Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 181, Issue 1–4, pp 281–296 | Cite as

Biodegradation of PAHs and PCBs in Soils and Sludges

Article

Abstract

Results from a multi-year, pilot-scale land treatment project for PAHs and PCBs biodegradation were evaluated. A mathematical model, capable of describing sorption, sequestration, and biodegradation in soil/water systems, is applied to interpret the efficacy of a sequential active–passive biotreatment process of organic chemicals on remediation sites. To account for the recalcitrance of PAHs and PCBs in soils and sludges during long-term biotreatment, this model comprises a kinetic equation for organic chemical intraparticle sequestration process. Model responses were verified by comparison to measurements of biodegradation of PAHs and PCBs in land treatment units; a favorable match was found between them. Model simulations were performed to predict on-going biodegradation behavior of PAHs and PCBs in land treatment units. Simulation results indicate that complete biostabilization will be achieved when the concentration of reversibly sorbed chemical (SRA) reduces to undetectable levels, with a certain amount of irreversibly sequestrated residual chemical (SIA) remaining within the soil particle solid phase. The residual fraction (SIA) tends to lose its original chemical and biological activity, and hence, is much less available, toxic, and mobile than the “free” compounds. Therefore, little or no PAHs and PCBs will leach from the treatment site and constitutes no threat to human health or the environment. Biotreatment of PAHs and PCBs can be terminated accordingly. Results from the pilot-scale testing data and model calculations also suggest that a significant fraction (10–30%) of high-molecular-weight PAHs and PCBs could be sequestrated and become unavailable for biodegradation. Bioavailability (large Kd, i.e., slow desorption rate) is the key factor limiting the PAHs degradation. However, both bioavailability and bioactivity (K in Monod kinetics, i.e., number of microbes, nutrients, and electron acceptor, etc.) regulate PCBs biodegradation. The sequential active–passive biotreatment can be a cost-effective approach for remediation of highly hydrophobic organic contaminants. The mathematical model proposed here would be useful in the design and operation of such organic chemical biodegradation processes on remediation sites.

Keywords

PAHs PCBs biodegradation land treatment mathematical model and application intraparticle 

References

  1. Adeel, Z., Luthy, R. G., Dzombak, D. A., Roy, S. B., & Smith, J. R. (1997). Leaching of PCB compounds from untreated and biotreated sludge-soil mixtures. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 28, 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcoa (1994). Evaluation of In Situ Bioremediation Treatment of 60-Acre Lagoon Sludge Material for PCB Reduction/Immobilization at Alcoa’s Massena, NY Facility. Internal report, EHS Technology Center, Alcoa Technical Center, Alcoa Center, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  3. Alcoa Remediation Projects Organization (1995). Bioremediation tests for Massena lagoon sludges/sediments. Report prepared for US EPA and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.Google Scholar
  4. Alexander, M. (1995). How toxic are toxic chemicals in soil? Environmental Science & Technology, 29, 2713–2717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alexander, M. (1977). Introduction to soil microbiology (2nd edn.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. ASTM (1996). 1996 Annual book of ASTM standards. West Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials.Google Scholar
  7. Ball, W. P., Euehler, E., & Harmon, T. C. (1990). Characterization of a sandy aquifer material at the grain scale. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 5, 253–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ball, W. P., & Roberts, V. (1991a). Long-term sorption of halogenated organic chemicals by aquifer material. 1. Equilibrium. Environmental Science and Technology, 25(7), 1223–1237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blake, G. R., & Hartge, K. H. (1986). Bulk density. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis part 1: Physical and mineralogical methods (2nd edn., pp. 363–375). Agronomy Monograph Number 9. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  10. Bollag, J. M., & Loll, M. J. (1983). Incorporation of xenobiotics into soil humus. Experientia, 39, 1221–1231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brunauer, S., Emett, P. H., & Teller, E. (1938). Adsorption of gases in multimolecular layers. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 60, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiou, C. T., Porter, P. E., & Schmedding, D. W. (1983). Partition equilibria of nonionic organic compounds between soil organic matter and water. Environmental Science & Technology, 17, 227–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Curtis, G. P., Roberts, P. V., & Reinhard, M. (1986). A natural gradient experiment and solute transport in a sand aquifer: 4. Sorption of organic solutes and its influence on mobility. Water Resources Research, 22, 2059–2067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Danielson, R. E., & Sutherland, P. L. (1986). Porosity. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis part 1: Physical and mineralogical methods (2nd edn., pp. 443–461). Agronomy Monograph Number 9. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  15. Focht, D. D., & Brunner, W. W. (1985). Kinetics of biphenyl and polychlorinated biphenyl metabolism in soil. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 50(10), 1058–1063.Google Scholar
  16. Hayduk, W., & Laudie, H. (1974). Prediction of diffusion coefficients for non-electrolytes in dilute aqueous solutions. AIChE Journal, 20, 611–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hill, M. C. (1998). Methods and guidelines for effective model calibration: US Geological Survey Water- Resources Investigations Report 98-4005, 90 p. 4–32.Google Scholar
  18. Karickhoff, S. W., Brown, D. S., & Scott, T. A. (1979). Sorption of hydrophobic pollutants in sediment suspensions. Water Research, 13(3), 241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kilbertus, G. (1980). Etudes des microhabitats contenus dans les agregats du sol. Leur relation avec la biomasse bacterienne presente et la taille des procaryotes. Revue d’écologie et de biologie du sol, 17, 543–557.Google Scholar
  20. Kuhn, E. P., Colberg, P. J., Schnoor, J. L., Wanner, O., Zehnder, A. J. B., & Schwarzenback, R. P. (1985). Microbial transformations of substituted benzenes during infiltration of river water to groundwater: Laboratory column studies. Environmental Science & Technology, 19, 961–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kyuma, K., & Kamaguchi, K. (1964). Oxidative changes of polyphenols as influenced by allophane. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 28, 371–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Law, A. T., & Button, D. K. (1977). Multiple-carbon-source-limited growth kinetics of a marine coryneform bacterium. Journal of Bacteriology, 129, 115–123.Google Scholar
  23. Lawrence, G. P., Payne, D., & Greenland, D. (1979). Pore size distribution in critical point and freeze dried aggregates from clay subsoils. Journal of Soil Science, 30, 499–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lichtenstein, E. P., De Pew, L. J., Eshbaugh, E. L., & Sleesman, J. P. (1960). Persistence of DDT, aldrin and lindane in some midwestern soils. Journal of Economic Entomology, 53, 136–142.Google Scholar
  25. Linz, D., & Nakles, D. (Eds.) (1997). Environmental acceptable endpoints in soils. Annapolis, MD: American Academy of Environmental Engineers.Google Scholar
  26. Loehr, R. C., & Webster, M. T. (1997). Effect of treatment on contaminant availability, mobility and toxicity. Chapter 2. In D. Linz & D. Nakles (Eds.), Environmentally acceptable endpoints in soils. Annapolis, MD: American Academy of Environmental Engineers.Google Scholar
  27. Luthy, R. G., Aiken, G. R., Brusseau, M. L., Cunningham, S. D., Gschwend, P. M., Pignatello, J. J., et al. (1997). Sequestration of hydrophobic organic contaminants by geosorbents. Environmental Science & Technology, 131, 3341–3347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nash, R. G., & Woolson, A. E. (1967). Resistance of chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides in soil. Science, 157, 924–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. NATO (1997). Perspective in bioremediation: Technologies for environmental improvement. NATO advanced research workshop on biotechnological remediation of contaminated sites. Dordrecht ,The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  30. NRC (National Research Council) (1993). In situ bioremediation: When does it work? Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  31. NRC (National Research Council) (1994). Alternatives for ground water cleanup. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  32. NYSDEC (1989). New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Analytical Service Protocol. NYSDEC Document 0073. NYSDEC, Albany, NY.Google Scholar
  33. Schmidt, S. K., & Alexander, M. (1985). Effects of dissolved organic carbon and second substrates on the biodegradation of organic compounds at low concentrations. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 49(4), 822–827.Google Scholar
  34. Sjoblad, R. D., & Bollag, J. M. (1981). Oxidative coupling of aromatic compounds by enzymes from soil microorganisms. In E. A. Paul & N. N. Ladd (Eds.), Soil biochemistry (pp. 113–152). New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  35. Smith, J. R., Tomicek, R. M., Swallow, P. V., Weightman, R. L., Nakles, D. V., & Hebling, M. (1995). Definition of Biodegradation Endpoints for PAH Contaminated Soils Using a Risk-Based Approach. In P. T. Kostecki, E. J. Calabrese & M. Bonazountas (Eds.), Hydrocarbon contaminated soils, vol. V (pp. 521–572). Amherst, MA: Amherst Scientific Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Statistical Analysis System (SAS) (1988). SAS/ETS Users guide. Version 6, first edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
  37. Tindall, J. A., Kunkel, J. R., & Anderson, D. E. (1999). Unsaturated zone hydrology for scientists and engineers (624 p.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  38. US EPA (1995). Symposium on bioremediation of hazardous wastes. US Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-95/076. Washington, DC: US EPA.Google Scholar
  39. US Environmental Protection Agency (1983). Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. US EPA, environmental monitoring and support laboratory. US EPA rep. EPA-600/4-79-020. US Gov.print. office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  40. US Environmental Protection Agency (1995). Methods for evaluating solid waste: Phsical/chemical methods (SW-846), third edn. January, 1995. US EPA, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  41. Weber, W. J. Jr., & DiGiano, F. A. (1996). Process dynamics in environmental systems. A wiley-interscience publication. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  42. Zhang, W. -X., & Bouwer, E. J. (1997). Biodegradation of benzene, toluene and naphthalene in soil-water-slurry microcosms. Biodegradation, 8, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ling Liu
    • 1
  • James A. Tindall
    • 2
  • Michael J. Friedel
    • 3
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Hydrology – Water Resources and Hydraulic EngineeringHohai UniversityNanjingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.National Research ProgramUS Geological SurveyDenverUSA
  3. 3.US Geological Survey, WRDDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations