Salah SharifParsons

Case Study: Remediation of Crude Oil in Fractured Shale using Multi‐Phase Extraction (MPE) Enhanced by Surfactant

www.vertexenvironmental.ca

SMART RemediationToronto, ON

January 28, 2016

SMART isPowered by:

1

CASE STUDY: REMEDIATION OF CRUDE OIL IN FRACTURED SHALE USING MULTI-PHASE EXTRACTION (MPE) ENHANCED

BY SURFACTANT INJECTIONS

January 28, 2016Presented by:Salah Sharif, Ph.D., P.Geo.

Background

Conceptual Site Model

2013 Pilot Remediation Study

2015 Pilot Testing

Results

Conclusions

Next Steps

Background

Free Product discovered in 2002

Excavation of PHC impacted soil/rock in 2002 and 2009 up to 5 mbgs

Plastic sheeting placed along excavation walls on N, E, and W

PHC impacts remaining in fractured shale bedrock

2004 Risk Assessment (RA): No unacceptable risks to

human health or ecology, except excavation workers

2

Target Area for MPE Pilot Study

2

Background

Risk Management Plan (RMP) since 2004

More than 40 multi-level monitoring wells (MLMW) at different depths

Each MLMW comprised individual wells screened in A1 to A5 zones

Monthly product removal from wells

Semi-annual monitoring and sampling of groundwater

Confirm delineation is maintained and monitor for potential migration of PHC impacts

3

Background

4

Extent of Free Product (2014)

Extent of PHC F2 Plume (2014) Exceeding MOECC Criteria

3

Conceptual Site Model

5

Bedrock matrix is not impacted

Free Product in fractures in A2 zone

Generally PHC fractions F2-F4

PHC impacts delineated

All data indicated the dissolved plume is stable

No evidence that the free product is migrating horizontally/vertically

PHC F1 PHC F2 PHC F3

PHC F3 + PHC F4

A5

2013 Pilot Remediation Study

Objectives Estimate hydraulic properties of the bedrock including the radius of

influence (ROI) for groundwater extraction

Evaluate the ROI for vapour extraction in the overburden

Evaluate enhancement of free product recovery by injecting surfactants

Estimate design parameters for pilot-scale MPE

Evaluate NA parameters in groundwater to determine if Site conditions are favourable for biodegradation of PHC impact

6

4

2013 Pilot Remediation Study

72-hour Pumping Test Draw-down response was similar to a leaky confined system

No drawdown in A2/A3 zones within 1m from pumping well in A4 zone for 6 hours after pumping started, after which drawdown in A2/A3 observed and continued to increase

Initial drawdown in pumping well (A4) was sharp and with continued pumping, drawdown flattened and stabilized indicating vertical leaking from the upper A2/A3 zones

Hydraulic conductivity values: A1: 5.7 x 10-5 m/s

A2: 7.5 x 10-6 m/s

A3: 3.5 x 10-6 m/s

A4: 2.5 x 10-6 m/s

For A2 zone Groundwater ROI of 15.2 m was calculated

7

2013 Pilot Remediation Study

Vapor Extraction Test An ROI of 4.5 m was estimated

An air extraction rate 25 cfm

Surfactant Injection TestTriton X-100 solution (0.25%) with a fluorescent dye injected in BH36 Triton X-100 (Polyethylene glycol octylphenyl ether) - Non-ionic Surfactant

Two weeks later, the surfactant and dye were encountered mostly in the A2 zone up to 17 m N, 60 m S, and <20 m E and W from the injection well

Free product thickness increased in the injection well BH36 (from sheen to 435 mm)

Natural Attenuation (NA) Anaerobic biodegradation is evident in the PHC impacted A2 zone

Manganese/iron/sulfate reduction are likely NA processes

Due to the presence of free product and stable area of impact NA alone is not considered a significant attenuation process

8

5

2013 Pilot Remediation Study

Recommendations Based on the results of the 2013 Pilot Remediation Study conditions are

considered favourable for the application of MPE to remediate PHC impacts, specifically free product and aqueous PHC phases

Surfactant is expected to enhance the performance of a MPE system, specifically the recovery of free product and dissolved PHC phases

Proceed to a pilot-scale surfactant enhanced MPE pilot testing

9

Pilot Testing-2015

10

Before Pilot Test Potable WaterInjection/Tracer testing To check hydraulic connection between

selected injection and extraction wells

To check capacity of injection wells to deliver surfactants

Injected 2000 L of potable water with fluorescent dye in each injection well (BH38 and BH24) at 20-40 psi and 15-20 L/min

Monitored extraction well (BH36) and surrounding observation wells for dye and groundwater levels including mounding, if any

Injection Well-2

Injection Well-1

Extraction Well

6

Pilot Testing-2015

11

Results of Potable Water Injection and Tracer tests Injection in BH24-A2 (distant well -15 m from extraction well BH36)

No dye detected in extraction well BH36

Poor connectivity between the injection well BH24(A2) and the selected MPE well BH36

Potable water with dye did not break-through to BH36

Injection in BH38-A2 (nearby well - 5 m from extraction well BH36) Dye detected in extraction well BH36 after 1 hr of injection

Injection capacity of both wells are sufficient to proceed with MPE test

Hydraulic control would be required for distant well BH24(A2) by creating a gradient towards the extraction well BH36

Pilot Testing-2015

12

Combined Surfactant Injectionand MPE Week 1- extraction using mobile MPE

system from BH36 to collect baseline data

Week 2- Injection of 3000 L of 0.25% Surfactant (Triton X-100) with green dye in BH24A2 (distant)

Week 3- Injection of 4000 L of 0.25% Triton X-100 with pink dye into BH38A2 (nearby)

Week 4- Continued extraction with varying slurp tube depths Surfactant injected at a wellhead pressure

of <2-5 psi and a flow rate of 16-25 L/min

Water Extraction rate was 2 L/min

Daily monitoring and sampling (groundwater/vapors)

Injection Well- Week 2

Injection Well- Week 3

Extraction Well

7

Pilot Testing-2015

13

Diagram of the Mobile MPE Trailer

Pilot Testing-2015

14

Extraction WellNearby Injection Well

Containment for Diesel AST & Generator

Carbon Filter TrailerMPE Trailer

Baker TankGenerator

Study Area Fenced

8

Pilot Testing-2015

15

Oil-Water Separator

Isolation Tank

Inside View of MPE Trailer

Results of Pilot Testing 2015

16

Pilot and Post-Injection (4-week) Concentrations of PHC F3-F4 in BH-36

9

Results of Pilot Testing 2015

Pilot and Post-Injection Concentrations of PHC F2-F4 in BH-36

17

WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 Post InjectionLOCATIONS BH 36 BH36 BH36 BH36 BH 36 BH 36 BH36 BH36 BH 36 BH36 BH36 BH36 BH36 BH36 BH36 BH36 BH36

Date Sampled 2015/05/26 2015/05/28 2015/06/01 2015/06/01 2015/06/04 2015/06/08 2015/06/09 2015/06/10 2015/06/11 2015/06/12 2015/06/15 2015/06/16 2015/06/17 2015/06/18 2015/06/19 2015/07/23 2015/10/30

Parameters

PHC F1 150 97 190 2200 31 40 7800 920 930 790 860 <25 <25 <25 <25 230 240

PHC F2 6000 2400 10 000 29 000 310 620 170 000 8400 23 000 18 000 1100 60 000 190 160 270 2800 <100

PHC F3 27 000 13000 51 000 130 000 3800 5100 540 000 47 000 120 000 74 000 4600 200 000 870 330 1400 1400 <100PHC F4 3300 2000 5400 18 000 1400 790 54 000 5200 15 000 6500 690 21 000 180 <100 210 140 <100

1 Month after Injection

4 Months after Injection

MPE & Surfactant Injection in Distant

Well BH24A2

MPE & Surfactant Injection in Nearby

Well BH38A2

Baseline: MPE and NO Surfactant Injection

MPE & Varying Slurp Tube Depth; No

Surfactant Injection

Results of Pilot Testing 2015

18

DATE (yyyy/mm/dd)

2013/01/28

2013/02/20

2013/03/18

2013/04/12

2013/05/06

2013/06/14

2013/07/10

2013/08/09

2013/09/13

2013/10/09

2013/10/28

2013/11/06

2013/12/03

2014/01/27

2014/02/24

2014/03/27

2014/04/25

2014/05/20

2014/06/13

2014/07/16

2014/08/18

2014/09/25

2014/10/31

2014/11/24

2014/12/16

2015/01/26

2015/02/24

2015/03/23

2015/04/24

2015/05/25

2015/07/20

2015/08/27

2015/09/25

2015/10/26

2015/11/30

2015/12/17

FREE PRODUCT THICKNESSES(mm)

Sheen

Sheen

Sheen

Sheen

ND

Sheen

Sheen

10

Sheen

11

435

325

315

168

107

180

38

30

62

832

53

162

18

45

38

68

21

33 3 3

Sheen

Sheen

ND

Sheen

ND

ND

Free Product in Extraction Well BH36

Surfactant Injection in 2013 increased free

product

During MPE & Surfactant Injection in June 2015

Recovery: 4 L of free product, 9 kg of dissolved PHC

Background free product

occurrences

After MPE & Surfactant Injection in 2015 (July-December)

No Free Product

10

Conclusions

19

• Pumping water without surfactant injection yielded little PHC recovery

• Maintaining hydraulic gradient ensures surfactant flow from distant injection well and increased ROI

• Surfactant increased dissolved PHC (F2-F4) recovery for short duration

• Surfactant mobilized LNAPL to extraction well

• Insignificant vapor-phase PHC recovery

• Varying slurp tube depth affect PHC recovery

• Triton X-100 was tested for positive bias of PHCs and was insignificant

• Approximately 13 kg of PHC removed in 3 weeks (4 L of free product, 9 kg of aqueous phase) from one extraction well

• MPE enhanced by surfactant injection is suitable for full-scale application

Next Step

20

Full Scale Remediation Detailed design

Drilling

Treatability study for activated carbon consumption by surfactant and PHC mixed groundwater

During/process/post-remediation monitoring and sampling program

Expectation 2016-2019

11

Thank You!

21

Questions…

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

PARSONSJohn Halstead, M.Sc., P.Geo.Tom Li, P.Eng., M.A.Sc., M.B.A.

VERTEXBruce Tunnicliffe, M.A.Sc., P.Eng.Nathan Lichti, B.A.Sc., P.Eng.