Assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) migration from creosote-treated Douglas-fir and southern pine posts over a 38-month period

Authors

  • Kaelin Quigley Department of Wood Science and Engineering, Oregon State University
  • Matthew Konkler Department of Wood Science and Engineering, Oregon State University
  • Skyler Foster Department of Wood Science and Engineering, Oregon State University
  • Gerald Presley Department of Wood Science and Engineering, Oregon State University

Keywords:

Wood Preservative, Soil, Ground Contact

Abstract

Creosote is a widely used industrial wood preservative largely used for infrastructure-related applications such as utility poles, railway ties, and marine pilings. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are the predominant component, and some PAHs in creosote have been identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as priority pollutants. While research on PAHs found in aquatic environments is widespread, studies on terrestrial PAH migration from creosote-treated wood commodities are less common. This study sought to quantify the extent (quantity, distance, and depth in soil column) of PAH migration from creosote-treated wood in ground contact by measuring the concentration of 16 EPA-regulated PAHs in soil around creosote-treated Douglas-fir and southern pine posts over a 38-month period. The concentrations of PAHs were highly variable from chemical to chemical and timepoint to timepoint, but a few trends were discernible. Where differences were apparent between the two wood species, soils around southern pine posts tended to have higher PAH concentration than soils around Douglas-fir posts, likely due to the differences in chemical retention in the outer 25 mm of the wood, at 143 kg/m3 and 52 kg/m3, respectively. Lighter PAHs, particularly naphthalene and acenaphthene, were often found in controls. This indicates that some of the lighter PAHs likely originated from a combination of environmental inputs such as wildfire smoke and vehicle emissions in addition to creosote. Distance from the post surface also played a role in determining PAH concentration for several PAHs. Several higher molecular weight PAHs (fluoranthene, pyrene, benz [a] anthracene, chrysene, benzo [a] pyrene and others) were more frequently identified in samples taken 15 cm from the post than in samples taken 30 cm from the posts in the later sampling times. This field study is ongoing and will continue to examine PAH migration from creosote-treated commodities.

References

AWPA (2020) A6-20 Standard method for the determination of retention of oil-type preservatives from small samples. American Wood Protection Association, Birmingham, AL.

Baechler RH, Stamm AJ (1954) Wood. I Eng Chem 46(10):2127–2130. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie50538a038

Baimatova N, Koziel JA, Kenessov B (2017) Passive sampling and analysis of naphthalene in internal combustion engine exhaust with retracted SPME Device and GC-MS. Atmosphere 8(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos8070130

Bestari K, Robinson R, Solomon K, Steele T, Day K, Sibley P (1998) Distribution and composition of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons within experimental microcosms treated with creosote-impregnated Douglas-fir pilings. Environ Toxicol Chem 17(12):2369–2377. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620171202

Bolin CA, Smith ST (2013) Life Cycle Assessment of Creosote-Treated Wooden Railroad Crossties in the US with Comparisons to Concrete and Plastic Composite Railroad Crossties. 2013. https://doi.org/10.4236/jtts.2013.32015

Brooks K (2004) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon migration from creosote-treated railway ties into ballast and adjacent wetlands (No. FPL−RP−617; p. 53). U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory.

Brooks K (2020) Preserved Wood Utility Poles and the Environment (Technical Bulletin Nos. 19-E-302; p. 12). North American Wood Pole Council.

Cargouët M, Jeannee N, Vidart B, Gregori P (2018) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) levels in environmental media potentially impacted by reused or stored creosote-treated railway ties. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(18):17409–17424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-1910-9

Coulon F, Pelletier E, Gourhant L, Delille D (2005) Effects of nutrient and temperature on degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons in contaminated sub-Antarctic soil. Chemosphere 58(10):1439–1448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.10.007

Duncan DL, Carls MG, Rice SD, Stekoll MS (2017) The toxicity of creosote‐treated wood to Pacific herring embryos and characterization of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons near creosoted pilings in Juneau, Alaska. Environ Toxicol Chem 36(5), 1261–1269. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3653

Eisler R (1987) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon hazards to fish, wildlife, and invertebrates: A synoptic review (Biological Report 85 No. 11; p. 81). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). (1997). Pole preservatives in soils adjacent to in-service utility poles in the United States (Report No. TR-108598). https://www.epri.com/research/products/TR-108598.

Gallacher C, Thomas R, Taylor C, Lord R, Kalin RM (2017) Comprehensive composition of Creosote using comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GCxGC-TOFMS). Chemosphere 178:34–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.03.050

Gewurtz SB, Lazar R, Douglas Haffner G (2000) Comparison of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon and polychlorinated biphenyl dynamics in benthic invertebrates of Lake Erie, USA. Environ Toxicol Chem 19(12):2943–2950. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620191215

Goyette D, Brooks KM (1998) Creosote Evaluation: Phase II Sooke Basin Study – Baseline to 535 Days Post Construction 1995–1996. Prepared for the Creosote Evaluation Steering Committee Regional Program, Report PR98-04.

Kang, S-M, Morrell JJ, Simonsen J, Lebow S (2005). Creosote movement from treated wood immersed in fresh water. Forest Prod J 55(12):42–46.

Kim EJ, Choi S-D, Chang Y-S (2011) Levels and patterns of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in soils after forest fires in South Korea. Environ Sci Pollut Res 18(9):1508–1517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-011-0515-3

Konkler MJ, Cappellazzi J, Presley G, Morrell JJ (2020) Migration of creosote components from timbers treated with creosote and processed using Best Management Practices. J Environ Manag 276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111270

Moret S, Purcaro G, Conte LS (2007) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) content of soil and olives collected in areas contaminated with creosote released from old railway ties. Sci Total Environ 386(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.07.008

Mueller JG, Chapman PJ, Pritchard PH (1989). Creosote-contaminated sites. Their potential for bioremediation. Environ Sci Technol 23(10):1197–1201. https://doi.org/10.1021/es00068a003

Murphy BL, Brown J (2005) Environmental forensics aspects of PAHs from wood treatment with creosote compounds. Environ Forensics 6(2):151–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/15275920590952829

Navarro KM, Cisneros R, Schweizer D, Chowdhary P, Noth EM, Balmes JR, Hammond SK (2019) Incident command post exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and particulate matter during a wildfire. J Occup Environ Hyg 16(11):735–744. https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2019.1657579

Nestler FH Max (1974) Characterization of wood-preserving coal-tar creosote by gas-liquid chromatography. Anal Chem 46(1):46–53. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60337a008

North American Wood Pole Council (NAWPC). (2020). Preserved wood utility poles and the environment (Technical Bulletin No. 19-E-302). https://woodpoles.org/wp-content/uploads/TB_Pole_Enviro.pdf

O’Malley KE, Ghetu CC, Rohlman D, Anderson KA (2024) Assessing wildfire impact on diffusive flux of parent and alkylated PAHs: A pilot study of soil-air chemical movement before, during, and after wildfires. Environ Sci Technol 58(52):23117–23126. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c09139

RTA (2025) Questions About the Railway Tie Association. Railway Tie Association. https://www.rta.org/faq

Shupe, T. F., Hse, C. Y., & Roliadi, H. (2006). Removal of creosote from wood particles at different horizontal and vertical locations of decommissioned poles using steam treatment. Wood and Fiber Science, 38(2), 345–350

US EPA (1981) Priority Pollutant List. 40 CFR Part 423, Appendix A

Vlosky RP (2009, February 16). Statistical Overview of the U.S. Wood Preserving Industry: 2007. Louisiana Forest Products Development Center, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343921608_STATISTICAL_OVERVIEW_OF_THE_US_WOOD_PRESERVING_INDUSTRY_2007

Webster, P.D. 1992. The Wood Crosstie, A 150 Year Success Story: The Railway Tie Association & the National Association of Railroad Tie Producers, A Three-Quarters of a Century History. Railway Tie Association, Gulf Shores, AL. 272 p.

Wilson S, Jones K (1993) Bioremediation of soil contaminated with polynuclear aromatic-hydrocarbons (PAHS)—A Review. Environ Pollut 81(3):229–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/0269-7491(93)90206-4

Published

2026-11-08

Issue

Section

Research Contributions