One-off geophysical detection of chlorinated DNAPL during remediation of an industrial site: a case study

Eve-Agnès Fiorentino; Sheldon Warden; Maksim Bano; Pascal Sailhac; Thomas Perrier; Eve-Agnès Fiorentino; Sheldon Warden; Maksim Bano; Pascal Sailhac; Thomas Perrier

doi:10.3934/geosci.2021001

AIMS Geosciences

2021, Volume 7, Issue 1: 1-21. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2021001

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

One-off geophysical detection of chlorinated DNAPL during remediation of an industrial site: a case study

1.
Ramboll France, 155 rue Louis de Broglie, 13100 Aix-en-Provence, France
2.
Hyperion Geophysical Services, 7 rue de Châtenois, 67100 Strasbourg, France
3.
IPGS, CNRS-UMR 7516, Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
4.
GEOPS, CNRS-UMR 8148, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France

Received: 19 October 2020 Accepted: 05 January 2021 Published: 13 January 2021

The remediation of a polluted site relies, as a first stage, on the proper delineation of the contamination sources. In classical investigations, soil and water samples are collected throughout the field. These measurements allow a quantitative characterization of the gathered materials but only provide information about the medium in the vicinity of the points where they were collected. On the other hand, geophysical techniques can provide a quasi-continuous coverage of the investigated field. This paper describes a geophysical survey that was performed on an industrial site impacted by a chlorinated DNAPL. The precise location of the contamination was needed for the treatment of the saturated zone, while the unsaturated zone was remediated by general excavation of the sediments, followed by separate treatment. As this excavation allowed to get closer to the saturated zone, geophysical measurements were conducted at the bottom of the pit. Whereas Electrical Resistivity Tomography measurements only brought little information, Ground Penetrating Radar drew the remediation operations towards an area that preliminary point measurements had not identified as a possible source location.
- geophysics,
- DNAPL,
- saturated zone,
- environmental investigations,
- remediation
Citation: Eve-Agnès Fiorentino, Sheldon Warden, Maksim Bano, Pascal Sailhac, Thomas Perrier. One-off geophysical detection of chlorinated DNAPL during remediation of an industrial site: a case study[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2021, 7(1): 1-21. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2021001

Related Papers:

Abstract

The remediation of a polluted site relies, as a first stage, on the proper delineation of the contamination sources. In classical investigations, soil and water samples are collected throughout the field. These measurements allow a quantitative characterization of the gathered materials but only provide information about the medium in the vicinity of the points where they were collected. On the other hand, geophysical techniques can provide a quasi-continuous coverage of the investigated field. This paper describes a geophysical survey that was performed on an industrial site impacted by a chlorinated DNAPL. The precise location of the contamination was needed for the treatment of the saturated zone, while the unsaturated zone was remediated by general excavation of the sediments, followed by separate treatment. As this excavation allowed to get closer to the saturated zone, geophysical measurements were conducted at the bottom of the pit. Whereas Electrical Resistivity Tomography measurements only brought little information, Ground Penetrating Radar drew the remediation operations towards an area that preliminary point measurements had not identified as a possible source location.

References

[1]	Mercer JW, Cohen RM (1990) A review of immiscible fluids in the subsurface: properties, models, characterization and remediation. J Contam Hydrol 6: 107–163. doi: 10.1016/0169-7722(90)90043-G
[2]	Suthersan S, Horst J, Schnobrich M, et al. (2016) Remediation engineering: design concepts. CRC Press.
[3]	Nativ R, Adar EM, Becker A (1999) Designing a monitoring network for contaminated ground water in fractured chalk. Groundwater 37: 38–147. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.1999.tb00956.x
[4]	Ajo-Franklin JB, Geller JT, Harris JM (2006) A survey of the geophysical properties of chlorinated DNAPLs. J Appl Geophys 59: 177–189. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2005.10.002
[5]	Brewster ML, Annan AP (1994) Ground-penetrating radar monitoring of a controlled DNAPL release: 200 MHz radar. Geophysics 59: 1211–1221. doi: 10.1190/1.1443679
[6]	Bano M, Loeffler O, Girard JF (2009) Ground penetrating radar imaging and time-domain modelling of the infiltration of diesel fuel in a sandbox experiment. C R Geosci 341: 846–858. doi: 10.1016/j.crte.2009.08.002
[7]	Orlando L, Palladini L (2019) Time-lapse laboratory tests to monitor multiple phases of DNAPL in a porous medium. Near Surf Geophys 17: 55–68.
[8]	Schneider GW, Greenhouse JP (1992) Geophysical detection of perchloroethylene in a sandy aquifer using resistivity and nuclear logging techniques. In 5th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems 1992, 619–628.
[9]	Newmark RL, Daily WD, Kyle KR, et al. (1998) Monitoring DNAPL pumping using integrated geophysical techniques. J Environ Eng Geophys 3: 7–13. doi: 10.4133/JEEG3.1.7
[10]	Chambers JE, Wilkinson PB, Wealthall GP, et al. (2010) Hydrogeophysical imaging of deposit heterogeneity and groundwater chemistry changes during DNAPL source zone bioremediation. J Contam Hydrol 118: 43–61. doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2010.07.001
[11]	Atekwana EA, Werkema Jr DD, Duris JW, et al. (2004) In-situ apparent conductivity measurements and microbial population distribution at a hydrocarbon-contaminated site. Geophysics 69: 56–63. doi: 10.1190/1.1649375
[12]	Binley A, Slater LD, Fukes M, et al. (2005) Relationship between spectral induced polarization and hydraulic properties of saturated and unsaturated sandstone. Water Resour Res 41.
[13]	Olhoeft GR (1985) Low-frequency electrical properties. Geophysics 50: 2492–2503. doi: 10.1190/1.1441880
[14]	Vanhala H, Soininen H, Kukkonen I (1992) Detecting organic chemical contaminants by spectral-induced polarization method in glacial till environment. Geophysics 57: 1014–1017. doi: 10.1190/1.1443312
[15]	Kemna A, Räkers E, Dresen L (1999) Field applications of complex resistivity tomography. 1999 SEG Annual Meeting.
[16]	Cardarelli E, Di Filippo G (2009) Electrical resistivity and induced polarization tomography in identifying the plume of chlorinated hydrocarbons in sedimentary formation: a case study in Rho (Milan—Italy). Waste Manage Res 27: 595–602. doi: 10.1177/0734242X09102524
[17]	Cassiani G, Kemna A, Villa A, et al. (2009) Spectral induced polarization for the characterization of free-phase hydrocarbon contamination of sediments with low clay content. Near Surf Geophys 7: 547–562. doi: 10.3997/1873-0604.2009028
[18]	Orozco AF, Kemna A, Oberdörster C, et al. (2012) Delineation of subsurface hydrocarbon contamination at a former hydrogenation plant using spectral induced polarization imaging. J Contam Hydrol 136: 131–144. doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2012.06.001
[19]	Johansson S, Fiandaca G, Dahlin T (2015) Influence of non-aqueous phase liquid configuration on induced polarization parameters: Conceptual models applied to a time-domain field case study. Geoexploration 123: 295–309.
[20]	Blondel A, Schmutz M, Franceschi M, et al. (2014) Temporal evolution of the geoelectrical response on a hydrocarbon contaminated site. J Appl Geophys 103: 161–171. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2014.01.013
[21]	Naudet V, Revil A, Bottero JY, et al. (2003) Relationship between self-potential (SP) signals and redox conditions in contaminated groundwater. Geophys Res Lett 30.
[22]	Minsley BJ, Sogade J, Morgan FD (2007) Three-dimensional self-potential inversion for subsurface DNAPL contaminant detection at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina. Water Resour Res 43.
[23]	Temples TJ, Waddell MG, Domoracki WJ, et al. (2001) Noninvasive determination of the location and distribution of DNAPL using advanced seismic reflection techniques. Groundwater 39: 465–474. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2001.tb02331.x
[24]	Waddell MG, Domoracki WJ, Temples TJ (2001) Use of seismic reflection amplitude versus offset (AVO) techniques to image dense nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPL). In 14th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems.
[25]	Vaudelet P, Schmutz M, Pessel M, et al. (2011) Mapping of contaminant plumes with geoelectrical methods. A case study in urban context. J Appl Geophys 75: 738–751. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.09.023
[26]	Sparrenbom CJ, Åkesson S, Johansson S, et al. (2017) Investigation of chlorinated solvent pollution with resistivity and induced polarization. Sci Total Environ 575: 767–778. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.117
[27]	Kueper BH, Stroo HF, Vogel CM, et al. (2014) Chlorinated solvent source zone remediation. Springer.
[28]	Davis JL, Annan AP (1989) Ground-penetrating radar for high-resolution mapping of soil and rock stratigraphy. Geophys Prospect 37: 531–551. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2478.1989.tb02221.x
[29]	Lucius JE, Olhoeft GR, Hill PL, et al. (1992) Properties and hazards of 108 selected substances—1992 edition. US Geological Survey Open-File Report, 92: 527–554.
[30]	Pankow JF, Cherry JA (1996) Dense chlorinated solvents and other DNAPLs in groundwater: History, behavior, and remediation. Waterloo Press.
[31]	Kirsch R (2008) Groundwater Geophysics: A Tool for Hydrogeology. Springer Verlag GmbH.
[32]	Jol HM (2008) Ground penetrating radar theory and applications. Elsevier.
[33]	Bano M (2006) Effects of the transition zone above a water table on the reflection of GPR waves. Geophys Res Lett 33: L13309. doi: 10.1029/2006GL026158
[34]	Yilmaz O (1987) Seismic Data Processing. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
[35]	Loke MH (2000) Electrical imaging surveys for environmental and engineering studies–A practical guide to 2-D and 3-D surveys.
[36]	Loke MH, Barker RD (1996) Rapid least-squares inversion of apparent resistivity pseudosections using a quasi-Newton method. Geophys Prospect 44: 131–152. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2478.1996.tb00142.x
[37]	Sharma S, Verma GK (2015) Inversion of electrical resistivity data: a review. Int J Environ Chem Ecol Geol Geophys Eng 9: 400–406.
[38]	Günther T, Rücker C, Spitzer K (2006) Three-dimensional modelling and inversion of DC resistivity data incorporating topography—II. Inversion. Geophy J Int 166: 506–517. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.03011.x
[39]	Daily W, Ramirez A (1995) Electrical resistance tomography during in-situ trichloroethylene remediation at the Savannah River Site. J Appl Geophys 33: 239–249. doi: 10.1016/0926-9851(95)90044-6
[40]	Power C, Gerhard JI, Karaoulis M, et al. (2014) Evaluating four-dimensional time-lapse electrical resistivity tomography for monitoring DNAPL source zone remediation. J Contam Hydrol 162: 27–46. doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2014.04.004
[41]	Brewster ML, Annan AP, Greenhouse JP, et al. (1995) Observed migration of a controlled DNAPL release by geophysical methods. Groundwater 33: 977–987. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.1995.tb00043.x
[42]	Hwang YK, Endres AL, Piggott SD, et al. (2008) Long-term ground penetrating radar monitoring of a small volume DNAPL release in a natural groundwater flow field. J Contam Hydrol 97: 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2007.11.004

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)