Bioremediation: An Eco-sustainable Approach for Restoration of Contaminated Sites

  • Vineet Kumar
  • S. K. Shahi
  • Simranjeet Singh


In the current scenario, pollution of soil, surface water, and groundwater, with toxic chemicals due to industrialization, is one of the global concerns for the sustainable development of human beings. Thus, the eradication of toxic organic and inorganic pollutants from the contaminated environment is the need of global concern to advance the sustainable development with low environmental impact. The treatment of contaminated soil, sediment, and water by the conventional method is found to be unfeasible due to its high cost and generates secondary pollutants. Therefore, bioremediation has emerged as a natural, economic, sustainable approach which can restore the contaminated soil, surface water, and groundwater, with the help of biological agents like bacteria, fungi, and other organisms or their enzymes. It is an evolving green technology where microbes are grown in the presence of contaminated soil, sediment, surface, and groundwater to elevate the decomposition and/or removal of inorganic and organic pollutants. Bioremediation technologies can be broadly categorized into two categories, i.e., in situ bioremediation and ex situ bioremediation. In situ bioremediation involves treatment of contaminated substances at the same place, whereas ex situ bioremediation involves the elimination of the contaminated material which is treated somewhere else. Some typical examples of bioremediation technologies involve bioventing, biosparging, bioaugmentation, land farming, composting, and biostimulation. This book chapter gives a gist about bioremediation, its strategies, factors affecting biodegradation processes, and advantages and disadvantages of bioremediation.


Biostimulation Bioaugmentation Organic pollutants In situ bioremediation Bioventing 


  1. Antizar-Ladislao B (2010) Bioremediation: Working with bacteria. Elements 6:389–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atagana HI, Haynes RJ, Wallis FM (2003) Optimization of soil physical and chemical conditions for the bioremediation of creosote-contaminated soil. Biodegradation 14:297–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chakraborty R, Wu CH, Hazen TC (2012) Systems biology approach to bioremediation. Curr Opin Biotechnol 23:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Doucette WJ, Bugbee B, Hayhurst S, Plaehn WA, Downey DC, Taffinder SA, Edwards R (1998) Phytoremediation of dissolved phase trichloroethylene using mature vegetation. In: Wickramanayake GB, Hinchee HE (eds) Bioremediation and phytoremediation: chlorinated and recalcitrant compounds. Batelle Press, Columbus, pp 251–256Google Scholar
  5. Das S, Dash HR (2014) Microbial biodegradation and bioremediation: A potential tool for restoration of contaminated areas. Elsevier Science Publishing Co Inc., LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. El Fantroussi S, Agathos SN (2005) Is bioaugmentation a feasible strategy for pollutant removal and site remediation? Curr Opin Microbiol 8:268–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fitz WJ, Wenzel WW (2002) Arsenic transformation in the soil-rhizosphere-plant system, fundamentals and potential application of phytoremediation. J Biotechol 99:259–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Garbiscu C, Alkorta I (2001) Phytoextraction: a cost effective plant based technology for the removal of metals from the environment. Bioresour Technol 77:229–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Germaine KJ, McGuinness M, Dowling DN (2012) Improving phytoremediation through plant associated bacteria. In: de Bruijn FJ (ed) Molecular ecology of the rhizosphere. Hoboken, Wiley-BlackwellGoogle Scholar
  10. Gupta AK, Sinha S (2007) Phytoextraction capacity of the Chenopodium album L. grown on soil amended with tannery sludge. Bioresour Technol 98:442–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hazen TC (2010) In situ: groundwater bioremediation. In: Timmis KN (ed) Handbook of hydrocarbon and lipid microbiology. Springer, Berlin, pp 2583–2594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hazen TC (2009) Cometabolic Bioremediation. LBNL-1694E. Scholar
  13. Jourtey NT, Bahafid W, Sayel H, EI Chachtouli N (2013) Bioderadation: involved microorganisms and genetically engineered microorganisms. In: Chamy R, Rosenkranz F (eds) Biodegradation-life science. Intech Publisher, China, pp 289-319Google Scholar
  14. Kumar M, Prasad R, Goyal P, Teotia P, Tuteja N, Varma A, Kumar V et al (2017) Environmental biodegradation of xenobiotics: role of potential microflora. In: Hashmi M, Kumar V, Varma A (eds) Xenobiotics in the soil environment. Soil biology, vol 49. Springer, Cham, pp 319–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kumar PBAN, Dushenkov V, Motto H, Raskin I (1995) Phytoextraction: The use of plants to remove heavy metals from soils. Environ Sci Technol 29(5):1232-1238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Margesin R, Labbe D, Schninner F, Greer CW, Whyte LG (2003) Characterisation of hydrocarbon degrading microbial populations in contaminated and pristine contaminated soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 69(6):3985–3092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McGrath SP, Zhao FJ (2003) Phytoextraction of metals and metalloids from contaminated soils. Curr Opin Biotechnol 14:277–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Megharaj M, Ramakrishnan B, Venkateswarlu K, Sethunathan N, Naidu R (2011) Bioremediation approaches for organic pollutants: a critical perspective. Environ Int 37(8):1362–1375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. NRC (2000) Natural attenuation for groundwater remediation, committee on intrinsic remediation. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, p 2000Google Scholar
  20. Pawar RM. (2012). The effect of soil pH on degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). URI: Scholar
  21. Rockne KJ, Reddy KR (2003) Bioremediation of contaminated sites. In: International e-conference on modern trends in foundation engineering: geotechnical challenges and solutions. Indian Institute of Technology, MadrasGoogle Scholar
  22. Segura A, Ramos JL (2013) Plant–bacteria interactions in the removal of pollutants. Curr Opin Biotechnol 24:467–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Salt DE, Smith RD, Raskin L (1998) Phytoremediation. Ann Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 49(1):643–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Trapp S, Zambrano KC, Kusk KC, Karlson U (2000) A phytotoxicity test using transpiration of willows. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 39:154–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tyagi M, da Fonseca MMR, de Carvalho CCCR (2011) Bioaugmentation and biostimulation strategies to improve the effectiveness of bioremediation processes. Biodegradation 22:231–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tordoff GM, Baker AJM, Willis AJ (2004) Current approaches to the revegetation and reclamation of metalliferous mine wastes. Chemosphere 41:219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tangahu BV, Abdullah SRS, Basri H, Idris M, Anuar N, Mukhlisin M (2011) A review on heavy metals (As, Pb, and Hg) uptake by plants through phytoremediation. Int J Chemi Eng 2011:1–31. Article ID 939161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2012) A citizen guide to bioremediation. EPA 542-F-12-003Google Scholar
  29. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1999) Use of monitored natural attenuation at superfund, RCRA corrective action, and underground storage tank sites, directive number 9200.4-17PGoogle Scholar
  30. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2000a) Engineered approaches to In Situ bioremediation of chlorinated solvents: fundamentals and field applications, EPA-542-R-00-008Google Scholar
  31. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2000b) Ground water issue. EPA 540/S-01/500Google Scholar
  32. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2006) In situ and ex situ biodegradation technologies for remediation of contaminated sites. EPA/625/R-06/015Google Scholar
  33. Vidali M (2001) Bioremediation. An overview. Pure Appl Chem 73(7):1163–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vishnoi SR, Shrivastava PN (2008) Phytoremediation-green for environmental cleanup. In: The 12th World lake conference, 1016–1021Google Scholar
  35. Yoon J, Cao X, Zhou Q, Ma LQ (2006) Accumulation of Pb, Cu, and Zn in native plants growing on a contaminated Florida site. Sci Tota Environ 368(2):456–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vineet Kumar
    • 1
  • S. K. Shahi
    • 2
  • Simranjeet Singh
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Environmental Microbiology, School for Environmental SciencesBabasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Central UniversityLucknowIndia
  2. 2.Department of BotanyGuru Ghasidas ViswavidyalayaBilaspurIndia
  3. 3.Department of BiotechnologyLovely Professional UniversityPhagwaraIndia

Personalised recommendations