WO2001076782A2 - Procede d'extraction de sols - Google Patents

Procede d'extraction de sols Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2001076782A2
WO2001076782A2 PCT/US2001/011578 US0111578W WO0176782A2 WO 2001076782 A2 WO2001076782 A2 WO 2001076782A2 US 0111578 W US0111578 W US 0111578W WO 0176782 A2 WO0176782 A2 WO 0176782A2
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
oil
surfactant
phase
water
solid
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/US2001/011578
Other languages
English (en)
Other versions
WO2001076782A3 (fr
Inventor
Blaine F. Severin
Original Assignee
Michigan Biotechnology Institute
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Michigan Biotechnology Institute filed Critical Michigan Biotechnology Institute
Priority to AU2001253303A priority Critical patent/AU2001253303A1/en
Priority to US10/257,200 priority patent/US20030205525A1/en
Publication of WO2001076782A2 publication Critical patent/WO2001076782A2/fr
Publication of WO2001076782A3 publication Critical patent/WO2001076782A3/fr

Links

Classifications

    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B09—DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE; RECLAMATION OF CONTAMINATED SOIL
    • B09C—RECLAMATION OF CONTAMINATED SOIL
    • B09C1/00—Reclamation of contaminated soil
    • B09C1/02—Extraction using liquids, e.g. washing, leaching, flotation
    • B09C1/025—Extraction using liquids, e.g. washing, leaching, flotation using an oil as solvent or extracting agent
    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B09—DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE; RECLAMATION OF CONTAMINATED SOIL
    • B09C—RECLAMATION OF CONTAMINATED SOIL
    • B09C1/00—Reclamation of contaminated soil
    • B09C1/02—Extraction using liquids, e.g. washing, leaching, flotation

Definitions

  • Solvents with a high affinity for target pollutants have been used to extract the pollutant from the soil.
  • these solvents also have a high affinity for the soil and must be removed from the soil by physical means such as vaporization. Recovery of the solvent usually entails condensation or distillation.
  • the present invention pertains to the general field of extracting trace materials from solids. "
  • the invention teaches new methods of removing oily environmental pollutants and contaminants from soils and sediments using a surfactant and oil phase/water phase separation.
  • the contaminant may be an oil, such as petroleum, or oil by-products, such as PAH (poly-aromatic hydrocarbons), or an oil-soluble compound, such as PCB.
  • PAH poly-aromatic hydrocarbons
  • PCB oil-soluble compound
  • the contaminants may be concentrated in the water phase by foam fractionation. Furthermore, a more efficient separation and a higher concentration of contaminant may be separated from the water phase by combining the surfactant with an oil and concentrating the environmental pollutants or contaminants into the oil phase.
  • the present invention is a method of removing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) from lake sediment, bay sediment, and soil using the method described below.
  • the method comprises the steps of immersing a soil sediment or porous solid in a fluid comprising a water phase and an oil phase, mixing the phases, and allowing the phases to separate, wherein the contaminants are thereby concentrated in the oil phase.
  • the water phase comprises a surfactant with high detergency yet low emulsion carrying capacity.
  • the contaminated soil or solid may be first contacted with waterborne surfactant.
  • the waterborne surfactant may then be removed from the soil and contacted with oil in a second extraction step.
  • oil soluble contaminants may be concentrated and removed from contaminant bearing solids, such as soils and sediments.
  • Fig. 1 is a graph describing the amount of oil and surfactant required to form a recoverable oil layer.
  • Fig. 2 is a graph of a timed mixing study with weathered PCB sample.
  • Fig. 3 is a graph of the distribution of PCB mass between 5 ml corn oil and 25 ml waterborne surfactant.
  • Fig. 4 is a graph of the distribution of PCB mass between 5 ml motor oil and 25 ml waterborne surfactant.
  • Fig. 5 is a diagram of a laboratory scale screw washer apparatus.
  • Fig. 6 is a graph of the extraction of PCB from spiked lake sediment.
  • Fig. 7 is a diagram of a continuous or semi-continuous flow extraction reactor.
  • Fig. 8A, B and C are flow charts illustrating different embodiments of the invention.
  • the present invention is a method of extracting oil soluble contaminants from materials such as soils, sediments, or porous solids.
  • the method comprises the steps of immersing the solid in a fluid comprising an aqueous phase and an oil phase, mixing the phases, and allowing the phases to separate. The contaminants are thereby concentrated in the oil phase.
  • the contaminated soil or solid may be first contacted with waterborne surfactant.
  • the waterborne surfactant may then be removed from the soil and contacted with oil in a second extraction step.
  • water phase or aqueous phase or waterborne surfactant phase we mean an aqueous solution capable of removing oily materials or oil from a solid phase by virtue of strong detergency and rejecting the oil or oily material to an oil layer through strong anti-emulsion capacity.
  • the attributes required of the surfactant are demonstrated in Experiments 2, 3, 8 and 9, and exemplified in the commercial product, RHEMA SUPER CONCENTRATED MATRIX (Rhema Products, Inc, Memphis, TN). Solutions of the commercial product, which is approximately 90% water and 10% surfactant and builder by weight, have been successfully tested at ranges of concentration from 0.1% by volume of commercial product in 99.9% water to 100% commercial product in 0% water.
  • “oily phase” we mean a phase comprised of added oil or oil extracted from the oily contaminant.
  • a surfactant system that has the unique property of high detergency, yet low emulsion carrying capacity.
  • Detergency is a relative term defining the ability of a surfactant to remove dirt, grease, and oil from solid surfaces.
  • commercial products deemed to have high detergency are products like DAWN dishwashing liquid (Procter and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH.), TIDE laundry detergent (Procter and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH.), and JOY dishwashing liquid detergent (Procter and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH.).
  • the RHEMA SUPER CONCENTRATED MATRIX has detergent qualities similar to DAWN, TIDE and JOY.
  • Emulsivity is the property to surfactants to stabilize emulsions of oil in water. Emulsion breakers destabilize oil in water to aide in the formation of clear interfaces between distinct oil and water phases. It is noteworthy that most detergents are strong emulsifiers. The present invention, however, requires of the detergent to have anti-emulsion properties. Typical anti- emulsion products rely on high cationic charge density to lower the surface strength of the micelle structure. Examples are mono-valent, di-valent, and tri-valent cationic salts, polyacrylic acids, TRITON RW (Rohm and Haas) , and natural polycationic resins such as CMF KITOSAN (Cognis Company).
  • Experiments 8 and 9 show that an oily contaminant such as PCB can be driven from the water phase and concentrated into an established oil phase such that more than a 1 % solution of the surfactant causes more than 95% of the contaminant to partition to the oil phase.
  • Any surfactant that shows these types of physical behavior can be used to perform the art of the invention.
  • One example of such a surfactant is SUPER- CONCENTRATED MATRIX, from Rhema Products, Memphis, Tennessee.
  • Another example is SANTEC 1000 or SANTEC 2000, Santec Inc. of Farmington Hills, Michigan.
  • Oily materials removed from a solid surface are relatively quickly rejected from a solution of surfactant in water yielding a clear interface of oil and water.
  • the surfactant remains mostly with the water phase. Exemplary systems are described below, especially at Figs. 5 and 7. Any oily contaminant will partition strongly to the oil phase.
  • the present invention is a method of concentrating contaminants via foam fraction.
  • the contaminated solid is mixed with an aqueous/surfactant mixture.
  • the foam fractionation, air or mechanical energy is added to waterborne surfactant, creating a foam phase and a waterborne surfactant phase.
  • the oil or oil soluble materials are concentrated in the foam phase. Removal of the foam from the remainder of the waterborne surfactant caused a concentration in the target compounds known as foam fractionation.
  • the invention is a method in which this surfactant system can be used to leach a pollutant from pollutant-contaminated soil by immersing the soil in a water/oil/surfactant mixture, removing the oil contaminant from the soil, and ultimately rejecting the pollutant-bearing oil from the water/surfactant solution.
  • the water may be reused with only slight recharging of surfactant and make-up water equivalent to the losses from removal of wetted soil from the reaction vessel.
  • the soil is preferably cleansed of pollutant to a safe level.
  • the oil may be captured and reused until the equilibrium limit between the pollutant level and the soil is reached.
  • Fig. 8A is one embodiment of the invention in which oil (1 ), waterborne surfactant (2) and solids (3) are contacted in a mixing tank (4). Solids (6) are removed from tank (4) and sent to clean landfill or replaced on site, or sent for a second cleaning in the tank. Waterborne surfactant and oil are removed from tank (4) to an oil/water separator (5) from which the oil (7) is recycled to step 1 or disposed depending on the concentration of contaminant in the oil. Waterborne surfactant is recycled to step 2 or disposed.
  • Fig. 8B is a second embodiment of the invention in which waterborne surfactant (1) and solids (2) are contacted in a mixing tank (3). Solids (6) from the mixing tank are removed to clean landfill or replaced on site. Waterborne surfactant from tank (3) is contacted with oil (4) in a second mixing tank (5). The emulsion from tank 5 is sent to an oil/water separator (7) from which the oil (8) is recycled to step (4) or disposed. The waterborne surfactant (9) is recycled to step (1) or disposed.
  • Fig. 8C is a third embodiment of the invention in which waterborne surfactant (1) and solids (2) are contacted in a mixing tank (3). Solids from the mixing tank are sent to clean landfill, replaced at site, or sent back to tank (3) for reprocessing if necessary.
  • Waterborne surfactant from tank (3) is sent to a foam generation tank (5) in which air or mechanical energy are used to create a foam layer and a waterborne surfactant layer.
  • the waterborne surfactant layer (7) is recycled or disposed.
  • the foam layer is sent to a coalescence tank (8) to form a second waterborne surfactant layer.
  • This second waterborne surfactant batch is sent to a second mixing tank (9) and contacted with oil (10).
  • the resultant oil/water emulsion is sent to an oil/water separator (11).
  • the oil (12) is recycled to step (10) or disposed.
  • the waterborne surfactant (13) is recycle to step (1) or disposed.
  • the following contaminants are removed from soil: PCB, lindane, aldane, DDT, dioxins, polychlorinated terphenyls, atrazine, and chlorinated phenols.
  • the contaminants are petroleum products or chlorinated hydrocarbons or a mixture of these products.
  • Contaminants may also be natural such as poly- aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH).
  • PAH poly- aromatic hydrocarbons
  • at least 90% of the contaminant is removed from the soil or solid. More preferably, 95% of the contaminant is removed. Most preferably, 99% is removed.
  • the surfactant system is non-toxic and biodegradable
  • the oil system may be chosen to be non-petroleum based and non-toxic and biodegradable (for example, a vegetable oil like corn oil).
  • Preferable oils include oil derived from soy, peanuts, canola, oil, or olives. The oil may be derived solely or in part from oily contaminants extracted from the contaminated solid.
  • the contaminant may be concentrated and the water phase concentration reduced by use of foam fractionation of the water phase wherein the contaminant preferentially partitions to the foam phase.
  • Mechanical systems may be used to optimize the contact and recovery of the soil, water/surfactant, and oil components.
  • Fig. 7 is a schematic showing one embodiment of the extraction of the present invention.
  • a hopper 1 for storing contaminated solid medium, which is loaded at point (a).
  • the hopper 1 feeds a screw feeder 2 and the solids are delivered to a tank 3 at point (b).
  • a mixer is employed 4, which is depicted here to provide a variable amount of agitation for purposes of mixing the solid slurry, the water/surfactant layer, and the oil layer to the amount needed.
  • Different mixer styles and multiple mixers may be used.
  • the slurry is moved by agitation to the front of the screw feeder 5, which removes decontaminated, wetted solid from the reaction vessel at point (c).
  • Point (d) demonstrates an aspect of the invention wherein recycled or fresh water or water/surfactant or surfactant may be added as needed, or continuously as desired to optimize the extraction.
  • Point (e) demonstrates the possible need to remove water/surfactant layer materials as needed or implied by continuous feed. Water/surfactant removed at (e) may be treated as needed to prepare for recycle or disposal and it is not the intent to limit these further treatments by this disclosure.
  • point (f) is included to show that oil may be added as needed or continuously and this oil may be fresh oil or recycled oil.
  • Point (g) is depicted to show that it may be advantageous to remove oil as needed, or as part of a continuous flow scheme.
  • the recovered oil at point (g) may be further treated to prepare it for recycle at point (f) or for disposal as needed. It is not the intent to limit the treatment means of the oil at point (g), and these further treatments are not a part of this disclosure.
  • a second embodiment of the process may be performed in a method similar to the equipment used in Experiment 10 in which a mixing chamber is used to contact the sediment or soil with the surfactant.
  • the surfactant may then be removed in batch or continuously to a second contact vessel where the surfactant is cleansed with contact with an oil layer.
  • the cleansed surfactant may then be re-applied to the first chamber for further cleansing of the soil.
  • the soil may then undergo a final treatment to remove excess surfactant in a dewatering screw such as used in Experiment 10.
  • the soil may be dewatered using standard hydrocyclones or centrifuges or dewatering belt filters or dewatering vacuum filters.
  • the soil is considered to be a low clay content, sandy-loam.
  • the contaminant spike was produced by dissolving 250 mg PCB (Aroclor 1254) into 5 ml acetone followed by dilution with 45 ml deionized water. The spike was then added to 500 g dry weight (roughly 750 g wet weight) of Lake Lansing sediment to produce a laboratory-generated sample with approximately 500 mg/kg dry weight PCB. The spiked sediment was mixed for 15 minutes using a blender (Hamilton Beach) to achieve uniform distribution of the PCBs. The spiked sediment was used as test material in this study.
  • the surfactant solution at different concentrations was prepared by adding the appropriate volume of Rhema Products, Memphis, TN, Super Concentrated Matrix, into a 200 ml volumetric flask, then making up the remainder of the volume with deionized water.
  • the oil layer was Citgo SAE 30 non-detergent motor oil (Citgo Petroleum Corporation, Tulsa, OK). Extraction and Analysis of PCBs.
  • TCMX Tetrachloro m-xylene
  • Method E2 Extraction of PCBs from Liquid samples.
  • EPA method # 8080 water manual liquid-liquid extraction method was used.
  • liquid sample 500 ml (if sample is less than 500 ml, add enough water to make up 500 ml, and record the dilution) was poured into a 1000 ml separatory funnel.
  • Each sample was spiked with surrogate, 250 ppb of Decachloro biphenyl (DCB) diluted in methylene chloride.
  • DCB Decachloro biphenyl
  • the bottom layer was filtered through columns packed with sodium sulfate into Turbo Vap tube.
  • the top layer was re-extracted with methylene chloride and allowed the funnel to stand for about 10 minutes.
  • the bottom layer was filtered through the sodium sulfate column into a Turbo Vap tube.
  • Liquid samples (water/surfactant) were transferred to 250 ml separatory funnels. Hexane (50 ml) was added and shaken for approximately 5 minutes. The immiscible hexane and water phases were allowed to form for approximately 20 minutes. An emulsion of hexane and water was typically present, the more surfactant present in the water layer, the larger the volume of emulsion. To break the emulsion, 10 ml acetone was added in to each funnel to achieve clear separation of hexane phase and the aqueous phase. The upper solvent layer was gently transferred to another separatory funnel.
  • the dry soil was transferred to a cellulose extraction thimble (Whatman) in a soxhlet extraction apparatus (Kimble) which contained a condensing tube and 500 mL flat bottom flask.
  • a 50% hexanes and 50% acetone solution (300 mL) was added to the flask, and by heating the solution, the PCB's are extracted for 24 hours and collected in the organic phase.
  • the solution volume is reduced to 30 mL using a Turbo Vap II (Zymark Corporation, Hopkington, MA 01748), and transferred to a 250 mL separatory funnel.
  • a 2% sodium chloride solution (30 mL) (J.T. Baker) is added to the funnel and the solutions are shaken for one minute.
  • the sodium chloride solution is discarded.
  • 10 mL of a 3M sodium hydroxide (J.T. Baker, pellets) solution is added and the solutions are mixed for one minute.
  • 10 mL of concentrated sulfuric acid J.T. Baker, A.C.S. reagent
  • the solutions are mixed for one minute, then the acid layer is discarded.
  • the acid step is repeated until all discoloration is removed from the organic phase.
  • another 20 mL of 2% sodium chloride solution is added to the separatory funnel and the solutions are shaken for one minute. The salt solution is discarded.
  • the organic phase is passed through a drying column (Supelco Drying
  • the concentration of PCB in the hexane extracts or filtrates was analyzed by gas chromatography using a Varian 3500 GC.
  • the GC was equipped with a 63 Ni Electron Capture Detector (ECD), J & W megabore DB column 608 (size 30 m x 0.50 mm), and an autosampler (Type 8200).
  • ECD Electron Capture Detector
  • J & W megabore DB column 608 size 30 m x 0.50 mm
  • an autosampler Type 8200
  • the GC injector temperature setting was 250°C and the detector was set at 325°C.
  • the initial column temperature was set at 140°C with an increase in temperature at the rate of 5°C/minute, up to a maximum of 280°C.
  • the final hold time at the end of the temperature program was 6 minutes.
  • the total run time was 30 minutes per sample.
  • the detector attenuation and range were 2 and 10, respectively. Helium and nitrogen were used as the carrier and make up gases at a flow rate of 1 ml and 10 ml/minutes, respectively. All data and chromatograms were analyzed using Varian Star Workstation software. A three point calibration curve was created each sample day to standardize the ECD response and determine the concentration of PCBs. Method A2: GC Analysis of PCBs.
  • the concentration of PCBs in the hexane extracts or filtrates were analyzed by gas chromatography using a Hewlett Packard 5890 GC.
  • the GC was equipped with a 63 Ni Electron Capture Detector (ECD), HP Ultra 2 capillary column (size 50 m long x 0.20 mm i.d.), and an autosampler (HP 7673A).
  • ECD Electron Capture Detector
  • HP Ultra 2 capillary column size 50 m long x 0.20 mm i.d.
  • HP 7673A autosampler
  • the GC injector temperature setting was 220°C and the detector was set at 325°C.
  • the initial column temperature was set at 140°C with an increase in temperature at the rate of 2°C/minute, up to a maximum of 300°C.
  • the total run time was 81 minutes per sample.
  • Test sample (F) was treated first with 5 g corn oil and mixed for 2 minutes by hand, followed by addition of 25 ml of the 5% surfactant.
  • Sample (G) was treated first with 25 ml of the 5% surfactant solution followed by 5 g of corn oil. The tubes were sealed with the screw caps and shaken on a rotary shaker for 4 hours.
  • Treatments D and E are considered herein as a single test because the variability in the results do not allow for accurate assessment of the influence of the order of addition.
  • an average of 82 mg PCB/kg sediment remained on the sediment, representing a removal of approximately 81%.
  • the resulting concentration in the oil phase was 422 mg PCB's/kg oil.
  • Treatments F and G are considered herein as a single test because the variability in the results do not allow for accurate assessment of the influence of the order of addition.
  • oil and surfactant extraction an average of 23 mg PCB/kg sediment remained on the sediment, representing a removal of approximately 95%.
  • the resulting concentration in the oil phase was 602 mg PCB's/kg oil.
  • Experiment 2 Extraction with Surfactant Alone.
  • each tube The liquid consisted of 0%, 2.5%, 5%, 10%, 20%, or 30%
  • Fig. 1 is a plot of the results of Experiment 3. This figure clearly shows that the chosen surfactant is very efficient in improving the removal of oil from water. The adverse effects of lake sediment on oil recovery seem to be diminished at surfactant concentrations above 10%.
  • Samples 1a and 1b were controls to determine the concentration of PCBS in sediment in the presence of 25 ml water. These are consistent with the previous samples. Samples 2a, 2b, and 2c were prepared by adding 25 ml
  • the twin bladed mixing paddle was adjusted so that the bottom blade (3/4 inch paddle height) was in the sediment layer and the upper (3/8 inch height) blade was in the middle of the surfactant/oil interface.
  • the mixing paddle diameter was inch less than the diameter of the beaker.
  • the mixing paddle was then rotated at a slow speed (25 rpm) specifically to avoid any direct contact between the oil phase and the sediment layer.
  • Duplicate samples of sediment were measured for PCB content and served as the time zero reference.
  • Duplicate samples of sediment and the waterborne surfactant were recovered from the beaker after 240 minutes of mixing.
  • Duplicate samples (0.5 ml each) of the oil layer were removed after 15, 30, 60, 120, and 240 minutes of mixing.
  • Results of Experiment 6 are presented as concentration data and total mass recovery in each phase.
  • the right hand column shows the total mass of PCB at the start and finish of the test. These data indicate that full recovery of PCB (105%) was achieved in the three phases.
  • the initial concentration of PCB in the sediment was 1600 mg/kg dry weight.
  • the final concentration of PCB in the sediment was 330 mg/kg, representing 80% removal of PCB from the sediment.
  • the concentration of PCB in the oil phase rose linearly with time to a final concentration of 280 mg/kg (total mass 8600 ⁇ g).
  • the linearity of the concentration increase and the relatively low final concentration in the oil phase are taken as an indication that the stirring speed of 25 rpm was insufficient to bring the contents of the beaker to equilibrium within the 240 minute mixing time.
  • the distribution of PCB mass between the phases is shown in Fig. 2.
  • Table 8 A timed mixing test with weathered PCB contaminated River Sediment*
  • the liquid consisted of water, or water plus surfactant (Rhema super- concentrated Matrix) by volume, or corn oil. Each tube was shaken for 4 hours and the sediment was allowed to settle. The liquid layer from each tube was then removed and centrifuged. The recovered solids from the centrifugation step were returned to the original settled solids. Two liquid phases were recovered in treatments 1-4 and consisted of the water/surfactant layer and the oil layer. There was no oil in the control (treatment 5). The sediment solids and the recovered centrates were analyzed for
  • PCB's (Table 9). The triplicate results for phase for each treatment were summed to estimate the total recovered mass of PCB's. The average recovery in each phase is presented in the final column of Table 9. The data indicate that there is only a small redistribution of recovery between the phases that is directly due to the amount of oil used. For 5% surfactant, 91 % removal from sediment was obtained with 5 ml oil, whereas, 84% was achieved with 1 ml oil. For 15% surfactant, 86% was removed from with 5 ml oil versus 76% with 1 ml oil. The potential for finding an optimum cost advantage for single, or countercurrent, or multiple extractions with small volumes of oil is implied from these trends.
  • the tubes were shaken to provide equal distribution of PCB throughout the surfactant, and 5 mL of corn oil was placed on top of the surfactant layer.
  • the samples were shaken for four hours at 85 rpm using a Series 25 Incubator Horizontal Shaker (New Brunswick Scientific Co.), then centrifuged for 10 minutes at 2,000 rpm (Beckman Model TJ-6 Centrifuge) to improve phase separation.
  • the oil layer was removed by pipette and transferred to a separate glass vial. If any water was transferred with the oil, the sample was centrifuged again and the water was removed and placed back in the original vial.
  • the oil layer was diluted with 20 mL of hexanes, and passed through a Fluorisil column.
  • the samples were collected in a 100 mL graduated tube, and the column was rinsed three times with 20 mL portions of hexanes to capture any remaining PCB's.
  • the solution was concentrated to 10 mL by heating the tubes to 60 degrees and evaporating the sample volume with nitrogen gas.
  • the surfactant phase was extracted with three 50 mL portions of hexanes using a 250 mL separatory funnel.
  • the organic phase was transferred to another separatory funnel, and dried after passing the solution through a Fluorisil column.
  • the solutions were concentrated to 10 mL using heat and evaporation.
  • Samples for both surfactant and oil phases were diluted to exactly 20 mL with hexanes and transferred to 20 mL scintillation vials for storage. A portion of each sample was analyzed by Gas Chromatography for the PCB concentration in the hexane solution. The results of the separate experiments are compiled in Table 10.
  • Each result is an average value obtained from duplicate samples.
  • the percent PCB in each phase was determined by taking the amount in that phase and dividing it by the total PCB mass recovered.
  • the total mass of PCB's recovered is recorded as the sum of the mass values from the oil and surfactant samples.
  • the surfactant solution was extracted three times with 50 mL portions of hexanes. After each extraction the organic phase was transferred to another separatory funnel. The solution was dried upon passing it through a Fluorisil column. The sample solution was concentrated to 10 mL then diluted to 20 mL with hexanes, and transferred to 20 mL scintillation vials for storage. A small portion of the sample was taken for GC analysis.
  • PCB mass in oil occurs immediately and quickly becomes almost linear with increasing surfactant concentration.
  • the oil phase contains 98-99% of the PCB mass with surfactant concentrations of 4-12%.
  • An exponential decrease in PCB mass in the surfactant concentration indicates that PCB's are being rejected from the surfactant phase more than the control tube, which contains water alone.
  • the effective range of surfactant concentration does not change when altering the type of oil used in this experiment.
  • FIG. 5 shows the side view of the reactor.
  • a QVz inch diameter stainless steel pipe section with a height of 8>2 inches was used as the body of the reactor chamber (the hopper).
  • the body of the reactor was welded to a 25 inch screw trough such that the trough made a 30° angle to the horizontal.
  • a sectional base plate was welded to the bottom of the pipe and the sides of the trough to make a water tight seal.
  • portals (3/8 inch pipe nipples) were placed on the body of the reactor for convenience in removing reaction materials during testing.
  • a variable speed motor was mounted above the body of the reactor to operate a dual paddle mixing shaft. Both paddles extended to cover the entire inside diameter of the reactor body less % inch clearance at each wall. One paddle of approximately 1 inch height was placed at the bottom of the reactor body to move the settled solids. The second paddle of approximately 1/3 inch height was placed at a height to mix the waterborne surfactant.
  • a second variable speed motor was placed parallel with the bottom of the screw trough to operate the screw.
  • the screw was constructed of a 3/8 inch stainless steel rod.
  • the helical portion of the screw was constructed with 1/8 inch thick stainless steel plate.
  • the helix diameter was 1 3/8 inch with a 1 inch separation between rotations and approximately a 30° pitch.
  • a soil extraction was performed using the apparatus illustrated in Fig. 5 using PCB spiked sandy loam soil from MBI.
  • the total operational volume of the Hopper was approximately 3 liters.
  • the hopper was charged with 1.0 kg soil and 1500 mL of 7.5% waterborne surfactant.
  • the contents of the Hopper were mixed for 1 hour at 40 rpm.
  • the contents were allowed to settle, and the soil was the surfactant was drained from the reactor.
  • a total of 1400 mL surfactant was recovered.
  • the soil was removed from the reactor using the screw.
  • the surfactant was contacted with 300 mL of corn oil in a separatory funnel for 1 hour.
  • Experiments 2, 8 and 9 indicate that the process may be expected to proceed under the conditions in which sediment or soil are first contacted with surfactant and where the surfactant is subsequently contacted with oil.
  • Experiment 10 demonstrates that the process can be performed under the conditions in which the sediment and surfactant are first contacted followed by contacting of the oil and the surfactant.
  • Experiment 10 also demonstrates that soil or sediment may be further cleansed of pollutants by multiple extractions.
  • Experiment 4 demonstrates an alternative method of concentrating oily materials from the surfactant phase is produce foam from the surfactant and to collect the foam. The pollutant is concentrated in the foam.

Landscapes

  • Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
  • Soil Sciences (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Environmental & Geological Engineering (AREA)
  • Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
  • Oil, Petroleum & Natural Gas (AREA)
  • Processing Of Solid Wastes (AREA)
  • Treatment Of Sludge (AREA)

Abstract

L'invention concerne un procédé permettant d'extraire des contaminants solubles dans l'huile à partir de sols, de sédiments ou de solides poreux. Selon l'un des modes de réalisation de la présente invention, le procédé consiste à immerger le solide dans un fluide comportant une phase aqueuse et une phase huileuse, puis à mélanger ces deux phases et enfin, à leur permettre de se séparer. Ainsi, les contaminants se trouvent concentrés dans la phase huileuse.
PCT/US2001/011578 2000-04-11 2001-04-09 Procede d'extraction de sols WO2001076782A2 (fr)

Priority Applications (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
AU2001253303A AU2001253303A1 (en) 2000-04-11 2001-04-09 Method of soil extraction
US10/257,200 US20030205525A1 (en) 2001-04-09 2001-04-09 Method of soil extraction

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US19653000P 2000-04-11 2000-04-11
US60/196,530 2000-04-11

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2001076782A2 true WO2001076782A2 (fr) 2001-10-18
WO2001076782A3 WO2001076782A3 (fr) 2002-05-30

Family

ID=22725780

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US2001/011578 WO2001076782A2 (fr) 2000-04-11 2001-04-09 Procede d'extraction de sols

Country Status (2)

Country Link
AU (1) AU2001253303A1 (fr)
WO (1) WO2001076782A2 (fr)

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2007051337A1 (fr) * 2005-11-07 2007-05-10 Swisstech Holding Ag Agent pour le traitement d'une terre contaminee par du petrole ainsi que le nettoyage de surfaces et de reservoirs pollues par du petrole
CN105903759A (zh) * 2016-04-13 2016-08-31 沈阳大学 一种生物剂修复滴滴涕-多环芳烃复合污染土壤的方法

Citations (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4444260A (en) * 1981-08-17 1984-04-24 Conoco Inc. Oil solvation process for the treatment of oil contaminated sand
GB2289705A (en) * 1994-05-20 1995-11-29 Chevron Usa Inc Treating drill cuttings
DE19613485A1 (de) * 1996-04-04 1997-10-09 Forschungszentrum Juelich Gmbh Extraktion organischer Verbindungen aus tensidhaltigen wäßrigen Lösungen
US5690811A (en) * 1995-10-17 1997-11-25 Mobil Oil Corporation Method for extracting oil from oil-contaminated soil
US5723423A (en) * 1993-12-22 1998-03-03 Union Oil Company Of California, Dba Unocal Solvent soaps and methods employing same
US5833756A (en) * 1992-08-22 1998-11-10 Forschungszentrum Julich Gmbh Process and plant for decontaminating solid materials contaminated with organic pollutants

Patent Citations (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4444260A (en) * 1981-08-17 1984-04-24 Conoco Inc. Oil solvation process for the treatment of oil contaminated sand
US5833756A (en) * 1992-08-22 1998-11-10 Forschungszentrum Julich Gmbh Process and plant for decontaminating solid materials contaminated with organic pollutants
US5723423A (en) * 1993-12-22 1998-03-03 Union Oil Company Of California, Dba Unocal Solvent soaps and methods employing same
GB2289705A (en) * 1994-05-20 1995-11-29 Chevron Usa Inc Treating drill cuttings
US5690811A (en) * 1995-10-17 1997-11-25 Mobil Oil Corporation Method for extracting oil from oil-contaminated soil
DE19613485A1 (de) * 1996-04-04 1997-10-09 Forschungszentrum Juelich Gmbh Extraktion organischer Verbindungen aus tensidhaltigen wäßrigen Lösungen

Cited By (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2007051337A1 (fr) * 2005-11-07 2007-05-10 Swisstech Holding Ag Agent pour le traitement d'une terre contaminee par du petrole ainsi que le nettoyage de surfaces et de reservoirs pollues par du petrole
US7947641B2 (en) 2005-11-07 2011-05-24 Swisstech Holding Ag Agent for treating oil-polluted ground, and for cleaning oil-contaminated surfaces and containers
EA019013B1 (ru) * 2005-11-07 2013-12-30 Оти Гриинтех Груп Аг Средства для обработки земли, загрязненной нефтепродуктами, и для очистки поверхностей и резервуаров, загрязненных нефтепродуктами
CN105903759A (zh) * 2016-04-13 2016-08-31 沈阳大学 一种生物剂修复滴滴涕-多环芳烃复合污染土壤的方法

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
AU2001253303A1 (en) 2001-10-23
WO2001076782A3 (fr) 2002-05-30

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
Schenck et al. Comparison of magnesium sulfate and sodium sulfate for removal of water from pesticide extracts of foods
US4841998A (en) Soil decontamination method
US4906302A (en) Solids decontamination method with ammonia
EP0077833B1 (fr) Procede de separation du petrole ou du bitume a partir de surfaces recouvertes de ces derniers
EP0315672A1 (fr) Procede d'elimination de substances contaminantes organiques presentes dans des matieres solides et des sediments.
Noordkamp et al. Selection of an efficient extraction method for the determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in contaminated soil and sediment
CN108059313A (zh) 一种油泥清洗剂及其用于处理油泥的方法
US20030205525A1 (en) Method of soil extraction
Wang et al. Partitioning of hydrophobic pesticides within a soil–water–anionic surfactant system
US4704200A (en) Method of separating oil or bitumen from surfaces covered with same
WO2001076782A2 (fr) Procede d'extraction de sols
Nilsson et al. Pressurized-fluid extraction (PFE) of chlorinated paraffins from the biodegradable fraction of source-separated household waste
DE69214449T2 (de) Reinigung von mit Kohlenwasserstoff verunreinigtem Material
US20160279536A1 (en) Liquid-liquid extraction process and apparatus
Siddique et al. A proposed method for rapid and economical extraction of petroleum hydrocarbons from contaminated soils
Sahle‐Demessie et al. Remediating pesticide contaminated soils using solvent extraction
US4832833A (en) Formation of membrane-like material
Meckes et al. Solvent extraction processes: a survey of systems in the SITE program
Anderson et al. A Case Study of a Chemical Spill: Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): 3. PCB Sorption and Retardation in Soil Underlying the Site
Nejad Remediation of Waste Drilling Mud Using Surfactantenhanced Washing: Influencing Factors and Petroleum Hydrocarbon Removal
JP2006200907A (ja) 廃油中のｐｃｂ分析方法
Bentabol et al. Determination of organochlorine pesticides in cheese
Farrow et al. The effect of surfactant concentration on crude oil removal from contaminated soil
Hrivnak Solvent thin layer separator for microextraction of water
BR102014029761A2 (pt) processo ecológico para recuperar ou remediar águas ou solos contaminados com petróleo ou seus derivados

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY BZ CA CH CN CO CR CU CZ DE DK DM DZ EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT TZ UA UG US UZ VN YU ZA ZW

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE TR BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GW ML MR NE SN TD TG

121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application
DFPE Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101)
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A3

Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY BZ CA CH CN CO CR CU CZ DE DK DM DZ EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT TZ UA UG US UZ VN YU ZA ZW

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A3

Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE TR BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GW ML MR NE SN TD TG

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 10257200

Country of ref document: US

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase
NENP Non-entry into the national phase in:

Ref country code: JP