Post-Refinery Futures
Remediation
Cleaning Up 150 Years of Petroleum
Site conditions are complex; there are many utilities and pipelines underground and contaminants have infiltrated soil, groundwater, and air—even spaces in between. In general terms, the contaminants found consist of volatile organic compounds and metals. Concerns have focused on two major and ubiquitous contaminants that can travel to nearby communities: Benzene, a carcinogen that easily volatilizes into the air, and lead, a metal and poison, that can travel in dust and soil particles especially well in dry weather. These two contaminants have been the starting point for this research; however, they simply represent the two classes of many other contaminants that need to be addressed on the site to enable new occupation and development.
The site is currently in the PA Act 2 Land Recycling Program, also known as the Voluntary Cleanup Program, which enables and helps fund developers or those responsible for contaminating the site to address contamination for future redevelopment. Groundwater is being treated on many areas of the site while assessments and planning for soil and other structural remediation are in process. While the PA Act 2 program enables brownfield redevelopments that otherwise would not occur, it recognizes that the fastest path to redevelopment often means using the least transformative methods and maintaining properties for industrial uses based on existing conditions, not contextual need. Communities adjacent to the site and environmental organizations are skeptical of the process and do not believe there is full transparency. For example, under PA Act 2, the party responsible for clean up can do so under a “site specific standards” category in which they can set their own standards for testing and remediation levels based upon anticipated future use. At the refinery, assuming a future industrial use, a lead level was set that is 2.5 times higher than federal industrial use standards, and 5 times higher than residential standards, without considering that workers who may be pregnant - one of the most vulnerable populations - could work on the site in the future. Lead levels below that standard were not even reported, so the true condition of lead contamination is unknown.
It’s Going to Take a Long Time
Petrochemical and refining operations heavily pollute soil and groundwater with toxic chemicals that require long periods of time for effective remediation. Remediation of large sites like the PES refinery will take multiple decades before contamination is at a level suitable for alternative development and uses. Cleanup operations do not always begin immediately either, due to factors like ownership change or complicated site investigations, allowing many sites to sit fallow for years while continuing to pollute the areas around them.
Use Should Drive Remediation, Not The Other Way Around
Highly contaminated sites are often redeveloped for industrial uses, as they require the lowest cleanup standards and can employ the fastest and least expensive methods. But industry may not always be the best use of the site. Instead, future uses that reflect community context, economic goals, and ecological systems should drive remediation planning. Using an array of technologies, the remediation process can be spatially choreographed to accommodate best uses and adapt over time.
Lead, Benzene, and every other contaminant has its own particular affinity for treatment methods, which can range from highly mechanized groundwater pumping and filtering, to air blowing and vacuum systems, to injecting microbes, to more passive remediation using covers, amendments, or plants. Remediation methods are not always selected for efficacy but rather cost and time. Most often the main goal is not to “clean” the soil but to prevent exposure to humans and movement to other sites and water bodies; how much exposure is allowed is dependent on the expected use. In standard practice, the first line of defense for soil contamination is usually to either remove contaminated materials and replace with clean fill, or to leave contaminants in place and cap to prevent human exposure. It is assumed that the former would be prohibitively expensive and logistically difficult given the expanse of ground that would need to be hauled, disposed of, and replaced. The latter capping method is anticipated in the current planning given the relative cost, planned future use, and relatively fast time for installation. While a homogenous cap across the site would raise development out of the flood plain, it creates development restrictions in perpetuity, ignores potential floodwater displacement to other communities, and does not consider the scale and complexity of need in the city.
The Market Gives Us Time
Developers often argue that fast remediation is required to meet market demands. But in reality, land often lies fallow for years before a viable development receives funding and entitlements. On a site of this scale, market absorption alone suggests that full buildout will take decades. If we start remediation now, we can begin protecting public health, employ more nuanced methods, and deliver a better place in the end.
Given the need for more integrated planning and the national and local policies prioritizing jobs, justice, and decarbonization, we predicate this research on the following:
Best future uses should drive the remediation planning for the site, not the other way around. This includes safe access to clean air and healthful public space that has been lacking in the communities harmed by living next to the refinery.
The location in the flood zone and anticipated impacts from sea level rise require a multi-faceted and adaptive approach. Reconfiguration of ground to address contamination can also create places protected from flood and places where water can gather to support ecological systems.
Remediation timelines can be linked with development timelines. Based on development research, it will take decades for economics and demand to support full build out of the site parcels. Remediation technologies that take longer but better support future outcomes can be spatially choreographed to work with other faster methods (such as capping) where demand is more near term.
Remediation activities can not only provide jobs but also training for higher paying tech and science employment.
Technologies for remediation can aim to be carbon sinks, rather than additional sources of carbon emissions. Biochar soil amendments and capping fill or biomass growth that slows plumes and supports VOC treatment are two examples. The site can be an R&D facility to test how remediation can do better for future decommissioned refineries across the nation.
The need for a more robust and strategic remediation program is aligned with several important local and federal policies being developed, such as the American Jobs Plan, Philadelphia’s carbon neutral 2050 goals, xxxxx, xxxx.
