复配表面活性剂对DNAPL污染物去除过程的三维电阻率成像

曾志飞; 曹文翰; 刘汉乐

PDF(3069 KB)

中国环境科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (9) : 4935-4944.

水污染与控制

复配表面活性剂对DNAPL污染物去除过程的三维电阻率成像

曾志飞, 曹文翰, 刘汉乐

作者信息 +

Three-dimensional electrical resistivity tomography of DNAPL contaminant removal by mixed surfactants

ZENG Zhi-Fei, CAO Wen-Han, LIU Han-Le

Author information +

文章历史 +

摘要

通过砂柱与三维砂槽实验,结合电阻率成像(ERT),探讨复配表面活性剂溶液(十二烷基硫酸钠和聚乙二醇辛基苯基醚)对TCE污染的去除效果与机制.砂柱实验表明,复配表面活性剂溶液的浓度与配比对TCE的去除表现出显著的协同效应.当复配比α为0.9时,各浓度混合溶液均表现出最佳的去除效果,其中3.0g/L溶液的电阻率变化百分比最高,达到91.37%,其次为1.5g/L(87.07%)和0.5g/L(81.25%).电阻率监测显示,TCE的去除主要集中在溶液注入的第1pv内,此后电阻率趋于平稳,污染物去除过程基本完成.砂槽实验显示,TCE污染区域电阻率差值由初值约60Ω·m升至120~140Ω·m,电阻率差值的变化反映了TCE注入过程中污染物含量的增加;水流注入后,电阻率差值降至30~60Ω·m并局部回升至80~140Ω·m,反映污染物的稀释与重分布.注入复配表面活性剂(3.0g/L,α=0.9)后,污染区域电阻率差值显著降低至初始电阻率差值范围(约20~60Ω·m),去除效果显著.ERT直观揭示了污染物的去除过程,能够实时动态地呈现出污染物在不同纵深和剖面位置的空间分布变化,为污染治理过程提供了可视化、非破坏性、实时性的三维监测手段,展现出其独特的优势.

Abstract

This study investigated the removal effectiveness and mechanism of mixed surfactant solutions composed of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and polyethylene glycol octylphenyl ether (TX100) on trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination through column and three-dimensional sand tank experiments, combined with electrical resistivity tomography (ERT). The column experiments revealed a significant synergistic effect of surfactant concentration and mixing ratio on TCE removal. When the mixing ratio α was 0.9, all tested concentrations exhibited optimal removal performance, with the 3.0g/L solution showing the highest resistivity change percentage (91.37%), followed by 1.5g/L (87.07%) and 0.5g/L (81.25%). Resistivity monitoring indicated that most TCE removal occurred during the first pore volume (pv) of surfactant injection, after which the resistivity stabilized, suggesting the completion of the removal process. In the sand tank experiments, the resistivity difference in the TCE-contaminated region increased from an initial value of approximately 60 Ω·m to 120~140 Ω·m during TCE injection, reflecting the accumulation of contaminants. After water injection, the resistivity difference decreased to 30~60 Ω·m with a localized rebound to 80~140 Ω·m, indicating dilution and redistribution of the contaminant. Following the injection of the mixed surfactant solution (3.0g/L, α = 0.9), the resistivity difference in the contaminated area significantly decreased to the initial range (approximately 20~60 Ω·m), demonstrating a remarkable removal effect. ERT effectively visualized the contaminant removal process in real time, revealing spatial distribution changes of TCE across different depths and cross-sections. This non-invasive, real-time, and three-dimensional monitoring approach highlights the unique advantages of ERT in tracking and evaluating contaminant remediation processes.

导出引用

曾志飞, 曹文翰, 刘汉乐. 复配表面活性剂对DNAPL污染物去除过程的三维电阻率成像[J]. 中国环境科学. 2025, 45(9): 4935-4944

ZENG Zhi-Fei, CAO Wen-Han, LIU Han-Le. Three-dimensional electrical resistivity tomography of DNAPL contaminant removal by mixed surfactants[J]. China Environmental Science. 2025, 45(9): 4935-4944

中图分类号： X523

参考文献

[1] 邓亚平,郑菲,施小清,等.多孔介质中DNAPLs运移行为研究进展 [J].南京大学学报(自然科学), 2016,52(3):409-420. Deng Y P, Zheng F, Shi X Q, et al. Review on the transport of dense non-aqueous phase liquids in porous media [J]. Journal of Nanjing University (Natural Science), 2016,52(3):409-420.
[2] 田亦琦,陈征,王文杰.国内外非水相液体污染场地调查评估及风险管控研究进展 [J].环境污染与防治, 2022,44(10):1386-1391. Tian Y Q, Chen Z, Wang W J. Research progress on investigation, assessment and risk management of non-aqueous phase liquid contaminated sites at home and abroad [J]. Environmental Pollution & Control, 2022,44(10):1386-1391.
[3] 宋美钰,施小清,马春龙,等.复杂DNAPL污染源区溶解相污染通量的升尺度计算 [J].中国环境科学, 2022,42(5):2095-2104. Song M Y, Shi X Q, Ma C L, et al. Upscaling dissolved phase mass flux for complex DNAPL source zones. [J]. China Environmental Science, 2022,42(5):2095-2104.
[4] Wang Q, Jeong S W, Choi H. Removal of trichloroethylene DNAPL trapped in porous media using nanoscale zerovalent iron and bimetallic nanoparticles: Direct observation and quantification [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2012,213-214:299-310.
[5] Liang C, Hsieh C L. Evaluation of surfactant flushing for remediating EDC-tar contamination [J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2015, 177-178:158-166.
[6] 陈梦佳,吴剑锋,宋健,等.表面活性剂强化含水层修复模拟的尺度提升研究 [J].中国环境科学, 2019,39(12):5040-5048. Chen M J, Wu J F, Song J, et al. Upscaling of reactive transport modeling for surfactant-enhanced aquifer remediation [J]. China Environmental Science, 2019,39(12):5040-5048.
[7] Mulligan C N, Yong R N, Gibbs B F. Surfactant-enhanced remediation of contaminated soil: a review [J]. Engineering Geology, 2001,60(1): 371-380.
[8] Zhou W, Zhu L. Enhanced soil flushing of phenanthrene by anionic- nonionic mixed surfactant [J]. Water Research, 2008,42(1):101-108.
[9] 牛明芬,殷智慧,王琦,等.石油污染土壤清洗药剂筛选及效果评价 [J].生态学杂志, 2020,39(7):2302-2308. Niu M F, Yin Z H, Wang Q, et al. Selection of cleansing agents for petroleum-contaminated soil and assessment of their efficiency [J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2020,39(7):2302-2308.
[10] Rongsayamanont W, Tongcumpou C, Phasukarratchai N. Diesel- contaminated soil washing by mixed nonionic surfactant emulsion and seed germination test [J]. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 2020,231(6): 267.
[11] Ahn C K, Kim Y M, Woo S H, et al. Soil washing using various nonionic surfactants and their recovery by selective adsorption with activated carbon [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2008,154(1): 153-160.
[12] Cheng K Y, Wong J W C. Effect of synthetic surfactants on the solubilization and distribution of PAHs in water/soil-water systems [J]. Environmental Technology, 2006,27(8):835-844.
[13] Liu J W, Wei K H, Xu S W, et al. Surfactant-enhanced remediation of oil-contaminated soil and groundwater: A review [J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2021,756:144142.
[14] 姜迪瀚,董军,梁雪,等.烷基糖苷复配体系对地下水中四氯乙烯的增溶作用 [J].环境化学, 2022,41(12):3916-3924. Jiang D H, Dong J, Liang X, et al. Solubilization of tetrachloroethylene in groundwater by alkyl glycoside compounded system [J]. Environmental Chemistry, 2022,41(12):3916-3924.
[15] 李薇,王信粉,时利香,等.表面活性剂复配体系修复芘污染土壤实验 [J].化工进展, 2021,40(6):3526-3535. Li W, Wang X F, Shi L X, et al. Remediation of pyrene-contaminated soil using mixed surfactants solution [J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2021,40(6):3526-3535.
[16] 张泽霆,陈英,陈东,等.化学洗涤法修复石油污染土壤研究现状 [J].油气储运, 2019,38(1):20-25,50. Zhang Z T, Chen Y, Chen D, et al. Research status on the remediation of petroleum contaminated soil by chemical cleaning [J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2019,38(1):20-25,50.
[17] 朱柏伟,石佳月,刘世宾.表面活性剂增溶典型疏水性有机污染物性能评价 [J].环境化学, 2025,44(3):1-12. Zhu B W, Shi J Y, Liu S B. Evaluation of typical hydrophobic organic pollutant solubility enhancement by surfactants [J]. Environmental Chemistry, 2025,44 (3):1-12.
[18] 宋泽贤,吴宜霖,张腾飞,等.表面活性剂SDBS和Tween 80强化过硫酸盐氧化后土壤中石油烃的缺氧生物降解 [J].环境工程学报, 2023,17(3):900-908. Song Z X, Wu Y L, Zhang T F, et al. Surfactants SDBS and Tween 80 enhance anoxic biodegradation of petroleum hydrocarbons (PHC) in soil pretreated with persulfate [J]. Chinese Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2023,17(3):900-908.
[19] Jones G, Sentenac P, Zielinski M. Desiccation cracking detection using 2-D and 3-D electrical resistivity tomography: Validation on a flood embankment [J]. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 2014,106:196-211.
[20] Hussain Y, Campos J E G, Borges W R, et al. Hydrogeophysical characterization of fractured aquifers for groundwater exploration in the Federal District of Brazil [J]. Applied Sciences, 2022,12(5):2509.
[21] Alesse B, Orlando L, Palladini L. Non-invasive lab test in the monitoring of vadose zone contaminated by light non-aqueous phase liquid [J]. Geophysical Prospecting, 2019,67(8):2161-2175.
[22] 柳迪,宋权威,李玲,等.高密度电阻率法监测高压旋喷修复PAHs污染现场试验研究 [J].中国环境科学, 2023,43(11):5933-5943. Liu D, Song Q W, Li L, et al. Field study on electrical resistivity tomography to monitor high-pressure rotary jet repairing PAHs pollution [J]. China Environmental Science, 2023,43(11):5933-5943.
[23] Wang Y, Xu Y, Nai C, et al. Assessment of chromium waste contamination by electrical resistivity tomography: A case study [J]. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 2019,24(1): 163-167.
[24] Boeije C S, Portois C, Schmutz M, et al. Tracking a foam front in a 3D, heterogeneous porous medium [J]. Transport in Porous Media, 2020, 131(1):23-42.
[25] 窦旭强,韩东梅,曹天正,等.直流电阻率法在洋戴河平原海水入侵识别中的应用 [J].海洋地质前沿, 2020,36(8):65-73. Dou X Q, Han D M, Cao T Z, et al. Assessment of seawater intrusion in the coastal plain aquifers of Yang-Dai River using DC-resistivity methods [J]. Marine Geology Frontiers, 2020,36(8):65-73.
[26] Chambers J E, Wilkinson P B, Wealthall G P, et al. Hydrogeophysical imaging of deposit heterogeneity and groundwater chemistry changes during DNAPL source zone bioremediation [J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2010,118:43-61.
[27] Deng Y P, Shi X, Xu H, et al. Quantitative assessment of electrical resistivity tomography for monitoring DNAPLs migration - Comparison with high-resolution light transmission visualization in laboratory sandbox [J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2017,544:254-266.
[28] Koohbor B, Deparis J, Leroy P, et al. DNAPL flow and complex electrical resistivity evolution in saturated porous media: A coupled numerical simulation [J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2022, 248:104003.
[29] Aizebeokhai A P. 2D and 3D geoelectrical resistivity imaging: Theory and field design [J]. Scientific Research and Essays, 2010,5(23): 3592-3605.
[30] Aizebeokhai A P, Olayinka A I, Singh V S. Application of 2D and 3D geoelectrical resistivity imaging for engineering site investigation in a crystalline basement terrain, Southwestern Nigeria [J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2010,61:1481-1492.
[31] 刘汉乐,周启友,吴华桥.轻非水相液体污染过程的高密度电阻率成像法室内监测 [J].地球物理学报, 2008,51(4):1246-1254. Liu H L, Zhou Q Y, Wu H Q. Laboratorial monitoring of the LNAPL contamination process using electrical resistivity tomography [J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2008,51(4):1246-1254.
[32] Zhou Q Y, Shimada J, Sato A. Three-dimensional soil resistivity inversion using patching method [J]. Journal of the Japan Society of Engineering Geology, 1999,39(6):524-532.
[33] 李莎莎,孙玉焕,胡学锋,等.表面活性剂对土壤中石油类污染物的洗脱效果研究 [J].土壤, 2016,48(3):516-522. Li S S, Sun Y H, Hu X F, et al. Elution effects of surfactants on petroleum contaminants in soil [J]. Soils, 2016,48(3):516-522.
[34] 袁笑,相雷雷,赵振华,等.表面活性剂增溶洗脱土壤中多环芳烃的效果研究 [J].环境科学研究, 2022,35(8):1885-1892. Yuan X, Xiang L L, Zhao Z H, et al. Surfactant-enhanced solubilization and elution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soil [J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 2022,35(8):1885-1892.
[35] 程洲,吴吉春,徐红霞,等.DNAPL在透镜体及表面活性剂作用下的运移研究 [J].中国环境科学, 2014,34(11):2888-2896. Cheng Z, Wu J C, Xu H X, et al. Investigation of the migration characteristic of DNAPL in aquifer with lenses and under the action of surfactant flushing [J]. China Environmental Science, 2014,34(11): 2888-2896.
[36] 郑菲,高燕维,施小清,等.地下水流速及介质非均质性对重非水相流体运移的影响 [J].水利学报, 2015,46(8):925-933. Zheng F, Gao Y W, Shi X Q, et al. Influence of groundwater flow velocity and geological heterogeneity on DNAPL migration in saturated porous media [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2015, 46(8):925-933.
[37] Kueper B H, Stroo H F, Vogel C M, et al. Chlorinated solvent source zone remediation [M]. New York: Springer, 2014.
[38] 邓亚平,张烨,施小清,等.非均质裂隙介质中重非水相流体运移 [J]..水科学进展, 2015,26(5):722-730. Deng Y P, Zhang Y, Shi X Q, et al. Study on the migration of dense non-aqueous phase liquids in heterogeneous fractured media [J]. Advances in Water Science, 2015,26(5):722-730.
[39] Wipfler E L, Ness M, Breedveld G D, et al. Infiltration and redistribution of LNAPL into unsaturated layered porous media [J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2004,71(1-4):47-66.
[40] 张振宇,许伟伟,邓亚平,等.三氯乙烯污染土壤的复电阻率特征和频谱参数研究 [J].地学前缘, 2021,28(5):114-124. Zhang Z Y, Xu W W, Deng Y P, et al. Complex resistivity properties and spectral parameters of TCE contaminated soils [J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2021,28(5):114-124.
[41] 赵少桦,董艳辉,李学兰,等.地下水污染物浓度与电阻率映射关系的构建 [J].中国科学院大学学报, 2018,35(6):814-821. Zhao S H, Dong Y H, Li X L, et al. Establishment of the relationship between contamination concentration and electrical resistivity in shallow aquifer based on groundwater numerical modeling [J]. Journal of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2018,35(6):814-821.
[42] 郭琼泽,张烨,姜蓓蕾,等.表面活性剂增强修复地下水中PCE的砂箱实验及模拟 [J].中国环境科学, 2018,38(9):3398-3405. Guo Q Z, Zhang Y, Jiang B L, et al. Experiment and numerical simulation of surfactant-enhanced aquifer remediation in PCE contaminated laboratory sandbox [J]. China Environmental Science, 2018,38(9):3398-3405.
[43] 卢文喜,罗建男,辛欣,等.表面活性剂强化的DNAPLs污染含水层修复过程的数值模拟 [J].地球科学(中国地质大学学报), 2012,37 (5):1075-1081. Lu W X, Luo J N, Xin X, et al. Numerical simulation of surfactant enhanced aquifer remediation processes at DNAPLs contaminated aquifer [J]. Earth Science-Journal of China University of Geosciences, 2012,37(5):1075-1081.
[44] 伍斌,杨宾,李慧颖,等.表面活性剂强化抽出处理含水层中DNAPL污染物的去除特征 [J].环境工程学报, 2014,8(5):1956- 1964. Wu B, Yang B, Li H Y, et al. Ｒemoval characteristic of DNAPL contaminants in surfactant enhanced equifer remediation [J]. Chinese Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2014,8(5):1956-1964.
[45] 肖鹏飞,宋玉珍,王剑桥.表面活性剂对东北黑土中苯并[a] 芘的增溶洗脱作用 [J].土壤通报, 2014,45(3):743-748. Xiao P F, Song Y Z, Wang J Q. The solubilization and elution of benzo[a] yrene from black soils of Northeast China by surfactants [J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2014,45(3):743-748.