Remediation and Management of Contaminated Soil - Sustainable Practices in Geoenvironmental Engineering - page 431

Demonstration of the designed process will enable larger-scale evaluation of various
factors before inal design. Bioremediation has been suggested as a green remediation
scheme (USEPA, 2010). In the example shown for bioaugmentation at the MAG-1 Site, Fort
Dix, New Jersey, laboratory tests were used to evaluate the potential of a bacterial culture
for treating chlorinated VOCs. A new well system was devised to disperse the inocula
in the groundwater recirculation systems. The system was optimized to reduce material
consumption and maintenance of the equipment. The contaminants were reduced by 99%
with negative impacts.
Pilot scale ield tests of composting (Former Joliet Army Ammunition Plan, Will County,
Illinois) were performed to optimize amendments for composting and the turning fre-
quency (USEPA, 2010). Additives included manure, wood chips, spent digester waste, and
stable bedding. An 8.1-ha windrow composting facility was constructed to treat 280,000
tonnes of explosives-contaminated soil. Soil cleanup was 3 years ahead of schedule. The
land will be used for a business parks and an engineer training center. Another site in
Upper Arkansas River used municipal biosolids and limes for composting mine waste for
composting, which led to complete vegetative cover.
A case study by Aecom involved a sediment cleanup alternative analysis at Lower
Duwamish Waterway, Seattle, Washington (Fitzpatrick and Woodward, 2013). The site
was an 8.3-km waterway contaminated by industrial inputs situated in an economic cor-
ridor. Issues involved tribal ishing rights and proximity to residential neighborhoods.
Recontamination was occurring due to urban sources. EPA preferred dredging, but agreed
to a green sustainable remediation (GSR) evaluation. Alternatives cost between $200 mil-
lion and 1.2 billion dollars. Carbon dioxide emissions were compared for the various
alternatives. Dredging/landilling/backilling exhibited the highest level (5500 tonnes)
compared with minimal amounts from monitored natural recovery (MNR).
According to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
(2011) DER-31 green remediation is deined as “the practice of considering all environmen-
tal effects of remedy implementation and incorporating options to minimize the environ-
mental footprint of cleanup actions.” Some practices are easily implantable. Renewable
energy can be used as much as possible. Idling of vehicles must be limited. Materials
should be reused as base or ill to reduce waste as much as possible. Ideally, the alterna-
tives the most sustainable will have the following characteristics:
• Little impact on the environment in the short and long term
• Low GHG emissions
• Smaller environmental footprint
• Complete and permanent cleanup
• Optimal reuse
• Reduction of toxicity, mobility, and volume of contamination
• Achievement of remedial objectives
According to the EPA Green Remediation Best Management Practices Mining Sites
(USEPA, 2008), potential practices include a better understanding of the contamination
behavior, and implementation of passive treatment systems for acid mine drainage (slip-
pery rock watershed), agricultural waste (mushroom compost and limestone) was used
for neutralizing 82 kg of acidity per day. About 2 tonnes of MnO 2 were recovered over
8 years. Other waste materials such as industrial by-products such as chitin, and food