Abstract

This paper investigates the feasibility of electrokinetic remediation of contaminated sediment at Indiana Harbor, Indiana. The sediment is a fine-grained material with high moisture content of 78 % and high organic content of 19 % and it is contaminated with a wide range of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and heavy metals. Four bench-scale electrokinetic experiments were conducted at 2.0 VDC/cm of constant voltage gradient using two surfactants (5 % Igepal CA-720 and 3 % Tween 80), a cosolvent (20 % n-butylamine), and a cyclodextrin (10 % HP-β-CD) as flushing solutions for the solubilization/desorption of PAHs. The mobility and removal of heavy metals was also investigated while flushing these solutions. The experimental results show that 20 % n-butylamine and 5 % Igepal 720 systems are effective for the partial solubilization of the PAHs in the sediments; however, both 3 % Tween 80 and 10 % HP-β-CD systems are found to be ineffective for desorption/solubilization of PAHs in the sediment. None of the selected flushing agents is found to be effective for the removal of heavy metals from the contaminated sediment. The low removal of PAHs and heavy metals is attributed to the high organic content and high acid buffering capacity of the sediment.

References

1.
ASTM Standard D2216,
Soil
and
Rock
,
Annual Book of ASTM Standards
, Vol.
04.08
,
American Society of Testing and Materials
,
Philadelphia, PA
,
2003
.
2.
Dzenitis
,
J. M.
, “
Steady State and Limiting Current in Electroremediation of Soil
,”
J. Electrochem. Soc.
 0013-4651 
144
,
1317
-
1322
(
1997
).
3.
Eykholt
,
G. R.
, “
Development of Pore Pressures by Nonuniform Electroosmosis in Clays
,”
J. Hazard. Mater.
 0304-3894 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894(97)00022-8
55
,
171
-
186
(
1997
).
4.
Maturi
,
K.
, “
Electrokinetic Remediation of Soils Contaminated with Co-existing PAHs and Heavy Metals
,” M.S. Thesis,
University of Illinois at Chicago
,
2004
.
5.
Mitchell
,
J. K.
,
Fundamentals of Soil Behavior
,
John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
,
New York, NY
, p. 437,
1993
.
6.
Mulligan
,
C. N.
,
Yong
,
R. N.
, and
Gibbs
,
B. F.
, “
An Evaluation of Technologies for the Heavy Metal Remediation of Dredged Sediments
J. Hazard. Mater.
 0304-3894 
25
,
145
-
163
(
2001
).
7.
Nobbs
,
D.
and
Chipman
,
G.
, “
Contaminated Site Investigation and Remediation of Chlorinated Aromatic Compounds
,”
Sep. Purif. Technol.
 1383-5866 
31
,
37
-
40
(
2003
).
8.
Reddy
,
K. R.
and
Parupudi
,
U. S.
, “
Removal of Chromium, Nickel, and Cadmium from Clays by In-Situ Electrokinetic Remediation
,”
J. Soil Contaminat
 1058-8337 
6
,
391
-
407
(
1997
).
9.
USEPA
, “
Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste
,”
Volume 1A: Laboratory Manual, Physical/Chemical Methods
, SW-846, 3rd Ed.,
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
,
Washington, D.C.
10.
USEPA
, “
Realizing Remediation: A Summary of Contaminated Sediment Remediation Activities in the Great Lakes Basin
,”
Great Lakes National Program Office
,
Chicago
,
1998
.
11.
USEPA
, “
Guide to Great Lakes Program Office Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) Program
.” http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/arcs/arcshome.html,
2001
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.