Advertisement

In Situ Chemical Oxidation: Technology Description and Status

  • Robert L. Siegrist
  • Michelle Crimi
  • Richard A. Brown
Chapter
Part of the SERDP/ESTCP Environmental Remediation Technology book series (SERDP/ESTCP, volume 3)

Scope

Overview of in situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) as a remediation technology, including history of development and use, field applications, performance expectations, and costs.

Key Concepts

  • ISCO has had a long history of development and use. While research and development still continue, ISCO is a relatively mature technology for the remediation of contaminated groundwater, including source zones and plumes.

  • ISCO has primarily been applied for treatment of chlorinated organic solvents and petroleum hydrocarbons to achieve remediation objectives ranging from reducing contaminant mass in a source zone to achieving maximum contaminant levels in a plume. To achieve the more stringent remediation objectives, ISCO is almost always combined with another technology (e.g., bioremediation) or approach (e.g., monitored natural attenuation).

  • The effectiveness of ISCO varies and is highly dependent on proper site characterization and design of the oxidant delivery system to achieve oxidative destruction of contaminants of concern in a target treatment zone.

  • Typically ISCO applications require a targeted second or third oxidant delivery event since rebound in groundwater contaminant levels following cessation of active ISCO is a common occurrence.

  • The median cost of an ISCO project appears to be on the order of $100 per cubic yard treated. However, costs can vary widely depending on contaminant characteristics, site conditions, and the oxidant used.

  • When considering ISCO at a contaminated site, there are a number of frequently asked questions (Table 1.6) and key points to keep in mind to help support successful application (Table 1.7).

Keywords

Natural Organic Matter Source Zone Remediation Technology Subsurface Condition Sodium Persulfate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Anipsitakis GP, Dionysiou DD. 2004. Radical generation by the interaction of transition metals with common oxidants. Environ Sci Technol 38:3705–3712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2007. ASTM D7262-07 Standard Test Method for Estimating the Permanganate Natural Oxidant Demand of Soil and Aquifer Solids. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 5 p.Google Scholar
  3. ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry). 2009. ATSDR 2007 CERCLA Priority List of Hazardous Substances. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/cercla/. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  4. Barbeni M, Nfinero C, Pelizzetti E, Borgarello E, Serpon N. 1987. Chemical degradation of chlorophenols with Fenton’s reagent. Chemosphere 16:2225–2237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellamy WD, Hickman PA, Ziemba N. 1991. Treatment of VOC-contaminated groundwater by hydrogen peroxide and ozone oxidation. J Water Pollut Control Fed 63:120–128.Google Scholar
  6. Bissey LL, Smith JL, Watts RJ. 2006. Soil organic matter-hydrogen peroxide dynamics in the treatment of contaminated soils and groundwater using catalyzed H2O2 propagations (modified Fenton’s reagent). Water Res 40:2477–2484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Block PA, Brown RA, Robinson D. 2004. Novel Activation Technologies for Sodium Persulfate In Situ Chemical Oxidation. Proceedings, Fourth International Conference on the Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds, Monterey, CA, USA, May 24–27, Paper 2A-05.Google Scholar
  8. Bowers AR, Gaddipati P, Eckenfelder WW, Monsen RM. 1989. Treatment of toxic or refractory wastewaters with hydrogen peroxide. Water Sci Technol 21:477–486.Google Scholar
  9. Brown RA, Norris RD. 1986. Method for Decontaminating a Permeable Subterranean Formation. U.S. Patent 4,591,443.Google Scholar
  10. Brown RA, Norris RD, Westray M. 1986. In Situ Treatment of Groundwater. Presented at Haz Pro ’86, Baltimore, MD, USA, April 1–3.Google Scholar
  11. Brown RA, Skaladany G, Robinson D, Fiacco RJ. 2001. Comparing Permanganate and Persulfate Treatment Effectiveness for Various Organic Contaminants. Proceedings, First International Conference on Oxidation and Reduction Technologies for In-Situ Treatment of Soil and Groundwater, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada, June 25–29.Google Scholar
  12. Choi H, Lim H-N, Hwang T-M, Kang J-W. 2002. Transport characteristics of gas phase ozone in unsaturated porous media for in-situ chemical oxidation. J Contam Hydrol 57:81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crimi ML, Siegrist RL. 2003. Geochemical effects associated with permanganate oxidation of DNAPLs. Ground Water 41:458–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crimi ML, Siegrist RL. 2004a. Association of cadmium with MnO2 particles generated during permanganate oxidation. Water Res 38:887–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crimi ML, Siegrist RL. 2004b. Impact of reaction conditions on MnO2 genesis during permanganate oxidation. J Environ Eng 130:562–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Crimi ML, Siegrist RL. 2005. Factors affecting effectiveness and efficiency of DNAPL destruction using potassium permanganate and catalyzed hydrogen peroxide. J Environ Eng 131:1716–1723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Crimi ML, Taylor J. 2007. Experimental evaluation of catalyzed hydrogen peroxide and sodium persulfate for destruction of BTEX contaminants. Soil Sediment Contam 16:29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Crimi ML, Siegrist RL, Petri B, Krembs F, Simpkin T, Palaia T. 2008. In Situ Chemical Oxidation for Remediation of Contaminated Groundwater: Frequently Asked Questions. Prepared for the DoD Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), Arlington, VA, USA, 25 p. http://www.estcp.org/.
  19. Dugan P. 2006. Coupling In Situ Technologies for DNAPL Remediation and Viability of the PITT for Post-Remediation Performance Assessment. PhD Dissertation, Environmental Science and Engineering Division, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA, August.Google Scholar
  20. ESTCP (Environmental Security Technology Certification Program). 1999. Technology Status Review: In Situ Oxidation. ESTCP, Arlington, VA, USA, 50 p. http://www.estcp.org/documents/techdocs/ISO_Report.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  21. GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office). 2005. Report to Congressional Committees. Groundwater Contamination: DOD Uses and Develops a Range of Remediation Technologies to Clean up Military Sites. GAO-55-666. GAO, Washington, DC, USA, 46 p. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-666. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  22. Gates DD, Siegrist RL. 1993. Laboratory Evaluation of Chemical Oxidation Using Hydrogen Peroxide. Report from The X-231B Project for In Situ Treatment by Physicochemical Processes Coupled with Soil Mixing, ORNL/TM-12259. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA.Google Scholar
  23. Gates DD, Siegrist RL. 1995. In situ chemical oxidation of trichloroethylene using hydrogen peroxide. J Environ Eng 121:639–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gates DD, Siegrist RL, Cline SR. 1995. Chemical Oxidation of Contaminants in Clay or Sandy Soil. Proceedings, American Society of Civil Engineering (ASCE) National Conference on Environmental Engineering, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, July.Google Scholar
  25. Gates-Anderson DD, Siegrist RL, Cline SR. 2001. Comparison of potassium permanganate and hydrogen peroxide as chemical oxidants for organically contaminated soils. J Environ Eng 127:337–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Glaze WH, Kang JW. 1988. Advanced oxidation processes for treating groundwater contaminated with TCE and PCE: Laboratory studies. J Am Water Works Assoc 5:57–63.Google Scholar
  27. Haselow JS, Siegrist RL, Crimi ML, Jarosch T. 2003. Estimating the total oxidant demand for in situ chemical oxidation design. Remediation 13:5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heiderscheidt JL. 2005. DNAPL Source Zone Depletion During In Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO): Experimental and Modeling Studies. PhD Dissertation, Environmental Science and Engineering Division, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA, August.Google Scholar
  29. Heiderscheidt JL, Siegrist RL, Illangasekare TH. 2008a. Intermediate-scale 2-D experimental investigation of in situ chemical oxidation using potassium permanganate for remediation of complex DNAPL source zones. J Contam Hydrol 102:3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heiderscheidt JL, Crimi ML, Siegrist RL, Singletary M. 2008b. Optimization of full-scale permanganate ISCO system operation: Laboratory and numerical studies. Ground Water Monit Remediat 28:72–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Huling SG, Pivetz BE. 2006. Engineering Issue Paper: In-Situ Chemical Oxidation. EPA 600-R-06-072. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Office of Research and Development. National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, USA, 60 p. http://www.epa.gov/tio/tsp/issue.htm#EF. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  32. ITRC (Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council). 2001. Technical and Regulatory Guidance for In Situ Chemical Oxidation of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater (ISCO-1). Prepared by the Interstate Technology & Regulatory Cooperation Work Group In Situ Chemical Oxidation Work Team. http://www.itrcweb.org/guidancedocument.asp?TID=13. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  33. ITRC. 2005. Technical and Regulatory Guidance for In Situ Chemical Oxidation of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, 2nd ed (ISCO-2). Prepared by the ITRC In Situ Chemical Oxidation Team. http://www.itrcweb.org/guidancedocument.asp?TID=13. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  34. Jerome KM, Riha B, Looney BB. 1997. Demonstration of In Situ Oxidation of DNAPL Using the Geo-Cleanse Technology. WSRC-TR-97-00283. Westinghouse Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jones LJ. 2007. The Impact of NOD Reaction Kinetics on Treatment Efficiency. MS Thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
  36. Jung H, Kim J, Choi H. 2004. Reaction kinetics of ozone in variably saturated porous media. J Environ Eng 130:432–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jung H, Ahn Y, Choi H, Kim IS. 2005. Effects of in-situ ozonation on indigenous microorganisms in diesel contaminated soil: Survival and regrowth. Chemosphere 61:923–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kavanaugh MC, Rao PSC, Abriola L, Cherry J, Destouni G, Falta R, Major D, Mercer J, Newell C, Sale T, Shoemaker S, Siegrist RL, Teutsch G, Udell K. 2003. The DNAPL Cleanup Challenge: Is There a Case for Source Depletion? EPA/600/R-03/143. USEPA National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, USA, 129 p. http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/600R03143/600r03143.htm. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  39. Kim J, Choi H. 2002. Modeling in situ ozonation for the remediation of nonvolatile PAH-contaminated unsaturated soils. J Contam Hydrol 55:261–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kim K, Gurol MD. 2005. Reaction of nonaqueous phase TCE with permanganate. Environ Sci Technol 39:9303–9308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Krembs FJ. 2008. Critical Analysis of the Field Scale Application of In Situ Chemical Oxidation for the Remediation of Contaminated Groundwater. MS Thesis, Environmental Science and Engineering Division, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA, April.Google Scholar
  42. Lee ES, Seol Y, Fang YC, Schwartz FW. 2003. Destruction efficiencies and dynamics of reaction fronts associated with the permanganate oxidation of trichloroethylene. Environ Sci Technol 37:2540–2546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Liang C, Lee IL. 2008. In situ iron activated persulfate oxidative fluid sparging treatment of TCE contamination: A proof of concept study. J Contam Hydrol 100:91–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Liang C, Bruell CJ, Marley MC, Sperry KL. 2004a. Persulfate oxidation for in situ remediation of TCE. I. Activated by ferrous ion with and without a persulfate–thiosulfate redox couple. Chemosphere 55:1213–1223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Liang C, Bruell CJ, Marley MC, Sperry KL. 2004b. Persulfate oxidation for in situ remediation of TCE. II. Activated by chelated ferrous ion. Chemosphere 55:1225–1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lowe KS, Gardner FG, Siegrist RL. 2002. Field pilot test of in situ chemical oxidation through recirculation using vertical wells. Ground Water Monit Remediat 22:106–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mackay DM, Cherry JA. 1989. Ground water contamination: Limits of pump-and-treat remediation. Environ Sci Technol 23:630–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Marvin BK, Nelson CH, Clayton W, Sullivan KM, Skladany G. 1998. In Situ Chemical Oxidation of Pentachlorophenol and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons: From Laboratory Tests to Field Demonstration. In Wickramanayake GB, Hinchee RE, eds, Physical, Chemical, and Thermal Technologies: Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 383–388.Google Scholar
  49. McDade JM, McGuire TM, Newell CJ. 2005. Analysis of DNAPL source-depletion costs at 36 field sites. Remediation 15:9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Moes M, Peabody C, Siegrist R, Urynowicz M. 2000. Permanganate Injection for Source Zone Treatment of TCE DNAPL. In Wickramanayake GB, Gavaskar AR, Chen ASC, eds, Chemical Oxidation and Reactive Barriers: Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds Series C2-6. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 117–124.Google Scholar
  51. Monahan MJ, Teel AL, Watts RJ. 2005. Displacement of five metals sorbed on kaolinite during treatment with modified Fenton’s reagent. Water Res 39:2955–2963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mumford KG, Lamarche CS, Thomson NR. 2004. Natural oxidant demand of aquifer materials using the push-pull technique. J Environ Eng 130:1139–1146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mumford KG, Thomson NR, Allen-King RM. 2005. Bench-scale investigation of permanganate natural oxidant demand kinetics. Environ Sci Technol 39:2835–2840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Murdoch L, Slack W, Siegrist R, Vesper S, Meiggs T. 1997a. Advanced Hydraulic Fracturing Methods to Create In Situ Reactive Barriers. Proceedings, International Containment Technology Conference and Exhibition, St. Petersburg, FL, USA, February 9–12.Google Scholar
  55. Murdoch L, Slack B, Siegrist B, Vesper S, Meiggs T. 1997b. Hydraulic fracturing advances. Civil Eng 67:10A–12A.Google Scholar
  56. Nelson CH, Brown RA. 1994. Adapting ozonation for soil and ground water cleanup. Chem Eng 11:EE18–EE22.Google Scholar
  57. NRC (National Research Council). 1994. Alternatives for Ground Water Cleanup. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA, 336 p.Google Scholar
  58. NRC. 1997. Innovations in Ground Water and Soil Cleanup: From Concept to Commercialization. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA, 310 p.Google Scholar
  59. NRC. 2005. Contaminants in the Subsurface: Source Zone Assessment and Remediation. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA, 372 p.Google Scholar
  60. Petri BG. 2006. Impacts of Subsurface Permanganate Delivery Parameters on Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Mass Depletion Rates. MS Thesis, Environmental Science and Engineering Division, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA, January.Google Scholar
  61. Petri B, Siegrist RL, Crimi ML. 2008a. Effects of groundwater velocity and permanganate concentration on DNAPL mass depletion rates during in situ oxidation. J Environ Eng 134:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Petri B, Siegrist RL, Crimi ML. 2008b. Implications of the Scientific Literature for Field Applications of ISCO. Proceedings, Sixth International Conference on Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds, Monterey, CA, USA, May 18–22, Abstract C-045.Google Scholar
  63. Qiu Y, Kuo CH, Zappi ME, Fleming EC. 2004. Ozonation of 2,6- 3,4- and 3,5-dichlorophenol isomers within aqueous solutions. J Environ Eng 130:408–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ravikumar JX, Gurol M. 1994. Chemical oxidation of chlorinated organics by hydrogen peroxide in the presence of sand. Environ Sci Technol 28:394–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ross C, Murdoch LC, Freedman DL, Siegrist RL. 2005. Characteristics of potassium permanganate encapsulated in polymer. J Environ Eng 131:1203–1211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sahl J. 2005. Coupling In Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO) with Bioremediation Processes in the Treatment of Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLs). MS Thesis, Environmental Science and Engineering Division, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA, April.Google Scholar
  67. Sahl J, Munakata-Marr J. 2006. The effects of in situ chemical oxidation on microbial processes: A review. Remediation 16:57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sahl JW, Munakata-Marr J, Crimi ML, Siegrist RL. 2007. Coupling permanganate oxidation with microbial dechlorination of tetrachloroethene. Water Environ Res 79:5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schnarr MJ, Truax CL, Farquhar GJ, Hood ED, Gonullu T, Stickney B. 1998. Laboratory and controlled field experiments using potassium permanganate to remediate trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene DNAPLs in porous media. J Contam Hydrol 29:205–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Shin W-T, Garanzuay X, Yiacoumi S, Tsouris C, Gu B, Mahinthakumar G. 2004. Kinetics of soil ozonation: An experimental and numerical investigation. J Contam Hydrol 72:227–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Siegrist RL, Lowe KS, Murdoch LD, Slack WW, Houk TC. 1998a. X-231A Demonstration of In Situ Remediation of DNAPL Compounds in Low Permeability Media by Soil Fracturing with Thermally Enhanced Mass Recovery or Reactive Barrier Destruction. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Report ORNL/TM-13534. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Technology Development, Washington, DC, USA, 407 p.Google Scholar
  72. Siegrist RL, Lowe KS, Murdoch LC, Case TL, Pickering DA, Houk TC. 1998b. Horizontal Treatment Barriers of Fracture-Emplaced Iron and Permanganate Particles. In North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)/Committee on the Challenges for Modern Society (CCMS) Pilot Study Special Session on Treatment Walls and Permeable Reactive Barriers, EPA 542-R-98-003, pp 77–82.Google Scholar
  73. Siegrist RL, Lowe KS, Smuin DR, West OR, Gunderson JS, Korte NE, Pickering DA, Houk TC. 1998c. Permeation Dispersal of Reactive Fluids for In Situ Remediation: Field Studies. ORNL/TM-13596. Prepared by Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  74. Siegrist RL, Lowe KS, Murdoch LC, Case TL, Pickering DL. 1999. In situ oxidation by fracture emplaced reactive solids. J Environ Eng 125:429–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Siegrist RL, Urynowicz MA, West OR, Crimi ML, Lowe KS. 2001. Principles and Practices of In Situ Chemical Oxidation Using Permanganate. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, 336 p.Google Scholar
  76. Siegrist RL, Urynowicz MA, Crimi ML, Lowe KS. 2002. Genesis and effects of particles produced during in situ chemical oxidation using permanganate. J Environ Eng 128:1068–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Siegrist RL, Crimi ML, Munakata-Marr J, Illangasekare T, Lowe KS, Van Cuyk S, Dugan P, Heiderscheidt J, Jackson S, Petri B, Sahl J, Seitz S. 2006. Reaction and Transport Processes Controlling In Situ Chemical Oxidation of DNAPLs. ER-1290 Final Report. Prepared for the DoD Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP), 235 p. http://docs.serdp-estcp.org/. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  78. Siegrist RL, Crimi ML, Munakata-Marr J, Illangasekare T, Dugan P, Heiderscheidt J, Petri B, Sahl J. 2008a. Chemical Oxidation for Clean Up of Contaminated Ground Water. In Annable MD, Teodorescu M, Hlavinek P, Diels L, eds, Methods and Techniques for Cleaning-up Contaminated Sites, NATO Science for Peace and Security Series. Springer Publishing, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Siegrist RL, Petri B, Krembs F, Crimi ML, Ko S, Simpkin T, Palaia T. 2008b. In Situ Chemical Oxidation for Remediation of Contaminated Ground Water. Summary Proceedings, ISCO Technology Practices Workshop (ESTCP ER-0623), Golden, CO, USA, March 7–8, 2007. 77 p. http://docs.serdp-estcp.org/. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  80. Siegrist RL, Crimi ML, Petri B, Simpkin T, Palaia T, Krembs FJ, Munakata-Marr J, Illangasekare T, Ng G, Singletary M, Ruiz N. 2010. In Situ Chemical Oxidation for Groundwater Remediation: Site Specific Engineering and Technology Application. ER-0623 Final Report (CD-ROM, Version PRv1.01, October 29, 2010). Prepared for the ESTCP, Arlington, VA, USA. http://docs.serdp-estcp.org/.
  81. Sirguey C, de Souza e Silva PT, Schwartz C, Simonnot M. 2008. Impact of chemical oxidation on soil quality. Chemosphere 72:282–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Smith BA, Teel AL, Watts RJ. 2004. Identification of the reactive oxygen species responsible for carbon tetrachloride degradation in modified Fenton’s systems. Environ Sci Technol 38:5465–5469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Smith BA, Teel AL, Watts RJ. 2006. Mechanism for the destruction of carbon tetrachloride and chloroform DNAPLs by modified Fenton’s reagent. J Contam Hydrol 85:229–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Stroo HF. 2010. Remedial Technology Selection for Chlorinated Solvent Plumes. In Stroo HF, Ward CH, eds, In Situ Remediation of Chlorinated Solvent Plumes, SERDP and ESTCP Remediation Technology Monograph Series. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, New York, NY, USA. Chapter 9.Google Scholar
  85. Struse AM, Siegrist RL, Dawson HE, Urynowicz MA. 2002. Diffusive transport of permanganate during in situ oxidation. J Environ Eng 128:327–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Sun HW, Yan QS. 2007. Influence of Fenton oxidation on soil organic matter and its sorption and desorption of pyrene. J Hazard Mater 144:164–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Teel AL, Finn DD, Schmidt JT, Cutler LM, Watts RJ. 2007. Rates of trace mineral-catalyzed decomposition of hydrogen peroxide. J Environ Eng 133:853–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Tratnyek PG, Johnson TL, Warner SD, Clarke HS, Baker JA. 1998. In Situ Treatment of Organics by Sequential Reduction and Oxidation. In Wickramanayake GB, Hinchee RE, eds, Physical, Chemical, and Thermal Technologies: Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 371–376.Google Scholar
  89. Tunnicliffe BS, Thomson NR. 2004. Mass removal of chlorinated ethenes from rough-walled fractures using permanganate. J Contam Hydrol 75:91–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Tyre BW, Watts RJ, Miller GC. 1991. Treatment of four biorefractory contaminants in soils using catalyzed hydrogen peroxide. J Environ Qual 20:832–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Urynowicz MA, Siegrist RL. 2000. Chemical Degradation of TCE DNAPL by Permanganate. In Wickramanayake GB, Gavaskar AR, Chen ASC, eds, Chemical Oxidation and Reactive Barriers: Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds Series C2-6. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 75–82.Google Scholar
  92. Urynowicz MA, Siegrist RL. 2005. Interphase mass transfer during chemical oxidation of TCE DNAPL in an aqueous system. J Contam Hydrol 80:93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Urynowicz MA, Balu B, Udayasankar U. 2008. Kinetics of natural oxidant demand by permanganate in aquifer solids. J Contam Hydrol 96:87–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1997. Cleaning up the Nation’s Waste Sites: Markets and Technology Trends. EPA 542-R-96-005. USEPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), Washington, DC, USA. http://www.epa.gov/tio/download/market/market.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  95. USEPA. 1998. Field Applications of In Situ Remediation Technologies: Chemical Oxidation. EPA 542-R-98-008. USEPA OSWER, Washington, DC, USA. http://www.epa.gov/swertio1/download/remed/chemox.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  96. USEPA. 1999. Ground Water Cleanup: Overview of Operating Experience at 28 Sites. EPA 542-R-99-006. USEPA OSWER, Washington, DC, USA. http://www.clu-in.org/download/remed/ovopex.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  97. USEPA. 2004. Cleaning up the Nation’s Waste Sites: Markets and Technology Trends. EPA 542-R-04-015. USEPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), Washington, DC, USA. http://www.clu-in.org/download/market/2004market.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2010.
  98. Vella PA, Veronda B. 1994. Oxidation of Trichloroethylene: A Comparison of Potassium Permanganate and Fenton’s Reagent. In In Situ Chemical Oxidation for the Nineties, Vol. 3. Technomic Publishing Co., Inc., Lancaster, PA, USA, pp 62–73.Google Scholar
  99. Vella PA, Deshinsky G, Boll JE, Munder J, Joyce WM. 1990. Treatment of low level phenols with potassium permanganate. Res J Water Pollut Control Fed 62:907–914.Google Scholar
  100. Venkatadri R, Peters RW. 1993. Chemical oxidation technologies: Ultraviolet light/hydrogen peroxide, Fenton’s reagent, and titanium dioxide-assisted photocatalysis. J Hazard Waste Hazard Mater 10:107–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Waldemer RH, Tratnyek PG, Johnson RL, Nurmi JT. 2007. Oxidation of chlorinated ethenes by heat-activated persulfate: Kinetics and products. Environ Sci Technol 41:1010–1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Watts RJ, Smith BR. 1991. Catalyzed hydrogen peroxide treatment of octachlorobidenzo-pdioxin (OCCD) in surface soils. Chemosphere 23:949–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Watts RJ, Rausch RA, Leung SW, Udell MD. 1990. Treatment of pentachlorophenol contaminated soils using Fenton’s reagent. J Hazard Waste Hazard Mater 7:335–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Watts RJ, Leung SW, Udell MD. 1991. Treatment of Contaminated Soils Using Catalyzed Hydrogen Peroxide. Proceedings, First International Symposium on Chemical Oxidation. Technomic, Nashville, TN, USA, February 20–22.Google Scholar
  105. Watts RJ, Jones AP, Chen P, Kenny A. 1997. Mineral-catalyzed Fenton-like oxidation of sorbed chlorobenzenes. Water Environ Res 69:269–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Watts RJ, Sarasa J, Loge FJ, Teel AL. 2005a. Oxidative and reductive pathways in manganese-catalyzed Fenton’s reactions. J Environ Eng 131:158–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Watts RJ, Howsawkeng J, Teel AL. 2005b. Destruction of a carbon tetrachloride dense nonaqueous phase liquid by modified Fenton’s reagent. J Environ Eng 131:1114–1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. West OR, Cline SR, Holden WL, Gardner FG, Schlosser BM, Thate JE, Pickering DA, Houk TC. 1997. A Full-Scale Field Demonstration of In Situ Chemical Oxidation through Recirculation at the X-701B Site. ORNL/TM-13556. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TX, USA, 114 p.Google Scholar
  109. West OR, Cline SR, Siegrist RL, Houk TC, Holden WL, Gardner FG, Schlosser RM. 1998. A Field-Scale Test of In Situ Chemical Oxidation through Recirculation. Proceedings, Spectrum ’98 International Conference on Nuclear and Hazardous Waste Management, Denver, CO, USA, September 13–18, pp 1051–1057.Google Scholar
  110. Woods LM. 2008. In Situ Remediation Induced Changes in Subsurface Properties and Trichloroethene Partitioning Behavior. MS Thesis, Environmental Science and Engineering Division, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA, April.Google Scholar
  111. Yan YE, Schwartz FW. 1998. Oxidation of Chlorinated Solvents by Permanganate. In Wickramanayake GB, Hinchee RE, eds, Physical, Chemical, and Thermal Technologies: Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 403–408.Google Scholar
  112. Yan YE, Schwartz FW. 1999. Oxidative degradation and kinetics of chlorinated ethylenes by potassium permanganate. J Contam Hydrol 37:343–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Yin Y, Allen HE. 1999. In Situ Chemical Treatment. GWRTAC TE-99-01. Prepared for Ground Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 82 p.Google Scholar
  114. Zhang H, Ji L, Wu F, Tan J. 2005. In situ ozonation of anthracene in unsaturated porous media. J Hazard Waste Hazard Mater 120:143–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert L. Siegrist
    • 1
  • Michelle Crimi
    • 2
  • Richard A. Brown
    • 3
  1. 1.Colorado School of MinesGoldenUSA
  2. 2.Clarkson UniversityPotsdamUSA
  3. 3.Environmental Resources ManagementEwingUSA

Personalised recommendations