Innovative Surfactant/Cosolvent Technologies for Removal of NAPL and Sorbed Contaminants from Aquifers



Conventional pump-and-treat removal of nonaqueous phase liquids and sorbed contaminants from groundwater has proved unsuccessful in many cases for a variety of reasons. To overcome some of the limitations of these methods, innovative technologies are currently under development which attempt to increase subsurface contaminant removal efficiencies through the addition of surfactants and/or cosolvents. The rationale behind the use of these substances for improving groundwater contaminant removal, as well as several case studies are reviewed.


Surfactant Solution Injection Well Hazardous Waste Management Winsor Type NAPL Phase 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Winsor, PA., “Hydrotropy, solubilization, and related emulsification processes, Part I,” Trans. Faraday Soc., 54:376–399, 1948.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shiau, B.J., Sabatini, D.A., and Harwell, J.H., Ground Water 32:561–569, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jafvert, C.T., “Sediment and saturated-soil-associated reactions involving an anionic surfactant (dodecylsulfate). 2. Partitioning of PAH compounds among phases,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 25:1039–1045, 1991.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yalkowski, S.H., “Solubility of Organic Solutes in Mixed Aqueous Solvent,” Final Report to the R.S. Kerr Research Lab., U.S. EPA, contract CR811852-01-0, 1985.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fountain, J.C., Waddell-Sheets, C., Lagowski, A., Taylor, C., Frazier, D., and Byrne, M., “Chapter 13: Enhanced removal of dense nonaqueous-phase liquids using surfactants,” in Surfactant-Enhanced Subsurface Remediation: Emerging Technologies, ACS Symposium Series 594, Dave A. Sabatini, Robert C. Knox, and Jeffrey H. Harwell, eds., 1995.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fountain, J.C. and Hodge, D., “Project summary: Extraction of organic pollutants using enhanced surfactant flushing: Initial field test (part 1). NY State Center for Hazardous Waste Management, February, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fountain, J.C., “Project summary: Extraction of organic pollutants using enhanced sur-factant flushing, part II,” NY State Center for Hazardous Waste Management, November 1993.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fountain, J.C. and Waddell-Sheets, C., “A pilot field test of surfactant enhanced aquifer remediation: Corpus Christi, Texas,” Extended Abstract from ACS symposium in Atlanta Georgia, September 27–29, 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fountain, J.C., “A pilot scaletest of surfactant enhanced pump and treat,” in Proceedings of Air and Waste Management Association’s 86th Annual Meeting, Denver, June 13–18, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ross, A., Boulanger, C., and Tremblay, C., “In situ remediation of hydrocarbon contamination using an injection-extraction process,” Remediation Management, March/April, pp 42–45, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abdul, A.S. and Gibson, T.L., “Laboratory studies of surfactant-enhanced washing of polychlorinated biphenyls from sandy materials,” Environ. Sci. and Technol, 25:565–670, 1991.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ang, C.C. and Abdul, A.S., “Aqueous surfactant washing of residual oil contamination from sandy soil,” Ground Water Monitoring Review, 11:121–127, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ang, C.C. and Abdul, A.S., “A laboratory study of the biodegradation of an alcohol ethoxylate surfactant by native soil microbes,” J. of Hydrology, 138:191–209, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abdul, A.S., Gibson, T.L., Ang, C.C., Smith, J.C., and Sobczynski, R.E., “In situ surfactant washing of polychlorinated biphenyls and oils from a contaminated site,” Ground Water, 30:219–231, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abdul, A.S. and Ang, C.C., “In situ surfactant washing of polychlorinated biphenyls and oils from a contaminated field site: Phase II pilot study,” Ground Water, 32: 727–734, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ang, C.C. and Abdul, A.S., “Evaluation of an ultrafiltration method for surfactant recovery and reuse during in situ washing of contaminated sites: Laboratory and field studies,” Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Martel, R., Gélinas, P., Desnoyers, Jacques E., and Masson Anne, “Phase diagrams to optimize surfactant solutions for oil and DNAPL recovery in aquifers,” Ground Water, 31:789–800, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martel, R., Gélinas, P., and Laurent, S., “In situ recovery of DNAPL in sand aquifers: clean-up test using surfactants at Thouin Sand Quarry,” presented at the 5th Annual Symposium on Ground-water and Soil Remediation, Toronto, Ontario Canada, Oct. 2–6, 1995.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martel, R. and Gélinas, P, “Surfactant solutions developed for NAPL recovery in contaminated aquifers,” Ground Water, 34: 143–154, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martel, R. and Gelinas, P., “Residual diesel measurement in sand columns after surfactant/alcohol washing,” Ground Water, 34: 162–167, 1996.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Knox, R.C., Sabatini, D.A., Harwell, J.H., West, C.C., Blaha, F., Griffin, C., Wallick, D., and Quencer, L., “Traverse City field test,” presented at Workshop on In Situ Surfactant Use, Kansas City, MO, sponsored by the R.S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada OK, held September 20, 199s.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sabatini, D.A., Knox, R.C., Harwell, J.H., Soerens, T.S., Chen, L., Brown, R.E., and West C.C., “Design of a surfactant remediation field demonstration based on laboratory and modeling studies,” in review, Ground Water, submitted September 20, 1996.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Knox, R.C., Sabatini, D.A., Harwell, J.H., Brown, R.E., West, C.C., Blaha, F., and Griffin, S., “Surfactant remediation field demonstration using a vertical circulation well,” in review, Ground Water, submitted September 20, 1996.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sabatini, D.A., Knox, R.C., and Harwell, J.H. eds., Surfactant Enhanced Subsurface Remediation: Emerging Technologies, ACS Symposium Series, number 594, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., 312 pages, 1995.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gotlieb, I., Bozzelli, J.W., and Gotlieb, E., “Soil and Water Decontamination by Extraction with Surfactants,” Seper. Sci. and Technol., 28:793–804, 1993.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Di Cesare, D. and Smith, J.A., “Effects of Surfactants on the Desorption Rate of Nonionic Organic Compounds from Soil to Water,” Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 134: 1–29, 1994.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Deitsch, J.J. and Smith, J.A., “Surfactant Enhanced Remediation of Ground Waterat Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey,” in Morganwalp, D.W. and Aronson, D.A., eds., U.S. Geological Survey Toxics Substances Hydrology Program-Proceedings of the Technical Meeting Colorado Springs, Colorado-September 20–24, 1993, U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 94-4015, 1994.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Deitsch, J.J. and Smith, J.A., “Effect of Triton X-100 on the Rate of Trichloroethene Desorption from Soil to Water,” Environmental Science and Technology, 29: 1069–1080, 1995.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Annable, M.D., Rao, P.S.C., Hatfield, K., Graham, W.D., and Wood, A.L., “Use of Partitioning Tracers for Measuring Residual Napl Distribution in a Contaminated Aquifer: Preliminary Results from a Field-Scale Test,” proceedings, 2nd Tracer Workshop, U. of Texas, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pope, G.A., Jin, M., Dwarakanath, V., Rouse, B., and Sepehrnoori, K., “Partitioning Tracer Tests to Characterize Organic Contaminants,” proceedings, 2nd Tracer Workshop, U. of Texas, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Augestijin, D.C.M. and Rao, P.S.C., “Enhanced Removal of Organic Contaminants by Solvent Flushing,” ACS Symposium Series, submitted, 1995.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rao, P.S.C., Lee, L.S., and Wood, A.L., “Solubility, sorption, and transport of hydrophobic organic chemicals in Complex Mixtures,” U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600-M-91-009, March, 1991.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wood, A., Lynn, Bouchard, D., Brusseau, M., and Rao, P.S.C., “Cosolvent effects on sorption and mobility of Organic Contaminants in Soils,” Chemosphere, 21:575–587, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil Engineering Purdue UniversityPurdue UniversityWest Lafayette

Personalised recommendations