Bioremediation Case

There has been contamination found in the groundwater surrounding all four towns. The groundwater is contaminated with VOCs, trichloroethene (TCE), ethylene dibromide (EDB), carbon tetrachloride (CCI4), perchloroethylene (PCE), benzene, vinal chloride, 1,1,2,2-TeCA, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, manganese, thallium, lead, toluene, and RDX. “Ethylene dibromide is especially worry some because it was found upwelling in cranberry bogs located in Falmouth and Mashpee (militarycontamination)”. Where it would was stored in the cranberries skin. “Falmouth being the most affected area losing twenty five percent of its possible drinking water supply (wr.usgs)”. Although the plumes are deep down in the aquifer. “People could be at risk if they accidentally drink the water or come into direct contact with the contaminated groundwater (militarycontamination)”. The way towns keep the residents from coming in contact with the possible risks of

Water contamination is vastly becoming an alarming issue across the world. We rely on clean water to survive, yet right now we are heading towards a water crisis. Changing climate patterns are threatening lakes and rivers, and key sources that we tap for drinking water are being overdrawn or tainted with pollution (www.nrdc.org). Clean and plentiful water is the cornerstone of prosperous communities. Yet as we enter the 21st century, swelling demand and changing climate patterns are

1) The remedy chosen must attain a degree of cleanup that assures the protection of human health and environment. 2) The hazardous substances that will remain after the cleanup, they must meet the applicable and/or relevant and appropriate requirements under federal and state law (ARARs). 3) The remedy chosen must utilize permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum extent applicable. 4) There must be cost effective response, taking into consideration total long-and short-term costs of the actions. And 5) It must be in accordance with the NCP to a practicable

To address the issue of unregulated fertilizer pollution in water supplies, Glennon quantitatively analyzes the amount of fertilizer that is used in the United States: “According to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the agricultural industry annually applies 110 billion pounds of fertilizer to one-eighth of the landmass of the continental United States” (69). With this statistic, Glennon creates opportunities in his piece to include new and compelling evidence that demonstrates the dangers of water pollution and its impacts on the nation. Along with this statistic concerning fertilizers, Glennon further expands his claim to describe the issue of runoff from other chemicals, such as perchlorate, in water supplies: “…the contamination plume from the Kerr-McGee plant contains 20 million pounds of perchlorate dissolved in more than 9 billion gallons of water” (69). By including the words “million” and “billion” in his data about chemical runoff, Glennon intimidates the reader into believing that these contamination issues affect populations on an enormous scale. He also frequently uses authoritative figures to strengthen his claim: “[A 2004 EPA report] alarmingly predicted that as many as 355,000 hazardous waste sites would require cleanup over the next thirty years, costing $250 billion” (75). Glennon attempts to alarm the reader and expose the detrimental costs of water pollution and its widespread consequences. However, while Glennon usually cites his evidence, he also includes information from unknown sources, which causes the reader to question the validity of some of his claims. In one argument concerning TCE, another industrial chemical, Glennon declares the dangers of the chemical without

Remediating Agricultural Water Contamination: Problem, Solution, and Barriers Paper Student Name COMM 2367 MWF 9:10 Instructor Name September 29, 2012

The clean up phase of the railroad avenue site has used solvent flushing for enhanced in-situ bioremediation in hot spot PCE zones and dissolved-phase plume. The site is also monitored at least

In 1998, Biopure Corporation is one of the three legitimate contenders in the emerging field of “blood substitutes”. Biopure has invested $200M on the R&D on blood substitutes in the past with its primary goal being the development of a human blood substitute ( Hemopure) but Its entry into animal market (Oxyglobin) had been some

 Now we have established what the harms and causes are for water pollution, we move on to the question of why they are not being cleaned up?  That is easily answered in one word: money.  It is estimated to cost between 20 to 30 million dollars to clean up a minor waste spill into the ocean. (AED 1)  Another situation that arises is that the companies and individuals responsible for this refuse to pay for the clean up.  They would rather fight the issue in court or litigation spending 40 to 80 percent of the total cost of the site clean up in court fees, transaction

The key issue is to determine when Oxyglobin should be introduced to the market without jeopardizing Hemopure’s potential and how it should be marketed.

Bioremediation is extremely cost effective. It is less expensive than other technologies because the cost of production of remedial techniques is negligible in comparison to other available remedial technologies. This is mainly because microorganisms are naturally present in the environment so the cost of production gets diminished.

As opposed to depending on organisms and their flexibility in achieving bioremediation of polluted environments, plants either alone or in combination with microorganisms have been used for this reason. The idea of utilizing plants to help with the cleanup of contaminated ecosystems is not new. About 300 years ago, plants were proposed for utilization in the treatment of waste water. Vegetation-based bioremediation shows potential for aggregating, immobilizing and changing a low level of persistent contaminants (Rayu et al., 2012). The phytoremediation approach has several advantages including decreased expense, public acceptance and in particular the capacity of simultaneous evacuation of organic and inorganic contaminants. Phytoremediation might additionally be utilized as a last cleaning venture in combination with other microorganism driven treatment technologies, a technique called microbe-assisted phytoremediation. Regardless of its positive aspects, the commercial application of phytoremediation is slow. According to experts (Rayu et al., 2012), this is because of the following limitations: (1) lack of or slow development of plants at polluted locations which results into low viability of phytoremediation, (2) the proficiency is constrained by the diminished capacity of plants to enter in the soil through their root system and access the hazardous wastes, (3) the time needed for viable phytoremediation is frequently long with

The two general approaches to bioremediation approaches are environmental modification, such as through nutrient application and aeration, and the addiction of appropriate xenobiotic degraders by seeding. The end products of affective bioremediation include water and carbon dioxide that are nontoxic and can be accommodated without harm to the environment. Using bioremediation to remove pollutants is inexpensive compared to physical methods for decontaminating the environment. Whereas conventional technologies call for moving large quantities of toxic waste-contaminated soil to incinerators, bioremediation

Phytoremediation is the process by which plants and trees are used to remove or stabilize hazardous pollutants that exist in soil, sediments, surface water or groundwater. The EPA (environmental protection agency) estimates that more than 30,000 sites in the U.S. are in need of environmental treatment, and a great number of these sites are contaminated with highly toxic metals. Abandoned or under-used commercial and industrial facilities, termed as “brownfields,” are a major contributor to this environment concern. “Brownfields” pose significant health risks to nearby residential populations and threaten the plant and animal life close to them. Phytoremediation provides a very

Without treatment waste water from both municipal and industrial sources would have a significant impact on the environment, to protect the water environment the waste water must first be appropriately treated and processed. Water comes from many various sources and therefore the pollutants found in the water include a wide array of chemicals and pathogens, that all come with different physical chemistries (Rao, Senthilkumar, et al., 2016, p. 2). Eutrophication is the process in which waters experience excessive inputs of nutrients, namely nitrogen and phosphorus from wastewater discharges. Waste water treatment does focus on reducing the levels of nitrogen and phosphorus present in their effluent, as these contribute to nutrient loading in the environment. The combinations of tertiary treatments needed depends on the uses of the water the effluent is discharged into and how sensitive this area is deemed. The municipal waste water treatment process does vary slightly depending on many factors but it is essentially a three stage treatment process (Anand, 2011). The primary treatment stage objectives are to remove organic and inorganic solids through sedimentation and the skimming of materials floating on the surface of the effluent. During the primary treatment some organic nitrogen and organic phosphorus that are associated with solids can be removed (Food and Agriculture Organizations of the United Nations, 1992). Secondary treatment involves bacterial decomposition of both

Development of a TMDL is an iterative process that involves modeling and generation of allocation scenarios that meet the water quality criteria. The calibrated HSPF model was used to develop various pollutant reduction scenarios and the final TMDL allocation. Each scenario consists of a combination of load reductions from direct deposition and/or land based bacteria sources. The modeled scenarios provide an insight to the significance of different bacteria sources in each TMDL watershed and TMDL allocation possibilities. The TMDLs were developed based on the Virginia State standard for E. coli. The DEQ freshwater primary contact recreational use E. coli standard states that the calendar month geometric-mean concentration shall not exceed 126 cfu/100 ml, or that a maximum single sample concentration of E. coli shall not exceed 235 cfu/100 ml more than 10% of the time. A