Abstract
An environmental impact assessment of a landfarming process, which was performed at an actual petroleum-contaminated site, was conducted using a green and sustainable remediation (GSR) tool in this study. The landfarming process was divided into four stages: site preparation, installation, system operation, and system dismantling/waste disposal. The environmental footprints of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, water consumption, total energy usage, and air pollutants (SOx, NOx, and PM10) were analyzed. GHG emissions and water consumption were approximately 276 metric tons and 7.90E + 05 gal, respectively, in stage III, where they were the highest due to the consumables and equipment use in the system operation. Total energy usage had the highest value of 1.54E + 03 MMBTU in stage II due to material production. The SOx and NOx emissions primarily occurred in stages I and II due to energy usage. The PM10 was mostly emitted in stages I and III and was associated with heavy use of equipment. To reduce the environmental footprints, biodiesel and sunlight were suggested as alternatives in this study. The GHG and SOx emissions decreased to 1.7 and 4.4E-04 metric tons, respectively, on the basis of total emissions with a 1 % increase in biodiesel content, but the NOx emissions increased to 5.6E-03 metric tons. If sunlight was used instead of electricity, the GHG and NOx emissions could be reduced by as much as 79 and 84 %, respectively, and the SOx emissions could also be reduced.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atagana, H. I. (2003). Bioremediation of creosote-contaminated soil: a pilot-scale landfarming evaluation. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 19(6), 571–581.
Blanc, A., Métivier-Pignon, H., Gourdon, R., & Rousseaux, P. (2004). Life cycle assessment as a tool for controlling the development of technical activities: application to the remediation of a site contaminated by sulfur. Advances in Environmental Research, 8(3), 613–627.
Cadotte, M., Deschênes, L., & Samson, R. (2007). Selection of a remediation scenario for a diesel-contaminated site using LCA. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 12(4), 239–251.
Chatham, J. R. (2003). Landfarming on the Alaskan North slope—historical development and recent applications. In 10th Annual International Petroleum Environmental Conference, Houston, TX. pp. 11–14.
Diamond, M. L., Page, C. A., Campbell, M., McKenna, S., & Lall, R. (1999). Life‐cycle framework for assessment of site remediation options: method and generic survey. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 18(4), 788–800.
Genouw, G., De Naeyer, F., Van Meenen, P., Van de Werf, H., De Nijs, W., & Verstraete, W. (1994). Degradation of oil sludge by landfarming—a case-study at the Ghent harbour. Biodegradation, 5(1), 37–46.
Hejazi, R. F., & Husain, T. (2004a). Landfarm performance under arid conditions. 1. Conceptual framework. Environmental Science & Technology, 38(8), 2449–2456.
Hejazi, R. F., & Husain, T. (2004b). Landfarm performance under arid conditions. 2. Evaluation of parameters. Environmental Science & Technology, 38(8), 2457–2469.
Hejazi, R. F., Husain, T., & Khan, F. I. (2003). Landfarming operation of oily sludge in arid region—human health risk assessment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 99(3), 287–302.
Hoeks, J., Harmsen, J., & Pennings, M. (1988). Biologische reiniging van grond vervuild met gasolie en ruwe olie volgens de landfarming-methode. ICW.
ITRC (2011). Green and sustainable remediation: state of the science and practice, The Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council.
Ju, W.-H., Choi, S.-I., Kim, J.-M., Kim, B.-K., Kim, S.-G., & Park, S.-H. (2009). Evaluation of the large scale petroleum-contaminated site for the remediation of landfarming. Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment, 14(4), 15–22.
Kim, D.-H., Yoo, J.-C., Hwang, B.-R., Yang, J.-S., & Baek, K. (2014). Environmental assessment on electrokinetic remediation of multimetal-contaminated site: a case study. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 21(10), 6751–6758.
Korean Ministry of Environment. (2016). Standard method for soil. http://www.law.go.kr/admRulLsInfoP.do?admRulSeq=2100000036851&chrClsCd=010201&admFlag=0
Lemming, G., Hauschild, M. Z., & Bjerg, P. L. (2010). Life cycle assessment of soil and groundwater remediation technologies: literature review. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 15(1), 115–127.
Maila, M. P., & Cloete, T. E. (2004). Bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons through landfarming: are simplicity and cost-effectiveness the only advantages? Reviews in Environmental science and bio/Technology, 3(4), 349–360.
Marin, J., Hernandez, T., & Garcia, C. (2005). Bioremediation of oil refinery sludge by landfarming in semiarid conditions: influence on soil microbial activity. Environmental Research, 98(2), 185–195.
MOE (2013). Research of plan to activate soil remediation market.
Mohit Bhargava, R. S., (Battelle) (2011). SiteWise™ Version 2 User Guide.
Morais, S. A., & Delerue-Matos, C. (2010). A perspective on LCA application in site remediation services: critical review of challenges. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 175(1), 12–22.
Page, C. A., Diamond, M. L., Campbell, M., & McKenna, S. (1999). Life‐cycle framework for assessment of site remediation options: case study. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 18(4), 801–810.
Paudyn, K., Rutter, A., Rowe, R. K., & Poland, J. S. (2008). Remediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soils in the Canadian Arctic by landfarming. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 53(1), 102–114.
Petruzzi, N. M. (2011). A case study on the evaluation and implementation of green and sustainable remediation principles and practices during a RCRA corrective action cleanup. Groundwater Monitoring & Remediation, 31(2), 63–71.
Suèr, P., Nilsson-Påledal, S., & Norrman, J. (2004). LCA for site remediation: a literature review. Soil and Sediment Contamination, 13(4), 415–425.
SurF-UK (2010). A framework for assessing the sustainability of soil and groundwater remediation.
USEPA (2004). How to evaluate alternative cleanup technologies for underground storage tank sites: a guide for corrective action plan reviewers. EPA 510-R-04-002.
USEPA (2008). Green remediation: incorporating sustainable environmental practices into remediation of contaminated sites. EPA 542-R-08-002.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the Republic of Korea Ministry of the Environment as the “Green Remediation Research Center for Organic–inorganic Combined Contamination (The GAIA Project-2012000550001).”
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lim, H., Kwon, IS., Lee, H. et al. Environmental impact assessment using a GSR tool for a landfarming case in South Korea. Environ Monit Assess 188, 231 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-016-5243-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-016-5243-1