Incineration treatment of arsenic-contaminated soil

Download Incineration treatment of arsenic-contaminated soil

Post on 06-Jul-2016

221 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

TRANSCRIPT

<ul><li><p>Incineration Treatment of Arsenic-Contaminated Soil </p><p>Larry R. Watdand Chady King Marta K. Richards Robert C. Thurnau </p><p>hwy R Wderkznd It mmwger of incineration tecbndogy devebpment pmgrams f'Acurer Corporation in Mountain V k , c4, Cbarly King supervises :be Acrrrex Emlssioru Measurement Croup :bat operates EPA's Incineration Researcb Facility in J e f l m o q AR Robert C Tbumau supervises :be T b d Researcb Section witbin EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory in Cindnnatr, OH. Marta R Ricbards It a reseatrb cbemist on :be metmal Researcb Section s t a s </p><p>An incinetalion testpmgram wascondutedat the US. Envinmmental Protectionqgency 3 Incineration Research Facility to evaluate thepotential of incineration as a treatment option for contaminated SOUS at tbe Baird and McGuitv SuperJund site in Holho4 Massachwem. Thepuqme of these tests was to evaluate the inciwabiliiy of thesesoils in terms of the fate of arsenic and kad and the destructiim of organic contaminants dumg the incineration process. The tatprogram consisted of a series of bench- scale expajments witb a mumfurnace and a serfes of incineration tests. in a pilot-scale tvtary kiln incineratorsystem. </p><p>The study repotted in this paper was funded by the Envimmental Pmtection Agency under Contract 68-CY-0038 to Acurex Cotporation. It has been subjected to the Agency's nwkw and has been approyed for publication. Mention of tr&amp; numes or commerclalproducts does not constitute dorSement or recommendation for we. </p><p>One of the primary missions of the Incineration Research Facility OW) is to support EPA Regional Offices in evaluating the potential of incinera- tion as a treatment option for contaminated soils at Superfund sites. One priority site in Region I is the Baird and McGuire site in Holbrook, Massachusetts. EPA Region I requested that test bums be conducted at the IRF to support evaluations of incineration as a treatment technology for the contaminated soil. </p><p>The soil at the Baird and McGuire site is contaminated with low levels of several pesticide compounds, and varying levels of arsenic and lead, Several areas of the site have arsenic contamination levels on the order of 100 ppm. Two "hot spots" have arsenic levels up to 3,800 ppm. Lead contamination in the soil is on the order of a few tens of ppm. Thus, with respect to incinerability evaluation, the primary concern surrounds the fate of arsenic and lead in the soil when it is subjected to incineration. The effect of incineration on the fate of arsenic and lead in soil is currently unknown. A second concern relates to whether incineration can effectively destroy the organic pesticide contaminants in the soils. Therefore, the test conditions were designed to evaluate the effects of varying incinerator operating conditions on organic contaminant destruction and on the fate of the arsenic and lead in the soil. Specifically, the test program attempted to answer these questions: </p><p>RBMBDI~TIoN/SPRING 1991 227 </p></li><li><p>LARRY R WATERLAND CHARLY KING MARTA K. RICHARDS R D B T C. THURNAU </p><p>What is the distribution of arsenic and lead in the discharge streams </p><p>To what extent can rotary kiln incineration effectively destroy the </p><p>What are the effects of excess air and temperature on organic </p><p>during incineration of this metal-contaminated soil? </p><p>organic constituents in the soil? </p><p>constituent destruction and arsenic and lead distribution? </p><p>The test program consisted of two components. Initially a series of bench-scale experiments, using a muffle furnace, was performed to evaluate the leachability characteristics of the arsenic and lead in the soil as a function of the arsenidlead concentration in the soil. The second component of this test program consisted of a set of five incineration tests in the rotary kiln incineration system (RKS) at the IRF. These tests were aimed at evaluating the fate of arsenic and lead in the soil as a function of kiln temperature and excess air level. </p><p>MUFFLEFURNACEEXPERIMENTS A typical goal for any on-site remediation treatment process is that the </p><p>residue from the process (the treated soil) be able to be landfiiled at the site. For incineration treatment, this would not be possible if the kiln ash residue had TCLP leachable arsenic and lead at levels greater than the toxicity characteristic (TC) limit. In an actual site remediation, soils with very high arsenidlead levels can be blended with soils of low arsenidead contamination to give an incineration feed that results in a low concentra- tion of leachable arsenidead in the kiln ash. But, the aptjorlunknown is how low the feed arsenic or lead concentration must be. To address this unknown, a series of muffle furnace tests was performed. The objective of </p><p>were designed to </p><p>o f varying incinerator operating conditions on </p><p>the erects </p><p>Ill organic contaminant destruction and on the fate of the arsenic and lead in the soil* </p><p>these tests was to develop data to guide the determination of appropriate maximum feed arsenidead concentrations. </p><p>For these tests, the primary variable was the arsenidead concentration in the test mixture. Contaminated soil containing 650 ppm arsenic and 45 ppm lead was mixed with various amounts of a background soil containing less than 5 ppm arsenic and 14 ppm lead to produce seven samples of varying arsenidead concentrations. Each sample was heated in a muffle furnace at 982OC (1,800OF) for 1 hour. Analysis of the soil mixtures and the resultant ash residues showed that </p><p>Arsenic volatility increased with soil arsenic concentration. Similarly, </p><p>Soils containing less than 150 ppm arsenic produced ash residues </p><p>Lead content in all ash samples was constant at about 5 ppm. All ash TCLP leachate lead concentrations were below detection, </p><p>Organics and moisture in the soil contributed to 25% weight 10s. </p><p>lead volatility increased with soil lead concentration. </p><p>below the arsenic TC Iimit of 5 mditer. </p><p>regardless of initial soil lead content. </p><p>To achieve a secondary objective of determining whether the potential additives lime and alum can affect the distribution of metals to the resulting </p><p>228 REMBDIATION/SPRXNG 1991 </p></li><li><p>INCKNBRATION ~ T M B N T OF A R S B M C - C D Sou </p><p>soil ash, two additional tests were conducted. In both tests, the mixture consisted of the highly contaminated soil and 2% (by weight) of one of the additives. Analysis of the limited data suggests that: </p><p>Lime appeared to reduce the volatility of the arsenic; a greater </p><p>Alum appeared to increase zrsenic volatility; less soil arsenic </p><p>Neither additive affected the volatility of lead. Lime also decreased the leachability (fraction leachable) of resulting ash arsenic to the extent that lime may be added to soils with arsenic concentrations greater than 150 ppm while yielding a thermal treatment ash that would not possess the toxicity characteristic. </p><p>fraction of the soil arsenic remained with the resulting ash. </p><p>remained in the resulting ash. </p><p>PILOT-SCALE INCINERATION The pilot-scale incineration tests were conducted in the RKS to evaluate </p><p>the fate of arsenic and lead in the soil as a function of kiln temperature and excess air level. Figure 1 is a schematic of the RKS. The design character- istics of the system are summarized in Table 1. The RKS consists of a rotary kiln primary combustion chamber followed by an afterburner chamber. Downstream of the afterburner, the combustion gas is quenched by direct water injection. The gas then flows through a primary air pollution control system (APCS). For these tests the primary APCS consisted of a single-stage ionizing wet scrubber fabricated by Air Plastics Company. </p><p>~~~~~~ ~ </p><p>Figure 1. Schematic of the Rotary Kiln System </p><p>I I 8 1 8 </p><p>I </p><p>----- </p><p>I I I </p><p>I SYSTEM I I </p><p>I MODULAR PRIMARY AIR REDUNDANTAIR I ROTARY KILN PouuTloNcoNTRoL ~ P O U U W N ~ O L </p><p>DEVICES INCINERATOR </p><p>~~ </p><p>RE~~RDIATION/~PRING 1991 229 </p></li><li><p>Table 1. Design Characteristics of the IRF Rotary Kiln System for the VenturVPackedColumn Scrubber Trace Metals Tests </p><p>Charncte?istics of the KUn Main Chamber </p><p>Length, outside Diameter, outside Length, inside Diameter, inside Chamber volume Construction Refractory </p><p>Rotation Solids retention time Burner </p><p>Primary fuel Feed system </p><p>Liquids Sludges Solids </p><p>Temperature </p><p>2.61 m (a ft, 7 in) 1.22 m (4 ft) 2.44 m (8 ft&gt; 0.95 m 0 ft 1-l/2 inY 1.74m' (61.4 ft) 0.63 an (0.25 in) thick cold rolled steel 12.7 cm (5 in) thick high alumina castable refractory, variable depth to </p><p>Clockwise or counterdockwise 0.2 to 1.5 rpm 1 hr (at 0.2 rpm) American Combustion Burner, rated at 880 kW 0.0 MMBtu/hr) with </p><p>Propane </p><p>produce a frusvoconical effect for moving solids </p><p>dynamic 0, enhancement capability </p><p>Positive displacement pump via water-cooled lance Moyno pump via front face, water-cooled lance Metered twin-auger screw feeder or fiber pack ram feeder 1,010" C (1,850" F) </p><p>Characteristics of the AJerbumer Chamber </p><p>Length, outside Diameter, outside Length, inside Diameter, inside Chamber volume Construction Refractory Gas residence time Burner </p><p>Primary fuel Temperature </p><p>3.05 m (10 ft) 1.22 m (4 ft) 2.74 m 8 ft) 0.91 m 0 fc) l.8Om3 (63.6 fc9 0.63 cm (0.25 in) thick cold rolled steel 15.24 cm (6 in) thick high alumina castable refractory 1.2 to 2.5 sec, depending on temperature and excess air American Combustion Burner, rated at 440 k W 0.0 MMBtuh) with </p><p>Propane dynamic 0, enhancement capability </p><p>1,200" c (2,200" F) CharacteristCcs of the Air Pollution Control System </p><p>System capacity </p><p>Pressure drop Inlet gas flow </p><p>Venturi scrubber Packed column </p><p>Venmri scrubber Packed column </p><p>107 m3/min 0773 acfm) at 1200" F) and 101 kPa (14.7 psia) </p><p>7.5 kPa 00 in WC) 1.0 Wa (4 in WC) </p><p>77.2 Wmin (20.4 gpm) at 69 kPa (10 psi&amp; 116 Vmin 00.6 gpm) at 69 kPa (1Opsig) Feedback control by NaOH solution addition </p><p>Liquid flow </p><p>pH control </p></li><li><p>After the primary APCS, the flue gas passes through a secondary APCS consisting of a demister, an activated-carbon adsorber, and a high- efficiency particulate (HEPA) filter. The treated flue gas is discharged to the atmosphere via an induced draft fan and stack. </p><p>TESTPROGRAM Four tests were performed at different combinations of kiln tempera- </p><p>ture (nominally 816" and 980C [1,500 and 1,800OFJ) and kiln exit flue gas 0, (nominally 6% and 1M). A repeat fifth test was completed at the test conditions that produced the kiln ash with the lowest levels of TCLP leachable arsenic and lead. </p><p>A bulk sample (nominally 1350 kg, 3000 Ib) of arsenic-contaminated soil was excavated from the Baird and McGuire site to serve as the test waste. The bulk soil sample was packaged into four 55-gallon drums and shipped to the IRF for testing. At the IRF the soil was repacked into polyethylene-lined 1.5-gal fiber pack drums. Each fiber pack drum held about 4.5 kg (10 lb) of the test soil. In the tests, one fiber pack drum was fed into the RKS with a ram feeder every 5 minutes. Thus, test soil feedrate was nominally 55 kg/hr (120 lbhr). A kiln rotation speed of 0.65 rpm produced a solids residence time in the kiln of about 0.5 hour. Figum 2 identifies the sampling locations for the tests and summarizes the sampling protocol employed. </p><p>TESTRESULTS Throughout the test program, maximum CO levels at the scrubber exit </p><p>and the stack were a few ppm. Total unburned hydrocarbon levels were similarly low at the afterburner and scrubber exits and in the stack. Average NOx concentrations at the scrubber exit ranged from 32 to 51 ppm, levels that are typical for the rotary kiln system. </p><p>Flue gas particulate concentrations ranged from 6 to 17 mg/dscm (at 7% 03 at the scrubber exit. In the stack, concentrations ranged from 2 to 29 mg/dscm (at 7% 03. These levels are below the federal hazardous waste performance standard of 180 mg/dscm (at 7% 03. </p><p>The only organic contaminants found in the test soil above method detection limits of 2-4 mgkg were p,p' DDE, p,p'DDD, p,p'DDT, and methoxychlor. As shown in Table 2, DDE was present at 39-74 mghg, DDD at 181-310 mg/kg, DDT at 257-501 mg/kg, and methoxychlor at 5 4 81 mghg. None of these was present in the TCLP leachates of the test soils at a quantitation limit of 0.02 mdliter. </p><p>Organic analysis of kiln ash, kiln ash TCLP leachate, scrubber blowdown, and scrubber exit flue gas Method 0010 samples for each test showed that all semivolatile organic hazardous constituents analyzed, including the pesticide contaminants in the test soil, were present at less than method detection limits in all cases. The quantitation limits of the Method 0010 sampling trains, when combined with measured flue gas flow rates and soil feed concentrations and feed rates, confirm that incineration destruction and removal efficiencies (DREs) for the pesticide contaminants in the soil feeds were &gt;99.5% to &gt;99.97% for the tests performed. </p><p>23 1 </p></li><li><p>Figure 2.</p><p> Sam</p><p>plin</p><p>g Mat</p><p>rix </p><p>I </p><p>AFE</p><p>R- - QU</p><p>ENC</p><p>H - </p><p>lON</p><p>lZlN</p><p>0 - </p><p>BURN</p><p>ER </p><p>SEC</p><p>TIO</p><p>N </p><p>WET</p><p> SCR</p><p>UBBE</p><p>R KI</p><p>LN </p><p>I L</p><p>CA</p><p>RB</p><p>ON</p><p> - H</p><p>EPA </p><p>BED</p><p> FI</p><p>LTER</p><p> D</p><p>EM</p><p>WE</p><p>R ---C</p><p>1 2 </p><p>3 4 </p><p>5 6 </p><p>7 </p><p>a A </p><p>i </p><p>i </p><p>I b </p><p>Ioni</p><p>zing</p><p> wet</p><p> C</p><p>antin</p><p>uous</p><p> 00</p><p>10 </p><p>MS/</p><p>m&amp;</p><p>Is </p><p>trai</p><p>n M5 </p><p>Sam</p><p>plin</p><p>g K</p><p>iln </p><p>scru</p><p>bber</p><p> flu</p><p>e ga</p><p>s (s</p><p>emiv</p><p>olat</p><p>ile </p><p>(par</p><p>ticul</p><p>ate,</p><p> (p</p><p>artic</p><p>ulat</p><p>e po</p><p>int </p><p>Was</p><p>tefd</p><p> as</p><p>h b</p><p>low</p><p>dm</p><p> m</p><p>onito</p><p>ring</p><p> or</p><p>gani</p><p>cs) </p><p>arse</p><p>nic)</p><p> an</p><p>d H</p><p>CI) </p><p>1 X</p><p>2 X</p><p>3 X</p><p>X </p><p>X </p><p>X </p><p>X </p><p>X </p><p>X </p><p>X </p></li><li><p>INCINERATTON TaSATMBm OP ARSBNIC-COKTAMMATBD SOIL </p><p>. . . kiln temperature ha9 a clear effect on both arsenic and lead distributions in that kiln ash concentrations of arsenic and lead were lower at the higher incineration temperatures. </p><p>~~ ~ </p><p>Table 2. Semivolatile Organic Hazardous Constituents in Test Soils </p><p>Soil </p><p>Constituent Drum 15 Drum 16 Drum 18 (m@g&gt; vest 1) (Test 2) crest 3) p,p'-DDE 54 74 45 p,p'-DDD 228 310 197 p ,p'-DDT 334 50 1 247 Methoxychlor 81 73 54 All other semivolatiles analyzed c4 </p></li><li><p>LhRap R WATBRIAND CHARLY KING MARTA K RICHAXDS w RDBBRT C. THURNAU </p><p>Table 3. Normalized Metal Discharge Distributions for the Baird and McGuire Incineration Tests </p><p>Test 1 5 2 3 4 (9-26-89) (10-5-89) (9-29-89) (9-27-89) (9-2889) </p><p>Kiln exit temperature OC 832 839 844 994 994 </p><p>Kiln exit 0, % 11.3 11.2 6.8 10.4 7.5 (OF) (1529) (1541) (1552) (1822) (1822) </p><p>Kiln exit flue gas flowrate 22.8 22.6 11.1 34.8 21.6 (acdmin). </p><p>Arsenic Kiln ash Scrubber liquor Scrubber exit flue gas </p><p>Total </p><p>Lead Kiln ash Scrubber liquor Scrubber exit flue gas </p><p>Total </p><p>a/ Actual wet m3/min. </p><p>Dtmibution (% of metal measured) </p><p>72 23 5 </p><p>100 </p><p>89 4 7 </p><p>100 </p><p>66 29 5 </p><p>100 </p><p>91 3 6 </p><p>100 </p><p>76 22 2 </p><p>100 </p><p>93 3 4 </p><p>100 </p><p>36 55 9 </p><p>100 </p><p>69 12 19 </p><p>100 </p><p>56 38 6 </p><p>100 </p><p>69 13 18 </p><p>100 </p><p>collection efficiencies showed any significant variation with test variables (kiln temperature or excess air). </p><p>Table 5 shows that, with both increased kiln temperature and decreased kiln excess air, the leachability of the kiln ash arsenic was higher, with excess air level appearing to have the more significant effect. At 11% kiln exit 0,, between 8.3% and 13% of the kiln ash arsenic was leachable. At 7% kiln exit 0,, 28% and 67% of the arsenic was leachable, for kiln temperatures of 844" and 944OC, respectively. These tests suggest that,...</p></li></ul>

Recommended

View more >