ASTM F2823-2010 Standard Guide for In-Situ Burning of Oil Spills in Marshes《沼泽中的浮油就地燃烧的标准指南》.pdf

《ASTM F2823-2010 Standard Guide for In-Situ Burning of Oil Spills in Marshes《沼泽中的浮油就地燃烧的标准指南》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASTM F2823-2010 Standard Guide for In-Situ Burning of Oil Spills in Marshes《沼泽中的浮油就地燃烧的标准指南》.pdf（5页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Designation: F2823 10Standard Guide forIn-Situ Burning of Oil Spills in Marshes1This standard is issued under the fixed designation F2823; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in paren

2、theses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This guide addresses in-situ burning as a response toolfor oil spills that occur in marshes.1.2 In-situ burning, mechanical recovery, treating agentap

3、plication, and natural recovery are the usual options avail-able to an on-scene coordinator for the control and cleanup ofspilled oil.1.3 The purpose of this guide is to provide the user withgeneral information on in-situ burning in marshes as a meansof controlling and removing spilled oil.1.4 This

4、guide outlines considerations that can be used toconduct an in-situ burn in marshes.1.5 In making in-situ burn decisions, appropriate govern-ment authorities should be consulted.1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded asstandard. No other units of measurement are included in thisstandar

5、d.1.7 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 use.2. Referenced

6、 Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2F1788 Guide for In-Situ Burning of Oil Spills on Water:Environmental and Operational ConsiderationsF1990 Guide for In-Situ Burning of Spilled Oil: IgnitionDevices3. Terminology3.1 airborne emissionscompounds or substances that areemitted into the air as a result of a fi

7、re.3.2 fresh oiloil recently spilled that is un-weathered andun-emulsified.3.3 in-situ burningburning of oil directly on the water ormarsh surface.3.4 marsha wetland characterized by grassy surface matsthat are frequently interspersed with open water or by a closedcanopy of grasses, sedges, or other

8、 herbaceous plants.3.5 residuethe material, excluding airborne emissions,remaining after the oil stops burning.3.6 wetlandland that has the water table at, near, or abovethe land surface, or that is saturated for long enough periods topromote hydrophilic vegetation and various kinds of biologicalact

9、ivity which are adapted to the wet environment.4. Significance and Use4.1 This guide is meant to aid spill response teams duringplanning, training, spill response, and remediation.4.2 In the marsh environment, removal of the oil by in-situburning may be the only method available to responders. Theso

10、ft, soggy soil and presence of water and the potential forecological damage may inhibit the deployment of conventionaloil recovery equipment and personnel, while the shallow watermay not allow the deployment and operation of skimmers,booms, and storage devices.5. Background5.1 In-situ burning of oil

11、 has been conducted successfully ina number of marshes. Within several years, recovery wasnearly complete in areas where water level was sufficient(exceeded 2 cm) to provide protection to plant roots. Wherethis was not the case, recovery was slower.5.2 Ignition equipment for in-situ burning in marsh

12、es maybe minimal. Ignition devices may be the only specific equip-ment required. Ignition equipment may include helicopter-mounted devices or propane torches and fuel-soaked rags(Guide F1990).6. General Considerations for Making In Situ BurnDecisions for Marshes6.1 The decision of whether or not to

13、use in-situ burning ina given spill situation is always one involving trade-offs.General considerations such as smoke plume generated and thepotential for secondary fires, and specific factors such as marsh1This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F20 on HazardousSubstances and Oil Spi

14、ll Response and is the direct responsibility of SubcommitteeF20.15 on In-Situ Burning.Current edition approved April 1, 2010. Published April 2010. DOI 10.1520/F282310.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual

15、 Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.type, water level, season, wildlife present, and vegetationrecovery should be

16、considered. The human population, poten-tially affected by the smoke plume, should be considered asnoted in Guide F1788. In certain cases, burning of oiledvegetation can also be considered.6.2 Oil floating on water must be at least 2 to 3 mm thick tobe ignited successfully. Natural containment of sp

17、illed oil canoccur in marshes, providing such layer thickness. Wind mayalso concentrate the oil to the desired thickness (Guide F1788).6.3 Oil spilled in marshes is less prone to emulsificationthan in higher energy, open water environments. The sloweremulsification process provides responders with a

18、 wider win-dow of opportunity in which to plan and execute in-situburning operations.6.4 In some areas, intentional and controlled burning ofmarshes is a common method of controlling vegetation andreducing organic debris, with beneficial results for the marshes(1).36.5 Water level has been shown to

19、be a major factoraffecting plant recovery following in-situ burning in marshes(2, 3, 4). When the water depth is at least 2 cm, it provides aninsulating layer to plant root and rhizomes, keeping theirtemperature below 60C and allowing faster recovery.6.6 Fire spreading needs to be considered. Flatte

20、ned vegeta-tion and green, un-oiled vegetation may not provide adequatefirebreaks, especially in the presence of strong winds. Wettingperimeter may be beneficial.6.7 In-situ burning in a timely manner will simplify igni-tion, reduce the area affected, and minimize the duration ofvegetation exposure

21、to the toxic effects of the oil.6.8 Burning in the winter months may require specialconsiderations because of ice and snow. Cold results inincreased oil viscosity and reduced spreading potential. Severalburns in ice and snow-covered marshes also proved to beeffective and provided for good long-term

22、recovery of themarshes.6.9 In-situ burning of oil may generate a substantial smokeplume. If human exposure is possible, smoke plume monitor-ing at population centers should be considered as noted inGuide F1788.6.10 Utility lines, buildings, and other structures need to beprotected from fire.6.11 Smo

23、ke may impair visibility and impact air traffic inthe burn area.6.12 The spilled oil will not be consumed completely by thefire. Residue will be left after the burning has ended. Theeffects of the residue should be considered. A thick and denselayer of residue will impede revegetation. The effect of

24、 theresidue should be weighed against impacts of removing theresidue, and particularly the effects of movement over themarsh by people and equipment used to remove the residue.6.13 The presence of endangered or threatened species mustbe considered before making the decision to burn.7. Operational Co

25、nsiderations7.1 Appropriate regulatory agencies and fire departmentsshould be consulted prior to conducting a burn.7.2 A burn plan should be developed with the help of amarsh and fire ecologist. Air, burn, and plume models shouldbe run to predict the effect of the burn on the area. The burnplan and

26、a fire safety plan should include: weather, firecalculations, plume modeling, and air and fire modelingprotocols, sensitive ecological areas, marsh conditions, sea-sonal implications, and oil properties. The area should besurveyed for utility lines, pipelines, buildings, and otherman-made structures

27、. The risk posed by the burn to thesestructures should be assessed.7.3 When a marsh is impacted by an oil spill, all methods ofresponse and cleanup should be considered and assessed fortradeoffs, feasibility, and net benefit to the environment.7.4 Environmental risk considerations should include the

28、effects of the plume, soot, heat flux, fire spread and remainingburn residue (Guide F1788).7.5 Risks to human health and safety should be considered,both to personnel conducting the burn, and to the generalpublic. Monitoring protocols should be implemented in accor-dance with local regulations, and

29、the monitoring teams shouldbe alerted (Guide F1788). Plume, air, and fire modeling resultsshould be considered.7.6 Prevention or control of secondary fires should beplanned for. Provision should be made for changes in winddirection or speed.7.7 Local aviation, navigation, and highway authoritiesshou

30、ld be notified before the burn is initiated.7.8 The burn should be monitored and recorded, includingdirection, altitude, and behavior of the smoke plume. Still andvideo photography should be used for documentation.7.9 After the burn has been extinguished, the area should besurveyed, and the effectiv

31、eness of the burn should be assessedand documented. A fire watch should be established to ensurethat the fire is completely extinguished.7.10 Residual oil contamination may be ignited, if possible.7.11 If possible, burn residues should be collected anddisposed of in accordance with local regulations

32、. Oil residuecollection may not always be advisable, and should be weighedagainst the potential damage from people and equipment usedfor residue collection.7.12 Monitoring of marsh recovery and potential restorationshould be conducted.8. Summary8.1 Oil spills in marshes may present unique challenges

33、 forresponse personnel. Access may be difficult, and the presenceof water and soft substrate may preclude the use of conven-tional oil cleanup equipment and personnel. Shallow watermay not allow the use of vessels and successful deployment ofbooms and skimmers. In-situ burning may provide the mostsu

34、itable, and sometimes the only option for removing thespilled oil from the environment. Use of machinery and humanfoot traffic can result in mixing of oil with sediments, whichcan have an adverse effect on marshes.3The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to a list of references at the end ofthis s

35、tandard.F2823 1028.2 The decision to conduct in-situ burning should considera variety of factors including marsh type, vegetation recovery,water level, presence of wildlife, and secondary fires. Consul-tation with biologists, fire ecologists, and other experts isessential. For a successful burn to o

36、ccur, the oil thicknessshould be greater than 2 to 3 mm. A water depth of at least 2cm will encourage rapid vegetation recovery.8.3 Before conducting the burn, an in-situ burning plan andfire safety plan should be completed. Appropriate regulatoryagencies and fire departments should be notified, and

37、 burnpermit sought. Risk to human heath shall be considered.Monitoring of the burns and smoke plume should be conductedif necessary. When the fire has been extinguished, burnresidues may be collected and disposed of, if advisable.Monitoring of the marsh should be conducted to followrecovery.9. Keywo

38、rds9.1 in situ burning; marsh; oil spills; tradeoffsAPPENDIX(Nonmandatory Information)X1. CASE STUDIESX1.1 Seven case studies are presented to exemplify the useof in-situ burning in marshes (Refs (5-15).X1.1.1 Copano Bay:(Ref (5)On January 7, 1992, an underground pipelineruptured by Chiltipin Creek

39、near Copano Bay, Texas, spilling460 m3(2900 barrels) of South Texas light crude oil into a saltmarsh. Vacuum trucks, skimmer, pumps, and sorbents werebrought to the scene but proved to be only marginally effective.After considering various options, a decision was made to burnthe oil. The oil was ign

40、ited four days after it spilled, and burnedfor 20 h in various areas. The area was surveyed, and pocketsof remaining oil were ignited later. At the time of the burn themarsh was covered with water from recent heavy rainfall,providing protection to plant roots and rhyzomes. A study tomonitor marsh pl

41、ant recovery over a period of five yearssuggested that plant diversity in the impacted area was re-duced, but that total plant biomass was similar to the controlarea after two growth seasons.X1.1.2 Rockefeller Refuge:(Ref (6-8)On March 13, 1995, approximately 6 m3(40barrels) of condensate oil (API G

42、ravity 40 to 42) spilled froma pipeline in the Rockefeller Refuge, Louisiana, affecting 20ha. (50 acres) of brackish marsh. Mechanical cleanup equip-ment was brought on scene, but was both ineffective atcollecting the oil and damaging to the marsh. In-situ burning ofmarshes is commonly used in that

43、area to reduce organicdebris, reduce unwanted fires, and enhance marsh growth. Atthe time of the spill the water layer over the marsh soil was 5to 10 cm thick. In-situ burning of the oiled marsh was approvedand conducted four days after the burn, removing the oil from8 ha. (20 acres) of the impacted

44、 marsh. Studies conducted threeyears later concluded that the areas impacted and burnedrecovered better than the areas impacted but not burned. Threeyears after the burn, the burned areas attained the same plantdensity as the reference area.X1.1.3 Ruffy Brook:(Ref (9, 10)On July 22, 2000 a transfer

45、pipeline nearRuffy Brook, Minnesota, failed and released over 8 m3(50barrels) of medium Bow River crude oil into a marsh fed byRuffy Brook. The spill affected approximately 3 acres of freshwater marsh, that was covered by water 30 to 100 cm above themarsh soil surface. Mechanical recovery was deemed

46、 difficultto deploy and potentially damaging to the marsh, so in-situburning was conducted the same day of the spill. The burnlasted for three hours, and remaining pockets of oil wereignited over a period of three days. No secondary burningoccurred during this operation. It is estimated that 80 % of

47、 theoil was consumed during the burn. A significant amount ofburn residue (in some places 1 cm thick) was left after the firewent out. The residue was picked up by hand three days later.There is no evidence that any residue sank. The marsh wasvisited a year later, and found to have recovered well, w

48、ith theexception of willows, a fire sensitive species. The quickresponse prevented spreading of the oil and thereby minimiz-ing damage to the marsh.X1.1.4 Bayou Tank Battery:(Ref (11)On August 17, 2002, a spill occurred at a tankbattery in the Sabine National Wildlife Refuge in SouthwesternLouisiana

49、. The spill of 24 to 50 m3(150 to 300 barrels) crudeoil ran into the adjacent marsh. Salt water spilled together withthe oil, spread the oil over about 1.5 Ha (3.5 acres) of densemarsh. A burn was started on the first day. A survey indicatedthat most of the oil had been successfully removed from themarsh. The removal of the residue, however, proved to bedifficult and took several days to accomplish using sorbentsand nets. Soil samples were taken in unaffected and burn areasto assess them for metal content. Analysis of the soil samplesfor cadmium, chromium, copper, lea