Injection-extraction treatment well pairs: an alternative to permeable reactive barriers.
Two of the biggest drawbacks of using permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) to treat contaminated ground water are the high capital cost of installation, particularly when the contaminated ground water is deep below ground surface, and the uncertainty of whether or not PRBs remain effective for the long time scales (e.g., decades) needed for many contaminant plumes. The use of an injection-extraction treatment well pair (IETWP) for capture and treatment of contaminated ground water can circumvent these difficulties, while still providing many of the same advantages offered by PRBs. In this paper, the hydraulics of IETWPs and PRBs are compared, focusing primarily on the width of the captured plume. It is demonstrated that IETWPs act as hydraulic barriers in a manner similar to PRBs, and that IETWPs provide excellent plume capture. A mathematical expression is presented for the plume capture width of an IETWP oriented perpendicular to the ground water flow direction in a homogeneous aquifer. Also discussed are other practical considerations that might determine whether an IETWP is better suited than a PRB for a particular contaminated site; these considerations include operating and maintenance costs, and the conditions under which an IETWP system can be used for in situ remediation.
Cunningham
Jeffrey A
JA
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, CA 94305-4020, USA. cunning@stanford.edu
Reinhard
Martin
M
D008962:Models, Theoretical; D010539:Permeability; D012037:Refuse Disposal; D012987:Soil; D014872:Water Movements; D014876:Water Pollution / Q000517:prevention & control*; D014881:Water Supply
D012987:Soil