Natural Attenuation - Dealing with Contaminated Sites: From Theory Towards Practical Application - page 990

Table 22.1 (continued)

Aim Method Comments

Microbiological analyses (cell population
analyses, microcosm studies, in-situ
respiration tests, Fluorescence in-situ
hybridisation (FISH))

Results from laboratory studies are not directly
transferable to evaluate degradation in the
field

Quantitative NA Mass flow rate reduction (see above)

proof Determination of biodegradation rates from

field data

Knowledge of flow paths required

Quantification of total oxidation capacity using
consumed electron acceptors and produced
reduced species of electron acceptors

Spatial (2D or 3D) interpolation of electron
acceptors necessary

Quantification of percentage of biodegradation
from contaminant specific isotope analyses

Direct, quantitative proof of degradation (only
applicable to molecules up to C 10 ).
Contaminant specific fractionation factors
required (if no fraction factors are known, a
qualitative evaluation of contaminant
specific degradation is possible).

Quantification of sorption processes ( kd
concept / non-linear sorption)

Sorption is highly sensitive on the type of
organic material

Reactive Transport
Model

Quantification of coupled transport processes
on the basis of measured distributed
parameters

A lot of model codes with different levels of
complexity available. Only method to
consider all transport processes
quantitatively and coupled.

DP Direct Push, LIF Laser Induced Fluorescence Probe, ROST Rapid Optical Screening Tool, NAPL Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid, MIP Membrane Interface
Probe, PID Photo Ionization Detector, FID Flame Ionization Detector, DELCD Dry Electrolytic Conductivity Detector
For detailed descriptions and references see Wabbels and Teutsch ( 2008 ), Michels et al. ( 2008 ), Peter et al. ( 2006 ), Held ( 2007 ) and Werner et al. ( 2008 a)