Bench‐scale testing of a novel soil PFAS treatment train for informed remedial planning and decision‐making

Bench‐scale batch tests were conducted to assess the potential applicability of a combined separation/concentration/destruction treatment train to address soils and sediments impacted by per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination at Schriever Space Force Base with historic aqueous film...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Remediation (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2023-09, Vol.33 (4), p.309-321
Hauptverfasser: Nguyen, Dung, Schaefer, Charles E., Bamer, Jeffrey T., Lanza, Heather A., Wintle, Derek, Maynard, Ken G., Murphy, Peter, Anderson, Richard H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 321
container_issue 4
container_start_page 309
container_title Remediation (New York, N.Y.)
container_volume 33
creator Nguyen, Dung
Schaefer, Charles E.
Bamer, Jeffrey T.
Lanza, Heather A.
Wintle, Derek
Maynard, Ken G.
Murphy, Peter
Anderson, Richard H.
description Bench‐scale batch tests were conducted to assess the potential applicability of a combined separation/concentration/destruction treatment train to address soils and sediments impacted by per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination at Schriever Space Force Base with historic aqueous film‐forming foam (AFFF). Specifically, a novel treatment train coupling soil washing (for treatment of impacted soil/sediment) with foam fractionation (for treatment of the wash water [WW] generated during soil washing) and electrochemical oxidation (ECO, for treatment of the foam fractionate generated during foam fractionation) was evaluated at the bench scale using site‐specific materials. Results presented herein show that the AFFF‐impacted sandy soils with low organic content were amenable to treatment via soil washing. However, the removal of hydrophobic PFAS, such as perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), from the organic‐rich sediments was challenging. Results from batch desorption experiments were within a factor of 2 of those generated by soil washing bench studies, suggesting that simple batch tests can potentially be used to reasonably predict the treatment efficacy of soil washing. Long‐chained perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) within the WW were removed more effectively in the foam fractionation studies as compared to short‐chain PFAAs. Addition of a surfactant, such as cetrimonium bromide (CTAB), enhanced foaming but only marginally improved the treatment of short‐chained PFAAs and in some cases inhibited PFOS removal. ECO reduced PFAS concentrations in the foam fractionate generated during foam fractionation by several orders of magnitude. However, generation of unwanted byproducts may warrant further treatment and/or disposal. Overall, results from this study provide a novel data set highlighting the site‐dependent nature of these PFAS remedial technologies and how simple, low‐cost bench tests can be reliably leveraged for informed decision‐making during PFAS remedial planning.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/rem.21758
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2869971195</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2869971195</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c217t-c033fa16a35878ba75efd8e3d0389ef7e776e9d2dd1cd92a63dc750ba2033e23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotUNtKAzEQDaJgrT74BwGffFjNhWyyj7V4g4KCfV-myaym7iY1WQXf_AS_0S8xtTIwMwxnzpk5hJxydsEZE5cJhwvBtTJ7ZMKVYFVtJN8vPVO8UrUyh-Qo5zVjvISckHiFwb78fH1nCz3SEfPowzONHQUa4gf2NEff08eb2RMdE8I4YBhLBz7QLibqQ8kDOlqE0Xno6aaHELYcEBx1aH32MRSBAV7L9JgcdNBnPPmvU7K8uV7O76rFw-39fLaobLl-rCyTsgNeg1RGmxVohZ0zKB2TpsFOo9Y1Nk44x61rBNTSWa3YCkRZRCGn5GxHu0nx7b081a7jewpFsRWmbhrNeaMK6nyHsinmnLBrN8kPkD5bztqtnW35qv2zU_4CurdrGw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2869971195</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bench‐scale testing of a novel soil PFAS treatment train for informed remedial planning and decision‐making</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Nguyen, Dung ; Schaefer, Charles E. ; Bamer, Jeffrey T. ; Lanza, Heather A. ; Wintle, Derek ; Maynard, Ken G. ; Murphy, Peter ; Anderson, Richard H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Dung ; Schaefer, Charles E. ; Bamer, Jeffrey T. ; Lanza, Heather A. ; Wintle, Derek ; Maynard, Ken G. ; Murphy, Peter ; Anderson, Richard H.</creatorcontrib><description>Bench‐scale batch tests were conducted to assess the potential applicability of a combined separation/concentration/destruction treatment train to address soils and sediments impacted by per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination at Schriever Space Force Base with historic aqueous film‐forming foam (AFFF). Specifically, a novel treatment train coupling soil washing (for treatment of impacted soil/sediment) with foam fractionation (for treatment of the wash water [WW] generated during soil washing) and electrochemical oxidation (ECO, for treatment of the foam fractionate generated during foam fractionation) was evaluated at the bench scale using site‐specific materials. Results presented herein show that the AFFF‐impacted sandy soils with low organic content were amenable to treatment via soil washing. However, the removal of hydrophobic PFAS, such as perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), from the organic‐rich sediments was challenging. Results from batch desorption experiments were within a factor of 2 of those generated by soil washing bench studies, suggesting that simple batch tests can potentially be used to reasonably predict the treatment efficacy of soil washing. Long‐chained perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) within the WW were removed more effectively in the foam fractionation studies as compared to short‐chain PFAAs. Addition of a surfactant, such as cetrimonium bromide (CTAB), enhanced foaming but only marginally improved the treatment of short‐chained PFAAs and in some cases inhibited PFOS removal. ECO reduced PFAS concentrations in the foam fractionate generated during foam fractionation by several orders of magnitude. However, generation of unwanted byproducts may warrant further treatment and/or disposal. Overall, results from this study provide a novel data set highlighting the site‐dependent nature of these PFAS remedial technologies and how simple, low‐cost bench tests can be reliably leveraged for informed decision‐making during PFAS remedial planning.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1051-5658</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-6831</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/rem.21758</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Acidic soils ; Cetyltrimethylammonium bromide ; Contamination ; Decision making ; Electrochemical oxidation ; Electrochemistry ; Foam separation ; Foaming ; Fractionation ; Hydrophobicity ; Organic soils ; Oxidation ; Perfluorochemicals ; Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ; Sandy soils ; Sediments ; Soil contamination ; Soil testing ; Soil water ; Wash water ; Washing</subject><ispartof>Remediation (New York, N.Y.), 2023-09, Vol.33 (4), p.309-321</ispartof><rights>2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c217t-c033fa16a35878ba75efd8e3d0389ef7e776e9d2dd1cd92a63dc750ba2033e23</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6369-0091</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Dung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schaefer, Charles E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bamer, Jeffrey T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lanza, Heather A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wintle, Derek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maynard, Ken G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murphy, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Richard H.</creatorcontrib><title>Bench‐scale testing of a novel soil PFAS treatment train for informed remedial planning and decision‐making</title><title>Remediation (New York, N.Y.)</title><description>Bench‐scale batch tests were conducted to assess the potential applicability of a combined separation/concentration/destruction treatment train to address soils and sediments impacted by per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination at Schriever Space Force Base with historic aqueous film‐forming foam (AFFF). Specifically, a novel treatment train coupling soil washing (for treatment of impacted soil/sediment) with foam fractionation (for treatment of the wash water [WW] generated during soil washing) and electrochemical oxidation (ECO, for treatment of the foam fractionate generated during foam fractionation) was evaluated at the bench scale using site‐specific materials. Results presented herein show that the AFFF‐impacted sandy soils with low organic content were amenable to treatment via soil washing. However, the removal of hydrophobic PFAS, such as perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), from the organic‐rich sediments was challenging. Results from batch desorption experiments were within a factor of 2 of those generated by soil washing bench studies, suggesting that simple batch tests can potentially be used to reasonably predict the treatment efficacy of soil washing. Long‐chained perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) within the WW were removed more effectively in the foam fractionation studies as compared to short‐chain PFAAs. Addition of a surfactant, such as cetrimonium bromide (CTAB), enhanced foaming but only marginally improved the treatment of short‐chained PFAAs and in some cases inhibited PFOS removal. ECO reduced PFAS concentrations in the foam fractionate generated during foam fractionation by several orders of magnitude. However, generation of unwanted byproducts may warrant further treatment and/or disposal. Overall, results from this study provide a novel data set highlighting the site‐dependent nature of these PFAS remedial technologies and how simple, low‐cost bench tests can be reliably leveraged for informed decision‐making during PFAS remedial planning.</description><subject>Acidic soils</subject><subject>Cetyltrimethylammonium bromide</subject><subject>Contamination</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Electrochemical oxidation</subject><subject>Electrochemistry</subject><subject>Foam separation</subject><subject>Foaming</subject><subject>Fractionation</subject><subject>Hydrophobicity</subject><subject>Organic soils</subject><subject>Oxidation</subject><subject>Perfluorochemicals</subject><subject>Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid</subject><subject>Sandy soils</subject><subject>Sediments</subject><subject>Soil contamination</subject><subject>Soil testing</subject><subject>Soil water</subject><subject>Wash water</subject><subject>Washing</subject><issn>1051-5658</issn><issn>1520-6831</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNotUNtKAzEQDaJgrT74BwGffFjNhWyyj7V4g4KCfV-myaym7iY1WQXf_AS_0S8xtTIwMwxnzpk5hJxydsEZE5cJhwvBtTJ7ZMKVYFVtJN8vPVO8UrUyh-Qo5zVjvISckHiFwb78fH1nCz3SEfPowzONHQUa4gf2NEff08eb2RMdE8I4YBhLBz7QLibqQ8kDOlqE0Xno6aaHELYcEBx1aH32MRSBAV7L9JgcdNBnPPmvU7K8uV7O76rFw-39fLaobLl-rCyTsgNeg1RGmxVohZ0zKB2TpsFOo9Y1Nk44x61rBNTSWa3YCkRZRCGn5GxHu0nx7b081a7jewpFsRWmbhrNeaMK6nyHsinmnLBrN8kPkD5bztqtnW35qv2zU_4CurdrGw</recordid><startdate>20230901</startdate><enddate>20230901</enddate><creator>Nguyen, Dung</creator><creator>Schaefer, Charles E.</creator><creator>Bamer, Jeffrey T.</creator><creator>Lanza, Heather A.</creator><creator>Wintle, Derek</creator><creator>Maynard, Ken G.</creator><creator>Murphy, Peter</creator><creator>Anderson, Richard H.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6369-0091</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230901</creationdate><title>Bench‐scale testing of a novel soil PFAS treatment train for informed remedial planning and decision‐making</title><author>Nguyen, Dung ; Schaefer, Charles E. ; Bamer, Jeffrey T. ; Lanza, Heather A. ; Wintle, Derek ; Maynard, Ken G. ; Murphy, Peter ; Anderson, Richard H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c217t-c033fa16a35878ba75efd8e3d0389ef7e776e9d2dd1cd92a63dc750ba2033e23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Acidic soils</topic><topic>Cetyltrimethylammonium bromide</topic><topic>Contamination</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Electrochemical oxidation</topic><topic>Electrochemistry</topic><topic>Foam separation</topic><topic>Foaming</topic><topic>Fractionation</topic><topic>Hydrophobicity</topic><topic>Organic soils</topic><topic>Oxidation</topic><topic>Perfluorochemicals</topic><topic>Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid</topic><topic>Sandy soils</topic><topic>Sediments</topic><topic>Soil contamination</topic><topic>Soil testing</topic><topic>Soil water</topic><topic>Wash water</topic><topic>Washing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Dung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schaefer, Charles E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bamer, Jeffrey T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lanza, Heather A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wintle, Derek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maynard, Ken G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murphy, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Richard H.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology &amp; Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Remediation (New York, N.Y.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nguyen, Dung</au><au>Schaefer, Charles E.</au><au>Bamer, Jeffrey T.</au><au>Lanza, Heather A.</au><au>Wintle, Derek</au><au>Maynard, Ken G.</au><au>Murphy, Peter</au><au>Anderson, Richard H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bench‐scale testing of a novel soil PFAS treatment train for informed remedial planning and decision‐making</atitle><jtitle>Remediation (New York, N.Y.)</jtitle><date>2023-09-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>309</spage><epage>321</epage><pages>309-321</pages><issn>1051-5658</issn><eissn>1520-6831</eissn><abstract>Bench‐scale batch tests were conducted to assess the potential applicability of a combined separation/concentration/destruction treatment train to address soils and sediments impacted by per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination at Schriever Space Force Base with historic aqueous film‐forming foam (AFFF). Specifically, a novel treatment train coupling soil washing (for treatment of impacted soil/sediment) with foam fractionation (for treatment of the wash water [WW] generated during soil washing) and electrochemical oxidation (ECO, for treatment of the foam fractionate generated during foam fractionation) was evaluated at the bench scale using site‐specific materials. Results presented herein show that the AFFF‐impacted sandy soils with low organic content were amenable to treatment via soil washing. However, the removal of hydrophobic PFAS, such as perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), from the organic‐rich sediments was challenging. Results from batch desorption experiments were within a factor of 2 of those generated by soil washing bench studies, suggesting that simple batch tests can potentially be used to reasonably predict the treatment efficacy of soil washing. Long‐chained perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) within the WW were removed more effectively in the foam fractionation studies as compared to short‐chain PFAAs. Addition of a surfactant, such as cetrimonium bromide (CTAB), enhanced foaming but only marginally improved the treatment of short‐chained PFAAs and in some cases inhibited PFOS removal. ECO reduced PFAS concentrations in the foam fractionate generated during foam fractionation by several orders of magnitude. However, generation of unwanted byproducts may warrant further treatment and/or disposal. Overall, results from this study provide a novel data set highlighting the site‐dependent nature of these PFAS remedial technologies and how simple, low‐cost bench tests can be reliably leveraged for informed decision‐making during PFAS remedial planning.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/rem.21758</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6369-0091</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1051-5658
ispartof Remediation (New York, N.Y.), 2023-09, Vol.33 (4), p.309-321
issn 1051-5658
1520-6831
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2869971195
source Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects Acidic soils
Cetyltrimethylammonium bromide
Contamination
Decision making
Electrochemical oxidation
Electrochemistry
Foam separation
Foaming
Fractionation
Hydrophobicity
Organic soils
Oxidation
Perfluorochemicals
Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
Sandy soils
Sediments
Soil contamination
Soil testing
Soil water
Wash water
Washing
title Bench‐scale testing of a novel soil PFAS treatment train for informed remedial planning and decision‐making
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T11%3A13%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bench%E2%80%90scale%20testing%20of%20a%20novel%20soil%20PFAS%20treatment%20train%20for%20informed%20remedial%20planning%20and%20decision%E2%80%90making&rft.jtitle=Remediation%20(New%20York,%20N.Y.)&rft.au=Nguyen,%20Dung&rft.date=2023-09-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=309&rft.epage=321&rft.pages=309-321&rft.issn=1051-5658&rft.eissn=1520-6831&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/rem.21758&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2869971195%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2869971195&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true