Issue
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering,
Vol.19, No.5, 783-790, 2002
Kinetics of in situ Surfactant Soil Flushing at Moderate Washing Conditions
Economic in situ soil flushing using common surfactants may be a good substitute for exhaustive, pressurized soil washing or bioremediation requiring high energy consumption or laborious technique. Two model surfactants, sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan monooleate (Tween-80), were chosen as flushing agents. Those surfactant solutions were applied to clean hydrocarbon (motor oil) contaminated sand soil. A kinetic investigation such as order of reaction of pollutant compounds, flushing mode (semi-continuous and continuous), change of soil pore matrix, etc. comprised a main part of this work. We found that the hydrocarbon elution curves were dropping in an exponential way, which was stiffer with higher surfactant concentrations. Higher surfactant concentration, higher flow rate, and lower porosity guaranteed higher removal efficiency as well as higher removal rate. Strong initial lag phases were found for Tween-80 solutions. A modified Monod-type reaction model describing the removal kinetics was proposed to be the first-order reaction, which agreed well with most of the experimental results. The curve-fitted parameters, n, k0 and K1 were linear functions of surfactant concentration and reciprocal of soil porosity.
[References]
  1. Chan AF, Evans DF, Cussler EL, AIChE J., 22, 1106, 1976
  2. Cho D, Kwon SH, Environ. Eng. Res., 6(4), 223, 2001
  3. Cho JS, Personal Communication, U.S. EPA, 1997
  4. Choi SI, Jang M, Hwang KY, Ryoo D, J. Korean Soc. Environ. Soil., 3(1), 65, 1998
  5. Ellis WD, Payne JR, McNabb GD, "Treatment of Contaminated Soils with Aqueous Surfactants," U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH, EPA/600/2-851129, p. 84, 1985
  6. Evans DF, Wennerstrom H, "The Colloidal Domain," 2nd Ed., Wiley-VCH, Toronto, 1999
  7. Fountain JC, Starr RC, Middleton T, Beikirch M, Taylor C, Hodge D, Ground Water, 34(5), 910, 1996
  8. Groundwater Remediation Technology Analaysis Center (GWRTAC), "Technology Evaluation Report: Surfactant/Cosolvents,", 1996
  9. Holm LW, "Improved Oil Recovery by Surfactant and Polymer Flooding," (Shah, D.O. and Cshechter, R.S. Eds.), Academic Press, NY, 1977
  10. Imhoff PT, Gleyzer SN, McBride JF, Vancho LA, Okuda I, Miller CT, Environ. Sci. Technol., 29(8), 1966, 1995
  11. Kile DE, Chiou CT, Environ. Sci. Technol., 23(7), 832, 1989
  12. Lee JK, Kim BU, Park D, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 16(5), 684, 1999
  13. Myers D, "Surfactant Science and Technology," VCH Publishers, Inc., NY, 1985
  14. Ouyang Y, Mansell RS, Rhue RD, J. Hazard. Mater., 46, 23, 1996
  15. Park JA, Hur JM, Son BS, Lee JH, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 18(4), 486, 2001
  16. Pennell KD, Jin M, Abriola LM, Pope GA, J. Cont. Hydrol., 16(1), 35, 1994
  17. Peters CA, Luthy RG, Environ. Sci. Technol., 27(13), 2831, 1993
  18. Press WH, Flannery BP, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, "Numerical Recipes," Cambridge University Press, NY, 1986
  19. Rao PSC, Annable MD, Sillan RK, Dai D, Hatfield KH, Graham WD, Wood AL, Enfield CG, Water Resour. Res., 33(12), 2673, 1997
  20. Rhue RD, Annable MD, Rao PSC, "Lab and Field Evanluation of Single-Phase Microemulsions (SPME) for Enhanced in-situ Remediation of Contaminated Aquifers, Phase I: Laboratory Studies for Selection of SPME Precursors," AATDF Report, University of Florida, 1997
  21. Taylor KC, Hakins BF, "Emulsions in Enhanced Oil Recovery," in Emulsions (Laucier Schramm Ed.), Adv. Chem. Series 231, American Chemical Society, Washington D.C., 1992
  22. Vignon BW, Rubin AJ, J. Wat. Poll. Control. Fed., 61(7), 1233, 1989
  23. West CC, Harwell JF, Environ. Sci. Technol., 26(12), 2324, 1992