Presented by Paul J. Garrett

Regional Manager CHURNGOLD Remediation LimitedDATE 5th June 2006

Small Sites in Urban Areas

Outline of Presentation

Brief summary of sitesConceptual models System designs System performance

Comparisons of Cost & Performance

Conclusions

Site in South East England

Conceptual Model

• Former Petrol Filling Station (PFS) located in urban area (bordered by residential housing)

• Gross petrol range contamination (inc. BTEXs) in soils and groundwater

• Free Product Encountered

• SSTL’s derived from QRA – effectively a 90-99% reduction required

• Geology – Sands and gravels – Weathered Sandstone

• Client wants quickest solution possible!

Site in South East England

Proposed Treatment Solution

Proposed Solution – Steam Enhanced Remediation

Programme

Start of the project

Day 0

Start of treatmentDay 103

End of treatmentDay 193

Completion of Validation

Day 277

On SiteDay 55

Performance

D PVE1D PVE4

D PVE5

D PVE10

D PVE14

D PVE19D PVE22

D PVE18

D PVE13

D PVE9

ST1ST2

ST3ST4

ST5ST6

ST8 ST9 ST10ST11

ST13 ST14ST15 ST16

ST17ST18 ST19 ST20

ST7

ST12

D PVE2D PVE3

D PVE6 D PVE7 D PVE8

D PVE11D PVE12

D PVE15D PVE16

D PVE17

D PVE20D PVE21

Baseline 17th February 2005 Results

Cumulative Mass Recovery Curve for Xylene Vapours

Increasing temperatures increases treatment rates

DPVE1DPVE4

DPVE5

DPVE10

DPVE14

DPVE19DPVE22

DPVE18

DPVE13

DPVE9

ST1ST2

ST3ST4

ST5ST6

ST8 ST9 ST10ST11

ST13 ST14ST15 ST16

ST17ST18 ST19 ST20

ST7

ST12

DPVE2DPVE3

DPVE6 DPVE7 DPVE8

DPVE11DPVE12

DPVE15DPVE16

DPVE17

DPVE20DPVE21

DVPE23

58 Days Since Commissioning: 18th April 2005

Results taken from a similar project 5mins away from site

Site in Midlands

Conceptual Model

• Another Petrol Filling Station (PFS) – contaminated with petrol range contamination

• Geology is very similar – sands on top of weathered sandstone

• Free product encountered

• SSTL’s delivered from QRA – 90-95% reductions required

• Client’s not concerned with timeframe

Proposed Treatment Solution/Programme

Site in Midlands

• Phased approach proposed

• Free product skimming using vacuum enhanced pumping (3months)• Bio-venting• In-situ Bioremediation using Oxygen Infusion

Timeframe for treatment = 60 months

Performance

Results below taken from project using similar technology

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Baseline: Based on Pre-Remediation Data

Baseline: Based on CRLdata

After 1 Year of Treatment After 2.5 Years ofTreatment

Ma

ss

Ba

lan

ce

(k

g)

Mass Balance Calculation

Comparing Costs and Performance

SER SYSTEM – Total cost: €353,300 (£240,000)

More complex engineering required More expensive to run (fuel costs for boiler etc) Needs more engineers to operate (2no. full time) and manage Health & Safety

VACUUM/BIO SYSTEM - Total cost €125,100 (£85,000)

System engineering less intensive System has minimal power requirements Very reliable, hence needs little operations (1 visit per month)

Cost & Performance Comparison – Engineering Cost

The SER system needs complex engineering Upfront detail design/licensing Steam generator High vacuum extraction system Heat exchangers Treatment plant (GAC filters) Control system – (auto shutdown/temperature monitoring)

35% of total cost - €123,500 (£84,000)

The Bioventing/In-situ Bio is mostly Down well units Control system Compressor system

65% of Total costs - €81,300 (£55,250)

Cost & Performance Comparison – Running Costs

The SER system will generate “hot” waste streams Additional monitoring to ensure Health & Safety maintained Needs treatment (GAC consumption, discharge to sewer) Needs initial heating (fuel consumption)

42% of total cost - €141,00 (£96,000)

The Bioventing/In-situ Bio system “after initial skimming phase” Low power required (oxygen injected via pressurised cylinders) No waste stream generation

6% of Total costs - €7,500 (£5,100)

Cost & Performance Comparison – Man Power

The SER system needs fulltime operation/management During heating 2no. Engineers During cooling 1no. Engineer Additional project management (Health & Safety)

25% of total cost - €88,300 (£60,000)

The Bioventing/In-situ Bio system needs routine maintenance only

System looks after itself Has little to go wrong Is inherently safe

29% of Total costs - €36,300 (£24,650)

Conclusions

More powerful solutions such as SER will get you there quicker!

They also get you there with more certainty

More powerful solutions come with a higher running cost

HEAD OFFICE St Andrews HouseSt Andrews Road

Avonmouth Bristol

BS11 9DQUnited Kingdom

Tel: +44 117 916 0510Fax: +44 117 916 0511

http://www.churngold.comE-mail: paul.garrett@churngold.com

LONDON & SOUTH EAST

OFFICE Network House Bradfield Close

Woking Surrey GU22 7REUnited Kingdom

Tel: +44 1483 206 936

Fax: +44 1483 206 937

NORHTERN OFFICE

Cinnamon HouseCrab Lane

Warrington WA2 0XP

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 1925 661 706

Fax: +44 1925 661 800