基于化学氧化和堆式热脱附技术修复污染土壤的环境足迹分析

龚先河; 王健; 范例; 宾灯辉; 袁胜; 王明星; 颜渝森

doi:10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20240115

基于化学氧化和堆式热脱附技术修复污染土壤的环境足迹分析

doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20240115

龚先河^{1, 2,},
王健^{1, 2},
范例^{1, 2, 3, ,},
宾灯辉^{1, 2, 3},
袁胜^{1, 2},
王明星^{1, 2, 3},
颜渝森^{1, 2}

1.
重庆市生态环境科学研究院
2.
中国环境科学研究院西南分院
3.
重庆市绿色智能环保技术与装备技术创新中心

基金项目: 重庆市技术创新与应用发展专项重点项目（CSTB2023TIAD-KPX0071）；重庆市技术创新与应用示范专项社会民生类重点研发项目（cstc2018jscx-mszdX0064）

详细信息

作者简介:
龚先河（1997—），男，工程师，主要从事污染场地修复技术研究，gongxianhe0820@163.com

通讯作者:
范例（1980—），女，正高级工程师，主要从事土壤和固体废物污染防治研究，fanli1007@foxmail.com

中图分类号: X53
计量
- 文章访问数: 47
- HTML全文浏览量: 19
- PDF下载量: 6
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2024-02-27
- 录用日期: 2024-07-08
- 修回日期: 2024-06-12

Environmental footprint analysis of remediation of contaminated soil based on chemical oxidation and ex-situ thermal pile desorption technology

GONG Xianhe^{1, 2
,},
WANG Jian^{1, 2},
FAN Li^{1, 2, 3
, ,},
BIN Denghui^{1, 2, 3},
YUAN Sheng^{1, 2},
WANG Mingxing^{1, 2, 3},
YAN Yusen^{1, 2}

1.
Chongqing Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences
2.
Southwest Branch of Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences
3.
Chongqing Green Intelligent Environmental Protection Technology and Equipment Technology Innovation Center

摘要

摘要:
在“双碳”背景下，我国土壤修复工程使用技术类型不断向低碳、低能耗和绿色可持续修复技术转变，修复活动本身所产生的环境足迹受到了广泛关注和重视。采用环境足迹评估工具SiteWise^TM对重庆市某钢铁厂汞和多环芳烃污染场地化学氧化和堆式热脱附修复全过程的环境足迹进行了定量评价。结果表明：修复3 483 m³污染土壤，共排放温室气体（GHG）990.52 t，消耗能源1.57×10⁷ MJ，排放空气污染物4.94×10³ kg；GHG排放量、能源消耗量、空气污染物排放量占整个工程的比例在施工准备阶段为6.0%~9.1%，化学氧化阶段为43.6%~48.1%，化学氧化+堆式热脱附阶段为45.9%~47.5%；化学氧化+堆式热脱附技术相比化学氧化技术的环境影响更大，修复单方量污染土壤的GHG排放量、能源消耗量、空气污染物排放量为化学氧化技术的5.28~5.97倍。案例研究结果显示，材料消耗是对环境足迹贡献度最高的环节，其次为设备使用、运输、废物处理。
- 化学氧化 /
- 堆式热脱附 /
- 环境足迹 /
- 温室气体 /
- 能源消耗 /
- 空气污染物
Abstract:
Under the background of "Peak Carbon Dioxide Emissions" and "Carbon Neutrality", the technology type of China's soil remediation projects is continuously shifting towards low-carbon, low-energy, green and sustainable remediation technologies. The environmental footprint of remediation activities has been widely noticed and evaluated. SiteWise^TM, an environmental footprint assessment tool, was used to quantitatively assess the environmental footprint of the whole remediation process of a mercury and PAHs contaminated site in a steel plant in Chongqing. The results showed that the remediation of 3483 m³ of contaminated soil emitted a total of 990.52 t of greenhouse gases (GHGs), consumed 1.57×10⁷ MJ of energy and emitted 4.94×10³ kg of air pollutants. GHG emissions, energy consumption and air pollutant emissions at the construction preparation stage accounted for 6.0%-9.1% of the project, while those at the chemical oxidation stage accounted for 43.6%-48.1%. The GHG emissions, energy consumption and air pollutant emissions at the chemical oxidation + ex-situ thermal pile desorption stage accounted for 45.9%-47.5%. The chemical oxidation + ex-situ thermal pile desorption technology had a greater environmental impact compared to the chemical oxidation technology, and the environmental footprint for remediation of a single cubic volume of contaminated soil was about 5.28-5.97 times that of the chemical oxidation technology. The case study results showed that material consumption was the largest contributor to the environmental footprint, followed by equipment use, transport and residual handling.
- chemical oxidation /
- ex-situ thermal pile desorption /
- environmental footprint /
- greenhouse gas /
- energy consumption /
- air pollutant

HTML全文

图 1 化学氧化+堆式热脱附技术工艺流程

Figure 1. Process flow chart of chemical oxidation + ex-situ thermal pile desorption technology

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 全燃热修复燃烧器功能模块

Figure 2. Functional module of complete combustion thermal remediation burner

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 环境足迹核算系统边界

Figure 3. Environmental footprint accounting boundary

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 工程各阶段GHG排放量和能源消耗量

Figure 4. GHG emissions and energy consumption at each remediation stage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 工程各阶段空气污染物排放量

Figure 5. Air pollutant emissions at each remediation stage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 修复工程环境足迹贡献度

Figure 6. Analysis of environmental footprint contribution of remediation project

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 目标污染物浓度及修复目标值

Table 1. Concentrations of target pollutants and remediation target values mg/kg　

污染物类别	污染物浓度	场地修复目标值
汞	ND~8.74	8
萘	ND~237	25
苯并[a]蒽	ND~93.7	5.5
苯并[b]荧蒽	ND~88.2	5.5
苯并[a]芘	0.57~72.7	0.55
茚并[1,2,3-c,d]芘	ND~45.5	5.5
二苯并[a,h]蒽	ND~0.91	0.55
注：ND表示未检出。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 案例钢铁厂修复工程数据清单

Table 2. Data list of the case steel plant remediation project

类别		Stage Ⅰ	Stage Ⅱ	Stage Ⅲ
类别		Stage Ⅰ	Stage Ⅱ	化学氧化+堆式热脱附	废水废气处理
材料消耗	钢铁/kg	1 600	0	14 062	0
	PVC/kg	840	0	0	0
	HDPE/kg	3 780	0	801	71
	混凝土/t	160	0	400	60
药剂使用	过硫酸钠/t	0	104.5	15	0
	氢氧化钠/t	0	209	29	0
	氧化钙/t	0	51.5	9.5	0
	活性炭/kg	0	0	0	1 000
能源消耗	天然气/kg	0	0	15 042	0
	电/（kW·h）	0	0	149 760	193 440
	柴油/L	24 000	4 230	846	0
运输	人员运输/（人/km）	10/300	0	0	0
运输	货物运输/（t·km）	132 000	1 239	130.4	195
人员工作时间/h	施工人员	240	0	30	25
	工程师	0	250	180	50
	检测人员	0	8	5	5

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 案例工程修复后目标污染物浓度

Table 3. Concentrations of target pollutants after the case project remediation mg/kg　

污染物类别	修复后污染物浓度	修复后二次影响区污染物浓度
汞	0.043~0.05	0.003~0.091
萘	ND	ND
苯并[a]蒽	ND	0.1~0.7
苯并[b]荧蒽	ND	0.4~0.8
苯并[a]芘	ND	0.1~0.5
茚并[1,2,3-c,d]芘	ND	0.3~0.5
二苯并[a,h]蒽	ND	ND
注：ND表示未检出。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(32)

[1]	余勤飞, 侯红, 吕亮卿, 等. 工业企业搬迁及其对污染场地管理的启示: 以北京和重庆为例[J]. 城市发展研究,2010,17(11):95-100. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-3862.2010.11.016 YU Q F, HOU H, LÜ L Q, et al. Industrial enterprise relocation and their implications to contaminated site management: Beijing and Chongqing case study[J]. Urban Studies,2010,17(11):95-100. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-3862.2010.11.016
[2]	侯艺璇. 北方某大型钢铁企业场地土壤多环芳烃三维刻画与修复决策研究[D]. 合肥: 中国科学技术大学, 2023.
[3]	李凯华, 孟祥帅, 庞然, 等. 某钢铁厂污染地块土壤修复清挖运输阶段效果评估要点分析[J]. 能源与环境,2023(6):127-130. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-9064.2023.06.037
[4]	韩颖, 邓璟菲, 高铭晓, 等. 污染地块绿色可持续修复的国际进展及我国的发展路径分析[J]. 环境保护,2023,51(增刊1):62-67. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9705.2023.1.hjbh202301018 HAN Y, DENG J F, GAO M X, et al. International progresses and Chinese development path analysis of contaminated sites green sustainable remediation[J]. Environmental Protection,2023,51(Suppl 1):62-67. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9705.2023.1.hjbh202301018
[5]	SONG Y N, HOU D Y, ZHANG J L, et al. Environmental and socio-economic sustainability appraisal of contaminated land remediation strategies: a case study at a mega-site in China[J]. Science of the Total Environment,2018,610/611:391-401. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.016
[6]	PETRUZZI N M. A case study on the evaluation and implementation of green and sustainable remediation principles and practices during a RCRA corrective action cleanup[J]. Groundwater Monitoring & Remediation,2011,31(2):63-71.
[7]	侯德义, 李广贺. 污染土壤绿色可持续修复的内涵与发展方向分析[J]. 环境保护,2016,44(20):16-19. HOU D Y, LI G H. Green and sustainable remediation of contaminated soil in China: core elements and development direction[J]. Environmental Protection,2016,44(20):16-19.
[8]	CHEN C, ZHANG X M, CHEN J A, et al. Assessment of site contaminated soil remediation based on an input output life cycle assessment[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2020,263:121422. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121422
[9]	LIANG T, HUO M C, YU L, et al. Life cycle assessment-based decision-making for thermal remediation of contaminated soil in a regional perspective[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2023,392:136260. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136260
[10]	HOU D Y, GU Q B, MA F J, et al. Life cycle assessment comparison of thermal desorption and stabilization/solidification of mercury contaminated soil on agricultural land[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2016,139:949-956. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.108
[11]	桑春晖, 杨欣桐, 李香兰, 等. 基于SEFA方法的异位土壤修复环境足迹分析: 以某钢铁厂为例[J]. 中国环境科学,2023,43(10):5359-5367. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2023.10.034 SANG C H, YANG X T, LI X L, et al. Environmental footprint analysis of ectopic soil remediation based on SEFA method: a case study of a steel plant[J]. China Environmental Science,2023,43(10):5359-5367. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2023.10.034
[12]	FAVARA P J, KRIEGER T M, BOUGHTON B, et al. Guidance for performing footprint analyses and life-cycle assessments for the remediation industry[J]. Remediation Journal,2011,21(3):39-79. doi: 10.1002/rem.20289
[13]	KIM D H, YOO J C, HWANG B R, et al. Environmental assessment on electrokinetic remediation of multimetal-contaminated site: a case study[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International,2014,21(10):6751-6758. doi: 10.1007/s11356-014-2597-1
[14]	肖萌, 刘瑞平, 李香兰, 等. 基于SiteWise^TM工具的污染场地修复环境足迹分析[J]. 中国环境科学,2024,44(1):278-287. XIAO M, LIU R P, LI X L, et al. Environmental footprint analysis of site remediation based on the SiteWise^TM[J]. China Environmental Science,2024,44(1):278-287.
[15]	吴秉泽, 张文文, 刘昭玥, 等. 热脱附对多环芳烃和重金属复合污染土壤的影响[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2024,14(1):121-129. doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20230320 WU B Z, ZHANG W W, LIU Z Y, et al. Effects of thermal desorption on the complex contaminated soils of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heavy metals[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2024,14(1):121-129. doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20230320
[16]	WEI K H, MA J, XI B D, et al. Recent progress on in situ chemical oxidation for the remediation of petroleum contaminated soil and groundwater[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials,2022,432:128738. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.128738
[17]	严志楼, 王昶童, 张施阳. 碱活化过硫酸钠和热脱附技术对TPH和PAHs污染土壤修复的试验研究[J]. 化工管理,2022(12):49-53. YAN Z L, WANG C T, ZHANG S Y. Experimental study on remediation of TPH and PAHs contaminated soil by alkali-activated sodium persulfate and thermal desorption[J]. Chemical Management,2022(12):49-53.
[18]	姜文超. 热脱附耦合过硫酸盐对土壤苯并[a]芘去除效果研究[J]. 安全与环境学报,2022,22(3):1518-1524. JIANG W C. Study of thermal desorption coupled persulfate on removal of benzo[a]pyrene in soil[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment,2022,22(3):1518-1524.
[19]	丁浩然, 王镝翔, 陈成, 等. 典型焦化污染场地多技术联用治理工程应用案例分析[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2023,13(5):1732-1739. doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20230144 DING H R, WANG D X, CHEN C, et al. Analysis of application cases of multi-technology combined treatment for typical coking contaminated site[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2023,13(5):1732-1739. doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20230144
[20]	刘爽, 陈盼, 宋慧敏, 等. 我国华东地区污染土壤异位热脱附修复碳排放及减排策略[J]. 环境工程学报,2022,16(8):2663-2671. doi: 10.12030/j.cjee.202203028 LIU S, CHEN P, SONG H M, et al. Carbon emissions and emission reduction strategy for remediation of contaminated soil by ex-situ thermal desorption in East China[J]. Chinese Journal of Environmental Engineering,2022,16(8):2663-2671. doi: 10.12030/j.cjee.202203028
[21]	王遥, 崔莹, 洪睿晨, 等. 2018中国环境权益市场报告[J]. 环境经济,2019(18):18-45.
[22]	KIM D H, HWANG B R, MOON D H, et al. Environmental assessment on a soil washing process of a Pb-contaminated shooting range site: a case study[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research,2013,20(12):8417-8424. doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-1599-8
[23]	周游, 辛毅, 冯彤, 等. Sitewise^TM和SEFA方法测算污染场地修复环境足迹对比[J]. 中国环境科学,2023,43(10):5339-5348. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2023.10.032 ZHOU Y, XIN Y, FENG T, et al. Environmental footprint analysis of contaminated site remediation based on Sitewise^TM and SEFA methods[J]. China Environmental Science,2023,43(10):5339-5348. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2023.10.032
[24]	孟祥帅, 陈鸿汉, 何亚平, 等. 污染场地修复技术方案筛选中环境指标建立初探: 以某废弃焦化厂为例[J]. 环境工程,2021,39(2):153-159. MENG X S, CHEN H H, HE Y P, et al. Establishment of the environmental indexes in selection of remediation schemes: a case study of an abandoned coking site[J]. Environmental Engineering,2021,39(2):153-159.
[25]	NAM K M, WAUGH C J, PALTSEV S, et al. Carbon co-benefits of tighter SO₂ and NO_x regulations in China[J]. Global Environmental Change,2013,23(6):1648-1661. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.09.003
[26]	肖萌, 孟豪, 董璟琦, 等. 农田污染钝化修复环境影响定量评估方法与案例分析[J]. 中国环境科学,2023,43(7):3571-3581. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2023.07.033 XIAO M, MENG H, DONG J Q, et al. Quantitative assessment methodology and case studies on environmental impacts of passivation remediation of agricultural land pollution[J]. China Environmental Science,2023,43(7):3571-3581. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2023.07.033
[27]	孙凯鹏. 基于生命周期的石油污染土壤修复技术评价研究[D]. 北京: 中国石油大学(北京), 2020.
[28]	刘文晓, 夏天翔, 张丽娜, 等. 基于修复效果的污染土壤修复工程环境足迹分析[J]. 环境科学研究,2022,35(10):2367-2377. LIU W X, XIA T X, ZHANG L N, et al. Environmental footprint analysis of contaminated soil remediation projects based on remediation effects[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences,2022,35(10):2367-2377.
[29]	HE F, GAO J, PIERCE E, et al. In situ remediation technologies for mercury-contaminated soil[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International,2015,22(11):8124-8147. doi: 10.1007/s11356-015-4316-y
[30]	夏天翔, 姜林, 魏萌, 等. 焦化厂土壤中PAHs的热脱附行为及其对土壤性质的影响[J]. 化工学报,2014,65(4):1470-1480. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0438-1157.2014.04.043 XIA T X, JIANG L, WEI M, et al. PAHs thermal desorption behavior of coking plant soil and its effect on soil characteristics[J]. CIESC Journal,2014,65(4):1470-1480. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0438-1157.2014.04.043
[31]	桑春晖, 杨欣桐, 张红振, 等. 氰化物污染土壤修复工程环境足迹评估方法和案例研究[J]. 中国环境科学,2024,44(5):2905-2915. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2024.05.050 SANG C H, YANG X T, ZHANG H Z, et al. Environmental footprint assessment methods and case studies for cyanide-contaminated soil remediation projects[J]. China Environmental Science,2024,44(5):2905-2915. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2024.05.050
[32]	ALI KHAN M A, QADIR Z, ASAD M, et al. Environmental footprint assessment of a cleanup at hypothetical contaminated site[J]. Applied Sciences,2021,11(11):4907. □ doi: 10.3390/app11114907