RemediosRemedios
Technology Solutions to Environmental ProblemsTechnology Solutions to Environmental Problems
Graeme Paton...
Remedios BackgroundRemedios Background
4E t bli h d i A t 19994Established in August 1999
4Spin-out from University of Abe...
Awards/Recognition/ AchievementsAwards/Recognition/ Achievements
4Sir Ian Wood Award for Innovation 1999
4SMART Award for ...
The Technology PlatformThe Technology Platform
Contaminant concentrationContaminant concentration
Leading lights in enviro...
Remedios and the Environmental
Protection Act
4Since 1999, new Policy and Guidelines have
transformed environmental protec...
Remedios
The Case Studies:
f i k di ifrom Risk Assessment to Remediation
Risk management = risk assessment + risk reduction
selection
of actions
Risk management = risk assessment + risk reductionimplementation
of actions
Remediation Decision Support ToolRemediation Decision Support Tool
4 Developed support tool based on 3 tiers  designed to ...
Predicting Hydrocarbon Remediation?
• Empirical data from thirty sites have been generated & applied to appraise and
lid t...
BF & Rate of Degradation
10000
1000
Rate(mg/kg
100
g/day)
1
10
BF
1e+1 1e+2 1e+3 1e+4 1e+5 1e+6 1e+7 1e+8
1
Decision Support BiosensingDecision Support Biosensing
Diplock et al., 2009. Environmental Pollution
Volume 157, Issue 6, ...
Cement FactoryCement Factory
Cement FactoryCement Factory
4Long term spillLong term spill
4Generator oils
4Extensive areaExtensive area
4Local complain...
Compressor Area, Novi Popovac Cement Factory
Soil Hydrocarbon Contamination, 0-1m bgl
1300
1400
PC1
PC2
PC9
mg/kg
1000
110...
Compressor Area, Novi Popovac Cement Factory
Soil Hydrocarbon Contamination, 2-3m bgl
1300
1400
PC1
PC2
PC9
mg/kg
900
1000...
Compressor Area, Novi Popovac Cement Factory
Soil Hydrocarbon Contamination, 4-6m bgl
1300
1400
PC1
PC2
PC9
mg/kg
1000
110...
Compressor Area, Novi Popovac Cement Factory
Groundwater Hydrocarbon Contamination
PC1
PC2
PC9
0.14
mg/l
PC3
PC4
PC5
PC10
...
Cement FactoryCement Factory
4Hydrocarbons are localised
4Other measures reveal attenuationOther measures reveal attenuati...
Case Study 4 Hilden locationCase Study 4 Hilden location
An overview of the Hilden site
4 A 8 ha working site with complex pollution problems paints and4 A 8 ha working site with ...
Aerial Photo 1997
TF5TF5
TF1/C-B
A/BA/B
TF2/F-B
Project Rheingold KCL 18j g KCL 18
Plan of Hilden site
Toxicity map of Hilden site today
85
90
High toxicity
55
60
65
70
75
80
g y
30
35
40
45
50
55
0
5
10
15
20
25
Low toxicity...
90
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2004
0
5
10
15
20
1200
85
90
95
100
1998
800
1000
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
400
60...
Benzene specific Biosensor result
80
High Response
55
60
65
70
75
2
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
Low Response0
p
BTEX Analysis
13
14
8
9
10
11
12
Total
BTEX
(mg/l)
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
1
2
3
Comparison between maps
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
General toxicity
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50 General toxicity
60
65
70...
A i C t i tAssessing Constraints
Air sparging
Charcoal pH adjustment
(resuspension)
Removal of
volatile
organic
Removal
of...
Bioremediation stage 1
Total toxicityTotal toxicity
1000
1200
75
80
85
90
95
100
Low toxicity
600
800
50
55
60
65
70
75
40...
Bioremediation stage 2
Toxicity after spargingToxicity after sparging
100
Low toxicity
1000
1200
75
80
85
90
95
100
600
80...
Bioremediation stage 3
1200
100
Toxicity after pH adjustmentToxicity after pH adjustment
1000
1200
70
75
80
85
90
95 Low t...
C St d 4Case Study 4
Railway Yard Development
Excavation area 1 exposure of underlying clay at
3.2mbgl
Excavation area 2 – exposure of hydrocarbon
contaminated soils, confirmed by elevated FID readings
Conclusions 5Conclusions 5
Conclusions 5Conclusions 5
Data Collection Material Being Excavated
Assess against Risk
Nutrient level
Moisture
pH
TPH
MPN
Biosensor
CO2
TPH Characte...
Algorithm calculated
to assess most
suitable set-up
Microcosm
Microcosm
experiment used to
verify algorithm
Defined Target...
Biopile 1 - view to westBiopile 1 view to west
Gantt Chart for Biopile ProgressGantt Chart for Biopile Progress
18/07 25/07 01/08 08/08 15/08 22/08 29/08 05/09 12/09 19/...
Backfilling of Excavation (under buildings)Backfilling of Excavation (under buildings)
Compaction of Material in Backfill AreaCompaction of Material in Backfill Area
EconomicsEconomics
d
ostin£cum
nd,silt,clay,
diments,peat
OC
alogenated
AH
CDD
emi-Volatile
on-halogenated
CB
est/Herb
eav...
General ConclusionsGeneral Conclusions
4Bioremediation being more widely used4Bioremediation- being more widely used
4End-...
Remedios An Overview
Remedios An Overview
Remedios An Overview
Remedios An Overview
Remedios An Overview
Remedios An Overview
Remedios An Overview
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Remedios An Overview

432 views

Published on

An overview of the work carried out by Remedios

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
432
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
9
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Remedios An Overview

  1. 1. RemediosRemedios Technology Solutions to Environmental ProblemsTechnology Solutions to Environmental Problems Graeme Paton, Technical Director
  2. 2. Remedios BackgroundRemedios Background 4E t bli h d i A t 19994Established in August 1999 4Spin-out from University of Aberdeen 4Exclusive access to all University IP relating toExclusive access to all University IP relating to environmental biosensors 4Multi-disciplinary team (7) with international reputations 44Deploys biosensors to complement traditional approaches in the diagnosis, remediation and monitoring of pollution and contaminationp 4Access to high quality recruits through University connection 4Unique access to laboratory facilities4Unique access to laboratory facilities 4Utilisation of multi-million environmental technology resource
  3. 3. Awards/Recognition/ AchievementsAwards/Recognition/ Achievements 4Sir Ian Wood Award for Innovation 1999 4SMART Award for product development 1999SMART Award for product development 1999 4Millennium Product status- biosensors 4Best new Biotech Company 2000 – industry peersBest new Biotech Company 2000 industry peers 42004- selected by BP for exploring sustainable remediation of hydrocarbon wastesremediation of hydrocarbon wastes 42005- core founders of DTI, KTN-Net (FirstFaraday) 42007- DTI Promise Bioremediation Programme2007 DTI Promise Bioremediation Programme 42007- Scottish Environmental Technology Network, Board
  4. 4. The Technology PlatformThe Technology Platform Contaminant concentrationContaminant concentration Leading lights in environmental technology and solutions
  5. 5. Remedios and the Environmental Protection Act 4Since 1999, new Policy and Guidelines have transformed environmental protectionp 4The biosensor is applied in parallel with chemical analysis and hazard/ risk assessment as required 4Remedios perform complete contaminated land studies from desktop to intrusive investigation and remediation 4Remedios retain a close and complementary relationship with regulators 44Remedios have acted with regulators and as policy advisors
  6. 6. Remedios The Case Studies: f i k di ifrom Risk Assessment to Remediation
  7. 7. Risk management = risk assessment + risk reduction selection of actions
  8. 8. Risk management = risk assessment + risk reductionimplementation of actions
  9. 9. Remediation Decision Support ToolRemediation Decision Support Tool 4 Developed support tool based on 3 tiers  designed to reduce uncertainty in Developed support tool based on 3 tiers, designed to reduce uncertainty in  technology selection. 4 The tool assists in the decision making process of remediation  technologies:  • Enabling transparent justification of selection • Gives focussed and streamlined support for targeting best options. • Interfaces with web to enable continual updating as practices become  established and lessons are learned 
  10. 10. Predicting Hydrocarbon Remediation? • Empirical data from thirty sites have been generated & applied to appraise and lid t Predicting Hydrocarbon Remediation? validate. Resp [TPH] BF = bioremediation function I = induction [TPH] =TPH concentration (I x [TPH] [ ] log (MPN) BF = x x Inhibition [TPH] =TPH concentration MPN = most probable number Resp = respiration
  11. 11. BF & Rate of Degradation 10000 1000 Rate(mg/kg 100 g/day) 1 10 BF 1e+1 1e+2 1e+3 1e+4 1e+5 1e+6 1e+7 1e+8 1
  12. 12. Decision Support BiosensingDecision Support Biosensing Diplock et al., 2009. Environmental Pollution Volume 157, Issue 6, 1831-1840
  13. 13. Cement FactoryCement Factory
  14. 14. Cement FactoryCement Factory 4Long term spillLong term spill 4Generator oils 4Extensive areaExtensive area 4Local complaints 4Remedios trained theRemedios trained the environmental staff
  15. 15. Compressor Area, Novi Popovac Cement Factory Soil Hydrocarbon Contamination, 0-1m bgl 1300 1400 PC1 PC2 PC9 mg/kg 1000 1100 1200 1300 PC3 PC4 PC5 PC10 SB1 SB2 600 700 800 900 PC6PC11 PC12 200 300 400 500 PC7 0 100 PC8 Not To ScaleNot To Scale
  16. 16. Compressor Area, Novi Popovac Cement Factory Soil Hydrocarbon Contamination, 2-3m bgl 1300 1400 PC1 PC2 PC9 mg/kg 900 1000 1100 1200PC3 PC4 PC5 PC10 SB1 SB2 500 600 700 800PC6PC11 PC12 100 200 300 400PC7 0 100 PC8 Not To Scale
  17. 17. Compressor Area, Novi Popovac Cement Factory Soil Hydrocarbon Contamination, 4-6m bgl 1300 1400 PC1 PC2 PC9 mg/kg 1000 1100 1200 1300 PC3 PC4 PC5 PC10 SB1 SB2 600 700 800 900 PC6PC11 PC12 200 300 400 500 PC7 0 100 PC8 Not To ScaleNot To Scale
  18. 18. Compressor Area, Novi Popovac Cement Factory Groundwater Hydrocarbon Contamination PC1 PC2 PC9 0.14 mg/l PC3 PC4 PC5 PC10 SB1 SB2 0.1 0.12 0.14 PC6PC11 PC12 0.06 0.08 PC7 0.02 0.04 PC8 0 0.01 N t T S lNot To Scale
  19. 19. Cement FactoryCement Factory 4Hydrocarbons are localised 4Other measures reveal attenuationOther measures reveal attenuation 4Monitoring strategy to reflect this 4SI led to cost effective sustainable remediation4SI led to cost effective sustainable remediation
  20. 20. Case Study 4 Hilden locationCase Study 4 Hilden location
  21. 21. An overview of the Hilden site 4 A 8 ha working site with complex pollution problems paints and4 A 8 ha working site with complex pollution problems, paints and coatings produced for over 100 years 4 Contamination of both surface soils and groundwater 4 O i i l ti t f di ti i t d d l4 Original estimate for remediation using standard clean-up technologies was £40 million in 1991
  22. 22. Aerial Photo 1997 TF5TF5 TF1/C-B A/BA/B TF2/F-B Project Rheingold KCL 18j g KCL 18
  23. 23. Plan of Hilden site
  24. 24. Toxicity map of Hilden site today 85 90 High toxicity 55 60 65 70 75 80 g y 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 25 Low toxicity0 y
  25. 25. 90 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 2004 0 5 10 15 20 1200 85 90 95 100 1998 800 1000 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 400 600 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 200 0 5 10 15
  26. 26. Benzene specific Biosensor result 80 High Response 55 60 65 70 75 2 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 Low Response0 p
  27. 27. BTEX Analysis 13 14 8 9 10 11 12 Total BTEX (mg/l) 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3
  28. 28. Comparison between maps 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 General toxicity 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 General toxicity 60 65 70 75 80 0 5 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 TVA8 Response 0 5 10 15 10 11 12 13 14 Total BTEX analysis 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2
  29. 29. A i C t i tAssessing Constraints Air sparging Charcoal pH adjustment (resuspension) Removal of volatile organic Removal of non-volatile organic d Removal of adverse pH ( p ) compounds compounds high low high low high low Further sample manipulation Inorganic Further sample manipulationpH constraint VOC’s constraint manipulation constraint manipulation non-VOC’s constraint p
  30. 30. Bioremediation stage 1 Total toxicityTotal toxicity 1000 1200 75 80 85 90 95 100 Low toxicity 600 800 50 55 60 65 70 75 400 600 20 25 30 35 40 45 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 200 0 5 10 15 High toxicity
  31. 31. Bioremediation stage 2 Toxicity after spargingToxicity after sparging 100 Low toxicity 1000 1200 75 80 85 90 95 100 600 800 45 50 55 60 65 70 400 600 20 25 30 35 40 45 High toxicity 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 200 0 5 10 15
  32. 32. Bioremediation stage 3 1200 100 Toxicity after pH adjustmentToxicity after pH adjustment 1000 1200 70 75 80 85 90 95 Low toxicity 600 800 45 50 55 60 65 70 400 20 25 30 35 40 45 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 200 0 5 10 15 High toxicity
  33. 33. C St d 4Case Study 4 Railway Yard Development
  34. 34. Excavation area 1 exposure of underlying clay at 3.2mbgl
  35. 35. Excavation area 2 – exposure of hydrocarbon contaminated soils, confirmed by elevated FID readings
  36. 36. Conclusions 5Conclusions 5
  37. 37. Conclusions 5Conclusions 5
  38. 38. Data Collection Material Being Excavated Assess against Risk Nutrient level Moisture pH TPH MPN Biosensor CO2 TPH Characterisation On site FID Off site analysis FID low levels Assess against Risk Pass- then stockpile Fail- then biopile 2 O2 End-point Criteria Olfactory Risk-based Off site analysis Group material and send to AlControl Phase material Group material; do not add to biopiles Non-TPH G t i l d d t AlC t l TPH levels If TPH between 0.05 and 10 g/kg Consider for biopiling Physical/ engineering Group material and send to AlControl Excessive TPH Levels exceeding 10 g/kg Difficult Substances Group and stockpile For decision later Site Status Base of biopile area Made ready as Page 6 Material Management Data collection for characterisation Nutrient Amendment If trace levels are present, use 100:10:1 Select N source to suit pH (urea, ammonium nitrate) Add before biopiling and mix well. MPN A count of less than 104 is too low and augmentation is requirted TPH Calibrate FID with AlControl/ lab data and record for site characterisation pH of soil Amend with lime or sulphur to reach pH of 6- 7.5. Use standard agricultural calculation but remember CEC will be low Moisture Determine the water holding capacity of the soil and maintain at levels as per manual. Biosensor Use MeOH and water to assess bioavailability of co- pollutant and TPH Biopile Algorithm Put derived data into equation (p29) and calculate decay Amend and Optimise before biopiling Verify Algorithm Use microcosm to check algorithm prediction- max 2 weeks
  39. 39. Algorithm calculated to assess most suitable set-up Microcosm Microcosm experiment used to verify algorithm Defined Targets Olfactory Risk-based Physical/ engineering Constructed Biopile TPH Measurements Analysis carried out with calibrated FID Levels change as t d b YES Continue monitoring Routine Analysis CO2 Measurements Gas Analysis O2 Measurements Gas Analysis Specific Analysis expected by algorithm NO Plot data To assess trends WHC Confirm the values are Nutrient Amendment Verify bioavailable status in KCl Percent WHC Derived from moisture pH In water Confirm the values are between 60 and 80% Turning If the system is air limited then turn Moisture Add/ remove as i d pH Make sure 6-7.5 or amend: check buffering Biosensor Use MeOH and water to assess bioavailability of co-pollutant Analysis Verify presence of toxic metabolites or co-pollutant Physical constraints Temperature Using probe required pH Trickle filter to adjust Temperature If the temp is too low (<10) then add steam; too high (>40) remove covers. T t None of the above MPN A count of less than 104 is too low and and TPH Physical constraints Trial pits to make sure the biopile is homogenised Assessment of Bioaugmentation If the biopile was amended or not,there should be a minimum number of degraders present Temperature Assess site weather and forecasts The cause of reduced degradation rate cannot be related to one of the above factors re- augmentation is requirted number of degraders present
  40. 40. Biopile 1 - view to westBiopile 1 view to west
  41. 41. Gantt Chart for Biopile ProgressGantt Chart for Biopile Progress 18/07 25/07 01/08 08/08 15/08 22/08 29/08 05/09 12/09 19/09 26/09 03/10 10/10 17/10 24/10 31/10 07/11 14/11 21/11 28/11 Biopile 1 2 3 Biopile 1A pH, N t A t t t t t t t te te t t t t 2A pH, N t A t t t t t t t te te t t t t 3A pH, N t A t t t t t t t te te t t t t 4A pH, N t A t t t t t t t te te t t t t 4A pH, N A slippage pH adjust/ optimise pH impact of slippage N add nutrientsimpact of slippage N add nutrients t turning sampling (week start) e excavator for sampling sign off (week end) A Addition of inoculum back fill (week start)
  42. 42. Backfilling of Excavation (under buildings)Backfilling of Excavation (under buildings)
  43. 43. Compaction of Material in Backfill AreaCompaction of Material in Backfill Area
  44. 44. EconomicsEconomics d ostin£cum nd,silt,clay, diments,peat OC alogenated AH CDD emi-Volatile on-halogenated CB est/Herb eavymetals sbestos onmetal yanides orrosives xplosives Co sa se VO Ha PA TC Se No PC Pe He As No Cy Co Ex Surface Amendments 20-35 all x x x x Biopile 40-70 s, s, -, s, - x x x x x Windrow turning 50-110 s, s, -, s, - x x x x x xWindrow turning 50 110 s, s, , s, x x x x x x Bioventing and Air Sparging 80-85 s, s, -, s, - x x x x x Landfarming 80-180 s, s, -, s, - x x x x x x x Cement and Pozzolan-based 40-171 s, s, c, s, - x x x Pump and Treat 65 170 s s s x x x x x x x x xPump and Treat 65-170 s, s, -, s, - x x x x x x x x x Soil washing 80-370 s, s, -, s, p x x x x x x x Solvent Extraction 90-600 s, s, -, s, - x x x x x x x x Slurry Phase Bioreactor 110-140 all x x x x x x x x Th l D ti 115 400 llThermal Desorption 115-400 all x x x x x Chemical Dehalogenation 150-370 s, s, c, s, - x x x x x x Incineration 140-400 all x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
  45. 45. General ConclusionsGeneral Conclusions 4Bioremediation being more widely used4Bioremediation- being more widely used 4End-point issues are important as is the re-use potential ofp p p the material 4Many techniques to tailor to sites4Many techniques to tailor to sites 4Regulator inclusionRegulator inclusion 4Algorithm has great potential 4Integrated mechanisms and approaches

×