Search

The following paper presents a method to optimise a discontinuous permeable adsorptive barrier (PAB-D). This method is based on the comparison of different PAB-D configurations obtained by changing some of the main PAB-D design parameters. In particular, the well diameters, the distance between two consecutive passive wells and the distance between two consecutive well lines were varied, and a cost analysis for each configuration was carried out in order to define the best performing and most cost-effective PAB-D configuration. As a case study, a benzene-contaminated aquifer located in an urban area in the north of Naples (Italy) was considered. The PAB-D configuration with a well diameter of 0.8 m resulted the best optimised layout in terms of performance and cost-effectiveness. Moreover, in order to identify the best configuration for the remediation of the aquifer studied, a comparison with a continuous permeable adsorptive barrier (PAB-C) was added. In particular, this showed a 40% reduction of the total remediation costs by using the optimised PAB-D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This work presents an innovative configuration of a permeable adsorptive barrier (PAB) for thein situremediation of benzene-contaminated groundwater in the area of Naples (Italy). A PAB is a type of permeable reactive barrier (PRB) made with adsorbing materials (e.g. activated carbon). This particular PAB is a discontinuous permeable adsorptive barrier (PAB-D), consisting in an array of deep passive adsorptive wells whose hydraulic conductivity is higher than the surrounding soil. The design was based on COMSOL Multi-physics®simulations, which allow for the description of pollutant transport in groundwater and adsorption onto the barrier by means of a 2D model solved using a finite element approach. Based on a hydrological and geotechnical characterization of the entire polluted aquifer, the design and optimization of PAB-D parameters (location, orientation, number of wells and dimensions) were defined. The influence of hydraulic conductivity and dispersivity on the total number of wells for a complete aquifer remediation was investigated. Finally, a comparison with a continuous barrier (PAB-C), i.e. a wall of adsorptive material, in terms of total adsorbing material needed, is presented. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Hydrogeology Journal is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Pump and treat (P&T) systems are still widely employed for the hydraulic containment of contaminated groundwater despite the fact that their usage is decreasing due to their high operational costs. A way to partially mitigate such costs, both in monetary and environmental terms, is to perform heat exchange (directly or with a heat pump) on the groundwater extracted by these systems, thus providing low-carbon and low-cost heating and/or cooling to buildings or industrial processes. This opportunity should be carefully evaluated in view of preserving (or even improving) the removal efficiency of the remediation process. Therefore, the heat exchange should be placed upstream or downstream of all treatments, or in an intermediate position, depending on the effect of water temperature change on the removal efficiency of each treatment step. This article provides an overview of such effects and is meant to serve as a starting reference for a case-by-case evaluation. Finally, the potentiality of geothermal use of P&T systems is assessed in the Italian contaminated Sites of National Interest (SIN), i.e., the 41 priority contaminated sites in Italy. At least 29 of these sites use pumping wells as hydraulic barriers or P&T systems. The total discharge rate treated by these plants exceeds 7000 m3/h and can potentially provide about 33 MW of heating and/or cooling power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]