Geosciences Journal

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 377–385 | Cite as

Optimal groundwater remediation design considering effects of natural attenuation processes: pumping strategy with enhanced-natural-attenuation

  • Dong Kyu Park
  • Nak-Youl Ko
  • Kang-Kun Lee


A simulation-optimization model is proposed to investigate the effect of natural attenuation processes on pump-and-treat and to enhance the application efficiency of the remediation method. Numerical experiments under varying retardation and attenuation conditions demonstrate that the efficacy and the feasibility of pump-and treat are considerably sensitive to the retardation factor and the attenuation rates. The severe retarded condition and attenuation are, the more remediation costs are required and even success of the remediation can not be guaranteed. For these conditions, long pumping strategy or enhancement of biodegradability can be cost-effective and safe. These results indicate that optimal remediations with or without considering natural attenuation processes result in quite different pumping schedules and well locations, and this should be noticed in real practices of groundwater remediation design. The enhanced-natural-attenuation (ENA) optimization process developed to overcome some limitations of the pump-and-treat method determines the locations injecting oxygen to attenuate residual contaminants remained in the aquifer after applying the pump-and-treat. The performances of the ENA model with the cost and the contaminant removal are evaluated for three scenarios. Among these scenarios, second scenario designed for each 0.5 years was most suitable to efficiently remove a low concentration of contaminants remained in the aquifer. This optimization model will be helpful to improve the efficiency in contaminated sites applying the pump-and-treat system.

Key words

optimization remediation design pump-and-treat enhanced-natural-attenuation retardation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ahlfeld, D.P. and Hill, E.H. III, 1996, The sensitivity of remedial strategies to design criteria, Ground Water, 34, 341–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahlfeld, D.P., Mulvey, J.M. and Pinder, G.F., 1986, Designing optimal strategies for contaminated groundwater remediation, Advanced Water Resources, 9, 77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bedient, P. B., Rodgers A.C., Bouvette T.C., Tomson M.B. and Wang T.H., 1984, Ground-water quality at a creosote waste site, Ground Water, 22, 318–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berglund, S., 1995, The effect of Langmuir sorption on pump-and-treat remediation of a stratified aquifer, Journal of Contaminant hydrology, 18, 199–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fetter, C.W., 1999, Contaminant hydrogeology 2nd edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 500p.Google Scholar
  6. Goldberg, D.E., 1989, Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning, Addison-Wesley publishing company inc., Massachusetts, 432p.Google Scholar
  7. Gorelick, S.M., Voss, C.I., Gill, P.E., Murry, W., Saunders, M.A. and Wright, M.H., 1984, Aquifer reclamation design: The use of contaminant transport simulation combined with nonlinear programming, Water Resources Research, 20, 415–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guan, J. and Aral, M.M., 2004, Optimal design of groundwater remediation systems using fuzzy set theory. Water Resources Research, 40, W01518, doi:10.1029/2003WR002121.Google Scholar
  9. Guan, J. and Aral, M.M., 2005, Remediation system design with multiple uncertain parameters using fuzzy sets and genetic algorithm, Journal of hydrologic engineering, ASCE, 10, 386–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harbaugh, A.W. and McDonald, M.G., 1996, Users documentation for MODFLOW-96, an update to the U.S. Geological Survey modular finite-difference ground-water flow model, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 96-485.Google Scholar
  11. Hubbard, C.E., Barker J.F., O’Hannesin S.F., Vandegriendt M. and Gellham R.W., 1994, Transport and fate of dissolved methanol, methyl-tertiary butyl ether, and monoaromatic hydrocarbons in a shallow sand aquifer, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  12. Ko, N.-Y, Lee, K.-K. and Hyun, Y., 2005, Optimal groundwater remediation design of a pump and treat system considering clean-up time, Geosciences Journal, 9, 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Koenigsberg, S., 2001, The Efficacy of ORC: A Six Year Review, Proceedings of the six annual in-situ and on-situ bioremediation conference, San Deigo, CA.Google Scholar
  14. Latinopoulos, P., Theodosiou, N., Mylopoulos, Y. and Mylopoulos, N., 1994, A sensitivity analysis and parametric study for the evaluation of the optimal management of a contaminated aquifer, Water Resources Management, 8, 11–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lee, M.D. and Ward C.H., 1984, Reclamation of contaminated aquifers: Proceedings of the 1984 Hazardous Spills Conference, Nashville, TN.Google Scholar
  16. Mackay, D.M. and Cherry, J.A., 1989, Groundwater contamination: Limitations of pump-and-treat remediation, Environmental Science and Technology, 23, 630–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McKinney, D.C. and Lin, M.-D., 1994, Genetic algorithms solution of groundwater management models, Water Resources Research, 30, 1897–1906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McKinney, D.C. and Lin, M.-D., 1996, Pump-and-treat groundwater remediation system optimization, Journal of Water Resource Planning and Management, ASCE, 122, 128–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Newell, C.J., Rifai, H.S., Wilson, J.T., Connor, J.A., Aziz, J.A. and Suarez, M.P., 2002, Calculation and use of first-order rate constants for monitored natural attenuation studies, EPA/540/S-02/ 500, Washington, DC: US EPA. 28p.Google Scholar
  20. Rifai, H.S., Borden, R.C., Wilson, J.T. and Ward, C.H., 1995, Intrinsic bioattenuation for subsurface restoration, Intrinsic Bioremediation, Hinchee R.E., Wilson, J.T. and Downey, D.C., eds., Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH, 1-29.Google Scholar
  21. Ritzel, B.J., Eheart, J.W. and Ranjithnan, S., 1994, Using genetic algorithms to solve a multiple objective groundwater pollution containment problem, Water Resources Research, 32, 2549–2561.Google Scholar
  22. Seagren, E.A. and Becker, J.G., 2002, A review of natural attenuation of BTEX and MTBE in groundwater, Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Management, ASCE, 6, 156–172.Google Scholar
  23. Suarez, M.P. and Rifai, H.S., 1999, Biodegradation rates for fuel hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents in groundwater, Bioremediation Journal, 3, 337–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Suthersan, S., 2002, Natural and Enhanced Remediation Systems, Lewis Publishers, CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, 419p.Google Scholar
  25. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), 2004, Treatment Technologies for Site Cleanup: Annual Status Report (11th Edition), EPA-542-R-03-009, Washington, DC: US EPA., 228p.Google Scholar
  26. Wagner, B.J. and Gorelick, S.M., 1987, Optimal groundwater quality management under parameter uncertainty, Water Resources Research, 23, 1162–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Warner, J.W., Tamayo-Lara, C., Khazaei, E. and Manghi, F., 2006, Stochastic management modeling of a pump and treat system at the rocky mountain arsenal near Denver, Colorado, Journal of Hydrology, 328, 523–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Weber, W.J., Mcginley, P.M. and Katz, L.E., 1991, Sorption phenomena in subsurface systems: Concepts, models and effects on contaminant fate and transport. Water Research, 25, 499–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zheng, C., 1990, MT3D: A modular three-dimensional transport model for simulation of advection, dispersion, and chemical reactions in groundwater systems, Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ada, OK, 170p.Google Scholar
  30. Zheng, C. and Wang, P.P., 1998, MT3DMS, A modular three-dimensional multispecies transport model for simulation of advection, dispersion and chemical reactions of contaminants in groundwater systems: Vicksburg, Miss., Waterways Experiment Station, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 238p.Google Scholar
  31. Zheng, C. and Wang, P.P., 2002, A field demonstration of the simulation optimization approach for remediation system design, Ground Water, 40, 258–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zogorski, J.S., Morduchowitz, A.M., Baehr, A.L, Bauman, B.J., Conrad, D.L., Drew, R.T., Korte, N.E., Lapham, W.W., Pankow, J.F. and Washington, E.R., 1997, Fuel oxygenates and water quality, in Interagency Assessment of Oxygenated Fuels: Washington D.C., Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, chap. 2, 80 p.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Earth and Environmental SciencesSeoul National UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations