What cost savings are obtainable using the FRAC RITE™ process of hydraulic soil fracturing?
Cost is dependent on many factors including mobilization, scope of fracturing required, incorporation of additional remedial amendments into the fracture slurry, drilling conditions, need for subsurface fracture mapping, etc. When conducting Remediation Life Cycle cost comparisons at sites remediated using soil fracturing versus conventional methods, the cost savings have been in the order of 30% to 60% of the Total Cost of Remediation. These cost savings are due primarily to faster clean-ups achieved, and significantly fewer wells and related downhole equipment, infrastructure, monitoring, sampling, etc. required for fracture-enhanced remediation. At a former gas plant site in Alberta, Canada, the FRAC RITE™ process saved the client $1.35 million in remediation costs compared to the best alternative remedial options identified by their environmental consultant.
Related Questions
- How is hydraulic soil fracturing using the FRAC RITE™ process effective for in situ remediation of contaminants in low permeability soil?
- How does hydraulic soil fracturing differ from pneumatic soil fracturing, and what are their relative advantages and disadvantages?
- What cost savings are obtainable using the FRAC RITE™ process of hydraulic soil fracturing?
