Green and
Sustainable
Remediation of
Contaminated Sites
Presented by:
Christopher Hurst, PE, CHMM
AMEC
Atlanta, GA 30144
Topics
 Background on “Green” and “Sustainable”
 How Sustainable Principles Apply to Remediation
 Life Cycle Analysis Tool for Sustainable Remediation
 Examples of Sustainable Decisions
 The Future of Sustainable Remediation
After this presentation you will know the
difference between Green and Sustainable
Birth of Remediation Industry
 Began in 1970s in response to
environmental contamination (e.g. Love
Canal)
 Laws were created, regulatory agencies
grew and an industry emerged (RCRA,
CERCLA)
 Remediation focused on rapid response
and often involving energy-intensive
remedies (incineration)
 But remedies didn’t meet cleanup levels
due to technical limitations
 Long-term operations, such as pump-andtreat and SVE were commonly used after
initial remediation
 Long term O&M was the norm
Next Came Remediation Optimization
 Remedial Optimization (RPO, RSO) looked at improving
implemented remedies
 Evaluation of current conditions with respect to remedial
objective and goals
 Provided a process to improve effectiveness and efficiency
 Focused on:
 Understanding the site
 Developing an exit strategy
 Driving a site to reduce O&M cost and to
closure
Along Came Going Green and Living Sustainably
 Awareness of global climate change led to concern about
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
 Energy-intensive remedies contribute large amounts of GHGs
 DuPont (2008) estimated that the difference between two remedies in
NJ could be 2 percent of the annual GHG emissions for the State
 “Sustainability” came into vogue
 Society wants to reduce or avoid negative
environmental impacts to allow human activity
to be more sustainable
 Most developed countries are rethinking how
behavior, reliance on technology, and
consumption of energy impact the environment
 U.S. Government is requiring (EO 13514 for GHG,
Water, Energy, and Waste)
Green and Sustainable What Are They?
 Green: Minimizing environmental footprint including GHG
and other air emissions, waste, energy, water, materials,
land and ecological impacts. Includes the use of
biodegradable and ecologically friendly materials. One leg
of sustainability.
 Sustainable: Meeting the needs of present generations
without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their needs (Brandtland Commission, 1987)
EPA View of Green Remediation (2010)
 Goals:
 100% renewable energy (Including REC)
 Use green remediation factors in remedy
optimization
 Reduce natural resource and energy use
 Integrate clean, renewable, and innovative energy
sources
 On and off-site reuse of materials
 Specify that contractors use green remediation
practices
 Help communities establish networks and training
programs for green cleanups
 EPA Region 9 is evaluating off-site and on-site
impacts (holistic evaluation)
Sustainability and the Triple Bottom Line
(more than Green)
 Goals:
 Holistic Approach
 Balances
 Economic Considerations
 Environmental Impacts
 Social Benefits
Green and Sustainable Remediation
 Green Remediation
 The practice of considering environmental impacts of remedy implementation
and incorporating options to minimize the environmental footprint
 Current focus by EPA is more on minimizing post-remedy selection impacts
 Is the primary focus of most regulatory initiatives
 EPA recognizes that green is only part of sustainable
 EPA Region 9 is looking at off-site impacts as well as on-site (laboratory,
transportation)
 EPA’s desire is to look at impacts as part of remedy selection process
 Sustainable Remediation
 Selection and implementation of a remedy whose net benefit on human health
and the environment is maximized through the judicious use of limited resources
 Encourages evaluation of impacts of a remedy during the remedy selection
process
 Embraces the “Triple Bottom Line” – environmental, economic and social benefits
 Organizations such as ASTM, ITRC, and SuRF are tackling the broader issue of
sustainable remediation
How Does Green Support Sustainable Remediation?
 Green technologies and practices contribute to
sustainability
 Sustainable remediation can equate to green remediation
 Reduced energy consumption reduces GHG emissions
 Lower cost normally means less environmental impact
 Social acceptability can come from green practices
 Educating public and regulators on sustainability can bring
green and sustainable practices closer together
What is Sustainable Remediation?
 Improving traditional remediation through
adoption of a thoughtful remediation plan
that incorporates the following:
 Actions that decrease the environmental footprint
 A cost-effective yet still protective approach
 A remedial approach that take into account
timliness
 Minimal transfer of the problem from one medium
to another
 An increase in community benefits
 A consideration of safety associated with the action
 These elements are consistent with USEPA
policy and seek to take Green Remediation a
step further
A Tool for Sustainable Remediation
 Life Cycle Analysis (LCA): Quantifies environmental
impacts of a remedial action
 Provides a standardized, well documented approach
 Can include economic and social parameters
 LCA is covered under ISO 14040 and 14044 as part of
an environmental management program
 Can span from cradle to cradle (including operation
and land reuse)
 Goes well beyond life cycle cost analysis
Life Cycle Analysis for Sustainable Remediation
 Parameters included in impact analysis:




Air (SOx, NOx, PM, CO2, VOCs, GHG)
Energy (can be renewable or not)
Economics/Cost
Safety to Workers and Community
 Software Tools:




Site Wise (free software developed by Battelle for the Army and Navy)
SRT (free software developed by the Air Force)
SimaPro and GaBi (professional assessment tools--$$$$$)
Other proprietary and directed-use tools
 Software uses an inventory relevant to parameters evaluated (air
emissions per kilowatt, etc).
 Quality of data used affects quality of results
How is LCA Applied
 Defines the environmental footprint of project
 Can be applied to:
 Comparing a range of alternatives (i.e. feasibility study)
 Determining the effect of changing an alternative (optimization study)
 Can be applied through out the life of a project as part of the decision
making process
 On the surface it is a simple concept. Implementation can be
a complex process.
 Software’s inventory of data simplifies the process
 Industry and regulators not universally familiar with concepts
(understand carbon foot-print which is related)
 LCA can lead to more risk based remedial action
 Regulators may view this as “Green Washing” remediation
LCA Tool Output (for the project lifecycle)
Air Emissions (Tons)
Energy Consumption (KW, MW or GW)
Project Cost (NPV or total)
Reduction of Waste Generation
Safety/accident risk compared to environmental risk
Can compare to emissions from cars,
energy consumption by household, etc.
Diesel (on-site)
Gasoline (on-site use)
Natural gas (on-site use)
Diesel (off-site use)
Gasoline (off-site use)
Natural gas (off-site use)
On-site electricity use
Electricity transmission*
Electricity production*
PVC
HDPE
Steel
Stainless Steel
Gravel/sand
Cement Grout
Concrete
Bentonite
Regenerated GAC
Bioinjection (Molasses)
Bioinjection ( Cheese Whey)
Bioinjection (Vegetable Oil)
Diesel Produced
Gasoline Produced
Natural Gas Produced
Groundwater Extracted On-site
Potable Water Produced
Potable Water Transported
Potable Water Used
Other On-Site Water Used
Off-site waste water treatment
Solid Waste Generation
Solid Waste Disposal
Hazardous Waste Generation
Hazardous Waste Disposal
Laboratory Analysis
On-site process emissions (HAPs)
On-site process emissions (GHGs)
Key Contributors to Environmental Footprint
Romic East Palo Alto – Pump & Treat
18,000,000.
12,000,000.
10,000,000.
8,000,000.
16
Pump and Treat Parameter Breakdown
CO2e Emitted
(lbs) (lbs)
Total On-Site & Off-Site
CO2e Emitted
16,000,000.
14,000,000.
electricity
production
Information courtesy of EPA Region 9
carbon
regeneration
wastewater
treatment at
POTW
6,000,000.
4,000,000.
2,000,000.
0
Sustainable Remediation: Soil Excavation
 Former Gun Club: RCRA Corrective Action
 Goals
 Reduce, Reuse & Recycle Wastes & Raw Materials
 Reduce Transportation Related Impacts
Implementation (Required Significant Pre-Planning)
 Waste disposal profiling (lead & PAHs) of each location
conducted in advance of excavation
 Excavation depth minimized through constant field
oversight of each excavation cell
 Separated soil during removal as either non hazardous or
hazardous
 Location 1 -- 29,000 tons (39% total) of non-haz
soil was recycled for use as Portland Cement.
 Location 2 -- 5,500 tons (96% total) of non-haz soil
was recycled for use as Portland Cement
Green: reuse of material instead of disposal
Sustainable Remediation: Former MGP Site
 Achieved successful risk-based closure by evaluating site-specific toxicity
and exposure
 Managed removal of 2000+ gallons of coal tar and MGP residuals
 Constructed 2 impermeable barrier and 2 permeable barrier landfills
(9+ acres total) in lieu of excavation and offsite disposal
 Installed in situ lining in sanitary and storm sewer to eliminate
groundwater infiltration/migration
 Incorporated significant landscape improvements to ensure community
acceptance and satisfaction
Green: Xeriscape landscaping to reduce water demand
Sustainable Remediation:
Landfill Cap a “Brightfield” Redevelopment
 Landfill Cap redeveloped into a renewable
(solar) energy facility
 1,395 solar modules
 450 kw of electricity
 Provides in annual reduction of 300 tons of CO2
 Environmental and solar energy education
center were incorporated into the new facility
 All community concerns were incorporated into
the cleanup and redevelopment plans
 Supports the communities economic
development strategy
Green: Provides Alternative Energy Source
Sustainable Remediation Project Example
 Background
 Contaminated Site in East Point, GA: acetone, TCE, Benzene
 Initially pump and treat used for remediation
 Sustainable remedy




Turn off pump and treat
Bio-sparge to treat Acetone/Benzene in soil and groundwater
No-purge sampling to monitor performance
Added lactate to TCE well
 No net increase in annual cost (treatment cost < P&T cost)
 Achieved NFA from EPA within 24 months
 In retrospect:
 Environmental Protection: closed site with no further action
 Economic Consideration: No increase in present cost, no future cost
 Social: Allowed unrestricted use of blighted property (light industrial)
Sustainable Remediation:
Former Manufacturing Facility





Closed RCRA Landfill
Neighbor wanted property
Candidate for Brownfield Program (if not RCRA)
Off-site plume
Excavated shallow soil and treated with
chemical oxidants ( 20 tons permanganate)
 Proceeds from property sale covered
remediation cost
 Blighted property became useful parking lot and
tennis courts
 Improved appearance and community
acceptance of area
Green: Increased society’s perception of property value
Future of Sustainable Remediation
 DoD facilities are adding Sustainable Remediation to
Feasibility Study evaluation criteria
 Sustainable Remediation Standards are under development
 SuRF Guidance Document 2011
 ASTM Standard expected in 2012-2013
 ITRC Guidance expected in 2012-2013
 Ongoing Meetings with state and federal regulators to
discuss benefits of Sustainable Remediation (ITRC, SuRF)
 Industries adding Sustainable Remediation to evaluation
criteria
 In many cases, Sustainable Remediation has attractive
economic payback and improves public image
Tough Questions to Consider
 How do you weigh the need for site remediation against the
resources utilized?
 How to determine unintended consequences resulting from
remediation?
 Do you evaluate sustainability metrics be before or after remedy
selection?
 Weighting of short-term significant environmental footprint (e.g.
excavation, thermal treatment) against a longer period (e.g. SVE,
pump and treat)?
 Weighing environmental protection against environmental harm
(emissions), economic impact, and social benefits?
Tenets of Green and Sustainable Remediation







Implement remediation projects in an environmentally responsible
manner (Green)
Recognize that some metrics have limited role on time-critical
remediation projects (i.e. imminent risk)
Protection of human health and the environment are baseline
requirements
All relevant stakeholders should have a say in the decision-making
and by default the remedy selection
Goals include reduced consumption of energy, water and other
natural resources; maximization of reuse/recycling; and minimization
of carbon footprint, GHGs, and any other deleterious effect of
remediation
We can make better remediation decisions by accounting for
economic and social metrics
Make Sustainable Remediation part of Good Business
What is sustainable about moving a Lighthouse?
• Environmental
– Completed with minimal environmental impact.
– Preservation in place would have resulted in collapse,
protection against collapse would have had negative
environmental impacts
• Economic
– Tourist draw to area
– Jobs and tourist related income
• Social
– National Historic Site
– Provides educational and recreational opportunities
for visitors
– Preserves our national heritage
5,000 ton structure moved 2,900 feet at a cost of
$10 million
Thank You
Questions?