PB84-167642
Decontamination of Hazardous Waste
Substances from Spills and Uncontrolled
Waste Sites by Radio Frequency in situ Heating
Rockwell International, Newbury Park, CA
Prepared for
Municipal Environmental Research Lab,
Cincinnati, OH
10B-1
-------
-------
El'A-oOO/D-84-077
1984
DECONTAMINATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
SUBSTANv,r.S FROM SPILLS AI.'D UNCONTROLLED WASTE
SITES BY RADIO FREQUENCY IN SITU HEATING
by
Harsh Dev
Jack E. Bridges
Guggi1 am C. Sresty
1IT Research Institute
Chicaoo, IL 60616
Contract Number 68-03-3014
Project Officer
Hugh E. Masters
Oil and Hazardous Materials Spills Branch
Solid and Hazardous Waste Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory (Cincinnati)
Edison, New Jersey 08837
'MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
OFFICE Or RESEARCH AND DEVt LOPJ-'.ENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI , OHIO 45268
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(ftesie '>'oJ iHUmctiunt an i!if rct-ene be (ate ccmpl:iini>l
EPA-600/D-84-C77
3. ftJCir-'ENT'S ACCCSSIOW NO,
X' f LJ - / / '? *
O /:• ^ / & / A-?
1. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Decontamination of Hazardous Waste Substances
From Spills and Uncontrolled Waste Sites
By Radio Frequency in Situ Heating
5. REPORT DATE
1331-
6 PERPOnMlNG ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING onGAN.'ZATioN REPORT no.
H. Oev, J, Bridges, G. Sresty
9- PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Rockwell International
2421 West Hillcrest Drive
Newbury Park, CA 91320
10. PBOGRA.M. ECtMSNT NO.
C B R D 1 A
V». CONTRACT/GRANT N07
68-03-3014
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME ANO AOORtil
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory—Cin; OH
Office of Research and Developmc-ntd
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PEH1OD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
.1PA/QQQ/11
IS. SU(«PI.EMENTAfiY NOTtS
Project officer: Hugh'Masters (201) 321-6678
16. ABSTHACT
The radio frequency (Rf) heating process can bo used to volumetrically
heat and thus decontaminate uncontrolled landfills and hazardous substances
from^spil's. After the landfills are heated, decontamination of the hajaroous
substances_occurs due to thermal decomposition, vaporization, and distillation
assisted with steam in a temperature range of 3000 to 400°C in a residence
time of 14 days. Heating is achieved by laying a row of horizontal conductors
above the ground surface of the landfill and exciting them with an RF
generator through a matching , network. This method is particularly
attractive for uncontrolled landfills since it does not require mining
excavation, drilling, or boring in the contaminated volume.
Preliminary design and cost estimates were made for 3 mobile RF in situ
decontamination process. Comparative cost sudies indicate that the RF
decontamination process is two to four times cheaper than excavation of the
landfill and incineration of the contaminated volume in a nearby incinerator.
The economic attractiveness of the process warrants laboratory verification of
the decontamination mechanisms and field studies.
Kt Y WORDS ANO DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DISCMIPTORS
i "(Bui ION.' :'. in t t.'.n:NT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
rfn ?2J£M C9-73J "' :
;< CNOEO T6P.MS C. COSATt I'i»M/Gloup
t'j, M. CUMI t V CLASS f ?A.t He par 11
It, NO. Of PAGES
22. f»f
-------
Tliis document has been reviewed in accordance with
U.S. linvironmental Protection Agency policy and •
approved for publication. Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorse-
ment or recommendation for use.
-------
DECONTAMINATION 0' HAZARDOUS HASTE SUBSTANCES FROM SPILLS
AND UNCONTROLLED HASTE SITES BY RADIO FREQUENCY IN SITU HEATINGi
Harsh Oev
Jack E. Bridges
Guggilam C. Sresty
IIT Research Institute
Chicago, IPinois 60616
ABSTRACT
The radio frequency (RF) heating process can be used to volumetrically
^e^t and thus decontaminate uncontrolled landfills and hazardous substances
from spills. After the landfills are heated, decontamination of the organic
hazardous substances occur5 due to thermal decomposition, vaporization, and
distillation assisted witr. steam in a temperature range of 300° to 40o°C in a
residence tine of 14 days. Heating is achieved by laying a row of horizontal
co'nauctors above the ground surface of the landfill and exciting them with an
RF generator through a matching network. This method is particularly attrac-
tive for uncontrolled landfills since it does not require mining, excavation,
drilling, or boring in the contaminated volume.
i. This project has been supported with Federal funds from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Work was performed'by IIT Research Institute
as a subcontract under EPA contract No. 68-03-3014 with Rockwell International
Corp. Mention cf trade names or commercial products does not constitute
m^nt or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government.
-------
Preliminary design and cost estimates wore made for a mobile RF in situ
decontamination process.' Comparative cost studies indicate that the RF decon-
tamination process is two to four times cheaper than excavation of the land-
fill and incineration of the contaminated volume in a nearby incinerator. The
economic attractiveness of the process warrants laboratory verification of the
decontamination mechanisms and field studies.
INTRODUCTION
In the past century, technological advances leading to advanced processes
and products have been accompanied by the generation of unwanted waste
material. Convenient but inadequate methods for disposing of these hazardous
wastes, often oy dumping or storing in landfills, have resulted in widely
publicized environmental pollution problems (Murray, 1979; Barnhart, 1979;
Maugh, 1979, 1979a; Chen, 1978). Accidental spills during transport of
hazardous materials have also contributed to the pollution problem.
Hazardous waste materials have been improperly deposited in several
thousand sites a VI over the United States (Maugh, 1979). Some of these
wastes, for instance the polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), are very stable anrl
can have serious detrimental effects on mankind and the environment. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has attemoted to correct the situation
by initiating various regulations that require better management of hazardous
waste disposal.
Complete isolation or reclamation of these sites is preferred, but the
cost and risk associated with site disturbance by available methods of recla-
mation are considered prohibitive. New treatment methods are needed that are
able to reduce the concentrations of hazardous substances to a level where
they are harmless. These methods should be cost effective and not give rise
-------
:o (jroblems in oimr areas by transferring the substances from one biosphere
to another.
Tne radio frequency (RF) in situ heating process has been demonstrated to
heat earth and mineral formations rapidly to a temperature of 20'J°-600°C. The
Hazardous substances present in a landfill can possibly be rendered harmless
by the application of the same in situ heating technology at high tenperatures
(3UU°-4U'J°C) following relatively long soaking times (up to two weeks). The
process has the following potential advantages for landfill decontamination:
• in situ treatment of most hazardous substances
• no need for excavation, mining, earth-moving, or drilling
activities on or through the contaminated volume
• reduced exposure of operating personnel to hazardous
substances as opposed to other methods of cleanup
• nobility of major capital equipment
• riini.iiil environmental impact
• snail amount of contaminated storage generated requiring
special handling.
RADIO FREQUENCY KEATING TECHNOLOGY
The term RF generally refers to frequencies used in wireless communica-
tion. The frequencies can be as low as 45 Hertz (Hz) or extend well above
in ^igaHertz (GHz). The frequencies of principal interest to heat earth
resources are between 2 and 45 meyaHertz (MHz). Proper selection of frequency
within this range will ensure electromagnetic wave penetration of a few to
1U neters into typical soil, while at the s&ie time generating average
absorbed power densities of about 0.3 v/atts per kilogram (W/kg) for conserva-
tive values of electric field density. T|p .liter-relationship between soil
-------
properties aid selection of operating frequency is described elsewhere (Von
Hipp»l, 19b-4; Bridges, et al., 1930).
Earlier dielectric heating designs
Several types of electrical power input arrays have been designed and
tested for in situ heating of earth and mineral formations (Bridges, 1980).
Most of these systems were designed for thermal resource recovery from
deposits of oil shale, tar sand, heavy oil, etc. Invariably, all of the
previous desiyns of RF energy input arrays consisted of electrodes, antennas,
or microwave exciters placed in boreholes drilled through the deposit.
In principle, the previous dielectric heating methods are suitable for
true in situ volumetric heating of contaminated landfills, but require
drilling of boreholes through the contaminated volume. This creates the
associated risk of contaminant redispersion, personnel exposure, and fire or
explosions from sparks during drilling activities. It is therefore essential
to develop an RF energy applicator that is nonrcdiating and does not require
drilling through the contaminated soil in order to neat uncontrolled landfills
successfully.
Previous applications of the RF process
The radio frequency heating process has been under development since the
nid-1970s for the recovery of hydrocarbons by heating large volumes of earth
In si tu. After the initial laboratory experiments and the development of
computer models to predict the heating patterns based on deposit properties,
fieid experiments were conducted in Utah. The first field experiment was ..
conducted at Avintaquin Canyon, where approximately one ton of oil shale was
heated to about 38S°C (Carlson, 1980). This was followed by two field experi-
ments at the Asphalt. Ridge deposit of Utah. Approximately 30 tons of tar sand
were heated using RF energy and about 8 barrels of bitumen were recovered (30
-------
to 33% of the total in place). These field experiment-, demonstrated that
large volumes of earth can be heated volunetrical ly to tenperatures of up to
400°C (Krstansky, 1982). Background levels of the RF radiation in the
vicinity of the field test were monitored during the test. It was found, that
leakaye radiation levels did not exceed the recommended ANSI Standard C-95.
IN SITU DECONTAMINATION WITH RF HRAT1NG
The concept of in situ decontamination has three requirements:
(1) a hiyh temperature (300°-400°C) coupled with long residence
times (1-2 weeks) ;
(2) the presence of decontamination mechanism(s) (e.g., thermal ; ;
decomposition, distillation, vaporization, fixation to soil '
constituents) for the destruction or mobilization of the
contaminants
(3) the presence of a gas and vapor recovery mechanism allowing :
their collection at the surface. :
Decontamination mechanisms
The ability of RF heating methods to heat large volumes of soils and
earth formations in situ rapidly can be applied to satisfy the first require-
ment for the decontamination of soils containing hazardous chemical wastes.
Thetiitel decomposition. Temperature and residence time requirements for
the thermal decomposition of chlorinated hydrocarbons (HCs) were estimated by
extrapolating data obtained by Duvall (1930) for the incineration of hexa-
chlorobenzene (HCtf). This approach was used to obtain preliminary engineering
estimates of the required tine and temperature in the absence of data for
thermal decomposition at low temperatures and long residence times. Duvall's
data show that HCB can be 99.993% decomposed at 1000°C with a residence tine
of 2 seconds (sec).
5
-------
Based on tnese data, a rate constant of 1/2 sec"1, and an assumed
reasonable activation energy of 30 kcal/mole. the Arrenhius equation was used
to estimate time and temperature requirements. At 344°C, the calculated
residence tine is 7 days for 99.993% decomposition of HCB. In situ treatment
can easily provide such larye residence times economically because a costly
larye-volume reactor is not required. Other decontamination mechanisms such
as vaporization, distillation, or stean distillation also help, in the recovery
of contaminants. These can be collected at the surface of the landfill by an
appropriately designed vapor barrier and gas collection system.
Distillation. Many compounds found on the CERCLA Hazardous Substance
list are hydrocarbons (HC) boiliny between 80° and 420°C. Heating these
compounds to 30'J0-4CO°C would recover a large fraction of the components by
vaporization and distillation. Distillation is further assisted by the
presence of moisture in the landfill, since, in the presence of steam, the
boiliny point of the HC/water .mixtures is depressed. This mechanism, however,
is effective only for those HCs with vapor pressures of the same order of
magnitude as water.
In Table 1, the boiliny point reduction for some HCs in the presence of
water is compared with their normal boiliny points. This table shows that
steam distillation can be performed with reasonable quantities cf stean, pro-
vided the vapor pressure of the component -is of the same order of magnitude as
that of water.
For components boiliny at temperatures more than twice that of water,
steam distillation requires unreasonably larye quantities of saturated steam.
Such compounds, however, can be distilled in the presence of superheated
steam. The stean acts as a sweep gas that continuously carries the vapors
-------
away froio the surface where boiling is occurring, ensuring a good vaporization
rate. The PCS mixtures o' the Aroclor 'anily, trichlorophenol, and benzidine
are examples of hazardous cnemicals thst. can be distilled with superheated
steam.
Prelininary estimates were made for the anount of the PCB, Aroclor 1260,
that can be distilled witn superheated steam generated in situ. This calcula-
tion is based on equilibrium and thermcKiynairric considerations. The results
shown in Tjble 2 are based on the following assumptions: the landfill con-
tains 5 wti noisture, 25% of the total moisture present in the landfill gets
superheated to between 300° and 400°C, approach to equilibrium is only 25»,
and tne landfill area is 1 acre, depth "-, 20 ft.
The results in Table 2 show that, with a fixed amount of available
moisture, larger amounts of Aroclor 12oO can be distiller! as the temperature
is increased. Aroclor 1260 was selected in the above example as a worst case
since it na$ the highest boiling range (385°-420°C) of the PCB family.
Vapor and gar. recovery mechanism
The RF power will raise the temperature of the landfill so that the
decontamination mechanism begins to operate; the decontamination mechanisms
will thenselves decompose, pyrolyze, distill, and vaporize the contaminants.
The vapor d;id gas recovery mechanisms will allow the gases to escape preferen-
tially towards the landfill surface, where tney can be collected for ultimate
disposal.
The proposed RF exciter electrode array will develop a temperature and
heating profile characterized by a penetrating phase change boundary at wh'ich
water boils. Figure 1 is a sketch G~ the landfill showing a horizontal dashed
Hne representing this boundary. T.h.-r temperature above this boundary will be
hiijlier :.u.an 100°C, and the temperature below it less than 100°C. In the
I'IT RESEARCH INSTITUTE
7
-------
higher temperature region (Region A), the permeability of the soil to flow of
gases and vapors will be several fold gre-ter than the native pernec bi'. ity of
the landfill. The permeability of the landfill wi 11 increase due to vaporiza-
tion of water and the low boiling HCs present in the pore space.
The development of permeability will be directional because it will De
confined to those regions where low boiling liquids have evaporated. Thus the
region of high temperature, high permeability overlies the phase change
boundary for water. The str.an will become superheated as it moves towards the
surface through the hiyh temperature, high permeability zone of the landfill.
Un its way to the surface, the superheated steam will sweep the vapors of the
higher boiling components present 'in Region A. The development of directional
permeability in tar sand formations was confirmed in the laboratory and the
field by Krstansky and coworkers (1982). Figure 2 illustrates the increase in
permeability of a tar sand core above the boiling point of water.
A vapor barrier placed above the heated landfill surface will confine and
collect the vapors rising to the surface. These gases and vapors will be
treated for ultimate disposal by a combination of incineration and on-site
treatment.
Process description
A process flow sheet (Figure 3) was developed to allow cost evaluation of
the RF decontamination process. A schematic cross sectional view of the land-
fill is shown in Figure 4.
Rows of horizontal electrodes are placed a short distance above the
surface. A vapor barrier is placed over the electrodes. Collection lines
carry the gases and vapors to a mobile treatment plant. The vapor barrier is
designed to operate under a slight vacuum to prevent venting of the hazardous
gases and vapors to the environment.
-------
The impedance matching network, RF transnitters , and other RF hardware
(no: snown) are placed outside tiie vapor barrier. Coaxial cables carry Rf
power to energize individual electrodes. An induced draft (ID) fan carries
the gases through a gas handling system consisting of a gas/liquid separator,
-condenser, cooler, and another gas/liquid separator. The outlet o(r the ID fan
discharges to a demister.
The uncondensed yases from the demister outlet are incinerated on site in
a mobile incinerator of the type designed and built by EPA. The liquid phase
from both the separators and the denister is collected in a separator where
the water-rich phase is separated from the HC phases. The liquid KC phases
are also incinerated on site. The water-rich phase is treated on site to pro-
duce process-quality w.ater for captive use in the plant.
Other alternative process designs are possible: for example, on-site
incineration of all the gases and vapors without condensation, carbon adsorp-
tion instead of incineration of uncondensable gases, or treatment of liquid
phases at off-site locations.
Treatment duration
The time required to heat a landfill 1 acre in area and 20 feet (ft) deep
was calculated for various levels of net power input to the landfill and
various temperatures between 300° and 400°C. The duration of treatrent was
calculated by adding a soaking time of 14 days to the heat-up time.
Figure 5 illustrates the relationship between treatment duration and tem-
perature. Kor a net power input of 10 MW, the treatment time varies 60 to 90
days as temperature varies from 300° to 400°C. For net power inputs of 2 and
5 MW, the treatment tine increases two- to fivefold. Based on these calcula-
tions, a net ;>ower level of 10 MK was selected for cost evaluation purposes.
An KF power source larger than 10 MW is required to account for power
-------
deposition inefficiencies. These include heat loss from the landfill, over-
heating, and transmission lire losses.
Preliminary calculations on heat loss from the landfill show that 15 to
21% of tne energy required to heat the landfill nay be lost because of thermal
conduction. This depends on the treatment duration and the temperature. An
overall deposition efficiency of 65.' was assumed.
PROCESS ECONOMICS
Tne cost of landfill decontamination by in situ heating was developed by
separately estinatiny the capital and operating costs for tne process. The
cost evaluation was based on the following:
. Landfill area is 4047 n2 (1 acre), depth is 6.1 m (20 ft).
• Treatment temperature range is 300° to 400°C.
• Volatile matter in the landfill ranges between 5 to 20% by
weight; 10% of the total volatile natter is organic.
• Power will be provided by 10 2-MW RF transmitters.
• Other than the RF power source, all other process equip-
ment are duplicated so that an average 2.6 sites per year
are treated by the single mobile RF source. This is
possible because tno RF source is required at a site for
only 60 to 90 days. The remaininy part of the estimated
9 months at each site is used for installing and taking
down of equipment.
Capital cost
The capital cost of the process was estimated by developing the cost of
each of the seven sub$ystens of the process separately (Table 3). Vendor
quotations were used for all the r.ajor equipment items. Estimates were based
10
-------
on two options: purchased power and on-site power generation. The capital
cost for purchased power is $17 million and 'or on-sif.e generation,
$27.5 Riilion.
Operating cost
The operatiay costs of RF decontamination were calculated by separately
estimating the fixed costs for site preparation, equipment mobilization,
installation, tear down and decontamination, and permits and licensing
requirenents (Table 4). These costs are independent of treatment duration.
Variaole operatiny costs such as shift personnel salaries, par-diem payments,
electric power, water, fuel, and other consumable supplies were estimated on a
daily basis. The variable operating cost per day was multiplied by the
treatment duration and added to the fixed operating cost to obtain the total
operating cost.
Table 4 shows that the estimated total operating cost varies frcn $3.2 to
54.2 million, depending upon the treatment temperature and volatile natter
content. If power is yenerated on site, then the operating cost is higher by
45. to 54i.
Total cost of decontamination by the RF process
The total cost of decontamination (Table 5} varies between $4.6 to
$5.7 million per site. If power is yenerated on site, then the total treat-
ment cost is higher by 49 to 55%.
Tne total decontar.ination cost was obtained by addin-j depreciation and
interest to the operatiny cost. A uniform straight line depreciation was
assumed, with an average interest rate of 22.0% per year.
Cost of decontamination by the incineration process
In the incineration process all the contaminated soil and drums of
hazardous substances are excavated from the landfill and shipped to tin Annex 1
11
-------
incinerator. 7no drums are separately recovered and the waste liquids are
transferred to bul.< liquid tankers. The soil is loaded in sealed roll-off.
boxes for shipment.
Our calculations were Marie on the assumption that an Annex 1 incinerator
was available within 250 to 500 miles of the landfill. The incineration cost
-was assumed to vary between 6 and 16<|/lb.
The operating cost of treatment by excavation and incineration (Table 6)
varies between $8.9 to $25.1 million depending upon the volatile natter
content, distance to the incinerator, and the incineration cost. This estimate
does not include depreciation and interest on capital cost. The interest and
depreciation were calculated in a manner similar to that of the RF process, and
are included in Taole 7.
The total treatme.it cost for incineration (Table 7) varies between $9.0
and $25.2 million per site. The single largest, cost component in this estimate
is t.ne incineration cost, which constitutes 79 to 84% of the operating cost.
The capital cost for the incineration process (Table 8) "is estimated at
$0.83 million.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
A comparison of the costs of decontaminating a hazardous substance land-
fill by RF in situ heating and by incineration (Table 9) indicates that the RF
in situ process is 2 to 4 times cheaper than incineration.
The KF process also offers significant safety and environmentdl advantages:
• in situ treatment of the hazardous substances
• safe containment of the hazardous waste
• reduced exposure of operating personnel to hazardous
substances
12
-------
• only a sn?ll amount o',: the contaminated waste tonnage
generated nay require special handling.
Tne incineration process has alreedy been demonstrated to decontaminate a
wide spectrum of wastes found buried in landfills. However, large-scale
incineration of contaminated soils may not be iimmediately feasible due to the
inadequate installed capacity of Annex 1 incinerator.
The technical feasibility of the various proposed decontamination mechan-
isms proposed for the RF process should be verified in laboratory studies.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors g.acefully acknowledge the assistance and encouragement
provided by ,".r. Frank Freestone and Mr. Hugh Masters, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, OHMS Branch, and Dr. Walter Unterberg, Rockwell
International, EMS Center. The work reported herein was submitted to Rockwell
International in fulfillment of Contract 68-03-3014 under the sponsorship of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
REFERENCES
1. Barnhart, Benjamin J., 1979. The disposal of hazardous wastes.
Environmental Science and Technology.
2. Bridges, J., et al., 1980. Radio frequency heating to recover oil from
Utah tar sand. Future of Heavy Crude and Tar Sands, McGraw Hill, 1980,
pp. 396-409.
3. Carlson, R. D., E. F. Blase, and T. R. McLendon, 1981. Development of
the IIT Research Institute RF heating process for in si tu oil shale/tar
sand fu-al extraction-an overview. Proceedings of the 14th Oil Shale
Synuasiur-i. Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado.
-------
4. Chen, T. T., M. Chen, and J. lauber, 1973. Incineration of toxic
chemical wastes. Pollution r'niji
5. Duvall, D. C., W. A. Rt-Dey, and. J. A. Kescher, 1980. High-tenperature
decomposition of organic hazardous waste. Disposal of Hazardous Waste,
Sixth Annual Research Symposium, D. Schultz, Ed., Chicago, EPA 600/9-80-
010. ppl21-131.
6. Krstansky, J., et al., 1982. RF Heating ' Q* Carbonaceous Deposits. DOE
Report DOE/ER/10181-1, IIT Research Institute, Chicago.
7. Maugh, Thomas H. , 11, 1979. Toxic waste disposal, a growing problem.
Science.
8. Mauyh, Thomas H. , II, 1979a. Hazardous wastes technology is available.
Sc ience.
9. Murray, Chris, 1979. Chemical waste disposal, a costly problem.
Cherr.ical and Engineering News.
10. Von Hippel, A. R., Ed., 1954. Dielectric Materials and Applications.
John Wiley and Sons, New York.
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Boiliny Point Reduction and ideal Stean Requirements for Steam
Ui sti1lation.
Table 2. Temperature Required for Superheated-Stean Distillation of
Aroclor 1260
Table 3. Summary of Capital Equipment Costs for the RF Process
Tabl'e 4. Total Operating Cost Per Site for the RF Process [Purchased Power
Option]
Table 5. Treatment Cost for Decontamination of Hazardous Waste Landfills by
the RF Process (Including 10£ Contingency for Operating Costs)
[Purchased Power Option]
Table 6. Total Operating Costs Per Site for the Incineration Process
(Includes 10% Contingency Allowance)
Table. 7. Treatment Costs for Decontamination of Hazardous Waste Landfill by
the Incineration Process
•Table 8.. Cost of Capital Equipment Required for the Incineration Process
Taole 9. Comparison ct7 Decontamination Costs for the RF and Incineration
I'rocesses
15
-------
Component
Benzene
Toluene
Bromoforn
Chlorobenzene
Hexachloroethane
Mixture
Boi 1 iny Temp. ,
°C
68.3
83.9
94.3
91.0
98.7
Pure Component
Boiling Point,
°C
80.1
110.6
150.0
112.5
186.0
Ib Stean/
Ib Component
0.092
0.236
0.311
0.405
1.57
16
-------
"r, Aroclor
in Landfill
Mass
Weight of
Aroc'ior Distilled,
Ib (xlO6)
Mass Steai-i/
Ib Aroclor
Requi red
Temperature,
°C
1.1
5.8
26.0
1.43
7.7
35. U
1.13
0.21
0.04
300
350
375
17
-------
Total
Quantity Cost,
Subsystem Description Required S x 106
1U, 2-MW RF transmitters, transmission cables, 1 13.33
matchiny network, and dummy load
Vapor barrier and
-------
Cost (S x 106)
Volatile Temperature, °C
Matter, % 300 325 350 375 400
20 3.86 3.96 4.03 4.10 4.21
10 3.40 3.51 3.61 3.72 3.82
5 3.15 3.26 3.36 3.47 3.56
19
-------
Cost (S x 106)
Volatile Treatment Temperature, °C
Matter, % 300 325. . 350 375 400
20 5.34 5.44 5.51 5.58 5,69
10 4.83 4.99 , - 5.09 5.20 5.30
5 4.63 4.74.V 4,84 4.95 5.04
20
-------
Cost Per Site at (S x 10
Volatile 403 km to Incinerator 803 !
-------
Cost Per Site (S x 106)
Volatile 400 kn to Incinerator 80fi kn to Incinerator
22
."latter, % 6
-------
Description
Total
Quantity Cost, £
Bulldozer with a ripper
Front end loader with a backhoe
Roll-off boxes with gasketted-hinged doors
Decontamination showers on a mobile trailer
Trailer mounted mobile laboratory
Mooile diesel generator set, 75 kW
Monitoring equipment
Ualkie-talkie radios
Total cost of capital equipment
2
300
320,000
160,000
153,000
40,000
100,000
28,000
24,000
7,000
832.000
23
-------
RF Process*
Incineration Process'*"*
Volatile
Matter, %
20
10
5
'•-
S x 106/Site
5.34-5.69
4.88-5.30
4.63-5.04
S/100 Ib.
Material
4.97-5.30
4.00-4.34
3.53-3.84
S x 106/Site
9.0-21.5
9.7-23.9
10.2-25.2
S/100 lb
Material
8.4-20.08
7.96-19.61
7.79-19.26
* Temperature range: 300°-400°C
**lncineration cost range: 6.0f/lb-16.0
-------
'. LIST OF FIGURES
Fiyure 1. Temperature profile and development of permeability
Figure 2. Permeability development curing heating of mineral resources
Figure 3, Cross section of the KF energy input array and the vapor harrier
Fiyure 4. Preliminary process flow Ciayrarn for decontamination of landfills
Figure 5. Treatment duration as a function of treatment temperature
-------
VAPORS RECOVERED
FROM THIS SURFACE
o
ABOVE IOO"C
HIGH PERMEABILITY
(REGION A)
BELOW lwO°C
LOW PERMEABILITY
(REGION B)
MOVING PHASE CHANGE BOUNDARY
WATER BOILS HERE
z
UJ
o
o
o:
ten
700^
600
500
zo 400
—
-------
BAFFLES FOR
CO.NDtNSATE
COLLECTION
\
GAS COLLECTION
DUCTWORK
RFGROUND
PLANE WIRE
MESH
.VAPOR BARRIER
CONCRETE
/ SUPPORT
EXCITER ELECTRODE
\
ALUMINA ELECTRODE
SUPPORT
-------
TO ONSITE
VAPOR BARRIFR
VAPOR AND GAS COLLECTIO
1,11 1
I 0
inn H P li i
TREATED
VOLUME
.,— — if • —
_JL^.
X
TREATED / . \
TnWFR COOLING
TOWER VVATER
A AAA PUMP
%/ /*~*^ —
r< >-
I CONDENSER /
^ COOLER
H, I
1 GAS/ LIQUID
SEPARATOR
I-
WITH EPA MOBIL Ef
INCINERATOR 4
.^—^'IILU DE MISTER
r~~*Q _,
i 1.0,
] FAN
GAS /LIQUID
SEPARATOR
i
LIQUID CONDENSATE -JLJ-jL, ,
L.IWUIU uwrauc.ix3Mi c. -*-*-A~ LIQUID /LIQUID
-«™^«i ..,.--« cc"fv\ r> ATH Q
• ij'ltS^i^ OCMnKA 1 Un
2'
PH i-
ADJUSTMENT
_JL_ y-1
j WATER
^^l^^ ^»* PHASE
nr PUMP
IS* 3
K# l-:
UGHT^ANiC TOIMCINESATIW
PHASE PUMP
/• ™\: "^
WATER l" PRESSURE W
pp£5«rc* CAR80N F'LT£R HEW-ORGANIC' '.
PfP.hr,, o ADSORPTION PHASE PUMP
M AKt Ur
-------
500i
400
300
VOLATILE
WAITER
•20%
5%
150
•20%
10%
5,0 MW
70
60
300
325
350 375
TEMPERATURE t
400
10.0 MW
-------
------- |