\1 /
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA/600/S2-89/017 Jan. 1990
&EPA Project Summary
Assessment of International
Technologies for Superfund
Applications - Technology
Identification and Selection
Thomas Nunno, Jennifer Hyman, Peter Spawn, John Healy, Clay Spears,
Margaret Browne, and Edward J. Opatken
Technologies being developed or
applied for remediation of hazardous
waste sites in countries other than
the United States were Identified. An
assessment was made of the applica-
bility of each of the technologies to
Superfund sites. Of the 83 technol-
ogies screened, 12 were selected as
being sufficiently promising that
follow up was warranted. Of these,
two are thermal treatment tech-
niques, eight are physical/chemical
or electrolytically-driven technologies
and two are biological treatment
systems.
This Project Summary was devel-
oped by EPA's Risk Reduction Engi-
neering Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, to
announce key findings of the research
project that Is fully documented in a
separate report of the same title (see
Project Report ordering Information at
back).
Introduction
The objective of the assessment was to
identify technologies that are being
evaluated or are in use in countries in
Europe, Asia, and North America, exclud-
ing the United States, which could be
utilized for hazardous waste site remedi-
ation within the United States. The
approach focused on the location, acqui-
sition, and interpretation of existing data,
and studies and related documentation
for remedial technologies. Data were ob-
tained through a comprehensive literature
survey and telephone interviews with
personnel associated with agencies,
industries, vendors, research groups, and
others involved in the development and
marketing of technologies. Emphasis was
placed on technologies that have been
developed or applied in Europe, Japan
and Canada.
Findings
As a result of the investigation, 83
technologies have been identified that
may be applicable to Superfund site
remediation activity. Factors considered
in assessing the applicability of each
technology were:
• Function—purpose of the technology
and its applicability;
• Description—flow schematic, discus-
sion of theoretical operating principles
and design features;
• Performance— demonstrated
performance of the process for clean-
up of uncontrolled hazardous waste
sites;
• Limitations—physical or chemical
characteristics that limit the applica-
bility of the technology;
• Economics—the capital, operating,
and maintenance costs; and
• Status—current development status,
availability, and research plans.
These characteristics were used to
select technologies for follow up. Each
technology was described in a fact sheet
that summarized available information. An
example fact sheet is presented in Table
1.
The screening of the technologies
resulted in selecting 12 that were recom-
mended for further study, along with 10
additional that may warrant further study.
-------
Table 1. International Technology Fact Sheet
Process: Onsite Soil Cleaning Using the "Oil Crep System"
Type of Treatment: Physical/Chemical
Country: Federal Republic of Germany
Institution/Contact: Dipl.-lng. Peterson
AEG Shiffbau
BREMER Vulcan
TBSG Industrie Anlage
Function: Removal of oil (containing CB/Halogen) from soil using a mobile cleaning system
that washes out oil, forming a separable emulsion allowing recycling of the water phase.
Description: System is a basic washing procedure but uses the product CREP (Cleaning,
Recycling, Environmental Protection), which forms a separable emulsion with water and,
therefore, allows the recycling of the water layer. CREP itself is not toxic, contains no
aromatics, is not a dispersion agent, leaves the basic structure of the pollutant oil, and
has the "Environment Friendly" seal of the German environmental agency.
The system operates on the basic principle of adsorption and cold water washing with
high pressure to create a separable emulsion. This allows skimming of the oil layer and
after clarification, return of clean wastewater to the wastewater system without special
treatment. Heavy metals are removed as hydroxides. Process steps include centrifuge, oil
removal, pH adjustment, detoxification through oxidation or reduction, heavy metal
precipitation, water clarification, and neutralization through ion exchange.
Performance: Pilot plant was successfully operated, and in 1985, a 20-ft mobile container
unit was built. This unit has been in use with success since then. Bremen University has
conducted independent tests on one site and found that sand contaminated with 14,000
ppm oil was reduced to 190 ppm, which is well below the 300 ppm level for reuse of
sand in the FRG. Efficiency was 98.7%.
Limitations: Soil must be conditioned to reduce particle size to 60 mm.
Economics: Exact data not available, but considered a proven system.
Status: System is now in use in Europe. Efficiency is high. Extensive test data is available
(GCMS runs, etc.).
Recommendations: Further evaluation and comparison with U.S. techniques.
Reference: Brown, Margaret. Correspondence of October 19, 1987.
Technologies not considered further
include:
1. those that are applicable to only a
small percentage of Superfund
wastes,
2. those similar to conventional tech-
niques in use in the United States,
and
3. experimental technologies that are
not well developed.
Among the 12 most promising tech-
nologies, 2 are thermal treatment
techniques, 8 are physical/chemical or
electroiytically-driven technologies, and
2 are biological treatment systems.
Twelve additional technologies are
already being studied under the
NATO/CCMS Pilot Study program.
Hazardous Waste Management
Hazardous waste management in
countries throughout Europe, Asia, and
North America (excluding the United
States) is an evolving practice that
involves continually developing policies
and regulatory approaches to the
problems posed by hazardous waste
production and disposal. Most foreign
countries have developed a wide variety
of technologies for dealing with hazard-
ous waste problems, in addition to spon-
soring significant research and develop-
ment efforts in the field.
The European approach to hazardous
waste management is one of decentral-
ization, whereby individual countries or
provinces most often assume the re-
sponsibility for the collection and dis-
posal of hazardous wastes produced in
their locality. While implementation of
hazardous waste management systems
is often a local responsibility, most coun-
tries do have a National Environmental
Protection Agency that creates the envi-
ronmental policy for the country and
develops the regulatory framework for
meeting the goals of that policy.
Decentralization seems to allow for
greater dissemination of information, a
well as the development of organize
collection and transport systems d«
signed to meet the unique needs of eac
locality. However, problems do arise 01
of the lack of uniformity of environment.
regulation and policy enforcemer
throughout the country, in addition to th
lack of local facilities available for prope
waste disposal. Some European cour
tries including the Netherlands, Sweder
Austria, Denmark, and Norway hav
constructed centralized incineration faci
ities and landfills that accept waste
from all over the country, in response t
the shortage of local facilities.
A common practice of countrie
lacking proper disposal facilities of thei
own is the exporting of hazardou
wastes to neighboring countries, primar
ily in the Federal Republic of Germany
Other uncommon waste disposal prac
tices seen in Europe and Japan an
codisposal of hazardous wastes witl
municipal wastes and disposal at sea.
The high costs of disposal oftei
incurred by local municipalities am
extrepreneurs, along with the lack o
proper disposal facilities, tends to resul
in numerous incidence of illegal dump
ing throughout Europe. This is especially
true in the more populated anc
politically-reactive developing countries
where enforcement poses unique diffi
cullies. This, and the fact tha
environmental regulations are only <
recent phenomenon, give rise to the
contemporary issue of what to do witr
old, abandoned, contaminated waste
sites, known or suspected to exist ir
large quantities throughout these
countries.
Most foreign countries are onl^
beginning to catalogue their abandonee
sites with no country surveyed yet hav-
ing a regulatory mechanism for the
remediation of such sites as sophis-
ticated as the United States' Compre-
hensive Environmental Response Com-
pensation and Liabilities Act (CERCLA).
The Canadian Council of Resource and
Environmental Ministers (CCREM), how-
ever, is currently working on establishing
a "national contingency fund" to
respond to the problem of abandoned
sites in Canada. Most central govern-
ments are responding to the problem of
abandoned hazardous waste sites by
directing nationwide studies and provid-
ing subsidies to local communities for
remediation efforts. However, it is likely
in the near future that in most European
communities, the restoration of aban-
-------
doned hazardous waste sites will con-
inue to be a local affair.
The full report was submitted in partial
fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-3243 by
Alliance Technology Corporation under
sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
-------
Thomas Nunno. Jennifer Hyman, Peter Spawn, John Healy, Clay Spears, and
Margaret Browne are with Alliance Technologies Corporation, Bedford, MA
01730.; the EPA author Edward J. Opatken (also the EPA Project Officer, see be-
low) is with the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory,Cincinnati, OH 45268
The complete report, entitled "Assessment of International Technologies for Super-
fund Applications—Technology Identification and Selection," (Order No. PB 89-
205 959/AS; Cost: $28.95, subject to change) will be available only from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
EPA/600/S2-89/017
UNOFFICIAL MAIL;
025 =
~ 603044.; I
000085833 PS
IttunUnUULM.
------- |