitarized mines or shells
The rate at which equipment or material can be decontaminated is slower than
that for open burning.
4.3.3 Incineration
Incineration is the process of burning hazardous materials to destroy harmful
chemicals. Incineration also reduces the amount of material that must be disposed of
in a landfill. Although it destroys a range of chemicals, such as PCBs, solvents and
pesticides, incineration does not destroy metals.
108
Work description
The material is placed in the incinerator where it is heated. To increase the amount of
harmful chemicals destroyed, workers control the amount of heat and air in the
incinerator. As the chemicals heat up, they change into gases, which pass through a
flame to be heated further. The gases become so hot, that they break down into
smaller components that combine with oxygen to form less harmful gases and steam
(Fig. 33).
Fig. 33. Schematic view Incineration
The gases produced in the incinerator pass through air pollution control equipment to
remove any remaining metals, acids, and particles of ash. These wastes are harmful
and must be properly disposed of in a licensed landfill. The other cleaner gases, like
steam and carbon dioxide, are released outside through a stack. The soil or ash
remaining in the incinerator after the burning may be disposed of in a landfill or
buried on site. The amount of material that requires disposal is much less than the
initial amount of waste that was burned.

Incineration is used to remediate soils contaminated with explosives and hazardous
wastes, particularly chlorinated hydrocarbons, PCBs, and dioxins.
109
Limitations
There are specific feed size and materials handling requirements that can
impact applicability or cost at specific sites;
Heavy metals can produce a bottom ash that requires stabilisation;
Volatile heavy metals, including lead, cadmium, mercury, and arsenic, leave
the combustion unit with the flue gases and require the installation of gas
cleaning systems for removal;
Metals can react with other elements in the feed stream, such as chlorine or
sulphur, forming more volatile and toxic compounds than the original species.
Such compounds are likely to be short-lived reaction intermediates that can be
destroyed in a caustic quench;
Sodium and potassium form low melting point ashes that can attack the brick
lining and form a sticky particulate that fouls gas ducts.
Costs
Total cost per cubic meter may vary between 400 and 1000.

Full scale
Effectiveness
Incineration is used to remediate soils contaminated with hazardous wastes
(containing e.g. chlorinated hydrocarbons, PCBs, and dioxins) that usually exist in
concentrations not allowed to be deposited in landfills.
Advantages
The method gives very high percentage (95% - >99%) remediation efficiency and can
destroy contaminants that otherwise are recalcitrant (e.g. dioxins).
Disadvantages
Heavy metals can cause restrictions in deposition of the generated ash or it
may require stabilisation.
110
Volatile heavy metals, including lead, cadmium, mercury, and arsenic, leave
the combustion unit with the flue gases and require the installation of gas
cleaning systems for removal.
Metals can react with other elements in the feed stream, such as chlorine or
sulphur, forming more volatile and toxic compounds than the original species.
Such compounds are likely to be short-lived reaction intermediates that can be
destroyed in a caustic quench.
Sodium and potassium form low melting point ashes that can attack the brick
lining in the incineration and form a sticky particulate that fouls gas ducts.
4.3.4 Pyrolysis
Pyrolysis is formally defined as chemical decomposition induced in organic materials
by heat in the absence of oxygen. In practice, it is not possible to achieve a
completely oxygen-free atmosphere; actual pyrolytic systems are operated with less
than stoichiometric quantities of oxygen. Because some oxygen will be present in
any pyrolytic system, nominal oxidation will occur. If volatile or semi-volatile materials
are present in the waste, thermal desorption will also occur.
Work description
Pyrolysis transforms hazardous organic materials into gaseous components, small
quantities of liquid and a solid residue (coke) containing fixed carbon and ash.
Pyrolysis of organic materials produces combustible gases, including carbon
monoxide, hydrogen and methane and other hydrocarbons. If the off-gases are
cooled, liquids condense producing an oil/tar residue and contaminated water.
Pyrolysis typically occurs under pressure and at operating temperatures above 430
C (Fig. 34). The pyrolysis gases require further treatment. The off-gases may be
treated in a secondary combustion chamber, flared and partially condensed.
Particulate removal equipment such as fabric filters or wet scrubbers are also
required.
111
Fig. 34. Typical pyrolysis process

The target contaminant groups for pyrolysis are SVOCs and pesticides. The process
is applicable for the separation of organics from refinery wastes, coal tar wastes,
wood-treating wastes, creosote-contaminated soils, hydrocarbon-contaminated soils,
mixed (radioactive and hazardous) wastes, synthetic rubber processing wastes and
paint waste.
Pyrolysis systems may be applicable to a number or organic materials that "crack" or

undergo a chemical decomposition in the presence of heat. Pyrolysis has shown
promise in treating organic contaminants in soils and oily sludges. Chemical
contaminants for which treatment data exist include PCBs, dioxins, PAHs and many
other organics. Pyrolysis is not effective in either destroying or physically separating
inorganics from the contaminated medium. Volatile metals may be removed as a
result of the higher temperatures associated with the process but are similarly not
destroyed.
Limitations
There are specific feed size and materials handling requirements that impact
applicability or cost at specific sites;
112
The technology requires drying of the soil to achieve low soil moisture content
(< 1%). High moisture content increases treatment costs.
Highly abrasive feed can potentially damage the processor unit.
Treated media containing heavy metals may require stabilisation.
Costs
The overall cost for remediating approximately 18,200 metric tons (20,000 tons) of
contaminated media is expected to be approximately EURO350 per metric ton.
Full scale
Effectiveness
Advantages
Increased possibilities for recycling
Considerably lower emissions
Disadvantages
Technology is still evolving
Markets are yet to be developed for char product and pyrolysis liquids
113
5. DEWATERING TECHNOLOGIES
By Susanne Rostmark and Sven Knutsson, LTU
The need for dewatering is determined by the water requirements or limitations of the
treatment or disposal technologies and the solids content of the sediments following
removal and transport. In case of reuse a relatively high dry matter content of the
sediment is envisaged to obtain a soil like material with maximal geotechnical
properties. In case of disposal or treatment mass reduction is the main issue in order
to minimize the landfill or treatment costs. Mechanically dredged sediments typically
have solid content comparable to that of in situ sediments (about 50 percent by
weight for most fine-grained sediments). Hydraulically dredged sediments are in
slurry form with solids content typically in the range of 10-20 percent. Some hydraulic
dredge pumps are able to move slurries with higher solids content, but the average
solids content in an extended dredging operation is rarely greater than 20 percent. To
prepare dredged sediments for most treatment or disposal technologies, water must
be removed and/or the solids content of the sediments must be made more uniform.
Most of the described dewatering technologies were originally developed for the
mining industry and applications involving municipal and industrial sludge. These
applications are generally of a larger scale than that expected for most sediment
remediation projects and are usually part of a permanent process operation, whereas
most sediment remediation projects will be of shorter duration. The water removed
during dewatering may be contaminated and require further treatment.
The sediment/sludge matrix

Water in saturated soil materials exist in different forms; the classification given by
Vesilind and Martel (1990), will be used in this study. Free water is not associated
with the aggregates and is free to move within them; free water is easily removed
with conventional mechanical dewatering systems. The water that is trapped inside
an aggregate or is held by capillary forces is called interstitial water; a mechanical
dewatering device can break the aggregate and free the interstitial water. Surface
water is associated with the single particle by superficial forces. Mechanical systems,
like belt filter press or dewatering centrifuges, can easily remove free water,
interstitial water and can hardly remove superficial water. The fourth type of water
114
can be released from the particles only with a thermo-chemical treatment and is
called bond water (chemically bounded to the particles). In Figure 35 the four types
of water are shown.
Fig. 35. A model for water distribution in a saturated soil material, after Vesilind and Martel
(1990).
5.1 Thermo chemical treatment

Thermo chemical treatment methods can be used to improve settling and thickening
or as standalone dewatering technologies. The methods affect the surfaces of the
sediment particles and the thermal methods can also affect the bound water. Thermo
chemical methods can also be combined with the mechanical dewatering during
solids dewatering.

There are two main groups of chemicals available:
I Coagulants (positively charged): chemicals that serve to reduce the electrostatic
forces responsible for repulsion thereby allowing the suspended particles to
agglomerate. When particles come together, their effective size is increased resulting
in accelerated sedimentation rates.
II Flocculants: synthetic polymers made from long chains of polyacrylamide. The
length of the chain is indicative of the polymers molecular weight and the polymer is
engineered to have a characteristic electrical charge that may be anionic (negative
115
charge), non-ionic (neutral charge), or cationic (positive charge). The number of
charged sites along the polymer chain is also engineered into the polymer resulting in
the availability of a wide range of polymers characterized by molecular weight and
charge density. When a polymer flocculant is added to slurry containing suspended
particles, the particulates are attracted to the charged sites while the polymer chain
forms a physical bridge between the solids. This serves to bind the solids together
and prevents shear forces or excessive turbulence from re-suspending the solids.
The extent to which a relatively small amount of chemical additives can influence the
behavior of suspended particulates must not be underestimated. When properly
applied, improvements to solids settling rates, thickening, compaction, volume
reduction, and water release are profound.
Thermal treatment
By thermally treating freezing or drying- a sludge or sediment bound and surface
water can be removed. The processes are used as stand alone technologies for
industrial wastes and municipal sludges but can also be part of pre-treatment of the
sediments in other stages during treatment or dewatering. The basic process is the
same both for freezing and drying. Water is driven from the surface of the particles by
evaporation or cryogenic suction.
Thermal drying or the removal of moisture by evaporation is a process step in the
disposal of sewage sludge, the process is also applicable for sediment dewatering
prior to landfill or incineration.
Thermal dewatering (freezing)

Seasonal natural freezing of sewage sludge is used for dewatering sewage sludge
and contaminated landfill material in the Northern parts of Sweden. The basic
principle is the physical phenomena of structural change caused by the freeze thaw
cycle.
Work description
116
The thermo chemical methods can be used prior to mechanical dewatering, as a
combined technology during dewatering, after mechanical dewatering or before
treatment.
Applicability
Chemicals for settling and thickening are widely used in materials with a high amount
of fines. The additives are used both in passive dewatering (lagooning or geotubes)
and in active mechanical dewatering (presses, screws or centrifuges).
Thermal treatment as freezing and evaporation can be both a natural feature if
outside temperature is high or low, and an artificially induced process.
Limitations
Knowledge on the sediment/sludge properties are important predict the impact and
select the system for thermo chemical methods.
Natural freezing or drying only influence the surface of the sediments.
Costs
Chemical additives and natural freezing or drying are low cost alternatives. Artificial
drying or freezing are high cost options.

Chemicals are widely used. Thermal drying is mostly used as a natural feature during
lagooning but thermal drying prior to incineration is also common. Natural freezing
affects all landfill materials during winter days with sub-zero degrees, but only a few
stand alone facilities are used in the northern parts.
Large scale artificial freezing of industrial sludge is used prior to compost treatment
of oil contaminated sludge or prior to incineration of heavy metal contaminated
sludge. The process is built in during uptake with freeze-dredging.
Effectiveness
The overall impact of thermo chemical treatment is biggest if a lot of fines are
available. Right choice of additives is important for the performance.
117
Advantages
The overall impact of thermo chemical treatment is biggest if a lot of fines are
available. Right choice of additives is important for the performance, but the result of
only a small amount of chemicals can be large and the energy input is low.
Disadvantages
Adding chemical or thermal treatment to a mechanical dewatering process makes it
more complicated and time consuming. Artificial freezing is still an emerging
technology and thermal drying is energy intensive. The energy input for evaporating
a cube of water using freezing is 50 kWh, for thermal drying 900 kWh is used.
5.2. Lagooning/drainage in settling ponds

Lagooning is the process in which dredged sediments are dewatered by drainage,
consolidation and evaporation at the atmosphere on a lagooning field. Generally, the
evaporation rate is enhanced by tilling the sediments with an hydraulic excavator.
Dewatering trough drainage can be made directly in a CDF.
Work description
Sediments are discharged into a holding/handling facility like a tank or lagoon,
dewatering rely on primary settling, surface drainage, consolidation, and evaporation.
If the amount of dredged water and sediments exceeds the size of the lagoon water
can be discharged. If the sedimentation time is sufficient the water will have very low
turbidity. To increase the dewatering rate the velocity of the inlet water can be
lowered by energy consuming obstacles like walls. Subsurface drainage with
perforated pipes and wick drains have also been demonstrated to promote
dewatering and consolidation.
The time needed for sedimentation is depending on the sedimentation properties of
the material. To enhance the sedimentation rate polymers can be added. The first
stage of drying occurs until all free-standing water has been decanted from the
dredged material surface. The corresponding void ratio at this point is termed the
initial void ratio and has been determined to occur at a water content of
118
approximately 2.5 times the Atterberg liquid limit of the material. The second stage of
drying occurs until the material reaches a void ratio called the desiccation limit. At
this point, evaporation of any additional water from the dredged material will
effectively cease. Settled material is removed with an excavator.
Applicability
Lagooning can be used where there are large areas that can be used to collect the
discharged sediments and where the climate conditions allow high evaporation rates.
Limitations
Space and the timeframe can be limiting factors. Surface drainage can be difficult to
enhance with pipes or wicks if the sediment is fine grained as it will clog the drains.
Costs
Lagooning is a low cost technology, especially if no polymers need to be added and
climate conditions allow maximum evaporation.

Lagooning is a well-known and much used process. Many waste water facilities use
the technology and there are numeral examples of dredging operations where the
process is used.
Effectiveness
The effectiveness is depending on the sedimentation properties of the material,
climate conditions and time allowed for settlement (eg the length of the lagoon). The
technology requires significant amounts of land and is most effective if the sediments
can be spread out in thin layers allowing maximum evaporation.
Evaporation of water can also remove surface water, hence making it possible to
reach a higher DM than with mechanical methods.
Advantages
The robustness of lagooning makes it a very flexible technique in many ways: first of
all the large lagooning fields can buffer peak deliveries of dredged sediments. The
lagooning process is able to deal with sediments that contain coarse materials and
119
debris. The lagooning process can also deal with all types of sediment (from clayey
to sandy) and does not require any additives. Finally the sediments are turned into a
soil like material with a high geotechnical and chemical quality.
Disadvantages
Large lagooning fields are often used for dewatering, but they require space and their
production capacity is very climate dependant. Occasionally, for large scale
purposes, dredged sediment is (pre-) dewatered by centrifuges or by sieve belt
presses.
5.3. Mechanical dewatering (MDW)

Mechanical dewatering via filtration and compression (MDW) is widely used in fields
as varied as chemicals and pharmaceuticals production, minerals extraction and
wastewater treatment. These systems require the input of energy to squeeze, press,
or draw water from the feed material. Generally, mechanical dewatering technologies
can remove free and intestinal water and increase the solids content up to 70 percent
by weight.
5.3.1 Belt filter press

Belt filters are characterized by two continuous, tensioned filter cloths. In the process
the material is dewatered both under gravitation and press.
Work description
Flocculated sludge is fed to the lower cloth (belt); initial dewatering is under gravity
as the belt carries the sludge into a consolidation zone where it is progressively
squeezed under pressure by the upper and lower belts moving towards each other to
form a closed envelope (Fig. 36). The cake is then squeezed under increasing
pressure as the cloths move over a sequence of successively smaller diameter
rollers. As the two belts pass over the rollers there is a relative movement of the
belts, causing liquid to be removed by a combination of expression and shearing to
produce a dry, crumbly cake.
120
Fig. 36. Belt filter press.
Applicability
A key to successful operation of a belt press is that the feed must be flocculated, to
avoid blinding of the filter belt and facilitate gravity drainage when it is initially fed to
the belt.
Limitations
Sediments containing organic material can be difficult to dewater as they stick to the
cloth. Flocculant is always needed and large particles need to be removed prior to
dewatering.
Costs
Belt presses are a high cost alternative.

Belt presses are used as a dewatering option for dredged material and mobile large
scale dewatering rigs are available.
Effectiveness
The effectiveness depends on the accuracy in flocculent dosage and compressibility
of the material. Free and intestinal water can be removed but surface and bound
water are not affected.
Advantages
121
The Belt Filter press is capable of supporting relatively high production rates and is
generally regarded as being reliable and adaptable to changing conditions. There are
many presses available so a high capacity can be found within the region.
Disadvantages
Sludge containing high concentrations of oil and grease or mineral content can
permeate the weave and reduce water drainage. Belt presses gives effective
dewatering of sediments with low organic matter contents.
5.3.2 Filter press

A filter press comprises of a set of vertical, juxtaposed recessed plates, presses
against each other by hydraulic jacks at one end of the set (Fig. 37). The pressure
applied to the joint face of each filtering plate must withstand the chamber internal
pressure developed by the sludge pumping system. This vertical plate layout forms
watertight filtration chambers allowing easy mechanization for the discharge of
cakes. Filter clots finely or tightly meshed are applied to the two grooved surfaces in
these plates. The sludge is filtered under pressure in the filtration chamber. Solids
sludge gradually accumulates in the filtration chamber until the final compacted cake
is formed. The filtrate is collected at the back of the filtration support and carried
away by internal ducts.
Work description
The filtration cycle is completed in four steps:
- Slurry feeding - The flocculated slurry pumped into the press through a
center port running through the length of the filter plates until all of the air is
evacuated and the press is filled.
- Cake squeezing, by inflating the membranes - as the pump filling the press
feeds the slurry, filtration begins to occur while forcing a steady increase in
pressure, until a constant pressure is achieved. While at a constant pressure,
the filtration rate begins to diminish at the same time as the cake begins to
122
consolidate. When the full volume of the press is occupied, the pumping
process is stopped. Depending on the press and the type of solids being
dewatered, the press may remain pressurized from one to four hours.
- Air blow through the cake - in many instances, air is blown through the
press drainage ports to depressurize the press, remove any filtrate remaining
within the press, and to remove solids from the center core.
- Discharge - each individual plate is slid open so that the cake can be dropped
to the ground, a conveyor, or a receiving bin beneath the press.
Following the discharge of the cake, the filter media are cleaned, as
necessary, and the press is reassembled and readied for the next dewatering
cycle.
Fig. 37. Filter press
Applicability
With the appropriate filter media in place, the device can be adapted to dewater a
wide spectrum of sediment types. On small projects, the effective dewatering volume
can be decreased by placing a blank plate in the machine to section off a smaller
working volume. Large projects, however, may require the availability of a large
staging ground and the use of several units and/or batching tanks in order to
maintain an uninterrupted dredging program.
123
Limitations
Sediments containing organic material can be difficult to dewater as they stick to the
cloth. To be able to handle a continuos flow a collection tank is needed.
Costs
The filter press is a high cost alternative.

The technology is well known and has been used for decades. The types of cloths
and presses develop all the time.
Effectiveness
Cake moisture content reductions are dependent on its compressibility properties,
but moisture contents of 25% more than can be achieved on a conventional belt
press are not uncommon.
Advantages
If the compressibility of the material treated is high a Filter Press can produce high
cake solids and high capture rates.
Disadvantages
Achieving good results, requires a reliable and well planned thickened solids strategy
and continuously optimized chemical treatment program. Filter presses are not
suitable for organic rich material and production rate/unit which can be a limitation in
large scale projects. The filter press system is not a continuous process and storage
tanks/ponds are needed.
5.3.3 Screw press

The screw press is a simple, slow moving mechanical devise. Dewatering is
continuous and is accomplished by gravity drainage at the inlet end of the screw and
124
then by reducing the volume as the material being dewatered is conveyed from the
inlet to the discharge end of the screw press (Fig. 38).
Work description
Solids by transporting them in a helical path along the length of a tapered screw
encased within a screened housing. As solids are slowly moved from the entry zone
towards the discharge zone, they are conveyed through a cavity of diminishing
volume resulting in compressive forces. As the solids are compressed, water is
extruded and decanted after passing through the screened housing. In the
dewatering sequence, solids are advanced through three processes:
Feeding - flocculated slurry is gravity fed into an inlet hopper where free water
escapes through the screened housing.
Low Pressure Zone - compression occurs as the screw vanes advance the solids
through a fixed diameter screen, the screw shaft diameter increases resulting in a
gradually diminishing void space. As the void space is diminished, the solids are
gradually compressed causing the release of additional water.
High Pressure Zone - the discharge orifice at the end of the screw length is
equipped with an adjustable pressure cone or choke plate that controls the size of
the orifice opening. A small orifice opening yields a reduced rate of solids discharge
and exerts a back pressure on the solids resulting in an increased pressure that
yields higher cake dryness values.
Fig. 38. Screw press
125
Applicability
Screw presses are suitable both for inorganic and organic materials but different
materials require different screw speeds, screw configurations, and screens in order
to dewater to a high outlet consistency while maintaining at high capture rate.
Limitations
Large solids must be removed before dewatering and solids smaller than silt can be
difficult to separate in the process.
Costs
Screw presses are a medium cost technology.

The screw press is a well-known technology, there are many manufacturers of
equipment.
Effectiveness
Many factors, including screw length, taper, pitch, screen type and diameter, solids
characteristics, and chemical additive selection influence the cake solids and capture
rate generated by a screw press. Ideal conditions generally occur while dewatering
fibrous and/or inorganic solids and can produce medium-high cake solids. Non-
cohesive, non-fibrous materials (i.e., highly organic substrates) may produce lower
cake solids.
Advantages
As the screw press construction is simple and the rotation of its screw is slow, it is
less liable to attrition loss, its maintenance is easy because no filter cloth is used.
Disadvantages
A screw press configuration requires extensive chemical additive laboratory testing
and empirical evaluation through pilot testing. Most dredging projects will require the
use of several presses as the total solids throughput is relatively low when compared
126
to other types of dewatering equipment. The turbidity of the outlet water can be
high.
5.3.4 Centrifuges
A centrifuge uses rapid rotation of a fluid mixture in a rigid vessel. The movement
separates components on the basis of their mass (Fig. 39).
Work description
In the centrifuges the liquid mixture is fed into the centrifuge where rotating forces
separates the particles by mass. The mixture is usually conditioned with a flocculent.
The liquid phase passes through the barrel with solids conveyed co-currently along
the walls of the bowl by a helical screw.
Fig. 39. Schematic view, centrifuge, Wakeland, 2003.
Applicability
Centrifuges may be used for dewatering where space limitations or material
characteristics make other methods unsuitable. If sediment can be effectively
thickened by gravity without chemicals, centrifuge thickening is not
economically feasible. Centrifuges are generally used for dewatering p rocess
sludge in larger applications where sludge incineration is required.
127
Limitations
Large solids must be removed before dewatering and solids smaller than silt can be
difficult to separate in the process. The need for energy is large.
Costs
Centrifuges are a high cost technology.

Centrifuges can be used as a standalone dewatering technology or as a pre-
treatment of material before dewatering trough drainage in a logon/tank or CDF.
Effectiveness
Centrifuges separate solids from fine gravel to silt. The effectiveness can be
enhanced by addition of polymers.
Advantages
Centrifuges are a compact, simple, flexible, self-contained unit, and the capital cost is
relatively low. The ability to handle higher solids content feeds; its continuous
operation, with solids throughputs up to about 90 te h1.
Disadvantages
The centrifuge can be over-torqued due to the flow properties of the thickened solids,
or due to plugging by accumulation of unconveyed solids in the bowl. Wear problems
on the screw can also be caused by more abrasive particles. The processes can
have significant maintenance and power costs. Adequate electric power must
also be provided for the large motors that are required. Depending on the
waste, the liquid fraction after centrifugation may be considered hazardous
also and require proper disposal. Typically the liquid fraction will be relatively
high in suspended non settling solids.
5.4. Geotubes
128
Geotextile tubes are an innovative and still developing alternative, compared to
traditional methods. Geotextile tubes are comprised of high strength and permeable
woven or composite geotextiles and are filled with high water content materials.
Work description
To collect water from the Geotubes a dewatering pad of a sealed layer and gravel is
built and a water treatment facility is built. Geotubes are placed on the dewatering
pad and the sediment is pumped into the tubes. The three standard circumferences
of geotextile tubes are 4.5, 9.0, and 13.7 m and the length is dependent on the
specific project.
Applicability
A successful dewatering application of geotextile tube depends on two main
requirements: drainage and retention capability. Soil retention requires that the pore
openings of the geotextile be small enough to prevent excessive migration of soil
particles through the geotextile. Nonetheless, the drainage requirement necessitates
that the geotextile pores be large enough to allow for the flow of water. As a
consequence, the performance of geotextile tubes is primarily a function of the pore
characteristics of the geotextile and the nature of the slurry such as water content
and characteristic particle size.
Limitations
Grotubes can be difficult to operate during winter time.
Costs
Geotubes is a medium cost alternative.

Since the 80ies the process has been used in many dredging applications.
Effectiveness
129
Drainage with Geotubes is a passive dewatering technology not affecting the bound
or surface water. To gain extra compression, and to save space, the tubes can be
stacked on each other.
Advantages
Passive drainage in Geotubes is not as size dependent as using settling
ponds/lagoons.
Disadvantages
The dewatering can be time consuming and the performance during winter is poor.
Geotubes filled with sediment are heavy and difficult to handle.
5.5. Combined technologies

Mechanical dewatering is the most used process however, for many applications, it
cannot achieve sufficiently low water content. Therefore many potential alternatives
to enhance the dewatering ability of conventional processes has been proposed.
5.5.1. Thermally assisted dewatering

Thermal assisted dewatering describes the process whereby a heating plate and
heat supply unit are incorporated into a filter press system to improve separation of
water from sludge.
Work description
Mechanical and thermal effects, resulting in the reduction of water content, are a
combination of different mechanisms:
(i) the mechanical dewatering reduces the volume of the pores and squeezes the
water out of the product,
(ii) the application of elevated temperatures reduces the liquid density and viscosity,
and the surface tension. The decreased viscosity, density and surface tension lead to
the pores structure to hold a smaller mass of water, some of which flows out of the
product,
130
(iii) at high temperatures, the water in a porous vegetable matter is in a mobilized
state. This can occur through hydrophobization during the strong decrease in polar
groups, through the destruction of cellular structure and more easily overcoming the
electrostatic forces of attraction between water and particles .
Applicability
The method is applicable in dewatering projects with high demands on low cake
moisture.
Limitations
The technology is still not widely used and it is difficult to find high capacity
equipment.
Costs
The process is a high cost option.

Thermally assisted dewatering can still be seen as an emerging technology.
Effectiveness
The method can create very high 70% and higher dry matter contents of the cake.
Advantages
The mechanical dewatering is, in principle, limited by the resistance of the solid
structure against deformation. An essential acceleration of dewatering can be
achieved by increasing the temperature.
Disadvantages
The temperature increasing step is time and energy consuming.
5.5.2. Electro-Dewatering (EDW)

The use of an electric field changes the surface charge of particles and the particles
aggregate.
131
Work description
Most electro-dewatering techniques developed to date use a process known as
pressurized electro-dewatering. This process involves a vertical electric field, which is
usually applied in conjunction with vacuum filtration or an imposed mechanical
pressure acting on the upper anode. Electric field combined with mechanical
compression, complementary each other, is another efficient dewatering method.
Applicability
Electro-dewatering (EDW) can be an option for slurries, which either cannot be
sufficiently dewatered or would otherwise require extreme conditions using
conventional dewatering devices.
Limitations
For the electro-dewatering process to be viable on a commercial scale, it has to be
capable to dewater the given product to the desired water content at a sufficient rate
to reach throughput demands.
Costs
As the energy input is low the method is a medium-high cost option.

EDW is still an emerging technology.
Effectiveness
EDW can increase the compression properties thereby improving the performance of
mechanical dewatering.
Advantages
The treatment increase aggregate size which prevents clogging of the cloths in filter
presses. The energy input is lower than in thermally assisted dewatering.
Disadvantages
There is still a lot of work to understand the factors that affect the rate of EDW.
132

Technologies and Solutions For Handling of Contaminated Sediments State of The Art Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technologies and Solutions For Handling of Contaminated Sediments State of The Art Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technologies and Solutions for

Handling of Contaminated Sediments

Project acronym: SMOCS

Report status: Final

Author/Organisation: Nerijus Blaauskas, CORPI

2. UPTAKE TECHNOLOGY ............................................................................................ 5

2.1. Dry excavation..................................................................................................... 5

2.2. Dredging technologies ......................................................................................... 8

2.2.1. Mechanical dredging ....................................................................................... 9

2.2.1.1 Grab dredgers ............................................................................................. 10

2.2.1.2 Backhoe dredgers ....................................................................................... 12

2.2.1.3 Bucket (ladder) dredgers ............................................................................. 14

2.2.2. Hydraulic dredging ........................................................................................ 17

2.2.2.1 Cutter suction dredger ................................................................................. 17

2.2.2.2 Trailing suction hopper dredgers ................................................................. 20

2.2.3 Combined dredging technologies ................................................................... 22

2.2.4. Freeze dredging ............................................................................................ 23

2.2.5. Environmental dredging ................................................................................ 25

3. IN-SITU TREATMENT ............................................................................................... 26

3.1. Physical/chemical treatment .............................................................................. 26

3.1.1 In-situ Stabilisation/Solidification .................................................................... 27

3.1.2 Chemical oxidation ......................................................................................... 30

3.1.3 Electrokinetic separation ................................................................................ 33

3.1.4 In-situ Capping (ISC) ...................................................................................... 37

3.1.5 Soil flushing .................................................................................................... 40

3.2. Biological treatment ........................................................................................... 42

3.2.1 Monitored natural attenuation ......................................................................... 43

3.2.2 Enhanced natural attenuation ......................................................................... 45

3.2.3 Phytoremediation ........................................................................................... 48

3.3.1 Electrical resistance heating ........................................................................... 52

3.3.2 Steam injection and extraction ....................................................................... 54

3.3.3 Conductive heating......................................................................................... 56

3.3.4 Radio frequency heating ................................................................................ 58

3.3.5 In situ vitrification ............................................................................................ 61

4. EX SITU TREATMENT .............................................................................................. 64

4.1. Physical/chemical treatment .............................................................................. 64

4.1.1 Ex situ stabilisation/solidification..................................................................... 64

4.1.2 Gas-phase chemical reduction ....................................................................... 70

4.1.3 Liquefied gas solvent extraction ..................................................................... 72

4.1.4 Separation ...................................................................................................... 74

4.1.5 Dehalogenation .............................................................................................. 78

4.1.6 Soil washing ................................................................................................... 81

4.1.7 Solvent extraction ........................................................................................... 83

4.2 Biological treatment ............................................................................................ 85

4.2.1 Bioslurry ......................................................................................................... 86

4.2.2 Biopiles .......................................................................................................... 90

4.2.3 Landfarming ................................................................................................... 93

4.2.4 Composting .................................................................................................... 96

4.2.5 Phytoremediation ........................................................................................... 99

4.3 Thermal treatment ............................................................................................ 102

4.3.1 Thermal desorption ...................................................................................... 102

4.3.2 Hot gas decontamination .............................................................................. 106

4.3.3 Incineration .................................................................................................. 108

4.3.4 Pyrolysis ....................................................................................................... 111

5.1 Thermo chemical treatment .............................................................................. 115

5.2. Lagooning/drainage in settling ponds .............................................................. 118

5.3. Mechanical dewatering (MDW) ....................................................................... 120

5.4. Geotubes ......................................................................................................... 128

5.5. Combined technologies ................................................................................... 130

5.5.1. Thermally assisted dewatering .................................................................... 130

5.5.2. Electro-Dewatering (EDW) .......................................................................... 131

2.1. Dry excavation

There is a wide range of commercially available equipment applicable on hard and