Technological innovation environmental protection

U.S. EPA, "Case Study of Ground Water Extraction with Air Stripping, Eau Claire Municipal WeU Eield Site," in Innovative OperationalTreatment Technologies for Application to Supefund Sites Nine Case Studies, prepared by T. Pheiffer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1990. 

Venosa, A.D. and Swanson, G.R., Innovative Technology Evaluation Report for the High Energy Electron Injection (E-Beamj Technology, EPA 600-R-02-066, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, 2002. 

Table 1 gives cost and maintenance information for the frozen barrier installed as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). Table 2 gives physical design data for the ORNL project. 

Based on data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration, the total cost for PF extraction was estimated to be 307/kg of trichloroethene (TCE) removed. This demonstration was conducted over a 4-week period in August and September of 1992 at an industrial site in Somerville, New Jersey. The cost estimate includes expenses associated with both PF and soil vapor extraction. Major cost factors were labor (29%), capital equipment (22%), VOC emission control (19%), site preparation (11%), and residuals management (10%) (D10589F, p. v). 

According to a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) report, treatment costs for the BioGenesis soil washing technology are affected by the following factors ... 

Based on data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ERA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration program, the cost for using this technology to treat liquid wastes was calculated. Treatment costs vary with the system utilization rates. These cost estimates were 2000 per ton (1994 U.S. dollars) for a utilization rate of 60% 1850 per ton for a rate of 70% and 1670 per ton for a rate of 80%. The site preparation cost was 127,400. The feed rates used for this analysis were assumed to be 2.2 kg/min of wastewater and 0.485 kg/min of waste oil. The waste streams were simultaneously injected into the reactor. Labor proved to be the most important element affecting cost (52%), followed by site preparation (15%), supplies (12%), and startup/mobilization (12%) (D187160, p. 19). 

In April, 1988, DSM technology was demonstrated under the Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA s) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program. Since that... 

The patented Dual Auger system has been accepted into the Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA s) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration program. The technology has also been approved by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and demonstrated by the Department of Energy (DOE). Dual Auger is commercially available and has been used in full-scale applications. 

Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Emerging Technology Program. 

---