Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 231

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Chlorinated Ethene Source Remediation: Lessons Learned

Stroo, Hans F., Leeson, Andrea, Marqusee, Jeffrey A., Johnson, Paul C., Ward, C. Herb, Kavanaugh, Michael C., Sale, Tom C., Newell, Charles J., Pennell, Kurt D., Lebrón, Carmen A., Unger, Marvin·2012·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Chlorinated solvents such as trichloroethene (TCE) and tetrachloroethene (PCE) are widespread groundwater contaminants often released as dense nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs). These contaminants are difficult to remediate, particularly their source zones. This review summarizes the progress made in improving DNAPL source zone remediation over the past decade, and is structured to highlight the important practical lessons learned for improving DNAPL source zone remediation. Experience has shown that complete restoration is rare, and alternative metrics such as mass discharge are often useful for assessing the performance of partial restoration efforts. Experience also has shown that different technologies are needed for different times and locations, and that deliberately combining technologies may improve overall remedy performance. Several injection-based technologies are capable of removing a large fraction of the total contaminant mass, and reducing groundwater concentrations and mass discharge by 1 to 2 orders of magnitude. Thermal treatment can remove even more mass, but even these technologies generally leave some contamination in place. Research on better delivery techniques and characterization technologies will likely improve treatment, but managers should anticipate that source treatment will leave some contamination in place that will require future management.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es204714w

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 231

Metadata

Authors
Stroo, H. F., Leeson, A., Marqusee, J. A., Johnson, P. C., Ward, C. H., Kavanaugh, M. C., Sale, T. C., Newell, C. J., Pennell, K. D., Lebrón, C. A., & Unger, M.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2012-05-18
Volume
46
Issue
12
Pages
6438-6447
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2333206263
Cited by
231
References
1
Type
other
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Chlorinated Ethene Source Remediation: Lessons Learned. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es204714w
The paper
Stroo, H. F., Leeson, A., Marqusee, J. A., Johnson, P. C., Ward, C. H., Kavanaugh, M. C., Sale, T. C., Newell, C. J., Pennell, K. D., Lebrón, C. A., & Unger, M. (2012). Chlorinated Ethene Source Remediation: Lessons Learned. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es204714w

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.