report of the nicole network meeting: water in contaminated

24
REPORT OF THE NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in Contaminated Land Management - the challenge of preservation of our water resource – 13 – 15 Juni 2012 Baden-Baden, Germany Lauterbourg, France Compiled by Lida Schelwald-van der Kley, NICOLE Network

Upload: dangtuong

Post on 05-Feb-2017

219 views

Category:

Documents


5 download

TRANSCRIPT

REPORT OF THE NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in Contaminated Land Management - the challenge of preservation of our water resource – 13 – 15 Juni 2012 Baden-Baden, Germany Lauterbourg, France Compiled by Lida Schelwald-van der Kley, NICOLE Network

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 2

Acknowledgements

NICOLE gratefully acknowledges:

The speakers and chairpersons for their contributions to the meeting Jean-Louis Pfennig, DOW, for organising the venue in Lauterbourg The members of the Organising Committee:

o Laurent Bakker - Tauw, Chair Organizing Committee o Marianne Blom - ENVIRON o Daniel Cooper - WSP o Nik Dixon - Grontmij o Wouter Gevaerts - ARCADIS o Roger Jacquet - Solvay o Hans-Peter Koschitzky - VEGAS o Philippe Menoud - Dupont o Lida Schelwald-van der Kley – NICOLE Industry Group o Colin Shoesmith - National Grid o Mark Travers - ENVIRON

NICOLE is a network for the stimulation, dissemination and exchange of knowledge about all aspects of industrially contaminated land. Its 100 members of 20 European countries come from industrial companies and trade organizations (problem holders), service providers/ technology developers, universities and independent research organizations (problem solvers) and governmental organizations (policy makers). The network started in February 1996 as a concerted action under the 4th Framework Programme of the European Community. Since February 1999 NICOLE has been self-supporting and is financed by the fees of its members. More about NICOLE on www.nicole.org

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 3

Contents 1. Background 4

2. Opening session Error! Bookmark not defined.

3. Legal framework 6

4. Natural reactive interface (groundwater-surface water) 9

5. Water stewardship 11

6. Sustainable solutions- Phyto Technologies and Re-Use 13

7. Sustainable solutions – Integrated Groundwater Management 16

8. Overall conclusions and recommendations 18

8.1. General conclusions 18

8.2. Recommendations 18

Appendix 1. List of participants NICOLE Network Meeting on 13-15 June 2012, Baden-Baden, Germany and Lauterbourg, France 19

Appendix 2 Program NICOLE Network Meeting on 13-15 June 2012, Baden-Baden, Germany and Lauterbourg, France 22

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 4

1. Background Soil, groundwater and surface water are closely interlinked. This requires an integrated system approach for the management of these resources. Lately there has been growing attention within companies for water stewardship, going beyond merely determining the water footprint. Companies depend on a reliable supply of water for their operations and realise that they have a responsibility to ‘safeguard’ the valuable fresh water resources on and near their plants. There are numerous examples of sustainable use and re-use of water, both for process and remediation purposes. Reducing the water footprint serves the company’s interest to simultaneously reduce exploitation costs and possible future risks (shortage and quality).

A pro-active water and contaminated land management strategy can therefore also be aimed at ‘green’ design of groundwater extraction and water treatment onsite, if possible in combination with energy storage in the subsurface groundwater and/or groundwater recharge. Moreover, taking into account the soil-water interface as a natural reactive barrier, where there is natural groundwater flow to surface water, offers opportunities.

The workshop explored existing and innovative possibilities to integrate water stewardship into a sustainable contaminated land management approach.

A visit to a soil-washing plant in Lauterbourg, on the French-German border, formed part of the program. The soil washing plant is used to treat material which is excavated from a historic landfill and afterward filled back in the landfill site.

For each session theme you will find highlights and conclusions drawn from the different presentations given at the Network meeting. The power point presentations and the abstracts provided by the speakers can be downloaded from the NICOLE website www.nicole.org. For further information on the presentations please approach the speakers – their contact information is listed in the appendix to this report. This report reflects the conclusions of the Network meeting and the outcome of discussions. This document does not necessarily reflect the opinion of NICOLE and/or individual NICOLE members or member organizations.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 5

2. Opening session Session chair: Laurent Bakker, Tauw, the Netherlands

Opening and welcome - by Michael Geggus, Mayor of Baden-Baden

The Mayor of Baden-Baden welcomed everyone on behalf of the City of Baden-Baden. The city obviously has a close connection with water.

- by Peter Fuhrmann, Head of Department of Water and Soil, Ministry of the Environment, Climate Protection and the Energy Sector Baden-Württemberg

Peter Fuhrmann gave an overview of the progress that has been made since 1987 by the State of Baden-Württemberg in the investigation and remediation of contaminated sites. Groundwater is considered a key receptor.

A question was raised about the fact that industrial site owners are often required to remediate groundwater to very strict target levels. Is the principle of proportionality used? Mr Fuhrmann explained that, based on the target values of the laws and regulations as well as on different guidelines of the environmental agency of the State of Baden-Württemberg the local authorities can decide case by case to what level the groundwater has to be treated. The decision has to be well justified.

Setting the scene Laurent Bakker, Tauw, the Netherlands

Laurent Bakker set the scene for this workshop by first showing the water footprint of humanity. The global average human water footprint is almost 4000 litres/day, with the highest consumption rates in the western world. This figure is not just about the human consumption of water but also takes into account the production of consumer products. What is seen from the virtual water export is that many countries under water stress are using blue water (groundwater and surface water) resources and incorporate them into export products to countries without water stress. The question was raised whether this is sustainable and most efficient. In fact, water scarcity is not included in the price of these products. We should strive to make an effort towards more sustainable water use to prioritize production policies versus consumer policies aimed to increase water efficiency.

Laurent also touched upon the subject of river basin management and the relation between water and contaminated land management.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 6

3. Legal framework Session Chair: Wouter Gevaerts, ARCADIS, Belgium

This session gave a closer look at the legal incentives and consequences of sustainable (ground)water resource management.

How can industry contribute to sustainable (ground)water management? Annemieke Nijhof, former DG Water, CEO of Tauw, the Netherlands

The keyword in the presentation of Annemieke Nijhof was ”Connection”. Sustainability is about getting connected; to other people, other issues, to neighbours, the future and striving for continuous improvement. It is also important to concentrate on mutual benefits. Annemieke Nijhof compared the world of soil management to the world of water management and urged the audience to connect the two. She explained that in the Netherlands, surface water is managed quite well by the Water Boards (Regional Water Management Authorities), who have been responsible for this task for over 800 years. Thanks to the fact that they are a self-financed, and functional, public organisation, there is an institutional guarantee on money, asset management, investments, and continuity. Payment is based on solidarity, interests, and economic value of the assets of water users. Groundwater management is still a blank spot in the Netherlands, although a shift has been made from a stand-alone clean-up operation to an integrated functional approach. Industry has been an important factor in this transition to sustainable (groundwater) management. And although the focus in soil remediation has mostly been on the past (in German ‘Altlasten’) we also increasingly realise that the subsoil and groundwater are important for food production, biodiversity, energy savings, etc. Annemieke Nijhof proposed to combine the long term experience in water management with the aims of a cost effective soil remediation approach. This requires a clear division of responsibilities between site owners and regional authorities. For industries it means that they reduce their water footprint, clean-up their waste water and develop a new approach for topsoil clean-up and long-term groundwater remediation in industrial areas. The authorities have to take their responsibility and give financial support where it concerns the interests of the public. Active community involvement is important in this respect. Annemieke Nijhof ended her presentation by urging industry to “Get connected, because you can contribute”.

A Spanish representative in the audience raised a question from a public perspective. In Spain water and soil issues are politically not very attractive. It is therefore very difficult to involve local and regional authorities. How can NICOLE reach the public, ‘the man on the street’? Annemieke Nijhof talked about NICOLE itself being a learning community. This group of people from industries, consultants, and academics can be very influential and share successes from different countries in being a change agent. It might be an idea for NICOLE to participate in a project on water issues under the auspices of DG Environment.

Soil-water system approach and legal consequences Pascal Mallien, environmental lawyer at Baker & McKenzie, Belgium

Pascal Mallien focussed on the legal aspects of the soil-(ground)water system. In its essence groundwater has always been a ‘res communes’, or in other words ‘a good that cannot be owned by a particular person’. Ownership is normally an incentive for cleaning up pollution, as are tax and liability incentives. The lack of private ownership could be the main reason why groundwater has never been a concern in the past and no one felt responsible. A solution to overcome this problem might be to link groundwater to ownership through an easement (servitudo). Considering the groundwater as private property paves the way for tax exemption and the possibility to deduct the costs of cleaning-up.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 7

This may be a more appropriate incentive for the landowner to restore the groundwater. Pascal Mallien gave an overview of developments in (ground)water legislation. He mentioned the existing monitoring requirements in the Directive on Industrial Emissions (IED). The Groundwater Directive will be evaluated in 2013 and he pointed out to the NICOLE network to use this evaluation to get sustainable water management addressed. More stringent legislation, if appropriately developed, on monitoring of groundwater could be a first step towards sustainable water management. Considering groundwater as part of the public domain, to be restored by the community, is against the “polluter pays” principle and fundraising through taxes or liabilities is not obvious.

It was asked what NICOLE should focus on; tax exemptions or liabilities? NICOLE could focus on both according to Pascal Mallien.

Groundwater as a ‘resource’-discussing future strategies on limiting impacts and restoring quality Harald Kasamas, Environment Agency Austria

In his presentation Harald Kasamas informed the audience that according to Austrian law everyone has the right to use groundwater on his property and it is considered to be a private property! The Groundwater law is on a federal level, whereas soil legislation is on a provincial level. According to the Water Act of 1959 groundwater contamination has to be restored as a drinking water resource. There is a zero contamination tolerance. To implement recent ideas provided through European water policies such as the WFD and the GWD, new strategies and solutions to optimize measures within a cycle of learning and adaptation are envisaged in Austria.

A question was raised about the word ‘compensatory’, which is also used in the ELD. If you clean up groundwater contamination that is not yours, (eg if you clean-up your own BTEX spill and at the same time clean-up some chlorinated solvents from a neighbouring site (mixed plume)), could this be

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 8

considered as compensatory? Pascal Mallien answered that it is practically impossible to track which contamination you are taking out. But with the compensation system described in the ELD, member states could make regulations based on this suggestion (cleaning up more than required).

In the discussion that followed, the issue of ownership of groundwater came up again; in Austria you have a right to clean groundwater. It is like in the Netherlands where you can withdraw groundwater and become owner of the part that you withdraw, but you are not responsible for the maintenance of this ownership. Pascal Mallien added that from the old days ownership is the most important aspect of our legislation. Ownership gives the owner of a property the right to use and even destroy his own property. For groundwater everyone is the owner.

It was then asked if you can really have (or own) the property of something that is moving like water or a river? In Belgium, the rivers were formerly considered to be private property. The water is now public domain, so that all tax payers must pay for it. The ground is still your property; you are owner until the middle of the river, but you have to allow ships to pass.

According to Pascal Mallien, rights without obligations are not right. This was not the original purpose of groundwater legislation!

And what about transboundary water legislation? You may then go from private to public law. Pascal Mallien explained that private law cannot be applied ‘mutatis mutandis’ in public law. Here the Brundtland definition of sustainability is often referred to: All nations are sovereign to decide upon their environment but cannot endanger future generations.

A final question pertained to a company that had caused a spill, affecting the ecosystem of a bay. Seaweed had to be replanted as compensation under the ELD. A baseline ecological assessment was now looked into. A complicating factor is the fact that the territorial sea zone is not under EU jurisdiction. Habitat banking (in casu ‘ecosystem banking’) was mentioned as a new development under the ELD.

NICOLE Network meetingBaden-Baden, 14 June 2012

Categorizing groundwater contamination

7

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 9

4. Natural reactive interface (groundwater-surface water) Session Chair: Hans-Peter Koschitzky, University of Stuttgart/VEGAS, Germany

This session focussed on the interaction between groundwater and surface water systems and the natural processes that take place in the interface.

Interactions between groundwater and surface water systems, a case study in the Netherlands Charles Pijls, Tauw, the Netherlands

The interaction between surface water and groundwater systems is complex. Charles Pijls presented the results of a case study on an industrial site in Hengelo (NL), contaminated with chlorinated pesticides. The analysis of the quality of nearby surface water and sediments in a canal flowing along the site (receiving water system for the aquifer) demonstrated that in the present situation there is no unacceptable environmental risk in the canal. The concentrations in the canal appeared to fluctuate with the flow regimes in the canal. It was also demonstrated that a hydrogeological groundwater containment system did not serve to improve surface water quality. The analysis of the effectiveness of the groundwater extraction included sustainability REC criteria (Risk, Environmental Merit and Cost). It was decided to terminate the groundwater containment after three years of operation and study the development of surface water and ground water quality under natural conditions. Identifying sources and finding effective and sustainable source directed measures for surface water protection is a future challenge for water quality managers and soil problem owners.

It was asked if degradation at the interface was measured. This was not the case. Other questions and answers raised;

What is the causal relationship between concentrations in surface water and sediments and between the aquifer and what about the travel time of the migration through the sediment? Charles explained that once you start a hydrogeological containment you should directly see a drop of concentration in the surface water. The sediments in the canal along the site were also investigated; some pesticides concentrations were measured, but they were limited.

Why not consider flux reduction as a remedial option? This is possible if you first look at the surface water to determine how much mass/flux reduction is required.

Will monitoring cease after you have proven MNA is taking place? The client expressed no interest in spending thousands of Euros per year in continued monitoring after approval of the regulator. Also, the regulator had no means to impose this when the receptor is proven not to be at risk.

Modelling groundwater-surface water interactions using influence functions Jean-Louis Pfennig, DOW, France

A model was used to characterize the dynamic interaction of groundwater, surface water, and pumping-wells at the Dow Chemical Company site in Lauterbourg, France. The facility is located in an oxbow of the adjacent River Rhine, which levels fluctuate. The objective of the model was to determine optimal pumping rates from extraction wells to maintain hydraulic capture of groundwater around an internal landfill under varying flow conditions of the river. The results demonstrated that

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 10

capture around the landfill is achieved under the model-based optimized pumping rates.

The results were well received by the regulators.

A question was raised if geochemical characterisation of the groundwater was looked into? This was the case and also isotope measurements were performed.

Hyporheic processes at a long-lived contaminated source area in the context of sustainable remediation Kevin Leahy, ERM, UK

Kevin Leahy presented a case study on a former gasworks site in South-East London, where monitored natural attenuation (MNA) processes were explored in the Hyporheic zone. Hyporheic refers to the deep subsoil zone where the surface water can interact with the groundwater. Following the removal of a number of source zones at the site, residual contamination of dissolved phase polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) continued to act as a long term source. The interpretation of NA processes was complicated by the tidal setting and mixing of groundwater. Still the study presented ample evidence to the regulator (Environment Agency of England and Wales) that MNA was successful in preventing the flux of significant concentrations of dissolved PAH to the receptor. A brief overview of a retrospective sustainability analysis was also presented. The approach allowed the rapid redevelopment and re-use of the site as a medical research facility, bringing substantial social and economic benefits to the former industrial area. However the source is likely to persist for more decades. This raised two issues; how acceptable is it to leave residual sources long-term in the subsoil and is this long-term timescale an issue for site owners or regulators and what are the benefits of additional source mass reduction?

Figure: Detail of bio-geochemical processes in the case study PAH source area, located in a tidal hyporheic zone

Experience in France and other countries showed that we are getting a better understanding of the sustainable impact of remediation. A question was also raised about the contact between brackish and fresh water and the effects on the natural degradation processes. The naturally occurring saline interface and the continuous mixing of groundwater in the hyporheic zone, allowed for degradation to occur. In fact, the mixing process proved to be a key factor in natural degradation.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 11

5. Water stewardship Session chair: Roger Jacquet, Solvay, Belgium

Water availability is becoming a critical factor for industrial operations. The question at hand is: How far can/should industry go in water stewardship?

Use of local water tool and water balances to identify water related impacts, risks and management responses Amaia Zabaleta, Repsol, Spain and Carlo Zaffaroni, CH2M Hill, Italy

Industry cannot produce anything without water. Repsol has changed the way they manage water use. Two new water risk assessment tools were developed within the Petroleum Industry that helped them to do so. The first one is a global water risk assessment tool. It can be used to locate sites in water scarce areas. The second one is a local risk assessment tool that can be used to determine the water risks at a particular site. Repsol applied these tools to a production facility in Ecuador and to a refinery and chemical plant in Spain. This allowed them to identify opportunities to improve the water use and management on these sites. Both tools are available free of charge. See: www.ipieca.org/publication/global-water-tool-oil-and-gas and www.gemi.org/localwatertool/.

Carlo Zaffaroni explained how this approach can be useful to polluted ground water (PGW) management strategies. It can be used to reduce the rate of groundwater pumped and treated, through process and operational changes. It can also be used for pollution prevention approaches. The results of the tools are even more fruitful when they are applied together with an analysis of water management practices.

LEVEL ZERO WATER BALANCE

WATER IN WATER OUT

1 - RAINWATER 5 - EVAPORATION

2 - WATER from SOURCES 6 - KNOWN LOSSES

3 - WATER in RAW MATERIAL* 7 - WATER IN PRODUCTS

4 - POLLUTED GROUNDWATER 8 - WATER IN BY-PRODUCTS**

9 - TREATED WASTEWATER

level 0

* i.e. water in chemicals ** i.e. water in sludge or other by-products

touch with chemicals

PRODUCTION SITE xyx

water treatmentproduction process,

cleanining operationsother use of waterpre/post-treatment

they may/may not involvethe fact that water is in

Figure: Water balance at a production site

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 12

Water resources and climate change- The need for water resource management in remediation, Cecilia MacLeod, WYG Environment, UK

Cecilia MacLeod started her presentation by asking the audience if they knew their company water footprint? Some knew... Then she introduced the topic of climate change. England and Wales have decreasing levels of rainfall. Many regions in Europe suffer from water stress. Mankind is causing big impacts on the availability of water. The EU blue print shows that the economic impact is high. Industry should embrace water stewardship. Within industry there is still a great water loss; some 80% of the used water is wasted or lost. Loss mostly occurs through inefficient evaporative cooling processes whereas wastage occurs through leakage and disposal of water. In the EU a water stewardship standard has been established (EWS). The EWS standard covers 4 principles:

1) Achieve and maintain sustainable water abstraction in terms of water quantity

2) Ensure the achievement and maintenance of good water status in terms of chemical quality and biological elements.

3) Protection of high conservation value wetlands, lakes and riparian areas.

4) Achieve equitable and transparent water governance.

The UK Environment Agency is promoting water neutrality. There is also water lost in remediation (especially pump & treat) when the treated water is discharged in the river or foul water sewer and subsequently transported to the sea. We need to tell this to the regulators. For MNA the net water exchange is zero. When we use in situ treatment we add water that is abstracted from somewhere else. Incorporating re-use of treated water in the industrial site processes, where grey water can be used, will reduce a company’s water footprint.

In the discussion that followed the example of re-injecting the water from a pump and treat system was highlighted. In Baden-Württemberg in many cases you have to reinject the treated water (drinking water standard) in the same aquifer. Is it regionally different? The answer was ‘Yes, it depends on the quality and the use of the groundwater’ (drinking water resources). For instance salty water can’t be reinjected in fresh water. Another remark was made about the situation in Germany. Here it is different than in water-stressed countries like those in Southern Europe. The last few years the water consumption rate has been more or less stable. Because of problems with deep garages and housing estates getting flooded, we think about new ways to keep the contaminated water on the sites. Some countries in Europe have too much water, others suffer from water stress. In the UK there was a hose ban for a while. An overall conclusion was that it is useful for industries, wherever they are located, to think about wise water resource management.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 13

6. Sustainable solutions - Phyto Technologies and Re-Use Session chair: Philip Menoud, DuPont de Nemours, Switzerland

This session focussed on sustainable solutions for a ‘green’ design of contaminated groundwater containment or treatment and water re-use.

Welcome Jean-Michel Fetsch, Mayor of Lauterbourg

The Mayor of Lauterbourg welcomed everyone in Lauterbourg for the second day of this Workshop and gave a presentation of his city. He is also a board member of the Union of water distribution of the county. He mentioned that the price of water is very low in this area. There is a strong focus on prevention with respect to water quality; fertilizers and pesticides are not allowed within the drinking water pumping area.

Soil washing plant Lauterbourg Jean-Louis Pfennig, DOW

Jean-Louis Pfennig explained the process of the soil washing plant. In the morning there had been an excursion to the plant, where excavated material from a historic landfill is treated. There are two driving forces; firstly DOW’s policy in reducing its environmental liability. The second driving force is the authorities and the public. Soil washing is an ex situ solution. Excavated soil is washed and treated. It is then re-used or put back in the landfill. The used water goes to an existing waste water treatment plant. Part of the treated and backfilled material is stabilized with cement.

Soil washing plant in Lauterbourg

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 14

Phytohydraulic containment as a sustainable technique for contaminated plume management, Bruno Haerens, URS Corporation, Benelux

In his presentation, Bruno Haerens gave the audience two examples of phytohydraulic containment. The first example is a Flemish drum production site contaminated with TCE. It was ‘discovered’ that when the central plume passed mixed woodland of oak and ash, adjacent to the site, sharp decreases in contaminant levels occurred between monitoring wells up- and down-gradient of the wood. So the wood actually functioned as a ‘pump and treat (tree)’ system. The trees actively ‘pump’ groundwater during the growth season and hence have the potential to act as a sustainable hydraulic barrier. Further investigations showed that some TCE degradation took place, but it was insufficient to degrade all TCE taken up by the roots. The trees were evapotranspiring TCE into the air..

Picture from the NICOLE Technology Award Winning project; Pollution Investigation with Trees (PIT)

The second example is an oil depot with potential MTBE migration risk. It was evaluated if the existing woodland could act as a phytohydraulic barrier. Monitoring wells were installed inside the woodland and upgradient. As it appeared the trees were capable of extracting water from the deeper impacted groundwater zones and act as a phytohydraulic barrier. However evaporation from the trees also took place, which undermines the sustainability of phytoremediation as the contaminant disappears into the air. Still both examples demonstrate the potential for phytohydraulic control for groundwater contaminant plume management.

Some technical questions that were raised:

What is meant by inoculation and did you measure the bacteria in the trees after you inoculated them? Answer: TCE degrading strains of bacteria were added to the root zone to stimulate the degradation of halogenated volatile organic compounds. It was not measured after inoculation.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 15

Did you make a mass balance? No, this was also a concern raised by the regulators. And what will happen to the TCE that is evaporated into the air? It will quickly dilute.

How do you take into account the period of inactivity of the trees? It involves semi-continuously pumping; only from April to October.

Trees are functional for both detection and remediation. If you went to a regulator, could you calculate the quantity of woodland which is necessary to treat a certain plume? It is hard to determine this. There is another advantage in trees. Reducing your CO2 emission could be part of compensatory measures.

Water re-use from groundwater extraction Manlio Rossini, Syndial, Italy

Manlio Rossini mentioned that in 2011 Syndial launched an efficiency and sustainability program, which included water re-use. Within these objectives a groundwater remediation project was started at the Priolo site in Sicily. It is a multi-company site including a petroleum refinery, petrochemicals plants, and energy production plants. Already in 2004 a groundwater remediation project was started with a 4.600 meter sea front physical barrier. Then in 2010 a contaminated groundwater treatment system was built to treat the groundwater, mostly contaminated with heavy metals and hydrocarbons. This involved a complex process including oil separation, sand filtration, biological oxidation, reverse osmosis (RO), etc. In 2011, Syndial further improved the treatment by adding another RO section with an electrodeionization unit. The return on investment is less than a year. The treated water is re-injected or re-used at the site as process water. This was also a requirement from the Ministry. This additional polishing step resulted in reduction of the overall site groundwater footprint and savings on overall treatment cost, due to the selling of highly demineralised water. Altogether it resulted in improved sustainability of Syndial’s water stewardship.

Technical questions that were raised:

Can you elaborate on the presence of non-aqueous phase liquids in the groundwater. Where they present at the site? Yes, NAPLs were present. We recover and recycle them.

Did you consider extracting energy (heat or cold) from the groundwater? This was not the case. The temperature of the water is the normal temperature of the ground. However, we do recover mechanical energy from certain processes on the plant.

Did you have to obtain a permit to re-inject the groundwater? It was an element of the remediation project and therefore compulsory.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 16

7. Sustainable solutions – Integrated Groundwater Management

Session chair: Mark Travers, ENVIRON, France

This session continued on sustainable solutions from an integral perspective.

Groundwater management plans, financing mechanisms and organisation Gijsbert Schuur, Oranjewoud, The Netherlands

Gijsbert Schuur mentioned that area-based management requires working together between problem holders, advisors, regulators, etc. The management of urban or industrial areas with complex groundwater contamination plumes is often problematic for technical, practical and financial reasons and a lack of ownership. The solution can be area-based groundwater management, where liabilities are transferred to an area manager (public party). Still, it’s a game with many players. Along with a lack of finances, knowledge and organisation skills this may lead to stagnation. Urgency is important in this respect.

Apart from the urgency, there has to be a balance between research and decision-making and between the vision making process and participation. There are five criteria that have to be met to get the right balance and a successful area development. These refer to the organizational structure, the commitment of stakeholders, financial coverage, planning and permission procedures and interests. As to financial coverage Gijsbert gave some examples on how to create material and immaterial values from the project. He also stated five conditions for solid liability transfer.

It was asked if this method is also applicable in other countries than the Netherlands and if yes, will you the report be translated into English? Gijsbert Schuur answered that the basic ideas are applicable in other countries as well, so yes we should translate it.

And what to be done when there is no one who will pay for the clean-up of the source zone? If there is no liable polluter than one of the other (public) parties has to pay for the remediation of the source zone.

CityChlor- Biowashing machine Utrecht; a conceptual model for optimizing the combination ATES and biological NA in a historical city centre Jan Frank Mars, Agentschap NL, and Shakti Lieten, Bioclear, The Netherlands

In this duo-presentation a case example of an area-oriented approach was presented. The case is located in the Utrecht central station area, which is being redeveloped. At the site the deeper groundwater, mainly contaminated with chlorinated hydrocarbons, will be treated by a combination of ATES (Aquifer Thermal Heat Storage) and biological natural attenuation. In the subsoil of Utrecht several contamination plumes have mixed in the course of time. The municipality of Utrecht, who is a partner in the European Interreg project “CityChlor”, approved a remediation plan called the “Biowashing machine” (see www.citychlor.EU) . Groundwater remediation and energy production go hand in hand. This technical concept, which makes it possible to remediate, monitor and control multiple groundwater sources and plumes, has been applied before in the Netherlands.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

RESEARCH

VISION MAKINGPROCESS

PARTICIPATION

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

RESEARCH

VISION MAKINGPROCESS

PARTICIPATION

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 17

Nicole | June 2012 | pagina 11

Polluted Groundwater

Concept Bio-washing machineATES

Shakti Lieten told the audience more about the microbiology. Vital to the design of effective monitoring, is an understanding of the relevant processes such as the biological degradation capacity. Flux measurements were also performed in the city of Utrecht and the flux of VOCL coming from the source zones to the aquifer was determined. Furthermore, the influence of ATES on the microbiology was determined. There were indications that both micro-aerophilic degradation and reductive dechlorination occur. The bio-degradation capacity turned out to be low at the site. The conditions for biological degradation are not too favourable in certain parts. Degradation of Vinylchloride (VC) did occur. A next step is to integrate the biodegradation results at the site with the flux measurements and groundwater model.

Questions that were asked:

There was an indication that micro-aerophilic degradation occurred in the subsoil. How did the oxygen get there? Shakti answered that there are niches in the subsoil. Oxygen was measured, but we don’t know exactly how it got there.

Is degradation part of the biowashing machine or does it occur naturally? It occurs naturally. Shakti replied that the idea of the biowashing machine is that the plumes are mixed and the biodegradation capacity increases. This effect will be measured in-situ. It is the reason why we started a pilot to measure the effects of the ATES system on the biodegradation.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 18

8. Overall conclusions and recommendations

8.1. General conclusions

The network meeting has shown us the importance of an integrated system approach for the management of soil, groundwater and surface water. Key conclusions from this meeting are:

• A shift is taking place from a stand-alone soil clean-up operation to an integrated soil-water management approach.

• A shift can also be seen from a focus on the past (dealing with historic pollution or “Altlasten”) to a focus on present and future benefits of a good quality of the subsoil and (ground)water.

• Industry plays an important role in this transition to sustainable (groundwater) management. • There is growing attention within companies for water stewardship and securing water

supplies: • Industry depends on a reliable supply of water for their operations and recognizes their

responsibility to safeguard the fresh water supplies on and near their plants; this is particularly important in water stressed regions

• New management strategies are being developed and implemented to reduce the water footprint of companies

• This includes approaches to reduce the rate of groundwater pumped and treated, pollution prevention strategies and process and operational changes aimed at minimizing water losses and re-use of water

• There is a more noticeable attention for ‘green’ design of groundwater extraction and water treatment on-site. If possible in combination with energy storage in the subsurface groundwater and/or groundwater recharge.

• Another ‘green’ solution is phytohydraulic control for groundwater contaminant plume management by using trees (‘pump and tree’ system).

• Reducing the water footprint serves the company’s interest to simultaneously reduce exploitation costs and possible future risks (shortage and quality)

• The soil-water interface may serve as natural reactive barrier for (ground)water contaminant degradation under specific conditions which have to be investigated and proven.

• A number of presentations emphasized the importance of stakeholder involvement for integrated groundwater management. Stakeholders and stakeholder forces may include the community, regulators, politicians, etc. It is best to “connect” and plan for this.

• The issue of ownership of groundwater was discussed. Ownership is normally an incentive for cleaning-up pollution, as are tax and liability incentives.

• A lack of clear ownership of groundwater resources may be a barrier to interest in their preservation and remediation. A possible legal solution that was presented to overcome this problem might be to link groundwater to ownership. Considering the groundwater as private property also paves the way for tax exemption or deductions for clean-up costs.

• Creative thinking and a regulatory system that is flexible to allow for alternative solutions can lead to more sustainable approaches for integrated soil and water management

8.2. Recommendations

NICOLE could use the evaluation of the Groundwater Directive in 2013 to actively address the benefits of sustainable groundwater management.

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 19

Appendix 1. List of participants NICOLE Network Meeting on 13-15 June 2012, Baden-Baden, Germany and Lauterbourg, France Bakenhus, Albrecht Tauw GmbH Germany Bakker, Laurent Tauw BV NL Balouet, Chris Environment International France Baumeister, Stefan Ford Werke AG Germany Beuthe, Birgitta SPAQuE Belgium Birnstingl, Jeremy Regenesis Ltd. UK Blom, Marianne ENVIRON NL Boronat I Rodriguez, Jordi MediTerra Consultors Ambientals Spain Buvé, Lucia UMICORE Belgium Cooper, Daniel WSP Remediation UK Davarzani, Hossein BRGM France Dixon, Nik Grontmij UK Elelman, Richard Centre Tecnológic de Manresa Spain Ertel, Thomas et environment and technology Germany Esselström, Jean Auth. Bottenhavet River Basin Distr. Sweden Euser, Marjan NICOLE Secretariat NL Evans, Frank National Grid UK Fanger, Gabriella KemaktaKonsult AB Sweden Fetsch, Jean-Michel City of Lauterbourg France Flum, Manfred VILLIGER-Systemtechnik AG Switzerland De Fraye, Johan CH2M Hill UK Fuhrmann, Peter Min Env. Baden-Württemberg Germany Geggus, Michael City of Baden-Baden Germany Gevaerts, Wouter Arcadis Belgium NV Belgium de Groof, Arthur Grontmij NL Groot, Hans Deltares NL Grundfelt, Bertil KemaktaKonsult AB Sweden Guérin, Valérie BRGM France Haerens, Bruno URS Belgium Belgium Halla, Peter Berghof Germany van Hattem, Willem Port of Rotterdam NL Heasman, Ian Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd UK Held, Thomas Arcadis Consult GmbH Germany Herzog, Horst Westdeutsche Deponiegesellschaft Germany Heykes, Rolf URS Germany Germany Hudcová, Tereza DEKONTA a.s. Czech Republic Hudec, Barbara WSP Germany Hüttmann, Arne UMICORE Belgium Jacquet, Roger Solvay S.A. Belgium Jones, Marie WSP Consult GmbH Germany Jubany, Irene Centre Tecnológic de Manresa Spain Keuning, Sytze Bioclear BV NL Kirkebjerg, Kristian Grontmij Denmark Klaas, Norbert VEGAS Research Facility Germany Koschitzky, Hans-Peter University Stuttgart Germany Krauthausen, Bernhard Univ. Karlsruhe(KIT); Hydrosond Germany Leahy, Kevin ERM UK Lieten, Shakti Bioclear NL MacKay, Sarah WSP Environmental UK MacLeod, Cecilia WYG Environment UK

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 20

Madarász, Tamás University of Miskolc Hungary Maerten, Kris Regenesis Ltd. Belgium Mallien, Pascal Bvba - Legal Advice Environment Belgium Mars, Jan Frank CityChlor NL Martus, Peter HPC AG Germany Matz, Pierre Solvay Research and Technology Belgium Maurer, Olivier CH2M Hill Environmental Services Brasil van de Meene, Chris SBNS NL Melzer, Reiner ERM Germany Menoud, Philippe DuPont de Nemours Switzerland Merly, Corinne BRGM France Metz, Jérôme DEC Deme Env. Contractors NV Belgium Mezger, Thomas Akzo Nobel NL Mitu, Mariana OMV Petrom SA Romania Moll, Ulrich LyondellBasell France Mueller, Michael FMC Corporation Austria Muguet, Stéphane Almadius Belgium Müller, Dietmar Environment Agency Austria Austria Murphy, Richard ARCADIS US Inc. USA Mustatoiu, Doru OMV Petrom SA Romania Nardella, Alessandro Eni S.p.A. Italy Nicolaes, Tom ARCADIS NL Nielsen, Pernille MediTerra Consultors Ambientals Spain Van Nieuwenhove, Karel Antea Group Belgium Belgium van Noord, Wilfred AkzoNobel NL Nijhof, Annemieke Former DG Water NL Özkaraova Güngör, Burcu Ondokuz Mayis University Turkey Pals, Jan SBNS NL Parkman, Rick URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Pearce, Matthew Worley Parsons UK Pellegrini, Michele SAIPEM Italy Pensaert, Stany DEC Deme Env. Contractors NV Belgium Pfennig, Jean Louis DOW France Phipps, Oliver ERM UK Pijls, Charles Tauw NL Plaisier, Wim Arcadis NL van de Pol, Erwin Witteveen+Bos NL Rebelo, Fernando DEKONTA a.s. Czech Republic van Riet, Paul Dow Benelux BV NL Ross, Ian FMC UK Rossini, Manlio Syndial S.p.A. Italy Schelwald-van der Kleij, Lida NICOLE ISG Secretariat NL Schön, Carla AB Electrolux Sweden Schuur, Gijsbert Ingenieursbureau Oranjewoud BV NL Shoesmith, Colin National Grid Property Ltd. UK Siemers, Matthias URS Germany Germany Sinke, Anja BP International UK Slenders, Hans Arcadis NL Söhlmann, Reiner Berghof Germany Spence, Mike Shell Global Solutions UK Staal, Wim Dow Benelux BV NL Sterck, Ingo URS Belgium Belgium Thelen, Heinz-Peter URS Germany Germany Thomas, Alan ERM UK UK Travers, Mark ENVIRON France Undi, Tilly TOTAL RM France Vanhove, Bart CH2M Hill Belgium Belgium

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 21

Verreydt, Goedele VITO NV Belgium Visser-Westerweele, Elze-Lia NICOLE SPG Secretariat NL van der Voort, Jack Ingenieursbureau Oranjewoud BV NL Zabaleta Sainz de Ugarte, Amaia Repsol Spain Zaffaroni, Carlo CH2MHill Italy Italy Zeisberger, Volker Hessian Agency Env. and Geology Germany

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 22

Appendix 2 Program NICOLE Network Meeting on 13-15 June 2012, Baden-Baden, Germany and Lauterbourg, France

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 23

Report of the NICOLE Network Meeting: Water in contaminated land management

Page 24

Previous NICOLE Network Meetings State of the art of (Ecological) Risk Assessment, Stockholm, Sweden

16-17 June 2005

The impact of EU Directives on the Management of Contaminated Land, Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy

1-2 December 2005

Data Acquisition for a Good Conceptual Site Model, Carcassonne, France

10-11 May 2006

Making Managmenet of Contaminated Land an Obsolete Business – Challenges for the future (NICOLE 1996-2006 Ten Year Anniversary Workshop), Leuven, Belgium

5-6 October 2006

Redevelopment of sites – the industrial perspective. Akersloot, the Netherlands

14-15 June 2007

Using baselines in liability management: what do upcoming Directives require from us? Brussels, Belgium

15-16 November 2007

Sustainable Remediation, London, UK

3 March 2008

Environmental Decision Support Systems, Madrid, Spain

9-10 October 2008

Basics and Principles of Environmental Law, Brussels, Belgium

31 March 2009

Sustainable Remediation - A Solution to an Unsustainable Past? Leuven, Belgium

3-5 June 2009

From Site Closure to Disengagement, Douai, France

18-20 November 2009

Contaminated land management: opportunities, challenges and financial consequences of evolving legislation in Europe, Triest, Italy

5-7 July 2010

Emerging contaminants and solutions for large quantities of oil contaminated soil (Technical meeting), Brussels, Belgium

4 November 2010

Operating Windows for site characterisation, Copenhagen, Denmark

25-27 May 2011

Rotterdam Revisited; a renewed look at soil and groundwater management, Rotterdam, the Netherlands

16-18 November 2011

For a complete overview of all networks meetings that have been held from the start of NICOLE up to now see www.nicole.org.