Novel and Cost-Effective Technologies for Hydrocarbon Bioremediation

  • Rajeev KumarEmail author
  • Pooja Yadav


Hydrocarbon contamination of soil and water is increasing day by day around the world. Remediation of these contaminated sites using microorganisms (bioremediation) is the most efficient and environment-friendly method. Bioremediation is executed either on the site of contamination known as in situ or off the site of contamination known as ex situ. Among these two, ex situ bioremediation technologies are more expensive because the cost of excavation gets added up. But, on the other hand, installation of the equipments required for in situ technologies is also of major concern. So, it becomes very important to find the correct technology for bioremediation of a particular site to get the desired results. In this chapter various cost-effective technologies are discussed such as land farming, phytoremediation, bioreactors, biopiles, etc. Also, the two techniques, bioaugmentation and biostimulation, for enhanced bioremediation are discussed. Principles, advantages, and disadvantages of the techniques are described.



Dr. Rajeev Kumar is thankful to DST, SERB/F/8171/2015-16, as well as UGC (F. No. 194-2/2016 IC) for providing financial support. Ms. Pooja Yadav is also thankful to the Department of Environment Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India, for providing necessary assistance to complete this chapter.


  1. Abioye OP, Abdul AA, Agamuthu P (2009) Stimulated biodegradation of used lubricating oil in soil using organic wastes. Malays J Sci 28(2):127–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abioye OP, Abdul AA, Agamuthu P (2010) Enhanced biodegradation of used engine oil in soil amended with organic wastes. Water Air Soil Pollut 209:173–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agnieszka M, Piotrowska-Seget Z (2010) Bioaugmentation as a strategy for cleaning up of soils contaminated with aromatic compounds. Microbiol Res 165(5):363–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aislabie J, Saul DJ, Foght JM (2006) Bioremediation of hydrocarbon contaminated polar soils. Extremophiles 10:171–179CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Alexander M (1994) Biodegradation and bioremediation. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  6. Azubuike CC, Chikere CB, Okpokwasili GC (2016) Bioremediation techniques–classification based on site of application: principles, advantages, limitations and prospects. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 32(11):180CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Barr D (2002) Biological methods for assessment and remediation of contaminated land: case studies. Construction Industry Research and Information Association, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Bento FM, Camargo FAO, Okeke BC, Frankenberger WT (2005) Comparative bioremediation of soils contaminated with diesel oil by natural attenuation, biostimulation and bioaugmentation. Bioresour Technol 96:1049–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown RA, Crosbie JR (1994) Oxygen sources for bioremediation. In: Flathman PE, Jerger DE, Exner JH (eds) Bioremediation: field experience. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp 722–725Google Scholar
  10. Brown LD, Cologgi DL, Gee KF, Ulrich AC (2017) In: Fingas M (ed) Bioremediation of oil spills on land, in oil spill science and technology, 2nd edn. Gulf Professional Publishing, Boston, pp 699–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burgess JE, Parsons SA, Stuetz RM (2001) Developments in odour control and waste gas treatment biotechnology: a review. Biotechnol Adv 19:35–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carmichael LM, Pfaender FK (1997) The effect of inorganic and organic supplements on the microbial degradation of phenanthrene and pyrene in soils. Biodegradation 8:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Catherine NM, Yong RN, CRC Press (2004) Natural attenuation of contaminated soils. Environ Int 30(4):587–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cerqueira VS, Peralba MR, Camargo FAO, Bento FM (2014) Comparison of bioremediation strategies for soil impacted with petrochemical oily sludge. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 95:338–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chemlal R, Abdi N, Lounici H, Drouiche N, Pauss A, Mameri N (2013) Modeling and qualitative study of diesel biodegradation using biopile process in sandy soil. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 78:43–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chikere CB, Chikere BO, Okpokwasili GC (2012) Bioreactor-based bioremediation of hydrocarbon-polluted Niger Delta marine sediment. Nigeria 3 Biotech 2:53–66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Cho YG, Rhee SK, Lee ST (2000) Effect of soil moisture on bioremediation of chlorophenol-contaminated soil. Biotechnol Lett 22:915–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cookson JT Jr (1995) Bioremediation engineering design and application. McGraw-Hill, Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Coulon F, Al Awadi M, Cowie W, Mardlin D, Pollard S, Cunningham C, Risdon G, Arthur P, Semple KT, Paton GI (2010) When is a soil remediated? Comparison of biopiled and windrowed soils contaminated with bunker-fuel in a full-scale trial. Environ Pollut 158:3032–3040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. CPEO (1998) Bioslurping center for public environmental oversight. 425 Market Street, San Francisco, CA, available from website:
  21. Cresap GH (1999) Case study: application of short-duration, periodic bioslurping at a petroleum hydrocarbon release site, hazardous and industrial wastes. In: Proceedings of the Mid-Atlantic industrial waste conference, pp 159–168Google Scholar
  22. da Silva LJ, Flávia Chaves Alves FC, de França FP (2012) A review of the technological solutions for the treatment of oily sludges from petroleum refineries. Waste Manag Res 30(10):1016–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Das N, Chandran P (2011) Microbial degradation of petroleum hydrocarbon contaminants: an overview. Biotechnol Res Int. Article ID 941810, 13Google Scholar
  24. Delille D, Duval A, Pelletier E (2008) Highly efficient pilot biopiles for on-site fertilization treatment of diesel oil-contaminated sub Antarctic soil. Cold Reg Sci Technol 54:7–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dias RL, Ruberto L, Calabro’ A, Balbo AL, Del Panno MT, Mac Cormack WP (2015) Hydrocarbon removal and bacterial community structure in on-site biostimulated biopile systems designed for bioremediation of diesel-contaminated Antarctic soil. Polar Biol 38:677–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Eggen T (1999) Application of fungal substrate from commercial mushroom production-Pleurotus ostreatus- for bioremediation of creosote contaminated soil. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 44:117–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. El Fantroussi S, Agathos SN (2005) Is bioaugmentation a feasible strategy for pollutant removal and site remediation? Curr Opin Microbiol 8:268–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Etim EE (2012) Phytoremediation and its mechanisms: a review. Int J Environ Bioenergy 2(3):120–136Google Scholar
  29. Forsyth JV, Tsao YM, Bleam RD (1995) Bioremediation: when is augmentation needed? In: Hinchee RE, Fredrickson J, Alleman BC (eds) Bioaugmentation for site remediation. Battelle Press, Columbus, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  30. FRTR (1999) Bioslurping. Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable. USEPA, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, DC, available from website:
  31. Frutos FJG, Escolano O, García S, Mar Babín M, Fernández MD (2010) Bioventing remediation and ecotoxicity evaluation of phenanthrene-contaminated soil. J Hazard Mater 183:806–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. García-Delgado C, Alfaro-Barta I, Eymar E (2015) Combination of biochar amendment and mycoremediation for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons immobilization and biodegradation in creosote-contaminated soil. J Hazard Mater 285:259–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gomez F, Sartaj M (2014) Optimization of field scale biopiles for bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated soil at low temperature conditions by response surface methodology (RSM). Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 89:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. GWRTAC (1996) Technical documents-technical overview reports. Groundwater Remediation Technologies Analysis Center. 425 Sixth Avenue, Regional Enterprise Tower, Pittsburgh, PA, available from website:
  35. Held T, Dörr H (2000) In situ remediation. Biotechnology 11(b):350–370Google Scholar
  36. Hellekson D (1999) Bioventing principles, applications and potential, restoration and reclamation review. Stud On-line J 5(2):1–9Google Scholar
  37. Hinchee RE (1993) Bioventing of petroleum hydrocarbons. In: Handbook of bioremediation. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  38. Hobson AM, Frederickson J, Dise NB (2005) CH4 and N2O from mechanically turned windrow and vermicomposting systems following in-vessel pre-treatment. Waste Manag 25:345–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Höhener P, Ponsin V (2014) In situ vadose zone bioremediation. Curr Opin Biotechnol 27:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Iranzo M, Sainz-Padro I, Boluda R, Sanchez J, Mormeneo S (2001) The use of microorganisms in environmental engineering. Ann Microbiol 51:135–143Google Scholar
  41. Iturbe R, López J (2015) Bioremediation for a soil contaminated with hydrocarbons. J Pet Environ Biotechnol 6:208–215Google Scholar
  42. Iwamoto T, Nasu M (2001) Current bioremediation practice and perspective. J Biosci Bioeng 92:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jain PK, Gupta VK, Gaur R, Lowry M, Jaroli DP, Chauhan UK (2011) Bioremediation of petroleum oil contaminated soil and water. Res J Environ Toxicol 5:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kamath R, Rentz JA, Schnoor JL, Alvarez PJJ (2004) Chapter 16 Phytoremediation of hydrocarbon-contaminated soils: principles and applications. In: Vazquez-Duhalt R, Quintero-Ramirez R (eds) Studies in surface science and catalysis, vol 151. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 447–478Google Scholar
  45. Kim S, Choi DH, Sim DH, Oh Y (2005) Evaluation of bioremediation effectiveness on crude oil contaminated sand. Chemosphere 59:845–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Koning M, Hupe K, Stegmann R (2000) Thermal processes, scrubbing/extraction, bioremediation and disposal. Biotechnology 11:306–317Google Scholar
  47. Krysta P, Allison R, Rowe RK, John S (2008) Poland, remediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soils in the Canadian Arctic by land farming. Cold Reg Sci Technol 53(1):102–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lau KL, Tsang YY, Chiu SW (2003) Use of spent mushroom compost to bioremediate PAH-contaminated samples. Chemosphere 52(9):1539–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lee JH (2013) An overview of phytoremediation as a potentially promising technology for environmental pollution control. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 18:431–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lee K, Park JW, Ahn IS (2003) Effect of additional carbon source on naphthalene biodegradation by Pseudomonas putida G7. J Hazard Matt 105:157–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Liebeg EW, Cutright TJ (1999) the investigation of enhanced bioremediation through the addition of macro and micro nutrients in a PAH contaminated soil. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 44:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Magalhães SMC, Jorge RMF, Castro PML (2009) Investigations into the application of a combination of bioventing and biotrickling filter technologies for soil decontamination processes-a transition regime between bioventing and soil vapour extraction. J Hazard Matt 170:711–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Maila MP, Colete TE (2004) Bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons through land farming: are simplicity and cost-effectiveness the only advantages? Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 3:349–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. McCarthy K, Walker L, Vigoren L, Bartel J (2004) Remediation of spilled petroleum hydrocarbons by in situ land farming at an Arctic site. Cold Reg Sci Technol 40:31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Menendez-Vega D, Gallego JLR, Pelaez AI, Fernandez de Cordoba G, Moreno J, Munoz D, Sanchez J (2007) Engineered in situ bioremediation of soil and groundwater polluted with weathered hydrocarbons. Eur J Soil Biol 43:310–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Midwest Research Institute (1998) Petroleum hydrocarbon remediation. 425 Volker Boulevard, Kansas City, MI.
  57. Mihopoulos PG, Suidan MT, Sayles GD (2000) Vapor phase treatment of PCE by lab scale anaerobic bioventing. Water Res 34:3231–3237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mihopoulos PG, Suidan MT, Sayles GD, Kaskassian S (2002) Numerical modeling of oxygen exclusion experiments of anaerobic bioventing. J Contam Hydrol 58:209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mohan SV, Sirisha K, Rao NC, Sarma PN, Reddy SJ (2004) Degradation of chlorpyrifos contaminated soil by bioslurry reactor operated in sequencing batch mode: bioprocess monitoring. J Hazard Mater 116:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mulligan CN (2001) An overview of in situ bioremediation processes. In: Proceedings of the 29th annual conference of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Victoria, BC, May 30–June 2. Canadian Society of Civil Engineering, Montreal, PQGoogle Scholar
  61. Nikolopoulou M, Pasadakis N, Norf H, Kalogerakis N (2013) Enhanced ex situ bioremediation of crude oil contaminated beach sand by supplementation with nutrients and rhamnolipids. Mar Pollut Bull 77:37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Okolo JC, Amadi EN, Odu CTI (2005) Effects of soil treatments containing poultry manure on crude oil degradation in a sandy loam soil. Appl Ecol Environ Res 3(1):47–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Oudot J, Merlin MX, Pinvidic P (1998) Weathering rates of oil components in a bioremediation experiment in estuarine sediments. Mar Environ Res 45:113–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pelletier E, Delille D, Delille B (2004) Crude oil bioremediation in sub- Antarctic intertidal sediments: chemistry and toxicity of oiled residues. Mar Environ Res 57:311–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Philp JC, Atlas RM (2005) Bioremediation of contaminated soils and aquifers. In: Atlas RM, Philp JC (eds) Bioremediation: applied microbial solutions for real-world environmental cleanup. American Society for Microbiology (ASM) Press, Washington, DC, pp 139–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Piskonen R, Nyyssönen M, Rajamäki T, Itävaara M (2005) Monitoring of accelerated naphthalene-biodegradation in a bioaugmented soil slurry. Biodegradation 16:127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Prokop G, Schamann M, Edelgaard I (2000) Management of contaminated sites in western Europe. European Environment Agency, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  68. RAAG (2000) Evaluation of risk based corrective action model. Remediation Alternative Assessment Group, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John’sGoogle Scholar
  69. Rodrı’guez-Rodrı’guez CE, Marco-Urrea E, Caminal G (2010) Degradation of naproxen and carbamazepine in spiked sludge by slurry and solid-phase Trametes versicolor systems. Bioresour Technol 101:2259–2266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sang-Hwan L, Seokho L, Dae-YSang-Hwan L, Seokho L, Dae-Yeon K, Jeong-gyu K (2007) Degradation characteristics of waste lubricants under different nutrient conditions. J Hazard Mater 143:65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sanscartier D, Zeeb B, Koch I, Reimer K (2009) Bioremediation of diesel-contaminated soil by heated and humidified biopile system in cold climates. Cold Reg Sci Technol 55:167–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sarkar D, Ferguson M, Datta R, Birnbaum S (2005) Bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons in contaminated soil: comparison, and monitored natural attenuation. Environ Pollut 136:187–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Semple KT, Reid BJ, Fermor TR (2001) Impact of composting strategies on the treatment of soils contaminated with organic pollutants a review. Environ Pollut 112:269–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Shah JK, Sayles GD, Suidan MT, Mihopoulos PG, Kaskassian SR (2001) Anaerobic bioventing of unsaturated zone contaminated with DDT and DNT. Water Sci Technol 43:35–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Silva-Castro GA, Uad I, Gónzalez-López J, Fandiño CG, Toledo FL, Calvo C (2012) Application of selected microbial consortia combined with inorganic and oleophilic fertilizers to recuperate oil-polluted soil using land farming technology. Clean Techn Environ Policy 14:719–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Singh K, Chandra S (2014) Treatment of petroleum hydrocarbon polluted environment through bioremediation: a review. Pak J Biol Sci 17:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sutherland TD, Horne I, Lacey MJ, Harcourt RL, Russell RJ, Oakeshott JG (2000) Enrichment of an endosulfan degrading mixed bacterial culture. Appl Environ Microbiol 66:2822–2828CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. Thieman WJ, Palladino MA (2009) Introduction to biotechnology, 2nd edn. Pearson, New York, pp 209–222Google Scholar
  79. Thomé A, Reginatto C, Cecchin I, Colla LM (2014) Bioventing in a residual clayey soil contaminated with a blend of biodiesel and diesel oil. J Environ Eng 140:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Trejo-Hernandez MR, Lopez-Munguia AR, Ramirez Q (2001) Residual compost of Agaricus bisporus as a source of crude laccase for enzymatic oxidation of phenolic compounds. Process Biochem 36:635–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. U.S. Air Force Environics Directorate of the Armstrong Laboratory, U.S. Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (1995a) Manual: bioventing principles and practices, EPA/540/R-95/534aGoogle Scholar
  82. United States Environmental Protection Agency (1995) Bioventing principles and practice vol. 1: bioinventing principles. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  83. USEPA (2004) How to evaluate alternative cleanup technologies for underground storage tank sites: a guide for corrective action plan reviewers. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  84. Vogel TM (1996) Bioaugmentation as a soil bioremediation approach. Curr Opin Biotechnol 7:311–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Whelan MJ, Coulon F, Hince G, Rayner J, McWatters R, Spedding T, Snape I (2015) Fate and transport of petroleum hydrocarbons in engineered biopiles in Polar Regions. Chemosphere 131:232–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Widada J, Nojiri H, Omori T (2002) Recent development in molecular techniques for identification and monitoring of xenobiotic-degrading bacteria and their catabolic genes in bioremediation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 60:45–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Wolski EA, Murialdo SE, Gonzales JF (2006) Effect of pH and inoculum size on pentachlorophenol degradation by Pseudomonas sp. Water SA 32:1–5Google Scholar
  88. Yen HK, Chang NB, Lin TF (2003) Bioslurping model for assessing light hydrocarbon recovery in contaminated unconfined aquifer. I: simulation analysis. Pract Period Hazard Toxic Radioact Waste Manag 7(2):114–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Zangi-Kotler M, Ben-Dov E, Tiehm A, Kushmaro A (2015) Microbial community structure and dynamics in a membrane bioreactor supplemented with the flame retardant dibromoneopentyl glycol. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 22:17615–17624CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environment StudiesPanjab UniversityChandigarhIndia

Personalised recommendations