Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

In Situ Remediation of Chlorinated Solvent Plumes pp 455–480Cite as

Air Sparging for the Treatment of Chlorinated Solvent Plumes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: SERDP/ESTCP Environmental Remediation Technology ((SERDP/ESTCP))

Abstract

In its simplest form, in situ air sparging (IAS) is a source zone and dissolved groundwater plume remediation technology that involves injection of air into an aquifer through a collection of vertical wells screened below the water table. Modifications to this basic design may include the use of horizontal wells placed below the water table, vertical wells placed in an engineered trench, the delivery of gaseous reactants (hydrogen, propane, oxygen, etc.), the use of vapor recovery and treatment systems, pulsing of the gas injection and heating of the injection gas. The basic process components of IAS systems are shown in Figure 14.1.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Acomb LJ, McKay D, Currier P, Berglund ST, Sherhart TV, Benedicktsson CV. 1995. Neutron probe measurements of air saturation near an air sparging well. In Hinchee RE, Miller RN, Johnson PC, eds, In Situ Aeration: Air Sparging, Bioventing, and Related Remediation Processes. Battelle Press, Columbus, Ohio, USA, pp 47–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amerson IL. 1997. Diagnostic Tools for the Monitoring and Optimization of In Situ Air Sparging Systems. MS Thesis. Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amerson IL, Bruce CL, Johnson PC, Johnson RL. 2001. A multi-tracer push-pull diagnostic test for in situ air sparging systems. Bioremediation J 5:349–362.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bass DH, Brown RA. 1995. Performance of Air Sparging Systems: A Review of Case Studies. Proceedings, Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Organic Chemicals in Ground Water: Prevention, Detection and Restoration. Ground Water Publishing Company, Dublin, OH, USA, pp 621–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass DH, Brown RA. 1997. Performance of Air Sparging Systems: A Review of Case Studies. In Alleman BC, Leeson A, eds, In Situ and On-Site Bioremediation, Vol 4. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 117–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battelle. 2001. Final Air Sparging Guidance Document. Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center (NFESC) Technical Report TR-2193–ENV. Prepared for NFESC, Port Hueneme, CA, USA. http://www.cluin.org/download/contaminantfocus/dnapl/Treatment_Technologies/Air_Sparg_TR-2193.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2009.

  • Bruce CL, Amerson IL, Johnson RL, Johnson PC. 2001. Use of an SF6–based diagnostic tool for assessing air distributions and oxygen transfer rates during IAS operation. Bioremediation J 5:337–347.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bruell CJ, Marley MC, Hopkins H. 1997. American Petroleum Institute Air Sparging Database. J Soil Contam 6:169–185.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Daily W, Ramirez A, LaBrecque D, Barber W. 1995. Electrical resistance tomography experiments at the Oregon Graduate Institute. J Appl Geophys 33:227–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker A. 2001. Adjustable Depth Air Sparging Well. U.S. Patent No. 6,305,878.

    Google Scholar 

  • ESTCP (Environmental Security Technology Certification Program). 2001. Use of Cometabolic Air Sparging to Remediate Chloroethene-Contaminated Groundwater Aquifers. Project CU-9810 Final Report. Prepared by Battelle, Columbus, OH, USA. http://www.estcp.org/viewfile.cfm?Doc=CU%2D9810%2DFR%2D01%2Epdf. Accessed August 5, 2009.

  • ESTCP. 2002. Multi-Site Air Sparging. Project CU-9808 Final Report. Prepared by Battelle, Columbus, OH, USA. http://www.estcp.org/viewfile.cfm?Doc=CU%2D9808%2DFR%2D01%2Epdf. Accessed August 5, 2009.

  • ESTCP. 2003a. Low-Volume Pulsed Hydrogen Biosparging for Bioremediation of Chlorinated Solvent Plumes. Prepared by Groundwater Services, Inc., Houston, TX, USA. http://www.estcp.org/viewfile.cfm?Doc=CU%2D1206%2DFR%2D01%2Epdf. Accessed August 5, 2009.

  • ESTCP. 2003b. In-Situ Remediation of MTBE Contaminated Aquifers Using Propane Biosparging. Prepared by Envirogen, Inc., Lawrenceville, NJ, USA. http://www.estcp.org/viewfile.cfm?Doc=CU%2D0015%2DFR%2D01%2Epdf. Accessed August 5, 2009.

  • Gordon MJ. 1998. Case history of a large-scale air sparging/soil vapor extraction system for remediation of chlorinated volatile organic compounds in ground water. Ground Water Monit Remediat 18:137–149.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ji W, Dahmani A, Ahlfeld D, Lin JD, Hill E. 1993. Laboratory study of air sparging: Air flow visualization. Ground Water Monit Remediat 13:115–126.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PC. 1998. An assessment of the contributions of volatilization and biodegradation to in situ air sparging performance. Environ Sci Technol 32:276–281.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PC, Johnson RL, Neaville C, Hansen EE, Stearns SM, Dortch IJ. 1997. An assessment of conventional in situ air sparging pilot tests. Ground Water 35:765–774.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PC, Johnson RL, Bruce CL, Leeson A. 2001a. Advances in in situ air sparging/biosparging. Bioremediation J 5:251–266.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PC, Leeson A, Johnson RL, Vogel CM, Hinchee RE, Marley M, Peargin T, Bruce CL, Amerson IL, Coonfare CT, Gillespie RD. 2001b. A practical approach for the selection, pilot testing, design, and monitoring of in situ air sparging/biosparging systems. Bioremediation J 5:267–281.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson RL, Johnson PC, McWhorter DB, Hinchee R, Goodman I. 1993. An overview of in situ air sparging. Ground Water Monit Remediat 13:127–135.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson RL, Johnson PC, Amerson IL, Johnson TL, Bruce CL, Leeson A, Vogel CM. 2001a. Diagnostic tools for integrated in situ air sparging pilot tests. Bioremediation J 5:283–298.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson RL, Johnson PC, Johnson TL, Leeson A. 2001b. Helium tracer tests for assessing contaminant vapor recovery and air distribution during in situ air sparging. Bioremediation J 5:321–336.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson RL, Johnson PC, Johnson TL, Thomson NR, Leeson A. 2001c. Diagnosis of in situ air sparging performance using transient groundwater pressure changes during startup and shutdown. Bioremediation J 5:299–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klemm DE, Lummus S, Eaton S. 1997. Air Sparging in Various Lithologies: Three Case Studies. In Alleman BC, Leeson A, eds, In Situ and On-Site Bioremediation, Vol 4. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 193–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leeson A, Johnson PC, Johnson RL, Vogel CM, Hinchee RE, Marley M, Peargin T, Bruce CL, Amerson IL, Coonfare CT, Gillespie RD, McWhorter DB. 2002. Air Sparging Design Paradigm. Prepared by Battelle, Columbus, OH, USA for the ESTCP, Arlington, VA, USA. http://www.estcp.org/documents/techdocs/Air_Sparging.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2009.

  • Lundegard PD, LaBreque DJ. 1998. Geophysical and hydrologic monitoring of air sparging flow behavior: Comparison of two extreme sites. Remediat J 8:59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plummer CR, Nelson JD, Zumwalt GS. 1997. Horizontal and vertical well comparison for in situ air sparging. Ground Water Monit Remediat 17:91–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford K, Johnson PC. 1996. Effects of process control changes on aquifer oxygenation rates during in situ air sparging in homogeneous aquifers. Ground Water Monit Remediat 16:132–141.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1992. A Technology Assessment of Soil Vapor Extraction and Air Sparging. EPA/600/R-92/173. USEPA Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

Additional Resources

  • Adams JA, Reddy KR. 2000. Removal of dissolved- and free-phase benzene pools from ground water using in situ air sparging. J Environ Eng 126:697–707.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Aelion CM, Kirtland BC. 2000. Physical versus biological hydrocarbon removal during air sparging and soil vapor extraction. Environ Sci Technol 34:3167–3173.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Battelle. 2002. Multi-Site Air Sparging. Submitted to the Department of Defense (DoD) Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), Arlington, VA, USA. http://www.estcp.org/viewfile.cfm?doc=CU-9808-FR-01.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2009.

  • Bruce CL. 2001. Performance Expectations for In Situ Air Sparging Systems. PhD Dissertation. Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruce CL, Johnson PC, Johnson RL. 1998. Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether Removal by In Situ Air Sparging in Physical Model Studies. In Wickramanayake GD, Hinchee RE, eds, Physical, Chemical and Thermal Technologies. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 293–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen M, Hinkley RE, Killough JE. 1996. Computed tomography imaging of air sparging in porous media. Water Resour Res 32:3013–3024.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton WS. 1999. Effects of pore scale dead-end air fingers on relative permeabilities for air sparging in soils. Water Resour Res 35:2909–2919.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elder CR, Benson CH. 1999. Air channel formation, size, spacing, and tortuosity during air sparging. Ground Water Monit Remediat 19:171–181.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elder CR, Benson CH, Eykholt GR. 1999. Modeling mass removal during in situ air sparging. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 125:947–958.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hein GL, Gierke JS, Hutzler NJ, Falta RW. 1997. Three-dimensional experimental testing of a two-phase flow-modeling approach for air sparging. Ground Water Monit Remediat 17:222–230.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PC, Kemblowski MW, Colthart JD. 1990a. Quantitative analysis for the cleanup of hydrocarbon-contaminated soils by in situ soil venting. Ground Water 3:413–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PC, Stanley CC, Kemblowski MW, Byers DL, Colthart JD. 1990b. A practical approach to the design, operation, and monitoring of in situ soil-venting systems. Ground Water Monit Rev 10:159–178.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PC, Das A, Bruce CL. 1999. Effect of flow rate changes and pulsing on the treatment of source zones by in situ air sparging. Environ Sci Technol 33:1726–1731.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PC, Miller KD, Bruce CL. 2004. A Practical Approach to the Design, Monitoring and Optimization of In Situ MTBE Aerobic Biobarriers. NFESC TR-2257–ENV. Prepared for NFESC, Port Hueneme, CA, USA. http://www.estcp.org/viewfile.cfm?Doc=CU0013%2DTR%2D01%2Epdf. Accessed August 5, 2009.

  • Johnston CD, Rayner JL, Patterson BM, Davis GB. 1998. Volatilization and biodegradation during air sparging of dissolved BTEX-contaminated groundwater. J Contam Hydrol 33:377–404.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston CD, Rayner JL, Briegel D. 2002. Effectiveness of in situ air sparging for removing NAPL gasoline from a sandy aquifer near Perth, Western Australia: 2000 Contaminated Site Remediation Conference, From Source Zones to Ecosystems, Selected papers. J Contam Hydrol 59:87–111.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kim Y, Istok J, Semprini L. 2002. Single-well-gas-sparging tests for assessing the feasibility of in-situ aerobic treatment of CAH mixtures. American Geophysical Union (AGU) 2002 Fall meeting. Poster Abstract B51B-0718. EOS Trans Am Geophys Union 83:F199–F200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirtland BC, Aelion CM. 2000. Petroleum mass removal from low permeability sediment using air sparging/soil vapor extraction: Impact of continuous or pulsed operation. J Contam Hydrol 41:367–383.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leeson AL, Hinchee RE. 1996. Principles and Practices of Bioventing—Volume I: Bioventing Principles. Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKay DJ, Acomb LJ. 1996. Neutron moisture probe measurements of fluid displacement during in situ air sparging. Ground Water Monit Remediat 16:86–94.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mortensen AP, Jensen KH, Sonnenborg TO, Arvin E. 2000. Laboratory and numerical investigations of air sparging using MTBE as a tracer. Ground Water Monit Remediat 20:87–95.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy KR, Adams JA. 2001. Effects of soil heterogeneity on airflow patterns and hydrocarbon removal during in situ air sparging. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 127:234–247.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Salanitro JP, Johnson PC, Spinnler GE, Maner PM, Wisniewski HL, Bruce CL. 2000. Field-scale demonstration of enhanced MTBE bioremediation through aquifer bioaugmentation and oxygenation. Environ Sci Technol 34:4152–4162.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson DW, Thomson NR, Johnson RL, Redman JD. 2003. Air distribution in the Borden aquifer during in situ air sparging. J Contam Hydrol 67:113–132.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85287, USA

    Paul C. Johnson

  2. Oregon Health & Science University, Beaverton, OR, 97239, Canada

    Richard L. Johnson

  3. Shell Global Solutions, Houston, TX, 77082, USA

    Cristin L. Bruce

Authors
  1. Paul C. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard L. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cristin L. Bruce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. HydroGeoLogic, Inc., 11107 Sunset Hills Road, Reston, 20190-5309, Virginia, USA

    H.F. Stroo

  2. Dept. Environmental Science & Engin., Rice University, Main Street 6100, Houston, 77005-1892, Texas, USA

    C.H. Ward

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Johnson, P.C., Johnson, R.L., Bruce, C.L. (2010). Air Sparging for the Treatment of Chlorinated Solvent Plumes. In: Stroo, H., Ward, C. (eds) In Situ Remediation of Chlorinated Solvent Plumes. SERDP/ESTCP Environmental Remediation Technology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1401-9_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation