Mobile incinerators

Only two processes, high-temperature pyrolysis and mobile incineration, have proved effective for soil decontamination and are considered to be commercially viable. Both involve heating the contaminated soil to a high temperatnre, which is costly in terms of energy use and materials handling. There are substantial opportunities for innovation and development of processes for the separation of eontaminants from soils and the in-situ treatment of contaminated soils. Examples of each are given in the following subsections. 

Availability of equipment, specialists, and materials No services capacities required No special equipment, material, or specialists required cap materials available within 20 miles Needs readily available specialists to install and monitor vapor extraction system need treatment plant operators cap materials available within 20 miles Need a mobile incinerator and trained operators need treatment plant operators closest source of incinerator is 50 miles from site... 

In the summer of 1987, the Oxygen Combnstion System (OCS) was used to enhance the performance of the U.S. EPA s Mobile Incineration System. The OCS, along with other system modifications, helped double the feed rate of the MIS. According to the ERA, material processing costs were reduced from 2800 per ton before OCS installation to 1100 per ton after installation... 

The vendor estimates that treatment costs for a Bio-Raptor soil remediation would range from 15 to 100 per ton of treated soil compared with treatment costs of 100 to 400 per ton for other applicable technologies such as landfill disposal, mobile incineration, and stabilization. The vendor states that typical treatment costs using Bio-Raptor system are 3 per ton for the treatment of manure and 2.70 per ton to reduce odor, pathogens, and waste volume in yard waste (D204637, pp. 16, 28). 

We do not consider on-site, mobile incinerators for the following reason. Mobile incinerators are currently licensed to burn only PCB contaminated liquids, but EPA officials anticipate final approval to bum PCB contaminated solids by 1986 [ 4 ]. Hence, we cannot, concentrate the extract any further if a mobile incinerator were to be used. Tbe mobile incinerators appear to have a capacity of about 3.6 x 10 kg/day [5 ]. To incinerate the concentrated extract produced by solvent extraction process, in excess of 2700 days of continuous operation of a mobile incinerator would be required. To complete the incineration in a single working season (see below), many mobile incinerators would be required. The cost of a mobile incinerator has been estimated to be about 2 million dollars [6 ]. Applying the criteria of completing the cleanup in one season (this point will be discussed later), it appears as though mobile incinerators are unlikely to be economically advantageous. Hence, we eliminate this alternative. 

J.J. Yezzi, Jr., J.E. Brugger, I.Wilder, F. Freestone, R. A. Miller, C. Pfiommer, Jr., and R. Lovell, Results of the Initial Trial Bum of the EPAORD Mobile Incineration System , in Proceedings of the ASME National Waste Processing Conference (1984), pp. 1-30. 

In another mobile incinerator, oxy/fuel was successfully used, instead of the conventional air/fuel system, to meet very stringent particulate emissions regulations at a Superfund cleanup site where the soil contained a significant amount of sand.22... 

Griffith, C. R., PCB and PCP destruction using oxygen in mobile incinerators, in Proceedings of the 1990 Incineration Conference, San Diego, May 14-18, 1990. 

This section discusses some actual examples of using OEC in MSW incinerators, mobile incinerators, transportable incinerators, and fixed incinerators. 

FIGURE 8.6 Mobile incineration system block diagram. 

Operating Data from Two Superfund Sites Using a Mobile Incinerator... 

Baukal, C. E., Schafer, L. L., and Papadelis, E. P., PCB cleanup using an oxygen/fuel-fired mobile incinerator, Environ. Prog., 13(3), 188, 1994. 

Rotary kilns (e.g., cement kilns), metal-recovery and smelting furnaces, mobile incinerators, and industrial boilers are primarily used to incinerate hazardous wastes. The obvious benefits of combustion of waste as fuel are the recovery of energy from the waste and the conservation of fossil fuels. Because the kiln and furnace operators are paid to take in the waste, rather than having to pay for fuel, also create economic incentives. Mobile incinerators are most commonly used for soil decontamination projects, and can be moved from site to site once the job is completed. 

Baukal CE, Schafer LL, Papadelis EP. 1994. PCB cleanup using an oxygen/fiiel-fired mobile incinerator. Environmental Progress 13(3) 188-191. 

Public Perception The public usually is wary of hazardous waste incineration. There may be public concern that a mobile incinerator will be established at a site and subsequently used to incinerate waste from other sites. The public must be assured that, most often, mobile incinerators are used only for single site cleanups and that incineration can be an effective way to treat explosives waste. 

Destruction of Dioxin-Contaminated Solids and Liquids by Mobile Incineration... 

At that time, the design of the mobile incinerator and existing regulatory concepts prevented incineration of dioxin wastes above 1 ppm. However, redesign and operation of the incinerator in 1985 proved these concerns invalid (17). 

Incineration of dioxin wastes is the most versatile destruction process of those presently available. The mobile incinerator treated a combination of soil, sludge, and solvents... 

Concurrent with these efforts In Eastern Missouri, EPA embarked on an accelerated research and development program to find permanent solutions to the dioxin contamination problem. Paramount to this effort Is a project whereby the Agency s mobile Incinerator was transported from Its home base In Edison, New Jersey, to the Denney Farm site In Southwest Missouri in December 1984. 

The mobile Incinerator passed a series of trial burns (conducted between February 25 and April 8, 1985) and attained destruction and removal efficiencies exceeding 99.999 percent as required by RCRA for 2,3,7,8-TCDD-contamlnated materials burned In the system. Furthermore, the waste process streams, consisting of kiln ash and quench water, were successfully delisted. 

Community Relations Plan, EPA Mobile Incinerator Project," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Public Affairs,... 

R. D. Kleopfer, F. J. Freestone, R. Hazel, and P. desRosiers, "Destruction of Dioxin Containing Wastes In a Mobile Incineration System," Chapter 34 in Chlorinated Dioxins and Dibenzofurans... 

Eglin Air Force Base. The goals of the test effort were to evaluate the effect of time and temperature on 2,3,7,8-TCDD rernoval efficiency and to establish the importance of soil type. The samples were selected by the Air Force based on results of site surveys to yield high contamination levels in order to investigate a broad range of treatability. This testing was an extension of earlier testing performed for the EPA on two dioxin-contaminated soil samples from Missouri to support EPA s mobile incinerator trial burn in 1985 (5). 

The histories of the stockpile program, the non-stockpile program, and the use of mobile incinerators in hazardous waste site cleanups demonstrate that classical incineration often generates strong public opposition. There are concerns over the impact on local communities of the potential emission of small amounts of chemical agents not destroyed, as well as low concentrations of chemicals that are inevitably formed inside incinerators (e.g., polychlorinated dibenzodioxins) (Greenpeace, 2001 EPA, 1998 Sierra Club, 2001). 

Development of the EPA Mobile Incineration System began in the mid-1970s as a research effort to demonstrate the ability to incinerate oil and hazardous materials on-site. Following several years of design and construction, a unit was tested in 1981. 

---