本研究利用土體加熱/氣提法與蒸氣注入/真空萃取法整治管柱中受甲基第三丁基醚(MTBE)與柴油污染之土壤，以了解此兩種工法之復育特性，並以一維質量傳輸方程式模擬兩種工法在復育過程上之趨勢，以探討復育效率預測之可行性。本研究探討之復育工法操作參數有：土體加熱之有無、初始污染物濃度、蒸氣注入壓力與注入蒸氣量等。

研究結果顯示，在以土體加熱/氣提法整治MTBE污染土壤時，土壤環境溫度升高有助於MTBE之快速移除，其效應可反應在污染物之出流濃度。此外，也可發現出流氣體流率高於注入空氣流率之情形，顯示MTBE在土壤中由液相轉換成氣相移出。而在污染物初始濃度方面，發現低濃度MTBE實驗組之污染物出流濃度曲線與高濃度實驗組(具“非水相液體”，NAPL)相似，而中濃度實驗組之污染物出流濃度曲線則呈現線性，其原因有必要再做深入之吸附探討。在以蒸氣注入/真空萃取法整治MTBE污染土壤時，可發現MTBE於一小時內即可達90﹪以上之移除效率。

在以蒸氣注入/真空萃取法整治柴油污染土壤時，發現柴油之初始污染濃度愈高，其初始出流之污染物濃度也愈高。隨著復育之進行，發現在高濃度實驗組(13.912 g柴油/kg soil一組與約5 g柴油/kg soil三組)之污染物出流濃度曲線有明顯劇降之情形，顯示注入之蒸氣流偏大，以致無足夠之時間與柴油進行質量交換，而無法達到固定值之飽和濃度。但在低濃度實驗組(約1 g柴油/kg soil)之情況下，卻可發現其出流濃度曲線屬典型之NAPL復育曲線。高濃度與低濃度實驗組之出流濃度差異性，可能係在復育初期，柴油中低碳數之成分可大量揮發，而高碳數成分之揮發狀態則屬穩定型之拖尾狀，故在高濃度實驗組，其低碳數成分之量多，而一旦復育開始進行，此低碳數成分大量排出，導致出流濃度突升，之後隨低碳數成分之耗盡而下降。而在復育效率方面，以高濃度實驗組最大(73.7﹪)，低濃度實驗組則僅約20﹪。此外，柴油污染土壤之復育可看出一快速移除期，在本研究之操作條件下，此期間之移除效率占總移除量之95﹪以上，且注入蒸氣量愈大，快速移除期之時間愈短；而注入壓力愈大，快速移除期之時間則愈長。在以土體加熱/氣提法整治柴油污染土壤之效果上，則低於同濃度實驗組10-20﹪，其差異是由注入氣流種類(蒸氣與空氣)與氣流量之交互作用造成，需進一步探討此兩種參數對整治效率之影響程度。

就含NAPL土壤污染復育而言，若以一維模式模擬復育趨勢時，MTBE之情況上得到不錯的符合度；至於柴油之情況，則需以污染物之可移除量作為濃度初始條件才能得到較佳之模擬結果。至於不含NAPL之土壤污染整治，若以一維模式模擬MTBE之復育趨勢時，亦可得到極佳之符合度，且可推算污染物之最初含量。

This research reports on an experimental and theoretical study of soil heating/air stripping and steam injection/vacuum extraction for remediation of MTBE and Diesel Contaminated Soils. Two one-dimensional mass transfer models were using to simulate the process of remediaction. Contaminant kinds(MTBE and Diesel)， contaminant concentration (152~13,912 mg/kg soil)，soil temperature(38~120℃)，steam injection pressure(0.5~1.0 atm)， and the mass of steam used(0.379~0.730 kg/h)were employed as the experimental factors in this study.

In soil heating/air stripping study, rising soil temperature will enhance the MTBE removed efficiency， it was shown in the concentration of effluent gas. Further, the flow rate at outlet of column was higher than that at inlet of column, it revealed MTBE transfers from liquid phase to gas phase and was removed by gas flow. The concentration of effluent gas curve in low initial MTBE concentration test was similar with high concentration test, but the mechanisms was quiet different，it need advanced adsorption test to find the reasons. In medium initial MTBE concentration test，the concentration of effluent gas curve showed linear shape. When using steam injection/vacuum extraction treating MTBE contaminated soil, it showed 90﹪efficiency can be reached in one hour.

In steam injection/vacuum extraction study, it showed higher initial diesel contaminant concentration，higher initial concentration of effluent gas. Further, in high initial diesel concentration test (13.912 g diesel/kg soil test and about 5g/ kg soil tests)，the concentration of effluent gas curves had a dominant drop at early time in remediation, it revealed the injection steam flow was quiet large, so diesel didn’t has enough time to transfer to gas phase, that the gas couldn’t been saturation at outlet of column. But in low initial diesel concentration test (about 1 g diesel/kg soil tests), the concentration of effluent gas curves showed the typical NAPL remediation curve. The different with in high and low initial concentrations might from the complex composition of diesel. Because at the early time in remediaction of high initial diesel concentration, the low carbon numbers diesel could abundantly evaporate, it caused the high concentration of effluent gas. With the remediation time go by, the low carbon numbers diesel exhaust. So the main composition of effluent gas transfer to high carbon numbers diesel, that the concentration of effluent gas curve showed the slowly decline. For high initial diesel concentration test (13.912 g diesel/kg soil)， the efficiency was the highest (73.7﹪). For low initial diesel concentration test (about 1 g diesel/kg soil), the efficiency was the lost (about 20﹪). Further, the remediation of diesel contaminated soil exited a rapid removed period. Under the conditions of this study, the rapid removed period could remove more than 95﹪contaminant of diesel removed at hold remediation time. The experiment results also showed that larger the mass of steam injection, shorter the rapid removed period, and larger the steam injection pressure, longer the rapid removed period. When using soil heating/air stripping treating diesel contaminated soil, the removed efficiency was worse 10-20﹪than the same initial diesel contaminated concentration.

In simulating remediation process, the prediction with the MTBE measured concentration yielded good agreement in NAPL model. But to get the better fit of diesel in NAPL model, it might set the “could removed mass” to initial condition of model. In non-NAPL model, MTBE also showed good agreement with model, and the model enabled the prediction of the initial contaminant level in the soil.

謝誌 i
摘要 ii
Abstract iv
目錄 vii
表目錄 xi
圖目錄 xiii
第一章 前言 1
1.1 研究緣起 1
1.2 研究目的 3
1.3 研究內容 4
第二章 文獻回顧與理論分析 5
2.1 土壤蒸氣萃取法與地下環境加熱法之搭配 5
2.1.1 電阻加熱法與氣提法之搭配 6
2.1.2 蒸氣注入法與真空萃取法之搭配 8
2.2 土壤中之油品污染 18
2.2.1 柴油之物理/化學性質及危害性 18
2.2.2 甲基第三丁基醚(MTBE)之物理/化學性質及危害性 21
2.2.3 柴油及MTBE之污染指標與分析方法 24
2.3 不飽和層污染物質量傳輸理論分析 25
2.3.1 基本理論分析 25
2.3.2 一維不飽和層受污染土壤不含NAPL污染物之復育
質傳方程式 29
2.3.3 一維不飽和層受污染土壤含NAPL污染物之復育質
傳方程式 34
第三章 實驗材料、方法與架構 38
3.1 實驗材料 38
3.1.1 土壤來源與前處理 38
3.1.2 試藥及材料 38
3.2 實驗設備 39
3.2.1 土體加熱/氣提法處理系統 39
3.2.2 蒸氣注入/真空萃取處理系統 41
3.2.3 其它儀器設備 43
3.3 研究架構 45
3.4 土壤樣品基本性質分析 48
3.4.1 粒徑分析 48
3.4.2 比重 48
3.4.3 pH值 50
3.4.4 土壤水分含量 50
3.4.5 灼燒減量 51
3.4.6 有機物含量 51
3.4.7 比表面積 52
3.4.8 陽離子交換容量(CEC)-醋酸鈉法 52
3.4.9 總石油碳氫化合物含量 53
3.4.10 水溶液中柴油含量分析 54
3.4.11 土壤中、空氣中與水中MTBE含量分析 54
3.5 亨利常數與土壤-水分配係數批次檢測試驗 55
3.6 人工污染土配製及管柱填充和實驗操作程序 55
3.6.1 人工污染土配製程序 55
3.6.2 污染土管柱裝填和實驗操作程序 56
3.7 實驗前、後及過程分析 56
3.7.1 實驗前、後分析 56
3.7.2 實驗過程分析 58
第四章 結果與討論 60
4.1 土壤樣品基本性質分析結果 60
4.2 MTBE亨利常數與土壤-水分配係數檢測試驗 62
4.3 柴油之土壤-二氯甲烷分配性試驗 64
4.4 土體加熱/氣提法之實驗結果與模式模擬 67
4.4.1 污染物之移除趨勢 67
4.4.2 管柱出口氣體流率與污染物移除重量 81
4.4.3 實驗過程中之溫度變化 82
4.4.4 實驗前、後土壤水分含量之變化 87
4.4.5 土體溫度對MTBE氣提效果之影響 87
4.4.6 土體加熱/氣提法之模式模擬 88
4.5 蒸氣注入/真空萃取法之實驗結果與模式模擬 100
4.5.1 污染物之移除趨勢 100
4.5.2 實驗過程中之土壤管柱溫度與壓力變化 115
4.5.3 實驗前、後土壤水分含量之變化 124
4.5.4 柴油污染物初始濃度對蒸氣注入/真空萃取法處理果
之響 124
4.5.5 蒸氣注入壓力與蒸氣注入量對蒸氣注入/真空萃取法
處理效果之影響 126
4.5.6 蒸氣注入/真空萃取法之模式模擬 128
4.6 土壤管柱出流柴油污染物之氣相層析儀圖譜分析 136
4.7 MTBE與柴油於土體加熱/氣提法與蒸氣注入/真空萃取
法兩種工法處理上之比較 146
第五章 結論與建議 147
5.1 結論 147
5.2 建議 149
參考文獻 150
附錄一 實驗數據表 156
附錄二 美國MTBE管制限值表 186

1.陳靜生，「環境地學」，科技圖書股份有限公司，第三版，台北，1994。
2.「環保署將加強抽查加油站防範地下儲油槽洩漏」，1997年11月3日，http://www.epa.gov.tw/news/gn861103.htm。
3.「八十九年二月份各縣市加油站汽柴油銷售統計表」，2000年2月，http://www.moeaec.gov.tw/gas/加油站氣柴油銷售統計表8902.htm。
4.「正視汽油添加劑MTBE的問題」， http://www.envi.org.tw/news/MTBE.htm。
5.車明道，1997， “油品污染土壤及地下水復育技術評估系統之建立”，第五屆土壤污染防治研討會論文集，台北市，第339-414頁。
6.楊金鐘，1997， “受有機物污染土壤之整治技術”，第五屆土壤污染防治研討會論文集，台北市，第47-74頁。
7.U.S. EPA, 1996, “Completed North American Innovative Remediation Technology Demonstration Projects”, EPA 542-B-96-002, Washington, DC.
8.Heron, G., M. V. Zutphen, T. H. Christensen, and C. G. Enfield, 1998, “Soil Heating for Enhanced Remediation of Chlorinated Solvents：A Laboratory Study on Resistive Heating and Vapor Extraction in a Silty, Low-Permeable Soil Contaminated with Trichloroethylene”, Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 32, No. 10, pp. 1474-1481.
9.Wilson, D. J. and A. N. Clarke, 1992, “Removal of Semivolatiles from Soils by Steam Stripping. 1. A Local Equilibrium Model”, Saparation Science and Technology, Vol. 27, No. 11, pp.1337-1359.
10.Johnson, P. C., A. Baehr, R. A. Brown, R. Hinchee, and G. Hoag, 1993, Vacuum Vapor Extraction, Innovative Site Remediation Technology, Vol. 8, W. C. Anderson (Ed.), American Academy of Environmental Engineers, Annapolis, MD.
11.News, 1998, “Soil Heating Quickly Captures Contaminants”, Civil Engineering, Vol. 68, No. 4, pp. 14-14.
12.Webb, S. W. and J. M. Phelan, 1997, “Effect of Soil Layering on NAPL Removal Behavior in Soil-Heated Vapor Extraction”, Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, Vol. 27, No. 3-4, pp. 285-308.
13.Falta, R. W., K. Pruess, I. Javandel and, P. A. Witherspoon, 1992, “Numerical Modeling of Steam Injection for the Removal of Nonaqueous Phase Liquids from the Subsurface. 1. Numerical Formulation”, Water Resources Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 433-449.
14.Willman, B. T., V. V. Valleroy, G. W. Runberg, A. J. Cornelius, and L. W. Powers, 1961, “Laboratory Studies of Oil Recovery by Steam Injection”, Journal of Petroleum Technology, July Issue, pp. 681-690.
15.Stewart, L. D. and K. S. Udell, 1988,”Mechanisms of Residual Oil Displacement by Steam Injection”, SPE Reservoir Engineering, November Issue, pp.1233-1242.
16.Yuan, Z. G. and K. S. Udell, 1993, “Steam Distillation of a Single Component Hydrocarbon Liquid in Porous Media”, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol.36, No. 4, pp. 887-897.
17.Volek, C. W. and J. A. Pryor, 1972, “Steam Distillation Drive-Brea Field, California”, Journal of Petroleum Technology, August Issue, pp. 899-906.
18.Wu, C. H. and R. B. Elder, 1983, “Corelation of Crude Oil Steam Distillation Yields With Basci Crude Oil Properties”, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, December Issue,pp. 937-945.
19.Rodriguez-Maroto, J. M., C. Gomze-Lahoz, D. J. Wilson, and A. N. Clarke, 1995, “Removal of Semivolatiles from Soils by Steam Stripping. 2. Effects of Diffusion Kinetics”, Separation Science and Technology, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 159-187.
20.Rodriguez-Maroto, J. M., C. Gomez-Lahoz, D. J. Wilson, and A. N. Clarke, 1995, “Removal of Semivolatiles from Soils by Steam Stripping. 3. Steam Dynamics and the Stripping of Contaminants in a Column”, Separation Science and Technology, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 317-336.
21. Rodriguez-Maroto, J. M., C. Gomez-Lahoz, and D. J. Wilson, 1995, “Removal of Semivolatiles from Soils by Steam Stripping. 4. Effects of Adsorption/Desorption Kinetics”, Separation Science and Technology, Vol. 30, No. 13, pp. 2659-2678.
22.Hunt, J. R., N. Sitar, and K. S. Udell, 1988, “Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Transport and Cleanup. 1. Analysis of Mechanisms”, Water Resources Research, Vol. 24, No. 8, pp. 1247-1258.
23.Falta, R. W., K. Preuss, I. Javandel, and P. A. Witherspoon, 1992, “Numerical Modeling of Steam Injection for the Removal of Nonaqueous Phase Liquid from the Subsurface. 2. Code Validation and Application”, Water Resources Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 451-465.
24.Brouwers, H. J. H., 1996, “Experimental and Theoretical Study of Combined Solvent and Steam Stripping of 1,2,3,4,5,6-Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) and Mercury from Contaminated Natural Soil”, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 50, pp. 47-64.
25.Yow, J. L., R. D. Aines, and R. L. Newmark, 1995, “Demolishing NAPLs”, Civil Engineering, Vol. 65, No. 8, pp. 57-59.
26.Noonan, D. C., W. K. Glynn, and M. E. Miller, 1993, “Enhance Performance of Soil Vapor Extraction”, Chemical Engineering Progress, June Issue, pp. 55-61.
27.Wilkins, M. D., L. M. Abriola, and K. D. Pennell, 1995, “An Experimental Investigation of Rate-Limited Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Volatilization in Unsaturated Porous Media： Steady State Mass Transfer”, Water Resources Research, Vol. 31, No. 9, pp. 2159-2172.
28.Hanamura, K. and M. Kaviany, 1995, “Propagation of Condensation Front in Steam Injection into Dry Poruos-Media”, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 38, No. 8, pp. 1377-1386.
29.Brouwers, H. J. H., 1996, “An Experimental Study of Constant-Pressure Steam Injection and Transient Condensing Flow in an Air-Saturated Porous Medium”, Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 118, pp. 449-454.
30.Ham, A. G. J. and H. J. H. Brouwers, 1998, “Modeling and Experimental Investigation of Transient, Nonequilibrium Mass Transfer During Steam Stripping of a Nonaqueous Phase Liquid in Unsaturated Porous Media”, Water Resources Research, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 47-54.
31.Wang, C. Y. and P. Cheng, 1998, “Multidimensional Modeling of Steam Injection into Porous Media”, Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 120, pp. 286-290.
32.Poppendieck, D. G., R. C. Loehr and M. T. Webster, 1999, “Predicting Hydrocarbon Removal from Thermally Enhanced Soil Vapor Extraction Systems. 1. Laboratory Studies”, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 69, No. 1, pp. 81-93.
33.Poppendieck, D. G., R. C. Loehr, and M. T. Webster, 1999, “Predicting Hydrocarbon Removal from Thermally Enhanced Soil Vapor Extraction Systems. 2. Field Study”, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 69, No. 1, pp. 95-109.
34.Elgibaly, A. A. M., 1999, “Cleanup of Oil-Contaminated Soils of Kuwaiti Oil Lakes by Retorting”, Energy Sources, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 547-565.
35.Johnson, F. S., C. J. Walker, and A. F. Bayazeed, 1971, “Oil Vaporization During Steam Flooding”, Journal of Petroleum Technology, June Issue, pp. 731-742.
36.Duerksen, J. H. and L. Hsueh, 1983, “Steam Distillation of Crude Oils”, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, April Issue, pp. 265-271.
37.Blevins, T. R., J. H. Duerksen, and J. W. Adult, 1984, “Light-Oil Steamflooding-An Emerging Technology”, Journal of Petroleum Technology, July Issue, pp. 1115-1122.
38.車明道，1995， “土壤蒸氣萃取/通氣處理技術”，事業廢棄物處理技術講習訓練班，高雄市，第249-275頁。
39.林鎮洋、郭玲惠、郭振泰，1995， “德國土壤復育法規與技術初探”，工業污染防治，第14卷，第1期，第199-209頁。
40.陳維基，1996， “土壤水分對土壤氣提法去除甲苯的影響”，碩士論文，台灣大學環境工程研究所。
41.林鎮洋、郭振泰、W. Kinzelbach，1996， “未飽和層氣提法三維流場解析及模式應用”，中國環境工程學刊，第6卷，第4期，第269-277頁。
42.陳世裕、魏裕庭、吳先琪，1997， “土壤氣提法現地試驗研究”，第五屆土壤污染防治研討會論文集，台北市，第523-539頁。
43.許心蘭，1997， “不均質尺度對土壤中污染物傳輸的影響及模式”，碩士論文，台灣大學環境工程研究所。
44.黃俊逸、莊煒志、克斯誠，1997， “應用氣體抽除系統於污染土壤之整治案例”，第五屆土壤污染防治研討會論文集，台北市，第523-539頁。
45.成功大學，1998，「國道322.5K油料污染事件整治工作」，期末報告，中國石油股份有限公司台南營業處。
46.陳家洵、林鎮洋，1998，「土壤通氣技術最適化影響因子研究」，財團法人工業技術研究院能源與資源研究所委外計畫期中報告。
47.郭俊瑋、吳先琪，1999， “應用生物氣提法處理土壤有機污染物之研究”，第六屆土壤污染防治研討會論文集，台北市，第269頁。
48.蘭慶新、林啟燦、郭明錦，1999， “土壤氣體萃取法整治效率之實驗研究”，第三屆地下水資源及水至保護研討會論文集，中壢市，第183-191頁。
49.沈堯堅、林宏昌，1999, “土壤蒸氣抽除技術”，工業污染防治，第69期，第77-91頁。
50.楊金鐘、高志明，1999，「熱氣注入/真空萃取復育技術最適條件研究」，工業技術研究院委託學術機構研究計畫期末報告。
51.中國石油公司標準規範。
52.Stone, W. A., Jr., 1991, “Assessing Health Risks Associated with Diesel Contaminated Soils and Groundwater”, in Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils, Vol. 1, E. J. Calabrese and P. T. Kostecki (Eds.), Lewis Publishers, Ins., Chelsea, MI.
53.Block, R. N., N. Allworth, and M. Bishop, 1991, “Assessment of Diesel Contamination in Soil”, in Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils, Vol. 1, E. J. Calabrese and P. T. Kostecki (Eds.), Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, MI.
54.Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 1994, “Chemical Summary for Methyl-Tert-Butyl Ether”, U. S. EPA 749-F-94-017a.
55.「空氣污染系列探討- MTBE NOT MIB」，環境品質文教基金會，http://www.envi.org.tw/resource/air/air14.thm。
56.Bauman B., 1999, “MTBE Plume Length Studies Completed”, American Petroleum Institute, http://www.api.org/ehs/MTBE%20Content/LUSTLine%20article%20final.htm.
57.“What Role Dose Bioremediation Play in Limiting Exposure to BTEX and MTBE in Groundwater？” American Petroleum Inistitute, http://www.api.org/ehs/old%20rh/4654.htm.
58.Johnson, B., P. James, B. David, P. Curtis and Z. John, 2000, “MTBE-To What Extent Will Past Releases Contaminate Water Supply Wells？”, Environmental Science and Technology/News, pp. 2A-9A.
59.American Petroleum Institute, 1989, A Guide to the Assessment and Remediation of Underground Petroleum Release, Washington, D. C., U.S.A., pp. 1-18.
60.U. S. EPA, 1996, “Nonhalogenated Organics Using GC/FID”, SW-846, Method 8015B, Revision 2.
61.Bell, C. E., P. T. Kostecki and E. J. Calabrese, 1991, “Review of State Cleanup Levels for Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils”, in Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils and Groundwater, Chapter 5, P. T. Kostecki and E. J. Calabrese (Eds.), Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, MI, pp. 77-89.
62.何信恩，1999， “利用熱蒸氣注入/真空萃取技術現地整治受柴油污染土壤之最佳操作條件研究”，碩士論文，國立中山大學環境工程研究所。
63.Bedient, P. B., H. S. Rufai, and C. H. Newell, 1996, “Ground Water Contamination Transport and Remediation”, PTR Prentic-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
64.Bischoff, K. B., 1969, “Genernal Solution of Equation Representing Effects of Catalyst Deactivation in Fixed-Bed Reactor”, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Fundamental, Vol. 8, pp. 665-668.
65.ASTM, 1983, “Standard Test Method for Specific Gravity of Soils”, ASTM D854-83.
66.行政院環保署環境檢驗所，1995，土壤中酸鹼值測定方法， NIEA S410.60T.
67.行政院環保署環境檢驗所，1995，土壤水分含量測定方法-重量法， NIEA S280.60T.
68.Head, K. H., 1980, Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing, Volume 1： Soil Classification and Compaction Tests, Pentech Press Limited, Plymouth, Devon, pp. 249.
69.Nelson, D. W. and L. E. Sommers, 1980, “Total Carbon and Organic Matter”, in Handbook of Soil Mechanics, Vol. 2, Soil Testing, Chapter 29, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co., New York, pp. 539-579.
70.行政院環保署環境檢驗所，1995，陽離子交換容量(CEC)-醋酸鈉法， NIEA S202.60A.
71.State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 1996, Method TPH-D.
72.Lincoff, A. H. and J. M. Gossett, 1984, “The Dtermination of Henry’s Constant for Volatile Organic by Equilibrium Partitioning in Closed System” in Gas Transfer at Water Surface, W. Brutsaert and G. H. Jirka (Eds.), D. Reidel, Norwell, Mass., pp. 17-25.
73.Garbarini, D. R. and L. W. Lion, 1985, “Evaluation of Sorptive Partitioning of Nonionic Pollutants in Closed System by Headspace Analysis”, Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 19, No. 11, pp. 1122-1128.
74.Metcalf and Eddy, 1991, “Wastewater Engineering： Treatment, Disposal, and Reuse”, 3rd Ed., McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, pp. 1045.

75.Reid, C. R., J. M. Prausnitz, and B. E. Poling, 1987, “The Properties of Gases and Liquids”, Fourth Ed., McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
76.“STATE MTBE STANDARDS(1999)”, Arizona Department od Environmental Quality, http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/waste/ust/mtbe.html.