amendments for bioremediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soil SCLF - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
amendments for bioremediation
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

amendments for bioremediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soil SCLF - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 02, 2023 168 likes •465 views

Inorganic and organic amendments for bioremediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soil SCLF annual conference, Glasgow 5 th September 2018 Dr Thomas Aspray www.ersremediation.com www.ersremediation.com Contents There is a market for

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Inorganic and organic amendments for bioremediation

  • f hydrocarbon contaminated soil

www.ersremediation.com

Dr Thomas Aspray

SCLF annual conference, Glasgow 5th September 2018

slide-2
SLIDE 2

www.ersremediation.com

Contents

  • There is a market for bioremediation
  • Examples of successful bioremediation and timescales
  • ERS’ approach to soil bioremediation treatability testing
  • Current research

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

www.ersremediation.com

What is ex situ bioremediation?

slide-4
SLIDE 4

www.ersremediation.com

Aerobic biodegradation

Microbe

Oxygen Carbon dioxide Nutrients (e.g. N,P,K) Water

Contaminant

Soil Are microorganisms present and active? How active? Are the right microbes active?

slide-5
SLIDE 5

www.ersremediation.com

Ex situ bioremediation application in Scotland

  • 32 councils contacted
  • Responses received (to date) from 12
  • Onsite treatment reduced
  • Off site treatment?

5

Year Applications received by CLOs 2013 2 2014 4 2015* 1 2016 1 2017 2 2018 1 *Landfill tax devolved

slide-6
SLIDE 6

www.ersremediation.com

Bioremediation market drivers

2009 drivers

  • Move toward treatment rather than

disposal

  • End of landfill tax exemptions for

development sites

  • End of landfill tax exemption for

engineering materials

  • Economic crisis means developers

have more time to remediate sites and are looking for most cost effective method

  • Bioremediation is a cheap

remediation technique

  • Timescales are becoming more

predictable

6

2018 drivers

  • Economic uncertainty remains
  • Cost effective for larger sites
  • Hazardous waste soil subject to

increasing landfill tax

  • Onsite treatment for retention or

non-haz disposal advantageous where no local STC

  • No need to import replacement

material

  • Timescales are increasingly more

predictable

  • Sustainable solution
  • E.g. SURF1 case study (CL:AIRE)
slide-7
SLIDE 7

www.ersremediation.com

“Bioremediation doesn’t work”

  • Wrong assumptions on %

degradation (total and fractions)

  • Conditions not optimised for

degradation

  • Environmental conditions inhibitory
  • Treatment not effectively monitored /

maintained

  • Project issues e.g. reuse not planned

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

www.ersremediation.com

Ex situ bioremediation performance – case study 1

Contaminants: TPH, PAH and B(a)P Quantity: ~1000 m3 Treatment approach: biostimulation involving inorganic and organic amendment

Project 46001

Time (months)

8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

PAH concentration (mg/kg)

100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Project 46001

Time (months)

5 10 15 20 25

TPH concentration (mg/kg)

5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000

slide-9
SLIDE 9

www.ersremediation.com

Ex situ bioremediation performance – case study 2

9

Contaminants: TPH Targets: 500 mg/kg Quantity: >7500 m3 Treatment approach: biostimulation involving inorganic and organic amendment

Time (months)

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

TPH concentration (mg/kg)

1000 2000 3000 4000 A B C D E F G

slide-10
SLIDE 10

www.ersremediation.com

Ex situ bioremediation performance – case study 3

Contaminants: DRO and MRO Targets: GACs

  • C12-C16 aromatic (10.7 mg/kg),
  • C16-C21 aromatic (133 mg/kg),
  • C21-C40 aromatic (157 mg/kg)

Quantity: 1000 m3 Treatment approach: biostimulation involving organic and inorganic amendment

slide-11
SLIDE 11

www.ersremediation.com

ERS’ approach to bioremediation treatability testing and optimisation

  • Basal respiration (BR)
  • Basal respiration is a measure of the

total biological activity of microorganisms

  • Nutrient induced respiration (NIR)
  • Macro and micronutrient limitation
slide-12
SLIDE 12

www.ersremediation.com

Nutrient Induced Respiration (1)

  • Theoretically derived nutrient requirement
  • C:N:P ratio 100:10:1
  • Shortcomings
  • Practically derived
  • Nutrient induced respiration
slide-13
SLIDE 13

www.ersremediation.com

Nutrient Induced Respiration (2)

5000 25000 45000 65000 85000 105000 125000 Control 16 33 66 133 266 533 1066 2133 NH4NO3 amendment (mg/kg soil) Cummulative O 2 consumption (µl)

20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 Control 16 33 66 133 266 533 1066 2133 NH4NO3 amendment (mg/kg soil) Cumulative CO 2 production (µl)

Oxygen Carbon Dioxide Sandy loam (47001C)

Aspray et al., (2008) Chemosphere

slide-14
SLIDE 14

www.ersremediation.com

Nutrient Induced Respiration (3)

  • Combining multigas analysis with kinetics
  • Respiratory quotient (RQ) = CO2/O2
  • Increased activity or changes in metabolism?

0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 24 30 36 41 47 53 59 65 Time (h) RQ (CO2 ul/O2 ul)

0.25 0.5 1 2 4 8 16 32

Aspray et al., (2008) Chemosphere

slide-15
SLIDE 15

www.ersremediation.com

Potential benefits of compost bioremediation

  • Nutrient (N) addition
  • Improve porosity
  • Increase abundance of

degraders (i.e. augment the indigenous community)

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

www.ersremediation.com

Composting and compost bioremediation

  • Confusing terms
  • Composting bioremediation
  • Addition of significant quantities of compost feedstock

materials to contaminated soil

  • Compost bioremediation
  • Addition of small quantities of composting material or

finished compost to contaminated soil

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

www.ersremediation.com

Compost bioremediation literature

  • Addition of composts to contaminated soil less

widely studied (Semple et al., 2001)

  • ERS trailblazer project in 2006
  • Financial benefit demonstrated
  • Potential technical benefit harder to

demonstrate (absence of control at full scale)

  • Lab based studies
  • Sayara et al., (2010) used agricultural soil spiked

with PAH contamination, testing five different composts with varying stabilities. More stable composts, with higher humic acid content, were more effective at PAH removal than less stable composts

  • Wallisch et al., (2014) compared mature and

immature compost. Composts had positive effect on alkane degrader (alkB gene) abundance and diversity in soil. ‘Less mature’ sample had generally higher abundance

17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

www.ersremediation.com

Research project

  • Main objective
  • Improve compost stability test

precision

  • Secondary objective
  • Assess whether stability could be a

good indicator of compost maturity for soil bioremediation

  • As with case study 2 soils may be

contaminated with both TPH and PAH

  • Done on a shoestring budget!

18

50:50 peat:compost Peat control

Aspray, 2018

slide-19
SLIDE 19

www.ersremediation.com

Compost sample characterisation

19 Unpublished data removed

slide-20
SLIDE 20

www.ersremediation.com

Quantitative PCR (qPCR)

DNA extraction PCR setup PCR run

slide-21
SLIDE 21

www.ersremediation.com

Catabolic gene targets and justification

21

Primer set a b c d e f g h % strains amplified 18.6 18.6 20.9 23.3 48.8 44.2 18.6 44.2 Jurelevicius et al., 2013 Primer name Target Reference alkB F Alkane hydroxylase gene Kloos et al., 2006 alkB R PAH-RHDα GN F polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) ring- hydroxylating dioxygenases (RHD) genes (Gram negative population) Cebron et al., 2008 PAH-RHDα GN R PAH-RHDα GN F polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) ring- hydroxylating dioxygenases (RHD) genes (Gram positive population) Cebron et al., 2008 PAH-RHDα GN R

slide-22
SLIDE 22

www.ersremediation.com

Catabolic gene targets and justification 2

22

Cebron et al., (2008)

slide-23
SLIDE 23

www.ersremediation.com

Degrader gene abundance

23 Unpublished data removed

slide-24
SLIDE 24

www.ersremediation.com

Degrader abundance vs maturity (stability) – cross site comparison

24 Unpublished data removed

slide-25
SLIDE 25

www.ersremediation.com

Degrader abundance vs maturity (stability) – within site comparison

25 Unpublished data removed

slide-26
SLIDE 26

www.ersremediation.com

Compost sample bacterial diversity

26 Unpublished data removed

slide-27
SLIDE 27

www.ersremediation.com

Conclusions

  • Bioremediation when well managed with optimal amendment can

be the solution for your site

  • Timescales from 6 months – 2 years depending on recalcitrance,

starting concentrations(s) and end target(s)

  • The technique has moved on
  • Compost/composting materials are cheaper to source than many
  • ther organic materials
  • Commercial green waste composts are not the same!
  • Less stable samples do not necessarily have higher degrader (gene)

abundance

  • N content and porosity varies
  • qPCR is a rapid technique for biological treatment evaluation and

monitoring

27

slide-28
SLIDE 28

www.ersremediation.com

Acknowledgements

Diana Guillen Ferrari Heriot-Watt University Jennifer Pratscher

28

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Thanks for Listening