9/21/2018

1

NEBC Remediation ConferenceTacoma, WA

September 20, 2018

In Situ Thermal Remediation

forSource Zone &

Plume-wide Solutions

Why is Remediation so Difficult?

9/21/2018

2

ISTR Technologies

1. Electrical resistance heating (ERH)2. Low temperature thermal (HEPA)3. Thermal conduction heating (TCH)

TRS ERH PROCESS

Electricity is directed into the subsurface area.TRS ERH PROCESSTRS ERH PROCESS

TRS Power Control Unit

Electrical Resistance Heating

9/21/2018

3

Beneath Occupied Buildings

40⁰ angle off horizontal14⁰ angle at same site

9/21/2018

4

Seattle Neighborhood

Brownfield Redevelopment

9/21/2018

5

Active Industrial Facilities

ISTR in Sedimentary Rock

90 ft. rock sequence

Sandstone

~8% primary porosity

82 days of heating

400 lbs. TCE removed

99.9% mass reduction

9/21/2018

6

Completed ISTR Projects - Region 10City Year Contaminants Media -

% ReductionClient Contract

Portland, OR 2000 CVOCs GW – 99% Private Guaranteed

Lake City Way 2001 PCE DNAPL Soil, GW – 99.8% Private Guaranteed

Everett 2002 TCE DNAPL GW – 99.7% Private Fixed price

EGDY, Fort Lewis 2002 DNAPL, LNAPL Soil/GW – 99.9%, 99.6%, respectively

Superfund, DOD

PBC

Ballard, WA 2007 PCP GW – 99% Private Fixed Price

Fox Ave, Seattle 2012 CVOCs, LNAPL Soil, GW – 99.9%, 90%, respectively

Private Guaranteed

So Lake Union 2014 PCE GW – 99% Private Fixed price

Well 12A, Tacoma Source Area

2014 CVOCs, LNAPL Soil, GW – 99.9% EPA Superfund

PBC

Phinney Ridge 2015 PCE Soil – 99.9% Private Fixed price

Well 12A, Tacoma Low Temp ERH/Bio

2017 CVOCs GW – 90% EPA Superfund

PBC

Green Lake 2017 PCE Soil – 95%, 1/3 ND Private Fixed price

Well 12A Superfund Site

US EPA – Region 10

9/21/2018

7

• Sand, gravel, clay, silt – groundwater 33 ft bgs

• 1,1,2,2-PCA, PCE, TCE, cis, trans-DCE, VC

• 13,700 sq ft; 2 to 55 ft bgs; 27,900 yd3

• Mass est. ~500 lbs, including LNAPL

• Goal - 90% reduction in all VOCs

• 70 electrodes/VR, 35 MPE wells, 27 TMPs/Piezometers

Combined Remedies - Well 12A Superfund Site Tacoma WA

Compliments of CDM Smith

US EPA – Region 10

9/21/2018

8

ExcavationIn Situ Thermal

.

.

.

..

.

Compliments of CDM Smith

ZoneSurface Area (ft2)

VOC Mass (kg)

Discharge to GETS

Excavation Zone 3819 510 NA

Thermal Treatment Zone

13,000 ~242224 g/day(53%)

In Situ Bioremediation Zone

162,000 ~462199 g/day(47%)

Well 12A Superfund Site

US EPA – Region 10

Well 12A Source Cleanup

US EPA – Region 10

9/21/2018

9

Post‐ERH

Pre‐ERH

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

SB‐1SB‐4

SB‐5SB‐6

SB‐12SB‐13

SB‐14SB‐15

0.00000.0426

0.00007.2950

7.92000.0000

0.03170.0038

4,035.8

12,103.0

8.9

11,686.0

36.3

4,708.0

17.711.8

mg/kg

Sample Location

Post‐ERH

Pre‐ERH

• 99.9% reduction in total CVOCs

• ~32,000 lbs VOCs and LNAPL removed

• 117 days of operations

• 93% of the estimated design energy

• ~$74 per cubic yard

Results - CVOCs in Soil – Well 12A

9/21/2018

10

Bioremediation (EAB) Area

In‐Situ Thermal Remediation 

(ISTR) Area (high temperature)

Thermally Enhanced Bioremediation (EAB) 

Locations (low‐temperature) 

INJ‐30

EAB‐1

US EPA – Region 10

Well 12A Superfund Site Low Temp ERH

• 30⁰C - 70⁰C• 48 – 56 ft bgs• No vapor/liquid recovery• PCE reduced by >99% • Reduction in mass discharge• 1 year operations (=3yrs bio)

• ~$300K

US EPA – Region 10

9/21/2018

11

2013 Post‐35°C Bio

2010 Post‐ERH

2009 Pre‐ERH

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

DPT‐01R I MW‐04AR I MW‐04BR I MW‐16B I MW‐16A F MW‐03AR F Average

2

1 1

3 32 2

150

16

66110

1,200 1,100

308

130,000

560

3,100

20,00033,000

4,300

37,332

Groundwater TCE (µg/l)

TCE After ERH & Enhanced Bio99.99% average reduction

Thermal Conduction Heating

• FlexHeater• Patent-pending• 2” direct push casing• Electrical v. gas energy

9/21/2018

12

Variable Heating Capacity

at Different Depths

Up to 1,300°C 

Competitor: 940°C 

Combining ERH & TCH

• HybridHeater• Patent pending• ERH & TCH in single borehole• Add energy where needed

• Hot floor• High groundwater flow rates

9/21/2018

13

Emerging Contaminants

TRS ERH patent:• Miscible compounds• 1,4-Dioxane• >99% removal in GW

PFAS: TCH in Soil• >99.99% removal • Source term solution

PFAS in water:• PerfluorAd

Compound PFAS MW BP Temp (C°) Untreated 400°C % removed

at 400°CPerfluorobutanoic acid PFBA 214 121 91 0.049 J >99.999%Perfluoropentanoic acid PFPeA 264 124 to 148 100 <0.077 >99.999%Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid PFBS 300 80 to 210 41 <0.025 >99.999%Perfluorohexanoic acid PFHxA 314 167 200 <0.042 >99.999%Perfluoroheptanoic acid PFHpA 364 89 to 177 27 <0.029 >99.998%Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid PFHxS 400 239 1600 <0.031 >99.999%Perfluorooctanoic acid PFOA 414 189 to 191 64 <0.086 >99.865%Perfluorononanoic acid PFNA 464 218 16 <0.036 >99.997%Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid PFOS 500 249 21000 <0.2 >99.999%Perfluorodecanesulfonic acid PFDS 600 224 to 284 48 <0.039 >99.999%

PFAS Removal from Soil using TCH

9/21/2018

14

Conclusions

• Heat solves the matrix diffusion problem• ERH for VOCs• TCH for VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs & PFAS• Remediation outside of treatment zone• Treatment of PFAS in water• TRS Group embraces guarantees