TABLE 4-3 Effect of Application of In Situ Thermal Technology on Dissolved Groundwater Concentrations and Mass Discharge (Flux) from the Treatment Zone to the Aquifer

Site No. Heating Technology Generalized Scenario/Site Dissolved Groundwater Concentration Reduction Mass Discharge Reduction
<10× 10× 100× 1000× >1000×
1 ERH Generalized Scenario A(SDC) 10×     ×    
2 ERH Generalized Scenario Ba(SDC) <10× x x      
3 ERH Generalized Scenario C 10×   x      
4 ERH Generalized Scenario Cb(SDC) >10× to <100×   x      
5 ERH Generalized Scenario Cc <10× x        
6 ERH Generalized Scenario Cc <10× x   x    
7 ERH Generalized Scenario C <10×       x  
8 ERH Generalized Scenario C(SDC) 10×   x      
9 ERH Generalized Scenario C(SDC) 100×     x    
10 ERH Generalized Scenario C 1000×   x      
11 SEE Generalized Scenario C 100×     x    
12 SEE Generalized Scenario C 10× x        
13 SEE Generalized Scenario Cc 10000×       x x
14 SEE Generalized Scenario Db <10× x        

NOTE: SDC, supplemental data collection site for this project. Site 1 = Hunter Army Airfield, Site 2 = Air Force Plant 4, Site 4 = Camp LeJeune Site 89, Site 8 = Fort Lewis EGDY Area 3, Site 9 = NAS Alameda Site 5-1.

aMass discharge assessment involved two calculations using first only the post-treatment field investigation data and then the post-treatment field investigation data supplemented with data from a set of monitoring wells that were directly in line with the field investigation transect.

bPilot application appeared to encompass the entire source zone based on documentation reviewed.

cSite used two different vertical intervals to calculate mass discharge: (1) only shallow geology and (2) shallow and deep geology.

SOURCE: Triplett Kingston et al. (2010b).



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement