The total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) degradation was monitored in a batch reactor with the addition of biostimulants like palm oil processed wastewater (POPWW) acting as nutrients, to effectively enhance high efficiency in contaminants remediation in clay soil. The kinetic components were evaluated in terms of specific rates of petroleum hydrocarbon degradation, maximum specific rate of total petroleum hydrocarbon degradation as well as the equilibrium constant of total petroleum hydrocarbon degradation. The effect on the variations on the concentration of the dosages 30 g, 60 g, 90 g, 120 g, 150 g, and the control samples were evaluated as presented in this research in relationship of reciprocal of specific rate of TPH against Reciprocal of TPH Degradation for nutrient sample application of POPWW. The obtained data for the maximum specific rate of total petroleum hydrocarbon degradation and the equilibrium constant of total petroleum hydrocarbon degradation demonstrates values of Vmax and Ks for 30 g dosage as 16666.67 (ppm/day)^–1 and 14488.33 (ppm)^–1 as well as the regression value of the best fit (R² = 99.51%). In the case of 60 g dosage the values are Vmax = 2000 (ppm/day)^–1, Ks = 21768 (ppm)^–1 and R² = 96.11% as well as for 90 g dosage we have Vmax = 1250 (ppm/day)^–1, Ks = 5563.5 (ppm)^–1 and R² = 92.5%. Also, in the case of 120 g, 150 g, and the control sample of the functional parameters and coefficients are obtained as Vmax = 476.19 (ppm/day)^–1, 909.09 (ppm/day)^–1, Vmax = 25.71 (ppm/day)^–1, respectively. The Ks values are 5483.89 (ppm)^–1, 44626.36 (ppm)^–1, 33601.54 (ppm)^–1, respectively, as well as the R² values of 99.31%, 99,76%, 99.75%, respectively. This investigation has revealed that kinetic parameters and coefficients are dependent on the rate of total petroleum degradation at interval of sampling.

🔒 This is a subscription article

Full text is available to subscribers and institutional members. Please choose an option below to access it.

1. Adams GO, Tawari-Fufeyin P, Okoro SE, Igelenyah E. Bioremediation, biostimulation and bioaugmention: A review. Int J Environ Bioremed Biodegrad. 2015;3(1):28–39.
2. Adekunle AA, Tobit IU. Assessing and forecasting the impact of bioremediation product derived from Nigeria local raw materials on electrical conductivity of soils contaminated with petroleum products. J Appl Technol Environ Sanit. 2013;2(1):57–66.
3. Amro MM, Benzagouta MS, Karnanda W. Investigation on crude oil penetration depth into soils. Arab J Geosci. 2013;6(3):873–80.
4. Asgari A, Nabizadeh R, Mahvi AH, Nasseri S, Dehghani MH, Nazmara S, et al. Biodegradation of total petroleum hydrocarbons from acidic sludge produced by re-refinery industries of waste oil using in-vessel composting. J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2017;15(3):1–9.
5. Bokonon-Ganta, A.H., Neuenschwander, P. and De Groote, H., 2003. Biological control of the mango mealybug, Rastrococcus invadens (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) in Africa. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods. FHTET-03-05. USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Washington DC (pp. 437-443).
6. Brown RA, Henschee RD, Wilson JT. Bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons. A flexible variable speed technology. 1996;7(4):95–100.
7. Chaineau CH, Morel JL, Oudot J. Biodegradation of fuel oil hydrocarbons in the rhizosphere of maize. J Environ Qual. 2001;29:569–72.
8. Frick CM, Germida JJ, Farrell RE. Assessment of phytoremediation as an in-situ technique for cleaning oil-contaminated sites. In: Technical seminar on chemical spills. 1999 Dec 29:105a–124a. Environment Canada; 1998.
9. Gaiero J, McAll C, Thompson K. Inside the root microbiome: Bacterial root endophytes and plant growth promotion. Am J Bot. 2013;100(9):1738–50.
10. Glick B, Todorovic B, Czarny J. Promotion of plant growth by bacterial ACC deaminase. Crit Rev Plant Sci. 2007:227–42.
11. Hardoim P, Van O. Properties of bacterial endophytes and their proposed role in plant growth. Trends Microbiol. 2008:463–71.
12. Huang X, El-Alawi Y. A multi-process phytoremediation system for decontamination of persistent total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs) from soils. Microchem J. 2005;81:139–47.
13. Hutchinson S, Banks M. Phytoremediation of aged petroleum sludge: effect of inorganic fertilizer. J Environ Qual. 2001;30:395–403.
14. Iturbe R, Flores RM, Torres LG. Sub-soil TPH and other petroleum fractions-contaminated levels in an oil storage and distribution stations in North-central Mexico. Chemosphere. 2005;61:1618–31.
15. Iturbe RM, Flores LG. TPH-contaminated Mexican refinery soil: Health risk assessment and first year of changes. Environ Monit Assess. 2004;91:237–39.

The total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) degradation was monitored in a batch reactor with the addition of biostimulants like palm oil processed wastewater (POPWW) acting as nutrients, to effectively enhance high efficiency in contaminants remediation in clay soil. The kinetic components were evaluated in terms of specific rates of petroleum hydrocarbon degradation, maximum specific rate of total petroleum hydrocarbon degradation as well as the equilibrium constant of total petroleum hydrocarbon degradation. The effect on the variations on the concentration of the dosages 30 g, 60 g, 90 g, 120 g, 150 g, and the control samples were evaluated as presented in this research in relationship of reciprocal of specific rate of TPH against Reciprocal of TPH Degradation for nutrient sample application of POPWW. The obtained data for the maximum specific rate of total petroleum hydrocarbon degradation and the equilibrium constant of total petroleum hydrocarbon degradation demonstrates values of Vmax and Ks for 30 g dosage as 16666.67 (ppm/day)^–1 and 14488.33 (ppm)^–1 as well as the regression value of the best fit (R² = 99.51%). In the case of 60 g dosage the values are Vmax = 2000 (ppm/day)^–1, Ks = 21768 (ppm)^–1 and R² = 96.11% as well as for 90 g dosage we have Vmax = 1250 (ppm/day)^–1, Ks = 5563.5 (ppm)^–1 and R² = 92.5%. Also, in the case of 120 g, 150 g, and the control sample of the functional parameters and coefficients are obtained as Vmax = 476.19 (ppm/day)^–1, 909.09 (ppm/day)^–1, Vmax = 25.71 (ppm/day)^–1, respectively. The Ks values are 5483.89 (ppm)^–1, 44626.36 (ppm)^–1, 33601.54 (ppm)^–1, respectively, as well as the R² values of 99.31%, 99,76%, 99.75%, respectively. This investigation has revealed that kinetic parameters and coefficients are dependent on the rate of total petroleum degradation at interval of sampling.

🔒 This is a subscription article

Full text is available to subscribers and institutional members. Please choose an option below to access it.

1. Adams GO, Tawari-Fufeyin P, Okoro SE, Igelenyah E. Bioremediation, biostimulation and bioaugmention: A review. Int J Environ Bioremed Biodegrad. 2015;3(1):28–39.
2. Adekunle AA, Tobit IU. Assessing and forecasting the impact of bioremediation product derived from Nigeria local raw materials on electrical conductivity of soils contaminated with petroleum products. J Appl Technol Environ Sanit. 2013;2(1):57–66.
3. Amro MM, Benzagouta MS, Karnanda W. Investigation on crude oil penetration depth into soils. Arab J Geosci. 2013;6(3):873–80.
4. Asgari A, Nabizadeh R, Mahvi AH, Nasseri S, Dehghani MH, Nazmara S, et al. Biodegradation of total petroleum hydrocarbons from acidic sludge produced by re-refinery industries of waste oil using in-vessel composting. J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2017;15(3):1–9.
5. Bokonon-Ganta, A.H., Neuenschwander, P. and De Groote, H., 2003. Biological control of the mango mealybug, Rastrococcus invadens (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) in Africa. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods. FHTET-03-05. USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Washington DC (pp. 437-443).
6. Brown RA, Henschee RD, Wilson JT. Bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons. A flexible variable speed technology. 1996;7(4):95–100.
7. Chaineau CH, Morel JL, Oudot J. Biodegradation of fuel oil hydrocarbons in the rhizosphere of maize. J Environ Qual. 2001;29:569–72.
8. Frick CM, Germida JJ, Farrell RE. Assessment of phytoremediation as an in-situ technique for cleaning oil-contaminated sites. In: Technical seminar on chemical spills. 1999 Dec 29:105a–124a. Environment Canada; 1998.
9. Gaiero J, McAll C, Thompson K. Inside the root microbiome: Bacterial root endophytes and plant growth promotion. Am J Bot. 2013;100(9):1738–50.
10. Glick B, Todorovic B, Czarny J. Promotion of plant growth by bacterial ACC deaminase. Crit Rev Plant Sci. 2007:227–42.
11. Hardoim P, Van O. Properties of bacterial endophytes and their proposed role in plant growth. Trends Microbiol. 2008:463–71.
12. Huang X, El-Alawi Y. A multi-process phytoremediation system for decontamination of persistent total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs) from soils. Microchem J. 2005;81:139–47.
13. Hutchinson S, Banks M. Phytoremediation of aged petroleum sludge: effect of inorganic fertilizer. J Environ Qual. 2001;30:395–403.
14. Iturbe R, Flores RM, Torres LG. Sub-soil TPH and other petroleum fractions-contaminated levels in an oil storage and distribution stations in North-central Mexico. Chemosphere. 2005;61:1618–31.
15. Iturbe RM, Flores LG. TPH-contaminated Mexican refinery soil: Health risk assessment and first year of changes. Environ Monit Assess. 2004;91:237–39.