地下水修复的技术不可达性及美国管理对策对我国的启示

张丽娜; 姜林; 贾晓洋; 夏天翔; 梁竞; 朱笑盈; 刘文晓

doi:10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2022.02.14

地下水修复的技术不可达性及美国管理对策对我国的启示

doi: 10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2022.02.14

张丽娜^{1, 2, 3,},
姜林^{1, 2, 3, ,},
贾晓洋^{1, 2, 3},
夏天翔^{1, 2, 3},
梁竞^{1, 2, 3},
朱笑盈^{1, 2, 3},
刘文晓^{1, 2, 3}

1.
北京市生态环境保护科学研究院，北京　100037
2.
国家城市环境污染控制工程技术研究中心，北京　100037
3.
污染场地风险模拟与修复北京市重点实验室，北京　100037

基金项目: 国家重点研发计划项目(No.2018YFC1801401, 2020YFC1807502)

详细信息

作者简介:
张丽娜（1982-），女，河南焦作人，副研究员，硕士，主要从事土壤和地下水污染防治研究，zhln2011@163.com

通讯作者:
姜林(1964-)，男，浙江长兴人，研究员，博士，主要从事污染场地调查评估、风险评估与修复技术研究，jianglin@cee.cn

中图分类号: X523
计量
- 文章访问数: 638
- HTML全文浏览量: 259
- PDF下载量: 147
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-10-30
- 修回日期: 2022-01-06
- 网络出版日期: 2022-05-17

Technical Impracticability of Groundwater Remediation and Management Countermeasures in the USA and Lessons Learned for China

ZHANG Lina^{1, 2, 3
,},
JIANG Lin^{1, 2, 3
, ,},
JIA Xiaoyang^{1, 2, 3},
XIA Tianxiang^{1, 2, 3},
LIANG Jing^{1, 2, 3},
ZHU Xiaoying^{1, 2, 3},
LIU Wenxiao^{1, 2, 3}

1.
Beijing Municipal Research Institute of Eco-Environmental Protection, Beijing 100037, China
2.
National Engineering Research Centre for Urban Environmental Pollution Control, Beijing 100037, China
3.
Beijing Key Laboratory for Risk Modeling and Remediation of Contaminated Sites, Beijing 100037, China

Funds: National Key Research and Development Program of China (No.2018YFC1801401, 2020YFC1807502)

摘要

摘要: 由于地下水文地质条件的非均质性、污染物环境行为的多样性、修复技术应用的局限性等原因，地下水修复过程存在较大的不确定性，导致出现修复时间和资源的消耗与修复预期不匹配等问题，对地下水修复效果评估和场地再开发利用带来压力. 美国提出了地下水修复技术不可达性的概念，推行了技术不可达豁免政策，将技术不可达评估纳入地下水修复管理程序中，并提出适应性管理、低风险结案、长期监测等一系列管理要求，以保障场地修复后的健康风险和环境风险. 我国尚未建立技术不可达情景的应对措施和技术体系，在复杂污染场地地下水修复中仍存在修复目标、修复周期、修复效果评估周期等各方面的挑战. 本文围绕地下水修复的技术不可达性，借鉴美国污染场地管理经验，提出了修复技术不可达情景下的应对策略，包括建立修复过程跟踪管理技术体系、适时开展残留污染物风险评估、严格落实污染场地后期管理等建议，以期为保障修复后场地再开发安全利用提供理论依据和技术支撑.
- 污染场地 /
- 地下水修复 /
- 技术不可达性 /
- 适应性管理 /
- 低风险结案
Abstract: Contaminated groundwater in many places is usually very difficult to remediate and has become a serious environmental problem in China. The heterogeneity of hydrogeological conditions, complexity of contaminant behavior, and limitations of remediation technologies require long-term remediation time frames and significant resource consumption, thus hindering the redevelopment and utilization of those contaminated sites. To cope with this issue, the US EPA proposed the concept of technical impracticability, which is determined based on site-specific characterization and remediation performance data. Furthermore, the ITRC proposed an adaptive management framework for dynamically refining the conceptual site model, setting up site objectives, and developing interim objectives and adaptive remedial strategies. Similarly, low-risk site closure is implemented on the site that is not completely cleaned up but actually poses minimum risk to human health and the environment. All of them need long-term management. China has not yet established countermeasures for technology impracticability, and there are still challenges in the remediation of complex contaminated ground water. Based on the lessons learned from the USA, we recommend the following strategies for groundwater remediation in China: establish a technical system for tracking the remediation process; carry out risk assessment of residual pollutants, and implement the long-term management of contaminated sites. The proposed management framework and tools will provide scientific support for the redevelopment of contaminated land in China.
- contaminated site /
- groundwater remediation /
- technology impracticability /
- adaptive management /
- low-risk site closure

HTML全文

图 1 美国案例场地地下水P&T修复系统污染物去除量与运行时间和费用的关系^[11]

Figure 1. Cumulative mass recovered versus time and costs of VOCs removed for the pump-and-treat system at case site in the USA^[11]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 地下水修复轨迹示意^[17]

注：y轴表征修复效果的变量，如污染物浓度.

Figure 2. Schematic of possible remediation trajectories for plume behavior^[17]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 美国超级基金场地各财年技术不可达豁免场地数量(1988—2017年)

Figure 3. Groundwater TI Waivers per Fiscal Year of EPA' Superfund from 1988 to 2017 in the USA

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 美国超级基金场地地下水修复路线^[25]

Figure 4. Recommended process for restoring contaminated groundwater at Superfund site in the USA^[25]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 适应性管理在美国超级基金场地管理中的作用^[30]

注：ROD—records of decision，决策记录； RD/RA—remedial design/remedial action，修复设计/修复实施；ROD-A—record of decision amendment，决策记录修正； O&M—operation and maintenance，操作和维护；RI/FS—remedial investigation/feasibility study，修复调查/可行性研究； ESD—explanation of significant differences，重大变化解释.

Figure 5. Superfund remedial site management mentality under AM in the USA^[30]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 低风险结案判断逻辑程序^[23]

Figure 6. Low-risk site closure manual decision logic flow chart^[23]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 超级基金地下水修复长期管理阶段示意^[31]

Figure 7. Superfund groundwater remediation timeline^[31]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 地下水修复全过程跟踪管理技术框架

Figure 8. Technical framework for whole-process tracking management of groundwater remediation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 国内某场地多层次修复效果评估路线

Figure 9. Road map of multi-level remediation results verification for a certain site in China

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

参考文献(40)

[1]	蒲生彦,王宇,王朋.地下水循环井修复技术与应用:关键问题、主要挑战及解决策略[J].安全与环境工程,2021,28(3):78-86. PU S Y,WANG Y,WANG P.Remediation technology and application of groundwater circulation well:key issues,main challenges and strategies[J].Safety and Environmental Engineering,2021,28(3):78-86.
[2]	生态环境部.中国生态环境状况公报(2020年)[R].北京:生态环境部,2021.
[3]	万长园,王明玉,王慧芳,等.华北平原典型剖面地下水三氮污染时空分布特征[J].地球与环境,2014,42(4):472-479. WAN C Y,WANG M Y,WANG H F,et al.Temporal and spatial distributions of nitrogen contamination in groundwater along the typical cross-sections of the North China plain[J].Earth and Environment,2014,42(4):472-479.
[4]	赵勇胜.地下水污染场地风险管理与修复技术筛选[J].吉林大学学报(地球科学版),2012,42(5):1426-1433. ZHAO Y S.Risk management and screening of remediation technologies for contaminated groundwater site[J].Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition),2012,42(5):1426-1433.
[5]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Superfund remedy report 16th edition(542-R-20-001)[R].Washington DC:Office of Land and Emergency Management,2020.
[6]	席北斗,李娟,汪洋,等.京津冀地区地下水污染防治现状、问题及科技发展对策[J].环境科学研究,2019,32(1):1-9. XI B D,LI J,WANG Y,et al.Strengthening the innovation capability of groundwater science and technology to support the coordinated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region:status quo,problems and goals[J].Research of Environmental Sciences,2019,32(1):1-9.
[7]	刘阳生,李书鹏,邢轶兰,等.2019年土壤修复行业发展评述及展望[J].中国环保产业,2020(3):26-30. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5377.2020.03.007 LIU Y S,LI S P,XING Y L,et al.Review and prospect of the development of soil remediation industry in 2019[J].China Environmental Protection Industry,2020(3):26-30. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5377.2020.03.007
[8]	姜林,梁竞,钟茂生,等.复杂污染场地的风险管理挑战及应对[J].环境科学研究,2021,34(2):458-467. JIANG L,LIANG J,ZHONG M S,et al.Challenges and response to risk management of complex contaminated sites[J].Research of Environmental Sciences,2021,34(2):458-467.
[9]	O'CONNOR D,HOU D Y,OK Y S,et al.Sustainable in situ remediation of recalcitrant organic pollutants in groundwater with controlled release materials:a review[J].Journal of Controlled Release,2018,283:200-213. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2018.06.007
[10]	GILBERT R O,SIMPSON J C.Statistical methods for evaluating the attainment of cleanup standards.Volume 3,reference-based standards for soils and solid media,Revision 1[R].Oak Ridge,Tennessee:Office of Scientific and Technical Information,1992.
[11]	Committee on Environmental Remediation at Naval Facilities.Environmental cleanup at navy facilities[M].Washington DC:National Academies Press,2003.
[12]	Committee on Future Options for Management in the Nation's Subsurface Remediation Effort.Alternatives for managing the nation's complex contaminated groundwater sites[M].Washington DC:National Academies Press,2013.
[13]	MCGUIRE T,ADAMSON D,NEWELL C,et al.Development of an expanded,high-Reliability cost and performance database for in-situ remediation technologies[M].1st ed.Washington DC:United States Defense Technical Information Center,2016.
[14]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Guidance for evaluating technical impracticability of ground-water restoration[R].Washington DC:Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation,1993.
[15]	National Research Council.Alternative for groundwater cleanup[R].Washington DC:National Academies Press,1994.
[16]	卢军,伍斌,谷庆宝.美国污染场地管理历程及对中国的启示:基于风险的可持续管理[J].环境保护,2017,45(24):65-70. LU J,WU B,GU Q B.Experiences in the management of contaminated sites in the United States and lessons learned for China:risk-based sustainable management[J].Environmental Protection,2017,45(24):65-70.
[17]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Abstracts of remediation case studies.Volume 10[R].Washington DC:Member Agencies of the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable,2006.
[18]	Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council.Integrated DNAPL site strategy[R].Washington DC:Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council,2011.
[19]	PIRNIE M.Technical impracticability waivers:guidelines for site applicability and the application process[R].Fort Detrick,Maryland:US Army Environmental Center,2002.
[20]	ESCHNER T R,RAWSON J R Y,GUSWA J H.Technical impracticability waiver as a component of a site-wide remedy at a fractured bedrock superfund site in New England[R/OL].Washington DC:Technology Innovation and Field Services Division,(2007-12-20)[2021-10-30].https://clu-in.org/products/siteprof/2007fracrock/086Eschner,T.pdf.
[21]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Summary of technical impracticability waivers at national priorities list sites[R].Washington DC:Solid Waste and Emergency Response,2012.
[22]	California State Water Resources Control Board.Low-threat underground storage tank case closure policy[EB/OL].California:State Water Resources Control Board,(2012-07-30)[2021-10-30].https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/california/23-CCR-Sec-2923#:~:text=Low-Threat%20Underground%20Storage%20Tank%20Case%20Closure%20Policy%20On,petroleum%20underground%20storage%20tank%20%28UST%29%20sites%20in%20California
[23]	FARHAT S K,NEWELL C J,VANDERFORD M,et al.Low-risk site closure guidance manual to accelerate closure of conventional and performance based contract sites[R].Houston,Texas:Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment by GSI Environmental Inc.,2012.
[24]	Interstate Technology & Regulatory.Using remediation risk management to address groundwater cleanup challenges at complex sites[R].Washington DC:Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council,2012.
[25]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Groundwater road map:recommended process for restoring contaminated groundwater at superfund sites[R].Washington DC:Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,2011.
[26]	Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council.Using remediation risk management to address groundwater cleanup challenges at complex sites:RRM-2[R].Washington DC:Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council,2012.
[27]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Environmental cleanup best management practices:effective use of the project life cycle conceptual site model[R].Washington DC:Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,2011.
[28]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Groundwater remedy completion strategy:moving forward with the end in mind[R].Washington DC:Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,2014.
[29]	O'NEILL T,LUX R,FRADEL J,et al.Technical Impracticability Guidance for Ground Water[R].New Jersey:Department of Environmental Protection Site Remediation Program,2013.
[30]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Adaptive management task force:implementation plan and pilot criteria[EB/OL].Washington DC:Adaptive Management Task Force Workgroup,(2018-10-30)[2021-10-30].https://clu-in.org/conf/tio/Adaptive Management-Stakeholders/slides/1Slide_Presentation_for_Kate_Garufi,_EPA_OSRTI.pdf.
[31]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Guidance for management of superfund remedies in post construction[R].Washington DC:Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation,2017.
[32]	US Environmental Protection Agency.National oil and hazardous substances pollution contingency plan (NCP) overview[EB/OL].Washington DC:National Response Center,(1994-09-15)[2021-10-30].https://www.epa.gov/emergency-response/national-oil-and-hazardous-substances-pollution-contingency-plan-ncp-overview.
[33]	US Environmental Protection Agency.National remediation framework:guidelines on long-term monitoring[R].Washington DC:CRC for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment,2016.
[34]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Close out procedures for national priorities list sites[R].Washington DC:Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation,2011.
[35]	Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council.Long-term contaminant management using institutional controls:IC-1[R].Washington DC:Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council,2016.
[36]	US Environmental Protection Agency.Comprehensive five year review guidance[R].Washington DC:Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,2001.
[37]	任加国,郜普闯,徐祥健,等.地下水氯代烃污染修复技术研究进展[J].环境科学研究,2021,34(7):1641-1653. REN J G,GAO P C,XU X J,et al.Advances in remediation technology for chlorinated hydrocarbons contamination in groundwater[J].Research of Environmental Sciences,2021,34(7):1641-1653.
[38]	宋易南,侯德义,赵勇胜,等.京津冀化工场地地下水污染修复治理对策研究[J].环境科学研究,2020,33(6):1345-1356. SONG Y N,HOU D Y,ZHAO Y S,et al.Remediation strategies for contaminated groundwater at chemical industrial sites in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region[J].Research of Environmental Sciences,2020,33(6):1345-1356.
[39]	生态环境部.污染地块地下水修复和风险管控技术导则:HJ 25.6—2019[S].北京:中国环境出版社,2019.
[40]	生态环境部.污染地块风险管控与土壤修复效果评估技术导则:HJ 25.5—2018[S].北京:中国环境出版社,2018.