REGENESIS

Case History 0-4
REGENESIS
Oxygen Release
Compound
ORC vs. AS/SVE Cost Comparison at UST Site
Covington, IN
SITE SUMMARY
The site, located in Covington, Indiana, was chosen for a pilot test,
to demonstrate the effectiveness of ORC in treating the existing
benzene and MTBE concentrations. Contamination in the
groundwater had resulted from leaking gasoline UST's. In addition
to the pilot test, a cost-comparison was also prepared to illustrate
the potential for cost savings associated with the use of a passive,
innovative technology like ORC vs. a traditional air sparge/soil
vapor extraction (AS/SVE) remediation system. The following
will discuss the pilot test and its results, then the cost comparison
analysis.
Figure 1. Oxygen Release
Compound
REMEDIATION APPROACH
~ Remediation Objective: Reduce concentrations of Benzene
and MTBE to target concentrations at the entire site. See
following table.
~ Application Type: Grid (direct-push injection)
~ Product: ORC
Contaminant
Benzene
MTBE
Concentration
0.2-2.1 ug/L
300 ug/L
Contaminant
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
.
~ Quantity Applied: 180 lbs
~ Application Rate: 3 lb/ft
~ Product Cost: <$3,000 in ORC
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
General
~ Name: Covington Shell
~ Location: Covington, IN
~ Industry: Gas Station
~ Contaminants of Concern:
Table 1. Target Concentrations
Concentration
5 ug/L
1000 ug/L
700 ug/L
10,000 ug/L
Hydrogeology
~ Treatment Area: 400 rr.
~ Soil Type: silt and clay
~ Groundwater Velocity: <10 ft/yr
~ Groundwater Flow Direction: unknown
~ Depth to Groundwater:
6-10 ft
THE PILOT TEST
The site characteristicsfor the purposes of the pilot test are as follows, an area of approximately20
ft x 20 ft was chosen for the test, this area, closest to MW-5, exhibited the highest concentrationsof
BTEX and MTBE. The groundwaterdepth within this area varies from 6-10 ft bgs, with a velocity
of <10 ft/year. The aquifer contains a sand water bearing zone from 10-14 ft over till. Benzene
concentrations varied from 200 ppm to 2100 ppm from low and high groundwater elevation,
respectively.In terms of ORC, 180 lbs. were injected into 10 points (Figure 2) with 3 lbs of ORC
per ft from 8-14ft bgs to ensure ample coverage of the sand layer and some of the smear zone.
All Rights Reserved 2004 Regenesis -1011 Calle Sombra,San
www.regenesis.com
Clemente, CA 92673
N
.
.
.
.
B-~MW-.
.
1
.
.
1'-6'
OR
FlOI.REI
IRe: SLLRRY IKJ[CIlON
O'JAUTY £NWRCMAEHIJ4L
PRa'ES9ONAI.S,
1He.
M.C..........
---
PlDT
1ES1 DJN'lWRA liON
.. !Mil
limo 1CI/'J2/IJ1
'iiiii1i"'"---
SI£l..L ~R\1CE STA1I[Ij
1B8 S. SIRNGTCIWN RD
IXWIlGroN, NCiAHA
T=tI'
I:WH
IItIICICD
lIT
ISlaI'
Figure 2. Site Map with ORC Injection Gl"id
RESULTS
Percent Contaminant Reduction
Contaminant
Benzene
MTBE
Post Treatment Concentrations
Percent Reduction
98%
59%
Contaminant
Benzene
MTBE
Concentration
ND
250 ug/L
Concentrations vs. Time
92.5
1,500
92.0
ORC Iniection
Q
~ 2,000
..J
bb
::I
';" 1,500
.9
1;j
....
"E
91.5
g::I
Co
91.0
90.5
8 1,000
§
U
500
90.0
89.5
~
!::.
n
~
"
~
0'
::I
89.0
o
4/24/2000 8/2/2000 11110/20002"/18/2001 5/29/2001 9/6/2001
88.5
5/29/2001
Date
All Rights Reserved 2004 Regene~is -1011 Calle Sombra, San Clemente, CA 92673
www.regenesis.com
Table 1
Cost Analysis - ORC Slurry Injection vs. AS/SVE
Covington, Indiana
Cost Associated with ORC Slurry Injection*
Task
1. Baseline GroundwaterMonitoring
2. ORC Powder
3. ORC Injection (Push Probe and Oversight)
4. Additional Monitoring Requirements (Analytical)
Quantity
1
3,810
1
3
Unit Cost
$290
event
pounds
event
event
3
events
1
event
1. Pilot Test Activities
1
2. System Design and Procurement
3. AS/SVE Well Installation and Development
4. System Piping Installation (Contractor and
Oversight)
Total Cost
$290
$10.35
$39,434
$38,000
$290
$38,000
$870
$1,500
$500
$39,152
$39,152
event
$7,500
$7,500
1
event
$5,000
$5,000
16
wells
$1,000
$16,000
1
event
$25,000
1
event
$750
I
ORC SLURRY INJECTION ESTIMATED TOTAL COST
Costs Associated with AS/SVE**
5. System Mobilization
$25,000
$750
6. System Rental
24
months
$1 ,750
$42,000
7. System O&M
24
months
$3,000
$72,000
8. System Electric
24
months
$500
$12,000
9. Quarterly Reporting
8
$3,600
9. System Demobilization
10. Extraction Well Abandonment
quarters
event
$450
1
$750
$750
wells
$500
$8,000
16
AS/SVE ESTIMATED TOT AL COST
Estimated Savings with use of ORC
$73,335
Notes:
Analysis does not include quarterly groundwater monitoring costs because they will be identical for both options.
*- ORC slurry injection costs assumes 1 reapplication at 50% cost.
** - Assumes 2 years of AS/SVE operation. This is a best case estimate.
All Rights Reserved 2004 Regenesis -1011 Calle Sombra, San Clemente, CA 92673
www.regenesis.com
CONCLUSION
Within one month, benzene concentrations were reduced from pre-ORC injection levels of 200
ppm to non-detect « 5 ppm). Dissolved oxygen content increased dramatically going from
<0.5 mglL pre ORC injection to > 20 mglL post ORC injection. Benzene rebound was
observed against the highest groundwater level in two years. MTBE which had historically
spiked to levels of up to 600 ppb with the variable groundwater levels showed a slight and
significant downward trend (near 250 ppb) ) even with groundwater levels increasing
approximately 3 feet in a very short period of time. However this site will need more time
when factoring in competitive inhibition (where organisms when given a choice between or
among compounds will choose those constituents that are more easily degraded first) in this
case BTEX compounds over MTBE. A successful full-scale injection was done using more.
than 4,000 Ibs of ORC, which saved the client more than $73,000 vs. the existing AS/SVE
system.
COST COMPARISON ANALYSIS
In the ~vent that full-scale application was to take place this site, QEPI prepared a
comprehensive cost analysis at the request of the Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) to assess the cost of using ORC vs. traditional air sparge/soil vapor
extraction techniques. This cost comparison is illustrated in (Table 1) and includes, for ORC,
the initial full-scale application costs and a second application at 50% of the costs of the initial
full-scale application. In other words, the second application at 50% of cost of first one is an
"insurance policy" in the event more ORC is needed to complete the job. The AS/SVE costs
are reflective of the design, installation and operation of such a system for 2 years. Based on
the analysis, the use of ORC represents 62% of the cost of the AS-£VE option or a potential
savings of $73,335, if a second "insurance" application is avoided the savings are even greater
at an estimated$112,000.
.
All Rights Reserved 2004 Regenesis -1011 Calle Sombra, San Clemente, CA 92673
www.regenesis.com