1、Designation: F 1279 08Standard Guide forEcological Considerations for the Restriction of the Use ofSurface Washing Agents: Permeable Land Surfaces1This standard is issued under the fixed designation F 1279; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, i
2、n the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This guide covers the use of surface washing agents toassist in the control of oil
3、 spills. The guide is written with thegoal of minimizing the environmental impacts of oil spills; thisgoal is the basis on which the recommendations are made.Aesthetic and socioeconomic factors are not considered al-though these and other factors are often important in spillresponse.1.2 In making su
4、rface washing agent use decisions, appro-priate government authorities should be consulted as requiredby law.1.3 Spill responders have available several means to controlor clean up spilled oil. In this guide, the use of chemical surfacewashing agents is considered.1.4 This guide applies only to perm
5、eable land surfaces.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to
6、 use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2F 1280 Guide for Ecological Considerations for the Use ofSurface Washing Agents: Impermeable SurfacesF 1872 Guide for Use of Chemical Shoreline CleaningAgents: Environmental and Operational Considerations3. Terminology3.1 Definitions:3.1.1 permeability
7、the capacity of the surface to conductor transmit liquids such as water. An impermeable surfacewould not transmit water in a short time (minutes).3.1.2 surfacethe top or cover of the land at the site ofinterest3.1.3 surface washing agentsa chemical agent used toloosen or remove oil from a surface su
8、ch as land. Surfacewashing agents are not dispersants and should not be used asdispersants4. Significance and Use4.1 This guide is meant to aid local and regional responseteams who may use it during spill response planning and spillevents.4.2 This guide should be adapted to site-specific circum-stan
9、ces.5. Environment CoveredPermeable Surfaces5.1 Permeable ground includes any soil, rock, agriculturalland and forest, pasture land, roadside or other surfaces, thatare permeable to water and oil.6. Background6.1 On permeable surfaces, the main concern is the penetra-tion of the oil downwards and th
10、e possibility of soil andgroundwater contamination (1, 2).3Efforts are generally fo-cused on removing liquid oil rapidly and preventing furtheraerial and downward contamination in the soil and to thegroundwater (3). (See Guide F 1280.)6.2 The effects of oil and especially that of treated oil onterre
11、strial biota have been studied. In one study, oil spilled onsoil decreased the nematode (worm) population by as much as80 % (4). Lai Hoi-Chaw and co-workers show that a littornidgastropod (snail) showed avoidance to oil spilled on the mud ofa mangrove swamp (5). This avoidance decreased the mortalit
12、yof the species to both oil and chemically-dispersed oil. McGillhas noted that soil arthropods (insects) are quickly killed afterspills (6).6.3 Oil has a broad-spectrum herbicidal effect on plants (7,8). Effects vary depending on concentration and on species. Oilin low concentrations has been shown
13、to increase growth insome species, whereas slight contact with oil causes death inothers (7). Black spruce, alfalfa, and canola have a low1This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F20 on HazardousSubstances and Oil Spill Response and is the direct responsibility of SubcommitteeF20.13 o
14、n Treatment.Current edition approved Sept. 15, 2008. Published September 2008. Originallyapproved in 1990. Last previous edition approved in 1999 as F 1279 90 (1999),which was withdrawn in January 2008 and reinstated in September 2008.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.
15、org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.3The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end ofthis guide.1Copyright ASTM International, 10
16、0 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.tolerance for oil, while willow, dogwood, and brome grasshave a high tolerance (8). Light oils may be toxic to vegetationon contact. Heavy oils have a tendency to smother plants overa longer period of time (6). Oiling
17、of the vegetative portionsmay kill the upper portion of the plant, but the root may stilllive and proceed to grow new stalks (6). In one test, 0.4 to 3.4L/m2of a light crude oil killed most plants in a northern borealsetting (9). In another experiment, light fuel oil at 0.6 % byweight killed all pla
18、nts present (10). Oil reduces the germina-tion rate of seeds. Weathered oil on the soil forms a crust whichcan slow revegetation (6). Revegetation time varies but hasranged from 1 to 20 years depending on location and spillconditions (amount, oil type, time of year)(4, 6).6.4 Oil spilled on ground w
19、ill penetrate the surface, the rateof penetration depending on soil type, pore size, depth of thewater table, and oil type. Surface washing agents increase thepenetration rate and depth (11, 12). Dewling and Silva exam-ined the use of surface washing agents in Brazil and deter-mined that the average
20、 penetration of oil was increased from 5to 60 cm by the use of hydrocarbon-based surface washingagents (13).6.5 Oil degradation takes place on soil surfaces under manyconditions. Factors that increase degradation rate and amountinclude higher-than-normal oxygen level, ample but not exces-sive (satur
21、ating) moisture, slightly alkaline pH, high tempera-ture and ample nutrients (4). Initially after a spill, the diversityof soil microorganisms is decreased by the toxicity of the oil,but the total number is increased due to the increase in numberof oleoclasts (oil degrading microorganisms). Parkinso
22、nshowed in a test spill on northern boreal soil that soilrespiration increased 100 % and the bacterial numbers in-creased tenfold (14).6.6 Microbial degradation of oil occurs primarily at the soilsurface (4, 7, 16). One study showed that below 15 cm therewas little degradation (16). Degradation occu
23、rs primarily at thesurface due to oxgyen, low but sufficient moisture, supply ofnutrients, and because the occurrence of the great number ofoleoclasts (4).6.7 Contamination of surface water and groundwater is ofprime concern in land spills. Little oil degradation takes placein groundwater and diluti
24、on alone would take many years toallow use of a groundwater supply contaminated by an oil spill(4, 17). One study estimated that 120 to 750 years of rainfalldilution alone would be required so that the supply could beused for human consumption (17). On the other hand, in a karstenvironment, flow to
25、groundwater could do more significantdamage. Movement of contaminated groundwater can result inbroad contamination of the subsurface.6.8 Several biological remediation techniques have beendemonstrated for oiled soils (4, 6, 8, 19, 20). Most of thesetechniques involve aeration, addition of fertilizer
26、, and plantingof cover crops. These techniques are well-documented andhave been effective in restoring agricultural land to fullproduction in as little as five years. No scientific evidence isavailable to show that surface washing agents have a usefulrole in these remediation techniques.6.9 Several
27、spills on permeable land have been dealt withsuccessfully using mechanical removal, in-situ burning andother remediation techniques (1, 21, 22, 23).6.10 Studies of the toxicity of natural products such asd-limonene, from citrus peels, reveals that many of these havehigh aquatic toxicities, while sho
28、wing little human toxicity.Such agents are not recommended for use where runoff caneffect biota (24, 25). (See Guide F 1872.)7. Recommendations7.1 Surface washing agents should not be used on anypermeable land surfaces.8. Keywords8.1 land; oil spill; oil spill surface washing agents; perme-able; soi
29、l; surface washing agentsREFERENCES(1) Owens, E. H., Taylor, E., Marty, R., and Little, D. I, “An Inland OilSpill Response Manual to MinimizeAdverse Environmental Impacts,”in Proceedings of the 1993 International Oil Spill Conference,American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 105109.(
30、2) Castle, R. W., Malamma, K. D., and Ammann, M. J., “The AreaRemediation Assessment Team Approach to Integrated Land Oil SpillRestoration,” in Proceedings of the 2003 International Oil SpillConference, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., 2003,pp. 413417.(3) Mahatnirunkul, V., Towprayoon
31、, S., and Bashkin, V., “Application ofthe EPA Hydrocarbon Spill Screening Model to a HydrocarbonContaminated Site in Thailand,” Land Contamination and Reclama-tion, 2002, pp. 1724.(4) Bossert, I., and Bartha, R., “The Fate of Petroleum in Soil Ecosys-tems,” Petroleum Microbiology, R. M. Atlas, ed.,
32、MacMillan Publish-ing Company, New York, NY, 1984, pp. 435473.(5) Lai, H. C., Lim, C. P., and Lee, K. T., “Effects of Naturally andChemically Dispersed Oil on Invertebrates in Mangrove Swamps.”Fate and Effects of Oil in the Mangrove Environment, eds. H. C. Laiand M. C. Feng, Universiti Sains Malaysi
33、a, Singapore, 1984, pp.101114.(6) McGill, W. B., and Bergstrom, D., “Inland Oil Spills and their Impactson Land,” Stress on Land in Canada, Lands Directorate, EnvironmentCanada, Ottawa, Ont., 1983, pp. 153181.(7) Baker, J. M., “The Effects of Oil on Plant Physiology,” The EcologicalEffects of Oil Po
34、llution on Littoral Communities, E. B. Cowell, ed.,Institute of Petroleum, London, England, 1971, pp. 8898.(8) McGill, W. B., An Introduction for Field Personnel to the Effects of OilSpills on Soil and Some General Restoration and Cleanup Procedures,Canadian Petroleum Association, Calgary, Alta., 19
35、76.(9) Hutchinson, T. C., and Hellebust, J. A., Oil Spills and Vegetation atNorman Wells, N.W.T., Task Force on Northern Oil Development,Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, Ottawa, Ont., 1974.(10) Swader, F. N., “Persistance and Effects of a Light Fuel Oil in Soil,”Proceedings of the 1975 Oil
36、 Spill Conference, American PetroleumInstitute, Washington, DC, 1975, pp. 589593.F1279082(11) Owens, E. H., Foget, C. R., and Robson, W., “Experimental Use ofDispersants for Spill Countermeasures on Arctic Beaches,” Oil SpillChemical Dispersants: Research, Experience, and Recommenda-tions, ASTM STP
37、840, ASTM, 1984, pp. 324337.(12) Mackay, D., Watson, A., and Kuhnt, A., The Behaviour of Oil andChemically Dispersed Oil at Shorelines, Petroleum Association forthe Conservation of the Canadian Environment, Ottawa, Ont., 1979.(13) Dewling, R. T., and Silva, C. C. D. A. E., “Impact of Dispersant UseD
38、uring the BRAZILIAN MARINA Incident,” Proceedings of the1979 Oil Spill Conference, American Petroleum Institute, Washing-ton, DC, 1979, pp. 269276.(14) Parkinson, D., Oil Spillage on Micro-organisms in Northern Cana-dian Soils, Task Force on Northern Oil Development, Department ofIndian and Northern
39、 Affairs, Ottawa, Ont., 1973.(15) Wilson, J. T., Noonan, M. J., and McNabb, J. F., “Biodegradation ofContaminants in the Subsurface,” Ground Water Quality, eds. C. H.Ward, W. Giger, and P. L. McCarty, John Wiley and Sons, New York,NY, 1985, pp. 483492.(16) Duffy, J. J., Peake, E., and Mohtadi, M. F.
40、, “Subsurface Biophysio-chemical Transformations of Spilled Crude Oil,” Proceedings of theConference on the Environmental Effects of Oil and Salt Water Spillson Land, Research Secretariat Alberta Environment, Edmonton,Alta., 1975, pp. 136183.(17) Duffy, J. J., Mohtadi, M. F., and Peake, E., “Subsurf
41、ace Persistance ofCrude Oil Spilled on Land and its Transport in Groundwater,”Proceedings of the 1977 Oil Spill Conference, American PetroleumInstitute, Washington, DC, 1977, pp. 475478.(18) Molina-Barahona, L., Roriguez-Vasquez, R., Hernandez-Velasco, M.,Vega-Jarquin, C., Zapata-Perez, O., Mendoza-
42、Cantu,A., andAlbores,A., “Diesel Removal from Contaminated Soils by Biostimulation andSupplementation with Crop Residues,” Applied Soil Ecology, Vol. 27,2004, pp. 165175.(19) Timmerman, M. D., Fuller, L. G., and Burton, D. L., “The Effects ofa Crude Oil Spill on Microbiological Indices of Soil Biolo
43、gicalQuality,”Canadian Journal of Soil Sciences, 2003, pp. 173181.(20) Trinidade, P. V. O., Sobral, L. G., Rizzo, A. C. L., Leite, S. G. F., andSoriano, A.U., “Bioremediation of a Weathered and a RecentlyOil-Contaminated Soils from Brazil: A Comparison Study,” Chemo-sphere, Vol. 58, 2005, pp. 515522
44、.(21) Mix, N., “Inland Pipeline Spill Response in Kansas”, in Proceedingsof the 2001 International Oil Spill Conference, American PetroleumInstitute, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 297301.(22) Halmemies, S., Grondahl, S., Arffman, M., Nenonen, K., andTuhkanen, T., “Vacuum Extraction Based Response Equi
45、pment forRecovery of Fresh Fuel Spills from Soils,” Journal of HazardousMaterials, 2003, pp. 127143.(23) Millette, D., Neto, A. C. B., Falkiewicz, F., Caicedo, N. O. L.,Zamberlan, E., Marques, D. M., de Campos Carvalho, F. J. P., andLinhares Biologa, M., “Development of a Soil, Surface-water andGrou
46、ndwater Remediation Program for the Accidental Crude OilSpill That Occurred on July 16, 2000 at the Petrobras RefineryRefinaria Presidente Getulio Vargas-Repar Araucaria, Brazil PR,”in Proceedings of the 2003 International Oil Spill Conference,American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp
47、. 403408.(24) Fingas, M. F., Kyle, D. A., Laroche, N. D., Fieldhouse, B. G., Sergy,G., and Stoodley, R. G., “The Effectiveness Testing of Spill TreatingAgents,” The Use of Chemicals in Oil Spill Response, ASTM STP1252, Peter Lane, Ed., American Society for Testing and Materials,Philadelphia, 1995, p
48、. 286298.(25) Walker, A. H., Kucklick, J. H., and Michel, J., Effectiveness andEnvironmental Considerations for Non-dispersant Chemical Coun-termeasures, Pure and Applied Chemistry, Vol 71, No. 1, 1999, pp.6781.ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserte
49、d in connection with any item mentionedin this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the riskof infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years andif not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standardsand should be addressed to ASTM International Head
