Madrid 1 , V.M., Gregory 1 , S., Verce 1 , M.F., Radyk 1 , J., Singleton 2 , M, Eaton 2 , G., Esser 2  B. K.   1 Environme...
Talk Outline  •  Site Background •  Objectives •  Experiment Design •  Data •  Results •  Conclusions
Site 300 location map T2 test area
Isotope studies at Site 300 3 H 235 U/ 238 U  18 O,  D (H 2 O)  15 N,  18 O (NO 3 )
Typical Site 300 Contaminant Source area <ul><li>15 m x 15 m (50 ft x 50 ft) </li></ul><ul><li>High contaminant concentrat...
Site Air Photo VOC plume T2 tracer experiment
Overall Objective  Evaluate feasibility of reagent injection as a source area cleanup technology using an existing well fi...
Tracer Experiment Design <ul><li>Single well, continuous injection tracer test. </li></ul><ul><li>Constant head injection ...
Why Hetch-Hetchy Water?   <ul><li>Conservative tracer </li></ul><ul><li>Large salinity & isotopic contrast compared to sit...
Performance Monitoring <ul><li>Water levels :  hourly </li></ul><ul><li>Stable Isotopes :  </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li> 18 ...
T2 site map [920.3] [919.4] [ 921.6 ] [918.6] [916.8] [918.3] 922 920 918 Pre-injection ground water  elevation contour Gr...
Cross section A – A' K = 10 -4  - 10 -6   cm/sec K =  <  10 -6   cm/sec Injection well
Outcrop of gravel / clay contact Tps clay  perching  horizon Calcium carbonate cemented gravel Caliche-filled fractures Fr...
Observation well hydrographs 916 918 920 922 924 926 16-Nov-2004 15-Dec-2004 13-Jan-2005 11-Feb-2005 12-Mar-2005 10-Apr-20...
<ul><li>18 O time-series plot </li></ul> 18 O Start of Injection Dual isotope sample
Specific Conductance  Specific Conductance (µS) Start of Injection Dual isotope sample
Pre-injection isotope signatures Hetch-Hetchy Tracer   Ground water  (pre-injection ) S300 precipitation (2006)  D  18 O...
Plot of all   18O &   D data Hetch-Hetchy Tracer    D  18 O SMOW Ground water  (pre-injection ) 25% 50% 75% Tracer-gro...
Isotope plots for individual wells tracer  18 O  D tracer 1833 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 - 1 1 0 - 1 0 0 - 9 0 - 8 0 - 7 0 - 6 0 - 5...
Time-series plot of tracer fraction Start of Injection End of Injection Change in salinity observed at T2 & 1825
Time-series tracer distribution Pre-injection Jan 21 May 23 July 21 -1824 -T2 -1825 -1833 -T2A -T2B -T2D -T2C 5 10 25 50 7...
Ground water  flow direction Injection well Extent of saturation May 23 July 21 Post-injection Sep 13 20,000 10,000 1,000 ...
Results <ul><li>Under a sustained, induced gradient of 0.3, an injection rate of about 100 L /day & a tracer velocity of 0...
Conclusions <ul><li>H-H reservoir water is a good, conservative tracer  when injected into an aquifer with significantly d...
Acknowledgements <ul><li>Brad Esser, Mike Singleton & Gail Eaton  </li></ul><ul><li>for mass spectrometry & data analysis ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Tracer Experiment using Hetch-Hetchy Water

767 views
657 views

Published on

Groundwater Tracer Experiment using Hetch-Hetchy Water

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
767
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • At our site, perchlorate usually exists with different contaminants across the site. Therefore, we need to develop strategies that deal with multiple areas that have multiple contaminants--and this pushes us to use smaller, portable treatment units and often systems in tandem with each other. Distributed plumes drive the need for portable units and the reuse of these treatment units once done at one area, for the next area.
  • Tracer Experiment using Hetch-Hetchy Water

    1. 1. Madrid 1 , V.M., Gregory 1 , S., Verce 1 , M.F., Radyk 1 , J., Singleton 2 , M, Eaton 2 , G., Esser 2 B. K. 1 Environmental Restoration Division , 2 Chemical Sciences Division Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory UCRL-PRES-228848 UCRL-PRES-XXXXXX This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by the University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract No. W-7405-Eng-48. A Stable Isotope Tracer Experiment Using Hetch-Hetchy Water  D = -104‰  18 O = -14.0‰  D = - 44‰  18 O= - 3.4‰
    2. 2. Talk Outline • Site Background • Objectives • Experiment Design • Data • Results • Conclusions
    3. 3. Site 300 location map T2 test area
    4. 4. Isotope studies at Site 300 3 H 235 U/ 238 U  18 O,  D (H 2 O)  15 N,  18 O (NO 3 )
    5. 5. Typical Site 300 Contaminant Source area <ul><li>15 m x 15 m (50 ft x 50 ft) </li></ul><ul><li>High contaminant concentrations </li></ul><ul><li>Low Permeability </li></ul><ul><li>Limited Recharge </li></ul><ul><li>Therefore, conventional pump & treat has limited effectiveness. </li></ul>
    6. 6. Site Air Photo VOC plume T2 tracer experiment
    7. 7. Overall Objective Evaluate feasibility of reagent injection as a source area cleanup technology using an existing well field. Phase 1: Tracer Test Emphasize Performance Monitoring Emphasize Cleanup Phase 3: Multi-well, source area cleanup Phase 2: Reagent injection Injection rate Area-of-influence Tracer / ground water mixing
    8. 8. Tracer Experiment Design <ul><li>Single well, continuous injection tracer test. </li></ul><ul><li>Constant head injection about 5 m (17 ft ) above the static water table. </li></ul><ul><li>Inject isotopically distinct, low salinity Hetch-Hetchy (H-H) water until it is detected in observation wells. </li></ul> D = -104‰  18 O = -14.0‰  D = - 44‰  18 O= - 3.4‰
    9. 9. Why Hetch-Hetchy Water? <ul><li>Conservative tracer </li></ul><ul><li>Large salinity & isotopic contrast compared to site ground water </li></ul><ul><li>Non–toxic </li></ul><ul><li>Analysis is commercially available & inexpensive </li></ul>
    10. 10. Performance Monitoring <ul><li>Water levels : hourly </li></ul><ul><li>Stable Isotopes : </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li> 18 O weekly </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li> D every 6 weeks </li></ul><ul><li>Specific Conductance : weekly </li></ul><ul><li>VOCs: monthly </li></ul>
    11. 11. T2 site map [920.3] [919.4] [ 921.6 ] [918.6] [916.8] [918.3] 922 920 918 Pre-injection ground water elevation contour Ground water flow direction dry dry
    12. 12. Cross section A – A' K = 10 -4 - 10 -6 cm/sec K = < 10 -6 cm/sec Injection well
    13. 13. Outcrop of gravel / clay contact Tps clay perching horizon Calcium carbonate cemented gravel Caliche-filled fractures Friable, medium-grained sand Tpsg gravel 1 meter
    14. 14. Observation well hydrographs 916 918 920 922 924 926 16-Nov-2004 15-Dec-2004 13-Jan-2005 11-Feb-2005 12-Mar-2005 10-Apr-2005 9-May-2005 7-Jun-2005 GWE (ft MSL) -T2A -T2 -1825 -T2D -T2B -1833 START STOP RE-START Pre-injection Dual isotope sample Daily Rain (inches) daily rain
    15. 15. <ul><li>18 O time-series plot </li></ul> 18 O Start of Injection Dual isotope sample
    16. 16. Specific Conductance Specific Conductance (µS) Start of Injection Dual isotope sample
    17. 17. Pre-injection isotope signatures Hetch-Hetchy Tracer Ground water (pre-injection ) S300 precipitation (2006)  D  18 O = Tracer fraction SMOW 25% 50% 75% Tracer-ground water mixing line [(  18 O sample -  18 O gw ) 2 + (  D sample -  D gw ) 2 ] 1/2 [(  18 O HH -  18 O gw ) 2 + (  D HH -  D gw ) 2 ] 1/2
    18. 18. Plot of all  18O &  D data Hetch-Hetchy Tracer  D  18 O SMOW Ground water (pre-injection ) 25% 50% 75% Tracer-ground water mixing line
    19. 19. Isotope plots for individual wells tracer  18 O  D tracer 1833 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 - 1 1 0 - 1 0 0 - 9 0 - 8 0 - 7 0 - 6 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 3 0 - 2 0 - 1 0 0 - 1 5 - 1 4 - 1 3 - 1 2 - 1 1 - 1 0 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 0  18 O  D tracer T2  18 O  D T2A  18 O  D tracer 1825 1 2 4 5 6 7 1 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 2 7 1: Jan 13 2: Mar 1 3: Apr 15 4: May 23 5: Jul 21 6: Aug 18 7: Sep 13 Start injection Stop injection Low salinity arrives High salinity arrives
    20. 20. Time-series plot of tracer fraction Start of Injection End of Injection Change in salinity observed at T2 & 1825
    21. 21. Time-series tracer distribution Pre-injection Jan 21 May 23 July 21 -1824 -T2 -1825 -1833 -T2A -T2B -T2D -T2C 5 10 25 50 75 5 10 25 50 5 10 25 50 75 Post-injection Sep 13
    22. 22. Ground water flow direction Injection well Extent of saturation May 23 July 21 Post-injection Sep 13 20,000 10,000 1,000 100 20,000 20,000 10,000 1,000 20,000 10,000 1,000 Pre-injection Jan 21 Time-series VOC distribution -1824 -T2 -1825 -1833 -T2A -T2B -T2D -T2C
    23. 23. Results <ul><li>Under a sustained, induced gradient of 0.3, an injection rate of about 100 L /day & a tracer velocity of 0.1 m/day was achieved. </li></ul><ul><li>An immediate (< 1 hour) ground water level rise was observed in all wells at the onset of injection. </li></ul><ul><li>In some wells that exhibited an immediate water level response, no tracer was detected during injection. </li></ul><ul><li>Salinity decreased in the nearest observation well, while in other wells salinity increased or remained essentially the same. </li></ul><ul><li>At the end of injection, the nearest observation well contained about 25% tracer. Other wells contained tracer concentrations ranging from 0 to 12 %. </li></ul>
    24. 24. Conclusions <ul><li>H-H reservoir water is a good, conservative tracer when injected into an aquifer with significantly different isotopic composition & salinity. </li></ul><ul><li>Rigorous monitoring of multiple, independent data sets was the key to understanding how this source area responded under stress conditions. </li></ul><ul><li>Under a steep induced gradient, the saturated zone responded like a confined system. </li></ul><ul><li>Differences in salinity trends & tracer arrival times suggest the injected H-H water took separate pathways to the observation wells. </li></ul><ul><li>Reagent injection is feasible at Site 300, however, some plume displacement is unavoidable. </li></ul>
    25. 25. Acknowledgements <ul><li>Brad Esser, Mike Singleton & Gail Eaton </li></ul><ul><li>for mass spectrometry & data analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Steve Gregory, Billy Clark, & Kian Atkinson </li></ul><ul><li>for field instrumentation & data collection </li></ul><ul><li>Matthew Verce, Steve Gregory & John Radyk </li></ul><ul><li>for data analysis </li></ul>

    ×