Thermal Desorption Videos
newest 100 thermal desorption videos / thermal desorption widgets / media rss:

At some point, citizens involved in watershed protection face the question - How do we pay for this? Most quickly realize that there are not enough grant funds to meet the needs for water quality projects. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund is a large, flexible, and largely untapped source of funding for watershed projects. It provides over $5 billion each year for traditional stormwater and wastewater projects, as well as over $200 million for nonpoint source projects, such as land conservation, agricultural best management practices, and clean-up of contaminated sites. Join us to hear more about how you can access the Clean Water State Revolving Fund to protect your watershed. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/tio/owcwasrf_071608/

At some point, citizens involved in watershed protection face the question - How do we pay for this? Most quickly realize that there are not enough grant funds to meet the needs for water quality projects. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund is a large, flexible, and largely untapped source of funding for watershed projects. It provides over $5 billion each year for traditional stormwater and wastewater projects, as well as over $200 million for nonpoint source projects, such as land conservation, agricultural best management practices, and clean-up of contaminated sites. Join us to hear more about how you can access the Clean Water State Revolving Fund to protect your watershed. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/tio/owcwasrf_071608/

Many sites with chlorinated organic contamination in groundwater have gone through extensive remedial evaluations and actions. After years of operating high energy processes, their effectiveness has begun to diminish without remedial objectives being met. Other effective remedial alternatives can be applied; however, there are difficulties transitioning these sites from these high energy systems to other low energy remedial alternatives and eventually to Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA). This training on the ITRC Technical and Regulatory Guidance for Enhanced Attenuation: Chlorinated Organics (EACO-1, 2008) describes the transition (the bridge) between aggressive remedial actions and MNA and vise versa. Enhanced attenuation (EA) is the application of technologies that minimize energy input and are sustainable in order to reduce contaminant loading and/or increase the attenuation capacity of a contaminated plume to progress sites towards established remedial objectives. Contaminant loading and attenuation capacity are fundamental to sound decisions for remediation of groundwater contamination. This training explains how a decision framework which, when followed, allows for a smooth transition between more aggressive remedial technologies to sustainable remedial alternatives and eventually to Monitored Natural Attenuation. This training will demonstrate how this decision framework allows regulators and practitioners to integrate Enhanced Attenuation into the remedial decision process. As our experience and knowledge grows around the implementation of MNA, the EA process will be considered an important management tool for optimizing site remedies and moving sites to final completion. This approach is consistent with the current regulatory environment and can be accommodated within a broad range of regulatory programs such as CERCLA and State dry cleaner regulations. This new framework and decision process will accelerate the environmental clean-up progress on a national scale and reduce overall costs, while still providing protection to human health and the environment. For reference during the training class, participants should download and print a copy of the decision flow chart, Figure 2-1 on page 10 of the ITRC Technical and Regulatory Guidance for Enhanced Attenuation: Chlorinated Organics (EACO-1, 2008) and available as a 1-page PDF at http://www.cluin.org/conf/itrc/eaco/ITRC-EACO-DecisionFlowchart.pdf. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/itrc/eaco_062608/

Many sites with chlorinated organic contamination in groundwater have gone through extensive remedial evaluations and actions. After years of operating high energy processes, their effectiveness has begun to diminish without remedial objectives being met. Other effective remedial alternatives can be applied; however, there are difficulties transitioning these sites from these high energy systems to other low energy remedial alternatives and eventually to Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA). This training on the ITRC Technical and Regulatory Guidance for Enhanced Attenuation: Chlorinated Organics (EACO-1, 2008) describes the transition (the bridge) between aggressive remedial actions and MNA and vise versa. Enhanced attenuation (EA) is the application of technologies that minimize energy input and are sustainable in order to reduce contaminant loading and/or increase the attenuation capacity of a contaminated plume to progress sites towards established remedial objectives. Contaminant loading and attenuation capacity are fundamental to sound decisions for remediation of groundwater contamination. This training explains how a decision framework which, when followed, allows for a smooth transition between more aggressive remedial technologies to sustainable remedial alternatives and eventually to Monitored Natural Attenuation. This training will demonstrate how this decision framework allows regulators and practitioners to integrate Enhanced Attenuation into the remedial decision process. As our experience and knowledge grows around the implementation of MNA, the EA process will be considered an important management tool for optimizing site remedies and moving sites to final completion. This approach is consistent with the current regulatory environment and can be accommodated within a broad range of regulatory programs such as CERCLA and State dry cleaner regulations. This new framework and decision process will accelerate the environmental clean-up progress on a national scale and reduce overall costs, while still providing protection to human health and the environment. For reference during the training class, participants should download and print a copy of the decision flow chart, Figure 2-1 on page 10 of the ITRC Technical and Regulatory Guidance for Enhanced Attenuation: Chlorinated Organics (EACO-1, 2008) and available as a 1-page PDF at http://www.cluin.org/conf/itrc/eaco/ITRC-EACO-DecisionFlowchart.pdf. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/itrc/eaco_062608/

Do you manage a Superfund landfill site? Is it producing methane gas? Have you wondered how to evaluate and responsibly manage the landfill methane gas? During this training we will discuss resources available to project managers to assess methane productivity at Superfund landfills as well as potential ways to use it as a source of energy or flare it, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions. EPA has a wealth of knowledge and experience with landfill gas that may have applicability to Superfund sites. This training will provide a brief overview of the tools available to evaluate, use and flare landfill methane gas and how they may apply to Superfund sites. Keep in mind that Superfund landfills are typically older, closed sites where codisposal of hazardous and municipal waste has occurred. The emissions will be different from a typical municipal landfill. Because of the age and types of waste, the volume of gas is likely less and concentration of hazardous air pollutants is likely higher. Therefore, before proceeding with exploring economics of energy recovery, the amount and characteristics of the landfill gas need to be evaluated. We will discuss how to conduct an evaluation using EPA's Guidance for Evaluating Landfill Gas Emissions From Closed or Abandoned Facilities (EPA-600/R-05/123a). We will also identify options for controlling emissions through either flaring the gas or recovery for its energy potential. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/tio/methane_062408/

The Superfund Basic Research Program (SBRP), in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Technology Innovation Program, presents the 2008 edition of Risk e Learning: "Bioavailability - Metals, Organics, and Use at Hazardous Waste Sites". This series of online seminars focuses on the science and policy issues of incorporating bioavailability into risk and exposure assessments. Largely drawing from the successful SBRP Bioavailability Workshop: "Assessing Bioavailability as a Determinant of Pollutant Exposure" held in Tampa, FL (February 2008), the web seminar series features SBRP-funded and other academic researchers and EPA senior staff. The first seminar "Bioavailability of Metals" was May 28th, the second seminar "Bioavailability of Organic Compounds: Methods and Case Studies" was June 11th, and the third seminar "Use of Bioavailability Information at hazardous Waste Sites" is June 18th. This, the third of the three sessions, will feature Mr. Mike Beringer, U.S. EPA Region VII toxicologist, and Dr. Mark Maddaloni, U.S. EPA Region II toxicologist. Site-specific bioavailability is an important consideration in determining potential threats to human health that are posed by metals-contaminated soils at waste sites. It is important to consider bioavailability because metals may be absorbed to a lesser or greater extent following ingestion of contaminated soils as compared to the fraction absorbed in the studies used to establish toxicity values, such as a reference dose or a cancer slope factor. U.S. EPA's Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) has led an effort to develop guidance on evaluating and incorporating bioavailability adjustments into human health risk assessments. The guidance outlines a decision framework for deciding when to collect and incorporate site-specific bioavailability information; recommends a process for documenting the data collection, analysis, and site-specific implementation of a validated method; as well as provides recommended method validation and regulatory acceptance criteria for evaluating alternative methodologies. OSRTI has used these criteria to evaluate two separate methodologies for predicting the relative bioavailability of lead in soil and soil-like materials. OSRTI has determined that both an in vivo swine bioavailability bioassay and an in vitro bioaccessibility assay have sufficiently satisfied these criteria. Thus, they are considered regulatory methodologies appropriate for determining the relative bioavailability of lead for quantitative use in site-specific risk assessments. Mr. Beringer's presentation will summarize the bioavailability guidance document and the basis for OSRTI's decision regarding the two methodologies for predicting lead relative bioavailability. EPA's bioavailability guidance provides a framework for using bioavailability/bioaccessibility data to inform and refine site specific risk assessments. In the case of lead, which benefits from well-characterized studies on the absorption of this metal when bound to soil, the guidance is highly prescriptive. For many other metals that have limited characterization of their absorption profiles, the guidance is more open to interpretation. The bioavailability guidance will be "test driven" so to speak in a situation where the roadmap is less detailed. In this presentation Dr. Maddaloni will go over a case study involving a RCRA Corrective Action site with arsenic-contaminated soil. The session will be moderated by Dr. Fred Pfaender, Professor of Environmental Microbiology, Environmental Sciences and Engineering, and Public Health. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/tio/bioavailability3_061808/

EPA recently released a new Web site where water quality managers and the public can go to view a wide range of state-reported water quality information. This Web site, sometimes referred to as ATTAINS, combines two formerly separate databases: the National Assessment Database and the National Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Tracking System. The National Assessment Database is for water quality assessment information reported by the states under Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, while the National TMDL Tracking System is for impaired waters information reported by the states under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. ATTAINS gives the “full story” showing which waters have been assessed, which are impaired, and which are being (or have been) restored. This Web site allows the user to view dynamic, continuously updated tables and charts that summarize state-reported information for the nation as a whole, for individual states and waters, and for the ten EPA Regions. Visit ATTAINS at http://www.epa.gov/waters/ir. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/tio/owattains_061808/

The Superfund Basic Research Program (SBRP), in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Technology Innovation Program, presents the 2008 edition of Risk e Learning: "Bioavailability - Metals, Organics, and Use at Hazardous Waste Sites". This series of online seminars focuses on the science and policy issues of incorporating bioavailability into risk and exposure assessments. Largely drawing from the successful SBRP Bioavailability Workshop: "Assessing Bioavailability as a Determinant of Pollutant Exposure" held in Tampa, FL (February 2008), the web seminar series features SBRP-funded and other academic researchers and EPA senior staff. The first seminar "Bioavailability of Metals" was May 28th, the second seminar "Bioavailability of Organic Compounds: Methods and Case Studies" was June 11th, and the third seminar "Use of Bioavailability Information at hazardous Waste Sites" is June 18th. This, the third of the three sessions, will feature Mr. Mike Beringer, U.S. EPA Region VII toxicologist, and Dr. Mark Maddaloni, U.S. EPA Region II toxicologist. Site-specific bioavailability is an important consideration in determining potential threats to human health that are posed by metals-contaminated soils at waste sites. It is important to consider bioavailability because metals may be absorbed to a lesser or greater extent following ingestion of contaminated soils as compared to the fraction absorbed in the studies used to establish toxicity values, such as a reference dose or a cancer slope factor. U.S. EPA's Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) has led an effort to develop guidance on evaluating and incorporating bioavailability adjustments into human health risk assessments. The guidance outlines a decision framework for deciding when to collect and incorporate site-specific bioavailability information; recommends a process for documenting the data collection, analysis, and site-specific implementation of a validated method; as well as provides recommended method validation and regulatory acceptance criteria for evaluating alternative methodologies. OSRTI has used these criteria to evaluate two separate methodologies for predicting the relative bioavailability of lead in soil and soil-like materials. OSRTI has determined that both an in vivo swine bioavailability bioassay and an in vitro bioaccessibility assay have sufficiently satisfied these criteria. Thus, they are considered regulatory methodologies appropriate for determining the relative bioavailability of lead for quantitative use in site-specific risk assessments. Mr. Beringer's presentation will summarize the bioavailability guidance document and the basis for OSRTI's decision regarding the two methodologies for predicting lead relative bioavailability. EPA's bioavailability guidance provides a framework for using bioavailability/bioaccessibility data to inform and refine site specific risk assessments. In the case of lead, which benefits from well-characterized studies on the absorption of this metal when bound to soil, the guidance is highly prescriptive. For many other metals that have limited characterization of their absorption profiles, the guidance is more open to interpretation. The bioavailability guidance will be "test driven" so to speak in a situation where the roadmap is less detailed. In this presentation Dr. Maddaloni will go over a case study involving a RCRA Corrective Action site with arsenic-contaminated soil. The session will be moderated by Dr. Fred Pfaender, Professor of Environmental Microbiology, Environmental Sciences and Engineering, and Public Health. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/tio/bioavailability3_061808/

EPA recently released a new Web site where water quality managers and the public can go to view a wide range of state-reported water quality information. This Web site, sometimes referred to as ATTAINS, combines two formerly separate databases: the National Assessment Database and the National Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Tracking System. The National Assessment Database is for water quality assessment information reported by the states under Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, while the National TMDL Tracking System is for impaired waters information reported by the states under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. ATTAINS gives the “full story” showing which waters have been assessed, which are impaired, and which are being (or have been) restored. This Web site allows the user to view dynamic, continuously updated tables and charts that summarize state-reported information for the nation as a whole, for individual states and waters, and for the ten EPA Regions. Visit ATTAINS at http://www.epa.gov/waters/ir. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/tio/owattains_061808/

Perchlorate contamination exists in water and soil, and occurs widely throughout the United States. Public awareness and concern regarding perchlorate has increased in recent years. Perchlorate occurrence in drinking water and food supplies is a human health concern because it can interfere with iodide uptake by the thyroid gland and result in decreased thyroid hormone production. The ITRC Perchlorate Team was formed in 2004 to address technical issues associated with perchlorate. Many technologies are available to remediate perchlorate contamination, but only a few are commonly used. This training introduces state regulators, environmental consultants, site owners, and community stakeholders to Remediation Technologies for Perchlorate Contamination in Water and Soil (PERC-2, 2008), created by ITRC's Perchlorate Team to assist reviewers in assessing the adequacy of perchlorate remediation projects. This course gives the student a background in the available remediation technologies to treat perchlorate contamination, discusses emerging technologies, and presents case studies of applications. The first document produced by the ITRC Perchlorate Team, Perchlorate: Overview of Issues, Status, and Remedial Options (PERC-1, 2005) and associated Internet-based training provide regulators and other stakeholders a basic overview of a broad spectrum of information regarding perchlorate sources, sampling and analysis techniques, a discussion of risk issues, risk management strategies and regulatory status, and included a brief summary of remediation technologies. It is recommended that the registrant review the Perchlorate: Overview of Issues, Status, and Remedial Options (PERC-1, 2005) document and associated Internet-based training archive (available from http://www.itrcweb.org/ibt.asp#Perchlorate_CurrentInfo) for more information. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/itrc/perremtech_061208/

Perchlorate contamination exists in water and soil, and occurs widely throughout the United States. Public awareness and concern regarding perchlorate has increased in recent years. Perchlorate occurrence in drinking water and food supplies is a human health concern because it can interfere with iodide uptake by the thyroid gland and result in decreased thyroid hormone production. The ITRC Perchlorate Team was formed in 2004 to address technical issues associated with perchlorate. Many technologies are available to remediate perchlorate contamination, but only a few are commonly used. This training introduces state regulators, environmental consultants, site owners, and community stakeholders to Remediation Technologies for Perchlorate Contamination in Water and Soil (PERC-2, 2008), created by ITRC's Perchlorate Team to assist reviewers in assessing the adequacy of perchlorate remediation projects. This course gives the student a background in the available remediation technologies to treat perchlorate contamination, discusses emerging technologies, and presents case studies of applications. The first document produced by the ITRC Perchlorate Team, Perchlorate: Overview of Issues, Status, and Remedial Options (PERC-1, 2005) and associated Internet-based training provide regulators and other stakeholders a basic overview of a broad spectrum of information regarding perchlorate sources, sampling and analysis techniques, a discussion of risk issues, risk management strategies and regulatory status, and included a brief summary of remediation technologies. It is recommended that the registrant review the Perchlorate: Overview of Issues, Status, and Remedial Options (PERC-1, 2005) document and associated Internet-based training archive (available from http://www.itrcweb.org/ibt.asp#Perchlorate_CurrentInfo) for more information. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/itrc/perremtech_061208/

Brownfield land exists for which there is no economic case for restoration to conventional functional re-use and/or no realistic prospect for 'hard' re-use. All across Europe and America there are areas of land which have been degraded by past use that are not easy candidates for conventional regeneration, often on economic grounds, or because there is no real driver for their redevelopment. An ideal solution for such areas would be a land management approach that is able to pay for itself, or is revenue generating. The combination of a wider range of risk management approaches with the emerging broad range of non-food uses of land offers great potential for low (or no) cost risk based land management that is stable and sustainable. This session (chaired by Thomas Track - Dechema, Germany) includes:Opportunities for managing marginal land for biomass, bioenergy and biofeedstocks in the UK, Sweden and Germany - a preliminary assessment: Paul Bardos (r3 environmental technology ltd, UK)Use of soil amendments for remediation, soil amendments for remediation, revitalization, and reuse, Michele Mahoney, US EPA.A Swedish case study - potential biofuel production and remediation/stabilisation, Yvonne Andersson-Sköld, Swedish Geotechnical InstituteDiscussion To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/studio/consoil2008/day2_060608/

Brownfield land exists for which there is no economic case for restoration to conventional functional re-use and/or no realistic prospect for 'hard' re-use. All across Europe and America there are areas of land which have been degraded by past use that are not easy candidates for conventional regeneration, often on economic grounds, or because there is no real driver for their redevelopment. An ideal solution for such areas would be a land management approach that is able to pay for itself, or is revenue generating. The combination of a wider range of risk management approaches with the emerging broad range of non-food uses of land offers great potential for low (or no) cost risk based land management that is stable and sustainable. This session (chaired by Thomas Track - Dechema, Germany) includes:Opportunities for managing marginal land for biomass, bioenergy and biofeedstocks in the UK, Sweden and Germany - a preliminary assessment: Paul Bardos (r3 environmental technology ltd, UK)Use of soil amendments for remediation, soil amendments for remediation, revitalization, and reuse, Michele Mahoney, US EPA.A Swedish case study - potential biofuel production and remediation/stabilisation, Yvonne Andersson-Sköld, Swedish Geotechnical InstituteDiscussion To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/studio/consoil2008/day2_060608/

Green Remediation can be defined as the practice of considering the environmental effects of a remediation strategy (i.e., the remedy selected and the implementation approach) early in the process, and incorporating options to maximize the net environmental benefit of the cleanup action. In addition to an overview of what the state of the practice is in the US and Europe, this panel focused on energy and climate change considerations at contaminated sites. Themes include: Assessment of the wider impacts of contaminated land management and remediationInnovative remediation practices that incorporate energy efficiency and cleaner and renewable energy sources to decrease greenhouse gas footprints while achieving cost savings and benefits to local air quality.Placing renewable energy generating capacity on contaminated landsRe-using the built environment / re-using materialsThese themes were explored in four presentations in this special session. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/studio/consoil2008/day1_060508/

Green Remediation can be defined as the practice of considering the environmental effects of a remediation strategy (i.e., the remedy selected and the implementation approach) early in the process, and incorporating options to maximize the net environmental benefit of the cleanup action. In addition to an overview of what the state of the practice is in the US and Europe, this panel focused on energy and climate change considerations at contaminated sites. Themes include: Assessment of the wider impacts of contaminated land management and remediationInnovative remediation practices that incorporate energy efficiency and cleaner and renewable energy sources to decrease greenhouse gas footprints while achieving cost savings and benefits to local air quality.Placing renewable energy generating capacity on contaminated landsRe-using the built environment / re-using materialsThese themes were explored in four presentations in this special session. To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/studio/consoil2008/day1_060508/

Performance-based environmental management (PBEM) is a strategic, goal-oriented methodology that is implemented through effective planning and decision logic to reach a desired end state of site cleanup. The goal of PBEM is to be protective of human health and the environment while efficiently implementing appropriate streamlined cleanup processes. The major components of PBEM include: systematic planning; effective communications; agreement of a land use risk strategy; current conceptual site model; decision logic analysis; remediation process optimization (RPO); ARAR analysis; exit strategy development; and performance-based contracting including environmental insurance. This ITRC training presents an overview of what PBEM is, explains how and when to implement it, and describes the issues that regulators are concerned about throughout PBEM's implementation. Case studies will be presented to illustrate successful PBEM projects. The course is valuable not only because PBEM is being proposed and implemented at many federal and private sites throughout the country, but also because PBEM provides an opportunity to enhance all site remediation. This training is geared to those in the environmental remediation field including Federal, state and local government officials; owners or operators of sites, and consultants. The course will be most beneficial if the participant has taken one of ITRC's remediation process optimization courses. Online archives are available for What is Remediation Process Optimization and How Can It Help Me Identify Opportunities for Enhanced and More Efficient Site Remediation? and for Remediation Process Optimization - Advanced Training. These courses are recommended as pre-requisites, but are not required. The training materials are based on the ITRC RPO Team's Technical Regulatory Guidance Document: Improving Environmental Site Remediation Through Performance-Based Environmental Management (RPO-7, November 2007). To view the slides associated with this audio, please visit http://www.clu-in.org/conf/itrc/pbem_060508/

Performance-based environme