United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
5403W
EPA510-F-93-019
October 1993
vvEPA
Ground water
Remediation For
UST Sites
In Situ Bioventing
Combined With Low
Flow Air Sparging
(Biosparging)
In situ bioventing combined with low flow air sparging
(biosparging) stimulates the aerobic biodegradation of
organic contaminants in groundwater by delivering
oxygen to the saturated and unsaturated zones. The oxygen
is delivered at a slow rate to encourage biodegradation
rather than volatilization.
Biosparging degrades volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
in place, reducing the need for subsequent vapor
treatment and the costs of remediation. This technique
is most effective in permeable aquifers.
Petroleum Types And Constituents
* Fresh or weathered gasoline, diesel, jet fuel,
kerosene, motor oil, fuel oil, lubricating oils,
and crude oils
* Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX);
and residual semivolatile organic compounds
(SVOCs) such as polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons
-------
In Situ Bioventing Combined With Low Flow Air Sparging
(Biosparging)
Advantages
• Degrades volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in place
• Reduces air emissions and subsequent need for vapor
treatment
Limitations
• Effectiveness is limited in low permeability or
heterogeneous media
• Difficult to control air distribution in groundwater
• Limited performance data available
System
Components
• Vertical or horizontal extraction and injection wells
• Vacuum pump, compressor, or blower
• Aboveground vapor treatment (optional)
Wastestream
Treatment
Vapor treatment options (might be needed for high
concentrations of contaminants):
• Vapor phase biofllters
• Granulated activated carbon
• Internal combustion engine
• Catalytic oxidation unit
• Thermal incinerator
Parameters to
Monitor1
Vacuum/pressure monitoring at the pump, compressor,
blower, and observation points
Airflow rate
Dissolved oxygen
Water levels
Constituent concentrations in groundwater
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
• Generally achieves maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)
for volatile constituents
• New application; to date, few sites have been fully
remediated
Costs3
• Estimates for an ideal site4, $60,000 to $180,000
• Estimates for an average site3, $120,000 to $200,000
• Costs vary depending on vapor treatment costs and
treatment time
'"Parameters to monitor" are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
3Costs include equipment, and operation and maintenance.
4An Ideal site" assumes no delays h corrective acton and a relatively roiiogenous, permeable subsurface.
5An "average site* assumes minimal delays in corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.
------- |