Thermal treatment and non-thermal technologies for remediation of manufactured gas plant sites
More than 1500 manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites exist throughout the U.S. Many are contaminated with coal tar from coal-fueled gas works which produced ‘town gas’ from the mid-1800s through the 1950s. 1,2 Virtually all old U.S. cities have such sites. Most are in downtown areas as they were instal...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Waste Management 1996-01, Vol.16 (8), p.691-698 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 698 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 691 |
container_title | Waste Management |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | McGowan, Thomas F. Greer, Bruce A. Lawless, Mike |
description | More than 1500 manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites exist throughout the U.S. Many are contaminated with coal tar from coal-fueled gas works which produced ‘town gas’ from the mid-1800s through the 1950s.
1,2 Virtually all old U.S. cities have such sites. Most are in downtown areas as they were installed for central distribution of manufactured gas. While a few sites are CERCLA/Superfund, most are not. However, the contaminants and methods used for remediation are similar to those used for Superfund clean-ups of coal tar contamination from wood-treating and coke oven facilities. Clean-up of sites is triggered by regulatory pressure, property transfers and re-development as well as releases to the environment — in particular, via groundwater migration. Due to utility de-regulation, site clean-ups may also be triggered by sale of a utility or of a specific utility site to other utilities. Utilities have used two approaches in dealing with their MGP sites. The first is ‘do nothing and hope for the best’. History suggests that, sooner or later, these sites become a bigger problem via a release, citizen lawsuit or regulatory/public service commission intervention. The second, far better approach is to define the problem now and make plans for waste treatment or immobilization. This paper describes recent experience with a high capacity/low cost thermal desorption process for this waste and reviews non-thermal technology, such as bio-treatment, capping, recycling, and dig and haul. Cost data is provided for all technologies, and a case study for thermal treatment is also presented. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0956-053X(97)00011-1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_29940344</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0956053X97000111</els_id><sourcerecordid>16440754</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c528t-42a221e9a52f4b9a01d93fde6ffad96e808d9f8dd15ab5b596fe8546fd332acd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc9rFTEQxxdR8Nn6JwgriOhhNckm2eQkUvwFhR5awZNhXjJpI7vJM8kT-t-b7au9Pk9zmM98Z5hP172g5B0lVL6_JFrIgYjxxxs9vSWEUDrQR92GqkkPjAv5uNs8IE-7Z6X8agxXlGy6n1c3mBeY-5oR6oKx9hBdH1Mc6r8O2puY5nQdsPQ-5T7jgi5ADSn2yfcLxL0HW_cZXX8Npd_N0GJKqFhOuyce5oLP7-tJ9_3zp6uzr8P5xZdvZx_PByuYqgNnwBhFDYJ5vtVAqNOjdyi9B6clKqKc9so5KmArtkJLj0pw6d04MrBuPOleHnJTqcEUG9ajbYoRbTVCypGSxrw-MLucfu-xVLOEYnFu12LaF8O05mTk_D9AqUbNjidSyTmZxPFEyrkUk1INFAfQ5lRKRm92OSyQbw0lZpVt7mSb1aTRk7mTbWibe3W_AIqF2WeINpSHYUYE0Vo27MMBw-biT8C8vgqjbTrz-imXwpFFfwGhOb86</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>14465788</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Thermal treatment and non-thermal technologies for remediation of manufactured gas plant sites</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>McGowan, Thomas F. ; Greer, Bruce A. ; Lawless, Mike</creator><creatorcontrib>McGowan, Thomas F. ; Greer, Bruce A. ; Lawless, Mike</creatorcontrib><description>More than 1500 manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites exist throughout the U.S. Many are contaminated with coal tar from coal-fueled gas works which produced ‘town gas’ from the mid-1800s through the 1950s.
1,2 Virtually all old U.S. cities have such sites. Most are in downtown areas as they were installed for central distribution of manufactured gas. While a few sites are CERCLA/Superfund, most are not. However, the contaminants and methods used for remediation are similar to those used for Superfund clean-ups of coal tar contamination from wood-treating and coke oven facilities. Clean-up of sites is triggered by regulatory pressure, property transfers and re-development as well as releases to the environment — in particular, via groundwater migration. Due to utility de-regulation, site clean-ups may also be triggered by sale of a utility or of a specific utility site to other utilities. Utilities have used two approaches in dealing with their MGP sites. The first is ‘do nothing and hope for the best’. History suggests that, sooner or later, these sites become a bigger problem via a release, citizen lawsuit or regulatory/public service commission intervention. The second, far better approach is to define the problem now and make plans for waste treatment or immobilization. This paper describes recent experience with a high capacity/low cost thermal desorption process for this waste and reviews non-thermal technology, such as bio-treatment, capping, recycling, and dig and haul. Cost data is provided for all technologies, and a case study for thermal treatment is also presented.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0956-053X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-2456</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0956-053X(97)00011-1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT ; Applied sciences ; COAL GASIFICATION PLANTS ; COAL TAR ; Decontamination. Miscellaneous ; Exact sciences and technology ; Pollution ; REMEDIAL ACTION ; SITE CHARACTERIZATION ; Soil and sediments pollution ; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT ; WASTE PROCESSING</subject><ispartof>Waste Management, 1996-01, Vol.16 (8), p.691-698</ispartof><rights>1997</rights><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c528t-42a221e9a52f4b9a01d93fde6ffad96e808d9f8dd15ab5b596fe8546fd332acd3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0956-053X(97)00011-1$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,882,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2050996$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/566310$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>McGowan, Thomas F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greer, Bruce A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawless, Mike</creatorcontrib><title>Thermal treatment and non-thermal technologies for remediation of manufactured gas plant sites</title><title>Waste Management</title><description>More than 1500 manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites exist throughout the U.S. Many are contaminated with coal tar from coal-fueled gas works which produced ‘town gas’ from the mid-1800s through the 1950s.
1,2 Virtually all old U.S. cities have such sites. Most are in downtown areas as they were installed for central distribution of manufactured gas. While a few sites are CERCLA/Superfund, most are not. However, the contaminants and methods used for remediation are similar to those used for Superfund clean-ups of coal tar contamination from wood-treating and coke oven facilities. Clean-up of sites is triggered by regulatory pressure, property transfers and re-development as well as releases to the environment — in particular, via groundwater migration. Due to utility de-regulation, site clean-ups may also be triggered by sale of a utility or of a specific utility site to other utilities. Utilities have used two approaches in dealing with their MGP sites. The first is ‘do nothing and hope for the best’. History suggests that, sooner or later, these sites become a bigger problem via a release, citizen lawsuit or regulatory/public service commission intervention. The second, far better approach is to define the problem now and make plans for waste treatment or immobilization. This paper describes recent experience with a high capacity/low cost thermal desorption process for this waste and reviews non-thermal technology, such as bio-treatment, capping, recycling, and dig and haul. Cost data is provided for all technologies, and a case study for thermal treatment is also presented.</description><subject>01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT</subject><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>COAL GASIFICATION PLANTS</subject><subject>COAL TAR</subject><subject>Decontamination. Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Pollution</subject><subject>REMEDIAL ACTION</subject><subject>SITE CHARACTERIZATION</subject><subject>Soil and sediments pollution</subject><subject>TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT</subject><subject>WASTE PROCESSING</subject><issn>0956-053X</issn><issn>1879-2456</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1996</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkc9rFTEQxxdR8Nn6JwgriOhhNckm2eQkUvwFhR5awZNhXjJpI7vJM8kT-t-b7au9Pk9zmM98Z5hP172g5B0lVL6_JFrIgYjxxxs9vSWEUDrQR92GqkkPjAv5uNs8IE-7Z6X8agxXlGy6n1c3mBeY-5oR6oKx9hBdH1Mc6r8O2puY5nQdsPQ-5T7jgi5ADSn2yfcLxL0HW_cZXX8Npd_N0GJKqFhOuyce5oLP7-tJ9_3zp6uzr8P5xZdvZx_PByuYqgNnwBhFDYJ5vtVAqNOjdyi9B6clKqKc9so5KmArtkJLj0pw6d04MrBuPOleHnJTqcEUG9ajbYoRbTVCypGSxrw-MLucfu-xVLOEYnFu12LaF8O05mTk_D9AqUbNjidSyTmZxPFEyrkUk1INFAfQ5lRKRm92OSyQbw0lZpVt7mSb1aTRk7mTbWibe3W_AIqF2WeINpSHYUYE0Vo27MMBw-biT8C8vgqjbTrz-imXwpFFfwGhOb86</recordid><startdate>19960101</startdate><enddate>19960101</enddate><creator>McGowan, Thomas F.</creator><creator>Greer, Bruce A.</creator><creator>Lawless, Mike</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Science</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19960101</creationdate><title>Thermal treatment and non-thermal technologies for remediation of manufactured gas plant sites</title><author>McGowan, Thomas F. ; Greer, Bruce A. ; Lawless, Mike</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c528t-42a221e9a52f4b9a01d93fde6ffad96e808d9f8dd15ab5b596fe8546fd332acd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1996</creationdate><topic>01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT</topic><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>COAL GASIFICATION PLANTS</topic><topic>COAL TAR</topic><topic>Decontamination. Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Pollution</topic><topic>REMEDIAL ACTION</topic><topic>SITE CHARACTERIZATION</topic><topic>Soil and sediments pollution</topic><topic>TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT</topic><topic>WASTE PROCESSING</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McGowan, Thomas F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greer, Bruce A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawless, Mike</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Waste Management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McGowan, Thomas F.</au><au>Greer, Bruce A.</au><au>Lawless, Mike</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Thermal treatment and non-thermal technologies for remediation of manufactured gas plant sites</atitle><jtitle>Waste Management</jtitle><date>1996-01-01</date><risdate>1996</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>691</spage><epage>698</epage><pages>691-698</pages><issn>0956-053X</issn><eissn>1879-2456</eissn><abstract>More than 1500 manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites exist throughout the U.S. Many are contaminated with coal tar from coal-fueled gas works which produced ‘town gas’ from the mid-1800s through the 1950s.
1,2 Virtually all old U.S. cities have such sites. Most are in downtown areas as they were installed for central distribution of manufactured gas. While a few sites are CERCLA/Superfund, most are not. However, the contaminants and methods used for remediation are similar to those used for Superfund clean-ups of coal tar contamination from wood-treating and coke oven facilities. Clean-up of sites is triggered by regulatory pressure, property transfers and re-development as well as releases to the environment — in particular, via groundwater migration. Due to utility de-regulation, site clean-ups may also be triggered by sale of a utility or of a specific utility site to other utilities. Utilities have used two approaches in dealing with their MGP sites. The first is ‘do nothing and hope for the best’. History suggests that, sooner or later, these sites become a bigger problem via a release, citizen lawsuit or regulatory/public service commission intervention. The second, far better approach is to define the problem now and make plans for waste treatment or immobilization. This paper describes recent experience with a high capacity/low cost thermal desorption process for this waste and reviews non-thermal technology, such as bio-treatment, capping, recycling, and dig and haul. Cost data is provided for all technologies, and a case study for thermal treatment is also presented.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/S0956-053X(97)00011-1</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0956-053X |
ispartof | Waste Management, 1996-01, Vol.16 (8), p.691-698 |
issn | 0956-053X 1879-2456 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_29940344 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | 01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT Applied sciences COAL GASIFICATION PLANTS COAL TAR Decontamination. Miscellaneous Exact sciences and technology Pollution REMEDIAL ACTION SITE CHARACTERIZATION Soil and sediments pollution TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT WASTE PROCESSING |
title | Thermal treatment and non-thermal technologies for remediation of manufactured gas plant sites |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T17%3A26%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Thermal%20treatment%20and%20non-thermal%20technologies%20for%20remediation%20of%20manufactured%20gas%20plant%20sites&rft.jtitle=Waste%20Management&rft.au=McGowan,%20Thomas%20F.&rft.date=1996-01-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=691&rft.epage=698&rft.pages=691-698&rft.issn=0956-053X&rft.eissn=1879-2456&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0956-053X(97)00011-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_osti_%3E16440754%3C/proquest_osti_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=14465788&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0956053X97000111&rfr_iscdi=true |