Evaluation of the impact of fuel hydrocarbons and oxygenates on groundwater resources.
The environmental behavior of fuel oxygenates (other than methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]) is poorly understood because few data have been systematically collected and analyzed. This study evaluated the potential for groundwater resource contamination by fuel hydrocarbons (FHCs) and oxygenates (e.g., tert-butyl alcohol [TBA], tertamyl methyl ether [TAME], diisopropyl ether [DIPE], ethyl tert-butyl ether [ETBE], and MTBE) by examining their occurrence, distribution, and spatial extent in groundwater beneath leaking underground fuel tank (LUFT) facilities, focusing on data collected from over 7200 monitoring wells in 868 LUFT sites from the greater Los Angeles, CA, region. Excluding the composite measure total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHG), TBA has the greatestsite maximum (geometric mean) groundwater concentration among the study analytes; therefore, its presence needs to be confirmed at LUFT sites so that specific cleanup strategies can be developed. The alternative ether oxygenates (DIPE, TAME, and ETBE) are less likely to be detected in groundwater beneath LUFT facilities in the area of California studied and when detected are present at lower dissolved concentrations than MTBE, benzene, or TBA. Groundwater plume length was used as an initial indicator of the threat of contamination to drinking water resources. Approximately 500 LUFT sites were randomly selected and analyzed. The results demonstrate MTBE to pose the greatest problem, followed by TBA and benzene. The alternative ether oxygenates were relatively localized and indicated lesser potential for groundwater resource contamination. However, all indications suggest the alternative ether oxygenates would pose groundwater contamination threats similar to MTBE if their scale of usage is expanded. Plume length data suggest that in the absence of a completely new design and construction of the underground storage tank (UST) system, an effective management strategy may involve placing greater emphasis on UST program for ensuring adequate enforcement and compliance with existing UST regulations.
Shih
Tom
T
Environmental Science and Engineering Program, University of California at Los Angeles, 46-081 CHS, Box 951771, Los Angeles, California 90095-1772, USA. Tshih@ucla.edu
Rong
Yue
Y
Harmon
Thomas
T
Suffet
Mel
M
D002273:Carcinogens / Q000032:analysis*; D004784:Environmental Monitoring; D006838:Hydrocarbons / Q000032:analysis* / Q000737:chemistry; D008738:Methyl Ethers / Q000032:analysis*; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D010100:Oxygen / Q000737:chemistry; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012989:Soil Pollutants / Q000032:analysis*; D012995:Solubility; D014865:Waste Disposal, Fluid; D014874:Water Pollutants, Chemical / Q000032:analysis*; D014881:Water Supply
D002273:Carcinogens; D006838:Hydrocarbons; D008738:Methyl Ethers; D012989:Soil Pollutants; D014874:Water Pollutants, Chemical; C043243:methyl tert-butyl ether; D010100:Oxygen