This study aimed to assess the mass fluxes and removal efficiencies of heavy hydrocarbons in a full-scale plant located in northern Italy. This plant receives and treats contaminated soil, soils and rocks from construction and demolition activities, incineration slags and street cleaning residues. The plant has three sections, consisting of bioremediation using biopile, a soil washing stage and a stabilization/solidification unit, which can perform independently or together with the others. The material flow analysis showed how the crisis in the construction industry changed the final destination of waste after the treatment: as the market demand for coarse material decreased, waste was sent directly to landfills for inert waste, instead of being recovered. Hydrocarbon mass fluxes showed that a considerable amount of pollutants was removed. In the period 2009–2014, the removal efficiencies of the bioremediation, the soil washing section and the entire plant were respectively 73%, 58% and 62%. The percentages of removal attained at the facility in study were sufficient to ensure the possibility of recovering the waste or disposing of it in different landfill categories, according to the national regulations.
AlharbiBHPashaMJAlhudhodiAH, et al. (2018) Assessment of soil contamination caused by underground fuel leakage from selected gas stations in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Soil and Sediment Contamination27: 674–691.
ATSDR (1999) Toxicological Profile for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH). Atlanta, GA: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, p. 315. Available at: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp123.pdf (accessed 28 March 2019).
4.
BenyahiaFEmbabyAS (2016) Bioremediation of crude oil contaminated desert soil: Effect of biostimulation, bioaugmentation and bioavailability in biopile treatment systems. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health13: 219.
5.
BeškoskiVPGojgić-CvijovićGMilićJ, et al. (2011) Ex situ bioremediation of a soil contaminated by mazut (heavy residual fuel oil) – A field experiment. Chemosphere83: 34–40.
6.
BhandariANovakJTDoveDC (2000) Effect of soil washing on petroleum-hydrocarbon distribution on sand surfaces. Journal of Hazardous Substance Research2: 1–13.
7.
BrunnerPHRechberger (2004) Practical Handbook of Material Flow Analysis: Advanced Methods in Resource and Waste Management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press LLC.
8.
CaiXDWangDYLiH, et al. (2014) Ex situ bioremediation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon contaminated soil using a static aeration biopile process. Applied Mechanics and Materials448: 498–504.
9.
CarmoEHTeixeiraMG (2020) Technological disasters and public health emergencies: The case of oil spill on the Brazilian coast. Reports in Public Health36: e00234419.
10.
CencicORechbergerH (2008) Material flow analysis with software STAN. Environmental Informatics and Industrial Ecology119: 440–447.
11.
ChemlalRAbdiNLouniciH, et al. (2013) Modeling and qualitative study of diesel biodegradation using biopile process in sandy soil. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation78: 43–48.
12.
ChemlalRTassistADrouicheM, et al. (2012) Microbiological aspects study of bioremediation of diesel-contaminated soils by biopile technique. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation75: 201–206.
13.
CollivignarelliMCVaccariMAbbàA, et al. (2018) Wet oxidation of fine soil contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons: A way towards a remediation cycle. Environments5: 69.
14.
CotillasSLacasaEHerraiz-CarbonéM, et al. (2020) Innovative photoelectrochemical cell for the removal of CHCs from soil washing wastes. Separation and Purification Technology230: 115876.
15.
CoulonFAwadiMACowieW, et al. (2010) When is a soil remediated? Comparison of biopiled and windrowed soils contaminated with bunker-fuel in a full-scale trial. Environmental Pollution158: 3032–3040.
16.
DiasRLRubertoLCalabróA, et al. (2015) Hydrocarbon removal and bacterial community structure in on-site biostimulated biopile systems designed for bioremediation of diesel-contaminated Antarctic soil. Polar Biology38: 677–687.
GenoveseMDenaroRCappelloS, et al. (2008) Bioremediation of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes-contaminated soil: A biopile pilot experiment. Journal of Applied Microbiology105: 1694–1702.
19.
ISO (1993) ISO 11465:1993. Soil quality – Determination of dry matter and water content on a mass basis – Gravimetric method.
20.
ISO (2004) ISO 16703:2004. Soil quality – Determination of content of hydrocarbon in the range C10 to C40 by gas chromatography.
IturbeRFloresCChavezC, et al. (2004) Remediation of contaminated soil using soil washing and biopile methodologies at a field level. Journal of Soils and Sediments4: 115–122.
23.
JørgensenKSPuustinenJSuorttiAM (2000) Bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated soil by composting in biopiles. Environmental Pollution107: 245–254.
24.
KaoCMChienHYSurampalliRY, et al. (2009) Application of biopile system for the remediation of petroleum-hydrocarbon contaminated soils. In: Proceedings of the World Environmental and Water Resources Congress (ed. SStarrett), Kansas City, USA, 17–21 May 2009, pp. 2575–2584. Reston: ASCE.
25.
KhanFIHusainTHejaziR (2004) An overview and analysis of site remediation technologies. Journal of Environmental Management71: 95–122.
26.
KhodadoustAPBagchiRSuidanMT, et al. (2000) Removal of PAHs from highly contaminated soils found at prior manufactured gas operations. Journal of Hazardous Materials80: 159–174.
27.
KimJLeeAHChangW (2018) Enhanced bioremediation of nutrient-amended, petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated soils over a cold-climate winter: The rate and extent of hydrocarbon biodegradation and microbial response in a pilot-scale biopile subjected to natural seasonal freeze-thaw temperatures. Science of the Total Environment612: 903–913.
28.
KuppusamySMaddelaNRMegharajM, et al. (2020) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons: Environmental Fate, Toxicity, and Remediation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature.
29.
Legislative Decree 152 (2006) Environmental regulations. Official Journal of the Italian Republic 88 of 14April2006, Italy (in Italian). Available at: http://www.camera.it/parlam/leggi/deleghe/06152dl.htm (accessed 29 March 2019).
30.
Legislative Decree 248 (1999) Approval of “Official Methods of Chemical Soil Analysis”. Ordinary Supplement 185 to the Official Journal of the Italian Republic 248 of 21October1999, Italy (in Italian).
31.
LinTCPanPTChengSS (2010) Ex situ bioremediation of oil-contaminated soil. Journal of Hazardous Materials176: 27–34.
32.
MaJYangYDaiX, et al. (2016) Effects of adding bulking agent, inorganic nutrient and microbial inocula on biopile treatment for oil-field drilling waste. Chemosphere150: 17–23.
33.
Martínez ÁlvarezLMRubertoLAMGurevichJM, et al. (2020) Environmental factors affecting reproducibility of bioremediation field assays in Antarctica. Cold Regions Science and Technology169: 102915.
34.
MATTM (2017) Ministerial Decree 11 October 2017 – Minimum environmental criteria for the award of design services and works for the new construction, renovation and maintenance of public buildings. Official Journal of the Italian Republic 259 of 6November2017, Italy (in Italian).
35.
McGowanCJKwokRKEngelLS, et al. (2017) Respiratory, dermal, and eye irritation symptoms associated with Corexit™ EC9527A/EC9500A following the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Findings from the GuLF STUDY. Environmental Health Perspectives125: 097015.
36.
MegharajMRamakrishnanBVenkateswarluK, et al. (2011) Bioremediation approaches for organic pollutants: A critical perspective. Environment International37: 1362–1375.
37.
MicleVSurIMCristeA, et al. (2018) Lab-scale experimental investigation concerning ex-situ bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons contaminated soils. Soil and Sediment Contamination: An International Journal27: 692–705.
38.
MoonDHParkJWKoutsospyrosA, et al. (2016) Assessment of soil washing for simultaneous removal of heavy metals and low-level petroleum hydrocarbons using various washing solutions. Environmental Earth Sciences75: 884.
39.
MuLZhouQZhaoY, et al. (2019) Graphene oxide quantum dots stimulate indigenous bacteria to remove oil contamination. Journal of Hazardous Materials366: 694–702.
40.
PengSWuWChenJ (2011) Removal of PAHs with surfactant-enhanced soil washing: Influencing factors and removal effectiveness. Chemosphere82: 1173–1177.
41.
StanisavljevicNBrunnerPH (2014) Combination of material flow analysis and substance flow analysis: A powerful approach for decision support in waste management. Waste Management & Research32: 733–744.
42.
StanisavljevicNVujovicSZivancevM, et al. (2015) Application of MFA as a decision support tool for waste management in small municipalities – case study of Serbia. Waste Management & Research33: 550–560.
43.
Technische Universitat Wien (2012) Stan 2.5. Available at: http://www.stan2web.net/ (accessed 28 March 2019).
44.
TrelluCMoussetEPechaudY, et al. (2016) Removal of hydrophobic organic pollutants from soil washing/flushing solutions: A critical review. Journal of Hazardous Materials306: 149–174.
45.
UNI (2004) Waste – Liquid, granular, pasty wastes and sludges – Manual sampling and preparation and analysis of eluates. Standard Number: UNI 10802:2004.
USEPA (2004) Chapter IV – Biopiles. In: USEPA (ed.) How to Evaluate Alternative Cleanup Technologies for Underground Storage Tank Sites - A Guide for Corrective Action Plan Reviewers. EPA 510-B-17-003. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-03/documents/tum_ch4.pdf (accessed 29 March 2019).
48.
VaccariMCollivignarelliMCCanatoM (2012) Reuse of hydrocarbon-contaminated sludge from soil washing process: Issues and perspectives. Chemical Engineering Transactions28: 169–174.
49.
Von FahnestockFMWickramanayakeGBKratzkeRJ, et al. (eds) (1998) Biopile Design, Operation, and Maintenance Handbook for Treating Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Soils. Columbus: Battelle Press.
50.
YeMSunMKengaraFO, et al. (2014) Evaluation of soil washing process with carboxymethyl-β-cyclodextrin and carboxymethyl chitosan for recovery of PAHs/heavy metals/fluorine from metallurgic plant site. Journal of Environmental Sciences26: 1661–1672.
51.
YehCKJYoungCC (2003) Effects of soil fines and surfactant sorption on contaminant reduction of coarse fractions during soil washing. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A38: 2697–2709.
52.
ZhangWLiuYGTanXF, et al. (2019) Enhancement of detoxification of petroleum hydrocarbons and heavy metals in oil-contaminated soil by using glycine-β-cyclodextrin. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health16: 1155.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
