آلوده زدایی آب زیرزمینی آلوده به شیرابه به وسیله لایه نفوذپذیر فعال

محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت محیط زیست

محمد بهشتیان اردکانی ¹ , تقی عبادی ²

1 - دانشجوی دکتری، مهندسی عمران- محیط زیست، دانشگاه صنعتی امیرکبیر *(مسوول مکاتبات
2 - استادیار دانشگاه صنعتی امیرکبیر

تاریخ دریافت : 1390/11/30 تاریخ پذیرش : 1390/05/22 تاریخ انتشار : 1395/04/01

کلید واژه: لایه واکنش دهنده نفوذپذیر, آب زیرزمینی, شیرابه, زئولیت, کربن فعال,

چکیده مقاله :

زمینه و هدف: یکی از چالش های مهم در بهره برداری از محل های دفن زباله شهری، جمع آوری و تصفیه شیرابه است. از آن جا که بیش‌تر نقاط ایران به دلیل اقلیم خشک و نیمه خشک با مشکل محدودیت منابع آب روبه‌رو است، مطالعه در زمینه آلوده زدایی از آب زیرزمینی آلوده به شیرابه حاصل از محل دفن زباله نیز دارای اهمیت فراوان می باشد. در دهه اخیر، فعالیت های گسترده ای در خصوص توسعه و پیاده سازی موانع واکنش دهنده نفوذپذیر (PRB ها ) صورت گرفته است که در این میان کاربرد این روش جهت آلوده زدایی از آب زیرزمینی آلوده به شیرابه هم‌چنان نیازمند بررسی های دقیق تر است. به همین منظور در این مقاله ضمن بررسی این روش، نقش کربن فعال گرانولی و زئولیت طبیعی به عنوان بسترهای رایج جهت حذف آلاینده آلی در آب زیرزمینی بررسی گردید. روش بررسی: جهت انجام آزمایش، آب آلوده به شیرابه با COD های 690، 1910 و (mg/L) 3100، از مدل آزمایشگاهی مانع واکنش دهنده نفوذپذیر پرشده با ماسه شسته شده، زئولیت طبیعی و کربن فعال گرانولی، عبور داده شد و میزان حذف COD در هریک از شرایط محاسبه گردید. یافته ها: بیش‌ترین میزان حذف COD توسط کربن فعال گرانولی و بهترین عملکرد آن در غلظت آلاینده (mg/L) 690 مشاهده گردید. هم‌چنین، اختلاف محسوسی در میزان کارایی حذف COD توسط زئولیت، با ماسه مشاهده نشد. نتیجه گیری: بنابراین، به منظور ایجاد شرایط بهینه مصرف مواد واکنش دهنده، پیشنهاد می شود این سیستم با ترتیب لایه های زئولیت و کربن فعال، در فاصله ای مناسب از منبع آلودگی قرار گیرد تا علاوه بر حذف مناسب آلاینده توسط هر لایه، بتوان از حذف آلاینده توسط خاک بیش‌ترین استفاده را نمود.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Background and Objective: Collection and treatment of landfill leaching is one of the most important challenges in the operation of municipal solid waste landfills. Since the most parts of Iran, due to the arid and semi-arid climate, are faced with the limited water resources, the study of landfill leaching-contaminated groundwater remediation is also very important. In recent decades, extensive work has been done regarding the development and implementation of permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) but application of this method needs more investigations for landfill leaching-contaminated groundwater remediation. For this purpose, the groundwater remediation method by permeable reactive barriers was investigated in this paper. In addition, the granular activated carbon and natural zeolite were studied as a common media for the removal of organic pollutants in water. Method: For the experiment, leaching-contaminated water with a COD of 690, 1910 and 3100 (mg/l) was passed from the experimental model of permeable reactive barrier, filled with washed sand, granular activated carbon and natural zeolite, and COD removal rate was calculated in each condition. Findings: The highest COD removal was obtained by granular activated carbon and the best performance was in the 690 (mg/l) concentration pollutants. Also, significant differences were not observed in the rate of COD removal efficiency by zeolite compare to sand. Discussion and Conclusions: Therefore, in order to optimize the use of reactive media, the system must be arranged with layers of zeolite and activated carbon respectively and in a suitable distance from pollution source so that removal of pollutants by the soil can be used in addition to the proper removal of pollutants by each layer.

منابع و مأخذ:

1. Foster, S.S.D., Sililo, O., 2000, Groundwater-Past Achievements and Further Challenges, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pp.27.


2. UNEP, 2003, Groundwater and its susceptibility to degradation: a global assessment of the problem and options for management, early warning and assessment report series, UNEP/DEWA/RS, 03-3, joint publication from United Nations Environment Programme, Department for International Development and the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC).


3. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 1990, Civilian’s Guide to Groundwater Protection, EPA 440/6-90-004.


4. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 2002, Field Applications of In Situ Remediation Technologies: Permeable Reactive Barriers, Washington, DC.


5. Woinarski, A.Z., 2004, Development of a natural zeolite permeable reactive barrier for the treatment of contaminated waters in Antarctica, PhD thesis, University of Melbourne.


6. 6.      Gupta, S. K., Singh, G., 2007, Assessment of the efficiency and economic viability of various methods of treatment of sanitary landfill leachate, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol.135, pp.107–117.


7. 7.      Fatta, D., Papadopoulos, A., Loizidou, M., 1999, A study on the landfill leachate and its impact on the groundwater quality of the greater area, Environmental Geochemistry and Health, Vol. 21, pp.175–190.


8. 8.      USEPA, 1989, Evaluation of Groundwater Extraction Remedies, vol. 1 and 2, EPA Office of Emergency and Remedial Responses, Washington, DC.


9. USEPA, 1992, Evaluation of Groundwater Extraction Remedies: Phase II, vol.1, Summery Report, Publication 9355.4-05, EPA Office of Emergency and Remedial Responses, Washington, DC.


10. 10.  Scherer, M.M., Richter, S., Valentine, R.L., Alvarez, P.J.J., 2000, Chemistry and microbiology of permeable reactive barriers for in situ groundwater cleanup, Environmental. Science. Technology, Vol. 30 (3), pp. 363-411.


11. 11.  Thriuvenkatachari, R., Vigneswaran, S., Naidu, R., 2008, Permeable reactive barrier for groundwater remediation, Review, Industrial Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 14, pp. 145-156.


12. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 1995c, Assessment of barrier containment technologies, presented at the International Containment Technology Workshop, Baltimore, MD, Aug. 29-31.


13. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 1996c, A Citizen’s Guide to Treatment Walls, EPA 542-F-96-016, USEPA, Washington, DC, Sept.


14. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency),1998c, Permeable Reactive Barrier Technologies for Contaminant Remediation, EPA/600/R-98/125, Office of Research and Development, USEPA, Washington, DC.


15. USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), 1997b, Design Guidance for Application of Permeable Barriers to Remediate Dissolved Chlorinated Solvents, CEMP DG 1110-345-117, U.S. Department of the Army, Washington, DC, Feb.


16. Vidic, R.D., and Pohland, F.G., 1996, Technology Evaluation Report: Treatment Walls, Groundwater Remediation Technologies Analysis Center, Pittsburgh, PA.


17. Bowman, R., 1999, Pilot-scale testing of a surfactant-modified zeolite PRG, Groundwater Currents.


18. Sharma, Hari D., Reddy, Krishna R., 2004, Geoenvironmental Engineering: Site Remediation, Waste Contaminant, and Emerging Waste Technologies, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.


19. PEREBAR, 2002, 5^th Framework Programme Research and Technology Development Project on Long-term Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers Used for the Remediation of Contaminated Groundwater, PEREBAR EVK1-CT-1999-00035, National Technical University of Athens, Greece.


20. Foo, K.Y., Hameed, B.H., 2009, An overview of landfill leachate treatment via activated carbon adsorption process, Review, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 171, pp. 54–60.


21. Corapcioglu, M.O., Huang, C.P., 1987, the Surface Acidity and Characterization of Some Commercial Activated Carbons, Carbon, Vol. 25, pp. 569-578.


22. Han, I., Schlautman, M.A., Batcherlor, B., 2000, Removal of Hexavalent Chromium from Groundwater by Granular Activated Carbon, Water and Environmental Research, Vol. 72 (1), pp. 29-39.


23. Woinarski, A. Z.,Stevens, G.W.,Snape, I., 2006, A natural zeolite permeable reactive barrier to treat heavy metal contaminated waters in Antractica, Kinetic and Fixed-bed Studies, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 84(B2): pp. 109–116.


24. Roehl, K.E., Meggyes, T., Simon, F.G., Stewart, D.I., 2005, Long-term Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers, Elsevier Publishers.


25. ITRC, 2005, Permeable Reactive Barriers: Lessons Learned/New Directions.Technical/Regulatory Guidelines, ITRC, Washington, DC.


26. Mossa Hosseini, S., Ataie Ashtiani, B., Kholghi, M, 2011, Bench-Scaled Nano-Fe⁰ Permeable Reactive Barrier for Nitrate Removal, Ground Water Monitoring & Remediation.


27. Gavaskar, Arun R., 1999, Design and construction techniques for permeable reactive barriers, Journal of Hazardous Material, Vol. 68, pp. 41-71.


28. Helfferich, F., 1962, Ion Exchange (McGraw-Hill, Japan).


29. Chi-Hui Yeh, Chi-Wen Lin, Chih-Hung Wu, 2010, A permeable reactive barrier for the bioremediation of BTEX-contaminated groundwater: Microbial community distribution and removal efficiencies, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol.178, pp. 74-80.


30. Jun, D., Yongsheng, Z., Weihong, Z., Mei, H., 2009, Laboratory study on sequenced permeable reactive barrier remediation for landfill leachate- contaminated groundwater, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 161, pp. 224-230.


31. APHA, AWWA, WPCF, 1992, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18^th Ed, Washington DC, USA.


32. Ansari Mahabadi, A., Hajabbasi, M.A., Khademi, H., Kazemian, H., 2007, Soil cadmium stabilization using an Iranian natural zeolite, Geoderma Vol. 137, pp. 388–393.


33. Metcalf and Eddy, 2004, Wastewater Engineering, treatment and Reuse, 4^th ed, McGraw Hill.