These tests were commissioned by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response to a proposed chemical plant being built over an important groundwater supply. This report will summarize the finding of the potential damages of a chemical spill and attempt to address how in the event of a chemical contamination in the groundwater should be dealt with. The proposed site for the chemical plant is divided into five different layers of sediments that vary in grain size and thickness. Layers one and four were both approximately one-inch-thick and consisted of medium-grained sediments, while layers two and five were around two inches thick and were made up of coarse-grained sediment. Layer three was less than a millimeter thick and consisted
…show more content…
Our recommendation for surface spills in dry conditions is to pump water into the spill. While it may seem more intuitive to attempt to dig up the spill from the soil, our process is more cost-effective. Water pumped into the chemical spill will push the spill deep into the ground, which will act as a natural filter. Although, in wet conditions, digging the contamination while pumping out the water around it is the only viable option. If we attempted to pump the contamination down in wet conditions, the ground beneath it would already be saturated with water preventing the contamination from being pushed down. In the event of an underground contamination, whether wet or dry, the best course of action would be to dig it out. No matter the amount of water pumped into it, the spill will not sink. Some have suggested that since underground spills remain static in dry conditions, that it would be possible to contain the spill, preventing it from spreading. This only pushes the problem to a further date, and is not a viable long-term solution. Not to mention, in the event of a failure, the spill would spread out horizontally, endangering the nearby populations. If the chemical plant is ultimately approved, these protocols will become imperative in mitigating the potential risk of a chemical spill. While the plans outlined above are costly, no chemical plant should
Our recommendation for surface spills in dry conditions is to pump water into the spill. While it may seem more intuitive to attempt to dig up the spill from the soil, our process is more cost-effective. Water pumped into the chemical spill will push the spill deep into the ground, which will act as a natural filter. Although, in wet conditions, digging the contamination while pumping out the water around it is the only viable option. If we attempted to pump the contamination down in wet conditions, the ground beneath it would already be saturated with water preventing the contamination from being pushed down. In the event of an underground contamination, whether wet or dry, the best course of action would be to dig it out. No matter the amount of water pumped into it, the spill will not sink. Some have suggested that since underground spills remain static in dry conditions, that it would be possible to contain the spill, preventing it from spreading. This only pushes the problem to a further date, and is not a viable long-term solution. Not to mention, in the event of a failure, the spill would spread out horizontally, endangering the nearby populations. If the chemical plant is ultimately approved, these protocols will become imperative in mitigating the potential risk of a chemical spill. While the plans outlined above are costly, no chemical plant should