Adaptive observation-based subsurface conceptual site modeling framework combining interdisciplinary methodologies: a case study on advancing the understanding of a groundwater nitrate plume occurrence

A data-driven modeling approach for the sustainable remediation of persistent arsenic (As) groundwater contamination in a fractured rock aquifer through a groundwater recirculation well (IEG-GCW®)

Persistent arsenic (As) pollution sources from anthropogenic activities pose a serious threat to groundwater quality. This work aims to illustrate the application of an innovative remediation technology to remove As from a heavily contaminated fractured aquifer at a historically polluted industrial site. Groundwater circulation well (GCW) technology was tested to significantly increase and accelerate the mobilization and removal of As in the source area. The GCW extracts and re-injects groundwater at different depths of a vertical circulation well. By pumping out and reinjecting in different screen sections of the well, the resulting vertical hydraulic gradients create recirculation cells and affect and mobilize trapped contaminants that cannot be influenced by traditional pumping systems. The first 45-m deep IEG-GCW® system was installed in 2020, equipped with 4 screen sections at different depths and with an above-ground As removal system by oxidation and filtration on Macrolite (Enki). A geomodeling approach supports both remediation and multi-source data interpretation. The first months of operation demonstrate the hydraulic effectiveness of the IEG-GCW® system in the fractured rock aquifer and the ability to significantly enhance As removal compared to conventional pumping wells currently feeding a centralized treatment system. The recirculation flow rate amounts to about 2 m³/h. Water pumped and treated by the GCW system is reintroduced with As concentrations reduced by an average of 20%-60%. During the pilot test, the recirculating system removed 23 kg As whilst the entire central pump-and-treat (P&T) system removed 129 kg, although it treated 100 times more water volume. The P&T plant removed 259 mg As per m³ of pumped and treated groundwater while the GCW removed 4814 mg As per m³ of the treated groundwater. The results offer the opportunity for a more environmentally sustainable remediation approach by actively attacking the contamination source rather than containing the plume.