Performance of air sparging systems: A review of case studies
Abstract
Fluor Daniel GTI (now IT Corporation) has compiled a database of 49 completed in-situ air sparging case studies. Air sparging is a commonly used remediation technology which volatilizes and enhances aerobic biodegradation of contamination in groundwater and saturated zone soil. The air sparging database was compiled to address questions regarding the effectiveness and permanence of air sparging, and to provide predictive indicators of air sparging success to aid in optimization of existing and future air sparging systems. In each case study, groundwater concentrations were compared before sparging was initiated, just before sparging was terminated, and in the months following shutdown of the sparging system. The case studies included both chlorinated solvents and petroleum hydrocarbon contamination, and covered a wide range of soil conditions and sparge system parameters. In many cases, air sparging achieved a substantial and permanent decrease in groundwater concentrations. Successful systems were achieved with both chlorinated and petroleum contamination, both sandy and silty soils, and both continuous and pulsed flow sparging. In other cases, however, a significant rebound of groundwater concentrations was observed after sparging was terminated. Rebound sometimes required 6 to 12 months to develop fully. Rebound was more frequently observed at sites contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons than with chlorinated solvents. Petroleum-contaminated sites were more likely to rebound when initial groundwater contamination levels were high enough to suggest the presence of LNAPL or a smear zone of residual LNAPL. Rebound at petroleum sites appeared to be minimized by a high density of sparge wells addressing the entire source area and a high sparge air injection rate. In some cases, rebound appeared to be related to a rising water table.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In situ aeration (air sparging) is an established method for bioremediation of contaminated groundwater where increased O2 concentrations stimulate growth of aerobic heterotrophs.
“This is similar to existing technologies for in situ aeration (i.e., air sparging), an established method for bioremediation of contaminated groundwater where increased O 2 concentrations stimulate growth of aerobic heterotrophs (e.g., [78,79]).”
From Strategizing carbon-neutral mines: A case for pilot projects (2014) · cites this paper as [78]
Cites
Laboratory Study of Air Sparging: Air Flow Visualization
Ji, W., Dahmani, A. M., Ahlfeld, D. P., Lin, J. D., & Hill, E. H. (1993) · Groundwater Monitoring & Remediation · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6592.1993.tb00455.x · Cited by 238 · see citing works
An Overview of In Situ Air Sparging
Johnson, R. L., Johnson, P. C., McWhorter, D. B., et al. (1993) · Groundwater Monitoring & Remediation · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6592.1993.tb00456.x · Cited by 187 · see citing works
Marley, M. C., Hazebrouck, D. J., & Walsh, M. T. (1992) · Groundwater Monitoring & Remediation · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6592.1992.tb00044.x · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Enhance performance of soil vapor extraction
Noonan, D. C., Glynn, W. K., & Miller, M. (1993) · Chemical engineering progress · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Sparging effectiveness for groundwater restoration
Boersma, P., Piontek, K. R., & Newman, P. A. (1995) · OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Strategizing carbon-neutral mines: A case for pilot projects
Power, I., McCutcheon, J., Harrison, A., Wilson, S., Dipple, G., Kelly, S., Southam, C., & Southam, G. (2014) · Minerals · doi:10.3390/min4020399 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Power, I. M., Dipple, G. M., Bradshaw, P. M. D., & Harrison, A. L. (2020) · International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control · doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102895 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Kabelitz, N., Machackova, J., Imfeld, G., Brennerova, M., Pieper, D. H., Heipieper, H. J., & Junca, H. (2009) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-009-1868-0 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bass, D. H., Hastings, N. A., & Brown, R. A.
- Corresponding author
- Hastings, Nicholas A
- ORCID
- Brown, Richard A
- Venue
- Journal of Hazardous Materials
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2000-02
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 2-3
- Pages
- 101-119
- ISSN
- 0304-3894 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1984669194
- Cited by
- 120
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 8.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Hazardous Materials (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Groundwater flow and contamination studies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Environmental remediation with nanomaterials
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microbial bioremediation and biosurfactants
- Keywords
- air sparging, groundwater remediation, chlorinated solvents, petroleum contamination, light non-aqueous phase liquids, smear zone, aerobic biodegradation, in situ remediation, performance indicators
- MeSH terms
- Aerobiosis, Air, Biodegradation, Environmental, Environmental Pollution, Forecasting, Humans, Hydrocarbons, Hydrocarbons, Chlorinated, Petroleum, Soil, Soil Pollutants, Solvents, Time Factors, Volatilization, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Water Pollution, Chemical, Hazardous Substances, Databases as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review