Lessons Learned Using Direct Sensing Technologies

Lessons Learned Using Direct Sensing Technologies

presented to the

2011 North American Environmental Field Conference and Exposition

A VETERAN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS

High Resolution Vertical Profiling

John Sohl, CEOCOLUMBIA Technologies

[email protected]

January 2011

Our Perspective

© 2011 COLUMBIA Technologies.

• 750+ direct sensing projects• North American footprint • 45 out of 50 states including Hawaii• Canada, Italy, Japan, New Zealand• Diverse client base• 14 years of experience in field chemistry, sampling, and data acquisition• 10 years working with multiple direct sensing and real time information

COLUMBIA Technologies’ 3 Core Principles

Three basic assumptions or principles we have in mind when deploying high resolution direct sensing tools with as near real time decision-making information:

1. The consumer of our services is firmly motivated in knowing the size, shape, and type of contaminant mass and soil structure.

2. They believe better information will reduce the uncertainty, risk, and the cost of gaining that knowledge, and

3. They believe that being approximately correct with a huge data set is far better than being precisely wrong with a limited data set.


Definition of High Resolution and Direct Sensing Tools

• Tools that can provide a lot of data points in a limited period of time

• Operate with as consistent of a measurement process as possible

• Are accurate in the measurement of depth beneath the surface

• Allow for measuring of multiple parameters such as soil and contaminants simultaneously

• Preferably do not require the retrieval of a sample of soil, water, or vapor – a process that introduces a range of variables and therefore uncertainty


High Resolution Vertical Profiling Systems


Sensor Target DataMIP (Membrane Interface Probe)Geoprobe Systems

Volatile Organic Compounds(Dissolved phase petroleum and/or Solvents)

LIF (Laser Induced Fluorescence)LIF/ROST®LIF/UVOST®LIF/TarGOST®

Dakota Technologies

LNAPL/Residual phase petroleumLight (gasoline, diesel, kerosene, jet fuel, etc.)Heavy (creosote, coal tar, heavy crude, etc.)

HPT (Hydraulic Profiling Tool)Geoprobe Systems

Soil hydraulics (pore pressure, soil permeability)

EC (Electrical Conductivity)Geoprobe Systems

Soil characteristic

• New Direct Sensing Vans• Dual rod racks for MIP and LIF• Client office facilities • Real time Data• 2D/3D visualizations


Value = Control, Visibility, & Lower Risk

Our SmartData Solutions® process includes:

• Collection of high resolution subsurface data• Geo-referencing the data• Linking to data analysis and storage• Performing error trapping and analysis on the data• Analyzing the data trends• Visualizing the data into decision-making information using an array of tools• Communicating the information back to the technical team, anywhere on

the planet, as quickly as possible


High definition real-time and accurate DECISION MAKING

information

Data Processing

High Resolution Data Collection + =

5 Myths About Direct Sensing

1. It’s not an EPA approved procedure2. It won’t tell me what a group of monitoring wells will in

terms of • groundwater flow direction, • actual concentration (“don’t get me any of that μV stuff”), and • static hydraulic head level• Etc., etc., etc.

3. Detection level is not low enough4. Too expensive5. I don’t need the data in real time


Myth 1 Regulators Won’t Accept Direct

Sensing Data


Regulatory Acceptance• Regulators are actually smarter

than your client wants to believe• They understand the value of

more data and information• Lots of data vs. best guess• SOME are motivated towards

NFA• Training and education is

required


WARNING: If your client is trying to say – “let’s only do the minimally, regulatory approved

procedures to keep the agency happy” then they don’t pass the FIRST PRINCIPLE of wanting to know the right answer using the most cost effective approach.

45 our of 50 statesU.S. EPA Triad philosophy

www.triadcentral.orgITRC

http://www.triadcentral.org/


Myth 2 Direct Sensing Does Not Provide Defensible Data Like Monitoring

Wells

I’ll Take a 1,000 Data Points Over One Monitoring Well Any Day

Just some of the sources of variation and UNCERTAINTY beyond the control of monitoring wells• Well construction• Heterogeneity of the subsurface lithology• Heterogeneity of the groundwater flow direction• Seasonality of groundwater• Sampling methodologies• Sample transport and holding times• Laboratory handling and analyses• Fouling• Plume dynamics over time


“Direction” of GW Flow

$$ of Monitoring

Wells

NAPL Distribution

“At any point of time local groundwater flow direction can vary by 270°” John Wilson USEPA



Where in this 100-ft column are you going to screen EACH $50,000

monitoring well?6

Km P

lum

e

Tens of Years and Dozens of Monitoring Wells vs. 3 Days of

Direct Sensing© 2011 COLUMBIA Technologies.


REMEMBER PRINCIPLE NO. 3: It’s far better to be approximately

correct than precisely wrong.


Myth 3 Detection Levels Are Too Low

Do you really only have 10 ppb?

• Direct sensing tools for contaminant profiling are first and foremost source area characterization tools• Published detection levels for VOCs using MIP are 1

ppm for petroleum and 100 ppb for some chlorinated compounds

• LIF tools are used to characterize residual petroleum-based or PAH containing compounds – not dissolved phase


• That said, direct sensing tools are also diagnostic tools for understanding the heterogeneity of the subsurface – often times more cost-effective than your other options

• Consider these questions:• If you have 10 ppb everywhere (forever) might you have a source

you have not found?• Where in the large 3D geospatial volume are you going to sample

to gain sufficient decision-making information?• What technologies are going to get you a decent answer out of a

tight clay, a flowing sand, a large vertical column, a large plume migration?

• Would not more detailed information about the soil and hydraulic properties provide a better basis for a sampling and analysis plan than conventional educated guessing?

• What’s it going to cost you to get those answers?


Where Are You Going to Sample? Screen Your Well?

Inject?


0.05 3.05 6.05 9.05 12.0515.0518.0521.0524.0527.0530.0533.0536.0539.0542.0545.0548.050

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.00E+00

2.00E+06

4.00E+06

6.00E+06

8.00E+06

1.00E+07

1.20E+07

1.40E+07

PressECD


Myth 4 Direct Sensing Costs are Too High

“My client has decided to just do conventional sampling and screening and lab analysis”

• First comment: “Good luck”• Second comment:

“If we keep doing this same way we always have, we’ll keep getting the same result (and spending the same money)” - Einstein


Fails PRINCIPLE TWO(and possibly PRINCIPLE ONE) –

Client doesn’t believe that better information will lead to better success at a lower cost.

Questions:

• Where in the 3D geospatial volume are you going to sample?• Will you get accurate recovery of soil or groundwater from

your sampling tools and protocol?• Do you really know what depth the sample came from?• How many volatiles did you lose in the sampling, handling,

transport, and sub-sampling process?• Can the screening tools you are using actually detect the

compounds of interest?• How long will it take you to find out that you got the answer?• WHAT WILL BE INCREASED COST OF REMEDIATION IF YOU ARE

OFF DEPTH, TOO CONSERVATIVE IN YOUR ENGINEERING ESTIMATE, OR SIMPLY MISS?


Cycle Time = Years

$25,000 Round TripsOffice Repeat

Repeat

Data Gaps

ReportsMapSampleDrill

Data Gaps

ReportsMapData

EvaluationLabSampleDrill

ReportsMapData

EvaluationLabSampleDrill

Data Evaluation

Lab

Fieldwork

Remobilization

Remobilization Repeat

Data Gaps



Myth 5 We Don’t Need Real Time

Information

“Why real time? My report is not due for several weeks?”

• Yes, your report may not be due, but your budget is going out the window at full speed

• Let’s be honest:• Aren’t you tired of finding out you’re right (or wrong) several weeks after

the fact?• Are you tired of blowing your budget and coming up short on conclusions

and high on risk and uncertainty?

• If not – then you don’t believe in PRINCIPLE ONE• Direct reading sensors provide data in real time.• SmartData Solutions® QA’s that data and provides decision-

making information in near real time


Real Time = Visibility, Control & Risk Management


Day 1

UNCERTAINTYBUDGET $$

Day 2

$5,000

Day 3

$10,000

Day 4

$15,000

750+ Projects Taught Us


• Subsurface Heterogeneity Rules• Relying on conventional sampling and

monitoring wells alone results in a lot of uncertainty• Real time information is critical to visibility,

control, and risk management

Direct Sensing Technologies Belong in Your ToolboxA strong case can be made that they are actually

Faster, Cheaper, and Better

Allowing you a better characterization and remedial optimization

to

• Better assess liability in property transactions• Significantly reduce your monitoring, remediation, and legal liability costs• Receive a more complete, comprehensive site characterization

COLUMBIA Technologies' Business Approach


Multiple systems moving from project to project“On-Call” Service in North America

Linked via SmartData Network

Thank You!


www.columbiatechnologies.com

Technology

Lessons Learned Using Direct Sensing Technologies