This workshop presentation provides regulators, consultants, and field applicators with an understanding of the operational processes behind thermal conductive heating (TCH) utilizing a gas powered system known commercially as Gas Thermal Remediation (GTR). A brief review of the various thermal options available today is presented to highlight the key differentiating operational factors. Additionally, benefits from heat generation, such as increased rates of naturally occurring processes (including hydrolysis, increased bio-availability, different forms of bio-degradation at various temperature regimes), and the primary contaminant removal mechanisms for thermal conductive heating are reviewed through three published literature references and case study review. The course examines various site conditions, identifies the remediation challenges leading to a thermal solution, and evaluates the results.

1. Design / Manufacturing / Operation
GEO Incorporated
1612 Jenks Drive
Corona, CA 92880

2. C3 Vapor Condensation Systems
◦Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)
◦Multi-Phase Extraction (MPE)
◦Celebrating 25 years
Gas Thermal Remediation (GTR)
◦In Situ Thermal Conductive Heating (TCH)
◦Ex Situ Thermal Desorption (ESTD)
◦Growing globally at a rapid rate

3. About the company
◦Woman owned California business founded in 1989
◦Facilities in Corona California and Belfast Maine
◦30 employees –2 offices –1 laboratory –1 R&D center
◦Working in US, CA, EU, AU, AF, CN, Demonstrated Leadership in Technology Innovation
◦25+ years experience of in situ remediation with C3 vapor treatment
◦5+ years of experience in Thermal Conductive Heating (TCH)
◦US, EU, AU and PCT patents, plus numerous pending patents

4. Refrigerated Cooling Compression andCondensation combined with regenerative adsorption
Condenses VOCs into NAPL
NO UPPER LIMIT for influent VOC concentration
NO DILUTION!

6. G.E.O. Inc - Copyright 2010
Vapor Treatment Options -Fuel
Low Flow
50-500
1,000
<500
2,000
>10,000
5,000
VOC concentrations in PPMV
Flow Rate in CFM
High Flow
>> 5,000
C3 Refrigerated Condensation
Internal Combustion Engine (ICE)
Zeolite
Catalytic Oxidation
Thermal Oxidation
Granular Activated Carbon (GAC)
FUEL Sites

7. G.E.O. Inc - Copyright 2010
Off-Gas Treatment Space
Low Flow
50-500
1,000
<500
2,000
>10,000
5,000
VOC concentrations in PPMV
Flow Rate in CFM
High Flow
>> 5,000
C3 Refrigerated Condensation
Zeolite
Catalytic Oxidation
Thermal Oxidation
Granular Activated Carbon (GAC)
Chlorinated Solvent Sites

8. More than 50 years of experience
Steam injection to enhance recovery of high gravity oils (Ramey 1966)
◦Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR)

9. Steam Enhanced Extraction (SEE)
Electro-Thermal Dynamic Stripping Process (ET- DSP™), Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH)
In-Situ Thermal Desorption (ISTD) Thermal Conductive Heating (TCH) Gas Thermal Remediation (GTR)
Combinations: ISTD/SEE, ET-DSP/SEETCHET-DSP™ ERHISTDSEETESVEIPTDISTRSTARGTRTEFP

10. ETDSPor Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH)
Steam Enhanced Extraction (SEE) – Steam Injection
Thermal ConductivityLow to High TLow To High k
Electrical ConductivityBP of WaterLow To Medium k
Hydraulic ConductivityBP of WaterMedium To High k
Gas Thermal Remediation (GTR) In Situ Thermal Desorption (ISTD) – Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)

11. 11

12. Challenging Sites
Limited access-no excavation
Source zone mass removal
Complex mix of COCs
DNAPL below the water table
LNAPL smear zones
Clay lithology-diffusion limited condition
Fractured bedrock
Other options failed
Challenging Goals
Rapid schedule (<90 days)
Low clean-upstandards in soil, GW or VI
High probability of success

13.  Vapor pressure of organic
materials increase
 Viscosity of separate phase
liquids decrease
 Increases desorption
 Diffusion rates increase
 Solubility increases
 Increases biodegradation
 Rates of Hydrolysis
increase
 Thermal Oxidation

14. Thermal conductivity = measure of the ability of a material to conduct heat (How quickly heat migrates through it).
Thermal Diffusivity = measure of the ability of a material to conduct heat relative to its ability to store heat (How quickly the temperature of the material increases).
Thermal diffusivity (m2/s) = thermal conductivity (W/mK)
volumetric heat capacity

15. Soil
Thermal conductivity(l)
Watts per meter Kelvin[W/mK]
Permeability
[m2]
Clay (dry)
0.15-1.8
10-16-10-20
Water saturatedclay
0.6-2.5
Sand
0.15-0.77
10-10-10-12
Water saturatedsand
2-4
Gravel (dry)
0.7
10-7-10-9
Water saturatedgravel
1.7-4
Fractured Bedrock (Granite)
1.4-4.0
Heat Transport Equation:
ACE EE 2009
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/thermal-conductivity-d_429.html

16. Source ACE EE 2009

17. Increased solubility of organics improves the bioavailability of the compounds for microbes
◦“Preliminary data have also shown that the increased solubility of selected PAHs at temperatures up to 60C enables thermophiles to degrade the PAHs at a rate of up to 8 times faster than mesophilesat lower temperatures (Viamajalaet al. (2007).” ACE EE 2009
The rate of dissolution of DNAPLsimproves the bioavailability for microbes
Heat increases breakdown of natural organic matter which becomes available for microbes.

18. Effect of Temperature on the Rate of
Bioremediation.
1
10
100
0 20 40 60
Temperature [C]
Bioremediation Population
Multiplier
Initial Temperature
Sources: ACE EE 2009, and “Analysis of Selected
Enhancements for Soil Vapor Extraction”, EPA
Report EPA-542-R-97-007
 Cooling rate = ¼ °C per day
resulting in a long duration of
accelerated natural attenuation
 Mesophiles are more efficient
at degrading hydrocarbons at
temperatures from 30 to 40°C
(86 to 104°F) (Bossert and
Bartha 1984).
 Thermophiles actively degrade
hydrocarbons and recalcitrant
NAPL constituents (PAHs and
high-molecular-weight
hydrocarbons) at temperatures
up to 70°C (158°F)
(Huesemann et al. 2002).

19. Propane/Natural gas/Diesel
Closed-loop heating system >> No pollution emissions
Soil and groundwater heated by thermal conduction
Treatment temperatures from 50°C to >400°C
Treat sand, silt, CLAY, Bedrock, and Groundwater
Vapor extraction wells remove VOCs
VOCs treated by vapor treatment system

20. Diffusion limited remediation progress
◦Enemy #1 for In Situ Remedies
ISCO
ISCR
MPE / SVE
P&T
1 mm
[Udellet al. 1999; Alameda Point SEE demonstration] Heat transfer occurs about 10,000 times faster than aqueous diffusion in porous media and rocks

21. NAPL
SOIL MINERALS
ORGANIC MATERIAL
H2O
Micropores

22. Level of Heating & ContaminantTarget Treatment Temperature(°C) Heating Well Spacing(m) Desiccation of Zone? Range of Costs (all inclusive) ($/m3) 1. VOCs: GentleHeating(BTEX, CVOCs) <1004 –6No40-2002. VOCs(CVOCs) 100-2002 –4 Depends60-3003. SVOCs(PCBs, PAHs, dioxins, pesticides) 200-3001.5 –3Yes150-600

23. The influence from enthalpy of water vaporization
Time (Days)
Temperature (°C)

25. Natural gas, propane, diesel, gasoline, ethanol, etc
National Avg: April 2014
Natural Gas per kWh is ~$0.05
Propane per kWh is ~$0.07
AC per kWh is ~$0.10
http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_ahttp://www.consumersenergy.com/apps/gasvalues/index.aspx?ekfrm=1654
Flexibility has been key for many projects internationally!

26. Outer C.S. tube
Inner S.S. tube
Heated air exhaust
Heated air introduction

32. Faster (Rapid mobilization, smaller footprint, & no electrical installation)
Scalable (Can be applied to very small and very large projects)

34. N
 Vapor Treatment system
permitted with BAAQMD
 Onsite Liquid Treatment
 Utilities?
 Existing Natural Gas
Connection
 Existing Electrical
Connection

35. Bathroom
TCU-1-2
(Before July 8, 2012)
TCU-1
(After July 8, 2013)
TCU-2
SVE-1 TCU-3
SVE-2
SVE-3
SVE-4
SVE-5
SVE-6 SVE-12
SVE-7
SVE-8
SVE-10
SVE-9
TCU-1 SVE-11
(Before July 8, 2013)
TCU 1-2
(After July 8, 2013)
T9 Wall
T10 Wall
T1
T2
T3
T5
T4
T6
T7
T8
TCU-1-1
TCU-3-1
TCU-3-2
TCU-2-1
TCU-2-2
0 40
Scale In Inches
 100°C target
treatment
temperature
 9 GTR Heater Wells
 12 Vapor Extraction
Points (dual nested)
 10 TPMPs

36. 0"
20"
40"
60"
80"
100"
120"
14(May"
21(May"
28(May"
4(Jun"
11(Jun"
18(Jun"
25(Jun"
2(Jul"
9(Jul"
16(Jul"
23(Jul"
30(Jul"
6(Aug"
13(Aug"
20(Aug"
27(Aug"
3(Sep"
10(Sep"
17(Sep"
24(Sep"
1(Oct"
8(Oct"
15(Oct"
22(Oct"
29(Oct"
5(Nov"
12(Nov"
19(Nov"
26(Nov"
3(Dec"
10(Dec"
17(Dec"
24(Dec"
31(Dec"
7(Jan"
PPMV$
Influent$Vapor$Sampling$Results$
PCE"
0"
50"
100"
150"
200"
250"
300"
350"
400"
12(May" 1(Jul" 20(Aug" 9(Oct" 28(Nov"
Well$Head$VOC$Data$in$Parts$Per$Million$by$Volume$(PPMV)$
SVE$Well$Head$VOC$Data$
sve"1"
sve"2"
sve"3"
sve"4"
sve"5"
sve"6"
sve"7"
sve"8"
sve"9"
sve"10"
sve"11"
sve"12"
0"
50"
100"
150"
200"
250"
300"
350"
400"
12(May" 1(Jul" 20(Aug" 9(Oct" Well$Head$VOC$Data$in$Parts$Per$Million$by$Volume$(PPMV)$
SVE$Well$Head$VOC$Data$
Individual SVE Wells

37. 100°C Treatment Temperature in Vadose Soils Maintained for 185 days.
2,938Pounds of PCE, cis-1,2-DCE, and Vinyl Chloride Recovered as DNAPL from vapor treatment (condensation) system
1 monthpost-remediation vapor results 180 ug/m3.
3 month post-remediationvapor results 70 ug/m3.
825 pore volume steam exchanges (calculated) in treatment zone.
5,944 gallons aqueousphase liquid (water) recovered and treated onsite.

38. Specialized Equipment Needed to Access Interior Through Standard 3ft wide Door.
High resolution site characterization is key to design and cost management
Site remediation goals driven by Vapor Intrusion Risk and achieved!

39. Benzo(a)pyreneand related MGP COCs, Naphthalene, TPH-g, TPH-d impacts above residential limits, TPH-mo impacts also present.
Impacts from surface to 15 ft bgs.
Sandy, gravely soils; GW at >90 ft bgs.
Residential Goals:
◦Combined B(a)P, Naphthalene, and MGP SVOCs: >0.9 mg/kg
◦TPH-d: >1,000 mg/kg
◦TPH-mo: >10,000 mg/kg

40. 14 GTR HeaterWells
15Vapor Extraction Points
4 TPMPs
Onsite Liquid Treatment
C2 Technology Vapor Condensation Unit (100scfm) with VGAC
Adjacent, Existing NaturalGas Connection
Adjacent,Existing Electrical Connection

41. TC-1TC-2TC-3TC-4 CHINA ALLEY BT01BT02HoldingTankChillerSkidSVESkid 1VGAC2HeaterFanVGAC1TCU1TCU2TCU14TCU3TCU12TCU11TCU10TCU8TCU7TCU6TCU4TCU5TCU13SVESVESkid 2TCU9LGACTITLE: TCH Equipment As BuiltFormer / Co-Located VaporExtraction Well (Total: 14) Vapor Extraction Well110Scale in FeetTPMP Pilot Test Treatment ZoneHeater Line* Well and Equipment Locations are ApproximateEquipmentSVE Skid 1: After CoolerKnock Out TankChiller Skid: ChillerKnock Out TankSVE Skid 2: BlowerAfter CoolerLGAC: 200 lbsVGAC 1:400 lbsVGAC 2: 200 lbsHoldingTank: 650 gal TankBT01:2500 gal TankBT02:1000 gal TankFigure

44. 0
5
10
15
20
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
T1 60day
T2 60day
T3 60day
T4 60day
T1 120day
T2 120day
T3 120day
T4 120day
°C
T4
T2
T1
T3
Depth (ft bgs.)

45. 0.01
0.1
1
10
100
BaP
BaP Eq.
Max. Conc. (mg/kg) Pre- Treatment
Max. Conc. (mg/kg) Post- Treatment
1
10
100
1000
10000
TPH-d
TPH-mo
Max. Conc. (mg/kg) Pre- Treatment
Max. Conc. (mg/kg) Post- Treatment
Target Treatment goal lines

46. 0
20
40
60
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
BaP Equivalent
TPH
Post = 0.01 lbs
before = 51.43 lbs
Post = ND
before = 1.47 lbs
Remedial Objectives Exceeded by Order of Magnitude in 130 Days of ISTD Operation.
BaPEquivalent mass (lbs)
TPHmass (lbs)

47. 1.Greater than expected water content of soil (20% versus anticipated 10%) and higher water production impacted heating schedule for superheated phase.
2.Electrical interruption caused down time, and thereby impacted system heating capabilities (downed power line offsite) –recommend providing backup generators
3.Longer heating duration increased heat lost to surface –installed thermal blankets.Recommend higher R value ‘air entrained’ material to improve overall thermal efficiencies

48. ISTDProject Estimates
Surface
Avg. Depth
Volume m3
Pollutant
Difficulty?
Total Price
62 m²
4 m
248
TPH
normal
$43,500
23 m²
14 m
322
CVOCs+ TPH
normal
$90,350
3551 m²
9 m
31959
TPH
normal
$3,770,000
1263 m²
9 m
11367
CVOCs+ TPH
ATEX zone
$2,262,325
80 m²
12 m
960
Creosote+TPH
LNAPLpresent
$277,550
125 m²
7 m
875
CVOCs+ TPH
incl. saturated
$237,250
60 m²
5 m
300
CVOCs
normal
$57,200
45 m²
6 m
270
SVOCs+ PAHs
under building
$55,250
73 m²
4 m
292
Mercury;SVOCs
underbuilding
$189,150
Prices are all inclusive (drilling, installation, energy/utilities, and operations).

49. GTR©ISTCH Individual Burner System:
1.Applicability: soil temperatures < 50°C to > 400°C
2.Speed: Mobilize and commence GTR operations in Weeks not months
3.Scalability: small pilots to acre size projects
4.Economics: No waiting/paying for electrical utilities, transformers, switchgear, third party inspections.
5.Guaranteesavailable

50. Less heat loss to surrounding
Less heat loss to groundwater
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
°C
Heating Days
SoilTemperature Curve (centroid location)
Ex-Situ
In-Situ

51. Target Temperature: 200°C
Thermal Treatment Duration: 39 days
Treatment Goal: less than 1000 mg/kg total petroleum hydrocarbons
Achieved sustainable reuse of soils on farm for dirt road cover
Central Valley California

52. Contaminants : PAHs and Heavy Hydrocarbons > 50,000 mg/kg
Geology: Clay, sandVolume: 620 m3
Treatment Time: 37 days Target Temperature: 200°C
Challenges: Treatment area surrounded by residences on three sides
Heating Tubes: 15
Return Tubes: 5
Remedial Goal: < 50 mg/kg
Remedial Result: Avg. Concentrations < 25 mg/kg
Both Performance and Time Guarantees Achieved

53. Small Generator
25–60 kVa
Gas or Diesel
Project Site in Eindhoven, Netherlands February 2012

54. Questions?