MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972823733 · doi:10.1002/rem.21616

The in situ treatment of BTEX, MTBE, and TBA in saline groundwater

2019· article· en· W2972823733 on OpenAlexaff
Rick McGregor, Fatemeh Vakili

Bibliographic record

VenueRemediation Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorWindsor Clinical Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBTEXPersulfateEthylbenzeneEnvironmental chemistryChemistryAquiferTolueneXyleneEnvironmental remediationBenzeneSalinePlumeGroundwaterContaminationOrganic chemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A pilot‐scale test was conducted in a saline aquifer to determine if a petroleum hydrocarbon (PHC) plume containing benzene (B), toluene (T), ethylbenzene (E), xylenes (X), methyl tert‐butyl ether (MTBE), and tert‐butyl alcohol (TBA) could be treated effectively using a sequential treatment approach that employed in situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) and enhanced bioremediation (EBR). Chemical oxidants, such as persulfate, have been shown to be effective in reducing dissolved concentrations of BTEX (B + T + E + X) and additives such as MTBE and TBA in a variety of geochemical environments including saline aquifers. However, the lifespan of the oxidants in saline environments tends to be short‐lived (i.e., hours to days) with their effectiveness being limited by poor delivery, inefficient consumption by nontargeted species, and back‐diffusion processes. Similarly, the addition of electron acceptors has also been shown to be effective at reducing BTEX and associated additives in saline groundwater through EBR, however EBR can be limited by various factors similar to ISCO. To minimize the limitations of both approaches, a pilot test was carried out in a saline unconfined PHC‐impacted aquifer to evaluate the performance of an engineered, combined remedy that employed both approaches in a sequence. The PHC plume had total BTEX, MTBE, and TBA concentrations of up to 4,584; 55,182; and 1,880 μg/L, respectively. The pilot test involved injecting 13,826 L of unactivated persulfate solution (19.4 weight percent (wt.%) sodium persulfate (Na 2 S 2 O 8 ) solution into a series of injection wells installed within the PHC plume. Parameters monitored over a 700‐day period included BTEX, MTBE, TBA, sulfate, and sulfate isotope concentrations in the groundwater, and carbon and hydrogen isotopes in benzene and MTBE in the groundwater. The pilot test data indicated that the BTEX, MTBE, and TBA within the PHC plume were treated over time by both chemical oxidation and sulfate reduction. The injection of the unactivated persulfate resulted in short‐term decreases in the concentrations of the BTEX compounds, MTBE, and TBA. The mean total BTEX concentration from the three monitoring wells within the pilot‐test area decreased by up to 91%, whereas MTBE and TBA mean concentrations decreased by up to 39 and 58%, respectively, over the first 50 days postinjection in which detectable concentrations of persulfate remained in groundwater. Concentrations of the BTEX compounds, MTBE, and TBA rebounded at the Day 61 marker, which corresponded to no persulfate being detected in the groundwater. Subsequent monitoring of the groundwater revealed that the concentrations of BTEX continued to decrease with time suggesting that EBR was occurring within the plume. Between Days 51 and 487, BTEX concentrations decreased an additional 84% from the concentration measured on Day 61. Mean concentrations of MTBE showed a reduction during the EBR phase of remediation of 33% while the TBA concentration appeared to decrease initially but then increased as the sulfate concentration decreased as a result of MTBE degradation. Isotope analyses of dissolved sulfate ( 34 S and 18 O), and compound‐specific isotope analysis (CSIA) of benzene and MTBE ( 13 C and 2 H) supported the conclusions that ISCO and EBR processes were occurring at different stages and locations within the plume over time.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemediation JournalSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207