ISTR in Complex Geologic Settings with Highly Variable Permeabilities and High Groundwater Flux Zones
Complex geologies with highly permeable zones can cause significant challenges while heating the subsurface during in situ thermal treatment and those challenges pose a serious threat to your project’s success. It is critical to have a detailed conceptual site model (CSM) and a proper understanding of the site’s lithology before choosing the technologies and designing the remedy that will best address the contaminant(s), the site’s unique complexities, and the outcomes demanded by state and federal guidance.
In this webinar, thermal expert John LaChance discusses the type and nature of high permeability and complex geologic settings, how they affect thermal treatment, and examples of effective in situ thermal remediation (ISTR) designs in complex geologic settings.
Thermal Remediation of High Mass Hydrocarbon Sites: When NAPL Capture Governs the Mass Recovery
On sites with contaminant masses counted in the hundred-thousand to million pound range, it’s imperative you choose the right technology for your remedy.
Thermal Technologies are widely used to target high mass contaminated sites where non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) are known to be present. While the geology and hydrogeology of a site typically is a driving factor for technology selection, the mass distribution, chemical composition and thermal behavior for the site contaminants are often the key drivers in determining in which phase the mass is mobilized, and thus the extraction strategy. For VOCs, mobilization in the vapor phase typically fully governs the mass removal. However, for more complex mixtures of high boiling point hydrocarbons, that may not be the case.
In this webinar, Technology Director Steffen Griepke explains what to consider when selecting and designing your thermal remedy for optimized mass removal. He shares best practices and examples drawn from the two decades he worked in thermal remediation.
Real-Time Solutions to Unexpected Challenges Encountered During Thermal Remedy Implementation
An in situ thermal remediation (ISTR) design may look good on paper, but how will it perform in the field?
Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH), Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH) and Steam Enhanced Extraction (SEE) are widely used thermal technologies capable of effectively remediating a variety of chemicals in various varying subsurface settings, yet sometimes operations do not perform as planned. Due to the aggressive nature of thermal remediation in parallel with pro-active monitoring, operational challenges must be addressed immediately, typically within days rather than weeks. Lessons learned from more than 100 full-scale TCH, ERH and SEE projects will be discussed, focusing on common operational challenges that arise during full-scale thermal projects.
Thermal Remedy of Fractured Crystalline Rock
Investigating and remediating fractured rock can be a lot more complex than treating a porous media like sand or clay. This webinar will present information and data from projects where thermal remediation was successfully used to clean up sedimentary, metamorphic, and igneous bedrock. The removal mechanisms as well as challenges for using thermal remediation technologies in fractured rock will also be reviewed, along with technology applicability and costs.
Thermal Rediation for Treatment of PFAS Source Areas
Per- and polyfluorinated substances (PFAS) are known as forever chemicals because they are persistent in the environment and difficult to remove. Tackling these contaminants is feasible with the right technology. Thermal conductive heating (TCH) is an effective remediation solution for PFAS and other recalcitrant compounds. Recent laboratory studies conducted by TerraTherm partner Krüger have shown better than 99.99% removal of PFAS contaminants when simulating the TCH efficiency.
You know there’s more to project success than technology alone. Experience matters. TerraTherm’s Technology Director with guest speaker Søren Eriksen, Chemical Engineer from Krüger. They addresses the literature background as it relates to thermal removal of PFAS, describes the conducted lab testing and results. They also touch on the fate of the thermally treated PFAS compounds in the process, and presents how a field application will be implemented.
Mass Removal: Why it’s Important and How to Calculate it
Mass removal is one of the major focal points for all parties involved in thermal projects, but it is often not well-defined or understood. The basis for calculating mass removal seems simple—flow x concentration—but if we take a deeper look into the methodology behind analyzing these parameters, we find it can be far more complicated than most clients and regulators are prepared for.
Project Engineer and Senior Chemist Alyson Fortune discusses how to ensure a solid understanding of the mass present in the subsurface prior to in situ thermal remediation (ISTR), walks us through an accurate mass removal calculation during operations, and cover the various field and laboratory analytical methods that are the basis of these calculations.
In Situ Thermal Remediation Modeling: The Basis of Design
For thermal projects, it all starts with the subsurface design. A numerical water and energy balance code can provide operational parameters such as energy input and extraction rates, operations duration and estimated utility usage that serve as the foundation upon which the rest of the in situ thermal remediation (ISTR) design is built. The numerical model simulates the addition, removal and loss of energy using a multi-layered box model approach that is driven by the conceptual site model (CSM) provided by the project consultant.
Technical Specialist, Amber Bonarrigo explores how to convert a CSM to input parameters for the numerical modeling effort, the mechanics and theory behind the numerical model and the key model outputs that fuel the overall ISTR design.
Thermal Remediation Vapor Covers: Why and How
While it may be tempting to reduce overall project cost of an in situ thermal remediation (ISTR) project by not properly insulating the treatment zone, one must consider what compromises are being made to the overall treatment success by not insulating the treatment area. In addition one should factor the weight of the remedy success with the potential cost being saved.
The depth to the top of the contaminated area, contaminant type, vadose zone, geology, vapor extraction strategy and location of the water table are all factors influencing whether the surface of a thermal site will need to be insulated during a thermal remedy.
Technical Director focuses on design considerations related to the selection of vapor caps for different thermal sites. Guidelines will be presented related to the choice of cap material for different heating scenarios based on the site-specific chemicals of concern, and the shallow soil temperatures needed for proper treatment. Scenarios where no vapor cap is needed is also presented.
How to Choose the Right Thermal Technology
In the remediation market at large, in situ thermal remediation (ISTR) is a niche of a niche. ISTR is a relatively complicated process with many moving parts and logistical elements, used primarily for complicated clean-ups, many with stringent treatment goals. Understanding which thermal method(s) would deliver the best solution is critical. Technical Director Steffen Griepke provides an overview of TerraTherm’s site screening process which is based on our experience evaluating hundreds of site. In addition, he wil present an analysis of each thermal technology and their sweet spots.