Corporate Address:
One Beacon Street, 17th Floor
Boston, MA
United States
Gradient is an environmental and risk science consulting firm renowned for our specialties in Toxicology, Epidemiology, Risk Assessment, Product Safety, Contaminant Fate and Transport, Industrial Hygiene, Geographic Information Systems, and Environmental/ Forensic Chemistry. Since 1985, Gradient has employed sound science to assist national and global clients with resolving their complex environmental and human health challenges.
Matthew Biega
Environmental Engineer at Gradient
A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Corrective Action Alternatives to Evaluate Sustainable Remediation
Matthew Biega – Gradient Corp
Life cycle assessments (LCAs) empower stakeholders to understand environmental impacts and allow for informed decision-making regarding sustainable alternatives. One LCA application that supports the comparison of environmental impacts is the selection of remedial corrective actions. This study reviewed a comprehensive LCA performed to assess the environmental sustainability of corrective action alternatives for groundwater remediation at an example industrial site. Three corrective action alternatives were considered: monitored natural attenuation (MNA), pump and treat (P&T), and permeable reactive barriers (PRBs). As part of this LCA, a variety of environmental impact categories were evaluated, including global warming, acidification, eutrophication, ozone depletion, smog, respiratory effects, human health, and ecotoxicity. The findings of the comparative LCA revealed substantial differences in the environmental impacts associated with MNA, P&T, and the PRB when each of the methods were applied to the example site. MNA was found to have the lowest overall environmental impacts, followed by P&T, while the PRB had the highest impacts. Operational energy of the pumping system was determined to be the major impact driver in the P&T scenario, while the potential impacts of the PRB were shown to be driven by the reactive medium supply.
1-Minute Introductory Video
A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Corrective Action Alternatives to Evaluate Sustainable Remediation
Information Request
I1
CCR | Impoundments | ZLD | LSA | Remediation
Feb 15 ( 7:30 – 9:30 am)
David Donkin (CHAIR)
Bottom Ash Transport Water Chemistry in High Recycle Rate Systems
Bottom Ash Transport Water Chemistry in High Recycle Rate Systems
Bottom Ash Transport Water Chemistry in High Recycle Rate Systems
David Donkin – UCC Environmental
The coal-fired electrical utility sector is faced with the regulatory requirement to retire their coal ash sluicing ponds under the finalized Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) regulation in the Spring of 2021. Wet-to-dry ash handling solutions are being implemented throughout the fleet to allow ponds to come out of service. However, the final disposition of outage wash wastewater, specifically the wastewater generated from washing boiler internals, air pre-heater, economizer and precipitator systems must also be considered. Historically these washwaters were simply directed to the CCR pond along with other ash materials and treated by dilution and settling prior to discharge. This option is longer available. The primary constituents of concern are total suspended solids, iron, copper and other heavy metals, and pH control. In addition, outage wash wastewater presents unique challenges with respect to wide flow variations and contaminant loading changes throughout a wash. A temporary or permanent retro-fit of existing wet-to-dry bottom ash handling systems can allow these systems to serve as a wastewater treatment system in order to meet water quality requirements with respect to outage wash wastewater streams. UCC Environmental’s lessons learned from over 2 years providing these retrofits and treating wastewater from outage washes will be reviewed.
Scott Holder (COCHAIR)
Zero Liquid Discharge an Integrated Solution for the Power Industry
Zero Liquid Discharge an Integrated Solution for the Power Industry
Scott Holder – Alfa Laval
Typical Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) applications are seen as a solution for a specific problem resulting in projects being siloed as traditional wastewater treatment systems. This approach prevents the full impact and utilization of ZLD within the power industry. ZLD systems can utilize process or waste heat to drive evaporation, reclaim water, reduce waste, and reduce the consumption of resources such as water. Ultimately, this approach can have the greatest effect on a facilities environmental impact and risk. Zero Liquid Discharge systems are a combination of technologies that work together to minimize wastewater as much as technically and economically practical, often resulting in a concentrated solid product and high-quality clean water for re-use or environmental discharge. Integrating a ZLD system into your process increases resiliency by reducing both cost and risk. Zero Liqui Discharge works to secure control over your water source and waste disposal reducing the influence of factors outside of your control. In many applications, ZLD should be seen as a comprehensive solution utilizing all aspects of the power generator process. Waste energy can be used to concentrate waste stream and recover water for reuse within the facility.Water scarcity, new Fuel-gas desulfurization (FGD) regulations, and a circular economy are driving industries to rethink their business models from the ground up. Zero Liquid Discharge should be seen as an integrated solution for beneficial reuse of both water and energy within the power energy Maximization of energy utilization through capturing high-temperature waste heat normally discarded to the cooling towers is one example of how this can be achieved.
Matthew Biega
A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Corrective Action Alternatives to Evaluate Sustainable Remediation
A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Corrective Action Alternatives to Evaluate Sustainable Remediation
Matthew Biega – Gradient Corp
Life cycle assessments (LCAs) empower stakeholders to understand environmental impacts and allow for informed decision-making regarding sustainable alternatives. One LCA application that supports the comparison of environmental impacts is the selection of remedial corrective actions. This study reviewed a comprehensive LCA performed to assess the environmental sustainability of corrective action alternatives for groundwater remediation at an example industrial site. Three corrective action alternatives were considered: monitored natural attenuation (MNA), pump and treat (P&T), and permeable reactive barriers (PRBs). As part of this LCA, a variety of environmental impact categories were evaluated, including global warming, acidification, eutrophication, ozone depletion, smog, respiratory effects, human health, and ecotoxicity. The findings of the comparative LCA revealed substantial differences in the environmental impacts associated with MNA, P&T, and the PRB when each of the methods were applied to the example site. MNA was found to have the lowest overall environmental impacts, followed by P&T, while the PRB had the highest impacts. Operational energy of the pumping system was determined to be the major impact driver in the P&T scenario, while the potential impacts of the PRB were shown to be driven by the reactive medium supply.
Monte Markley
The Basics of Deep Well Injection as a Leachate Disposal Option
The basics of Deep Well Injection as a Leachate Disposal Option
Monte Markley – SCS Engineers