Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Experimental Studies on Remediation of Arsenic Contaminated Soils Using a Novel Solvent Extract Ant Mixture

Experimental Studies on Remediation of Arsenic Contaminated Soils Using a Novel Solvent Extract Ant Mixture

Ratings: (0)|Views: 708|Likes:
Published by Bharadwaj Santhosh
Experimental Studies on Remediation of Arsenic Contaminated Soils Using a Novel Solvent Extract Ant Mixture
Experimental Studies on Remediation of Arsenic Contaminated Soils Using a Novel Solvent Extract Ant Mixture

More info:

Published by: Bharadwaj Santhosh on Nov 04, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/04/2011

pdf

text

original

 
EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ON REMEDIATION OF ARSENICCONTAMINATED SOILS USING A NOVEL SOLVENT EXTRACTANTMIXTURE
Document by: 
BharadwajVisit my website
More papers and Presentations available on above site
ABSTRACT
Remediation of arsenic contaminated soil was studied in this work, experiments were carried out using simulatedsoil contaminated arsenic is treated with an extractant solution comprising of Citric acid, Oxalic acid, SodiumHydroxide and Sodium Carbonate. Experiments were carried out by treating the soil with the extractant solutionand vibrating in a shaker for one hour at 150 rpm. The experiments were done to determine the optimal conditionsof the extractant solution that effect maximum efficiency in removal of arsenic from the soil. The optimizedconditions for the extractant solution were found to be at .05 M and 8 pH.
Keywords
: Remediation, arsenic, Citric acid, Oxalic acid, Sodium Hydroxide, Sodium Carbonate.
INTRODUCTION
Soil contamination is caused by the presence of man-madechemicals or other alteration in the natural soil environment. Thistype of contamination typically arises from the rupture of underground storage tanks, application of pesticides, and percolation of contaminated surface water to subsurface strata, oiland fuel dumping, leaching of wastes or direct discharge of industrial wastes to the soil. The most common chemicalsinvolved are petroleum hydrocarbons, solvents, pesticides, lead and other heavy metals. The concern over soil contaminationstems primarily from health risks, both of direct contact and fromsecondary contamination of water supplies. In recent years,attention has focused on the development of 
in situ
(in place)immobilization methods that are generally less expensive anddisruptive to the natural landscape, hydrology and ecosystemsthan are conventional excavation, treatment, and disposalmethods. In-situ immobilization of metals using inexpensive
 
amendments such as minerals (apatite, zeolite, or clay minerals) isa promising alternative to current remediation methods. In polluted soils, metals (arsenic) which is held on inorganic soil particles and complexed with organic components can bedissolved or extracted by passing a solution through it. Solublecontaminants are subject to migration with soil water, uptake by plants or aquatic organisms. Metals in soil may be associated withvarious phases that are reactive, semi-reactive or non-reactive.Arsenic compounds have been used for many years in the paintindustry, dyes and pigments, insecticides/herbicides, wood preservatives. Such compounds and their residues are knowntoxins and, for this reason, arsenic is one of several commonlyoccurring elements designated as a priority pollutant. Arsenictrioxide (As
2
O
3
) has been applied as a herbicide at a number of utility sites, resulting in contaminated soils and groundwater’sfrom applications of this weed killer. Arsenic trioxide is asuspected carcinogen and is highly toxic by ingestion or dustinhalation. The Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) allowablein drinking water supplies in 0.050 mg/L. In a recent study,arsenic was described as being "at the forefront" of liver, lung,kidney and bladder cancer risks. The arsenic drinking water standard is anticipated to be set at a near-zero level. Generally,arsenic concentrations range up to 3500 ppm in the soil, withone value of 8300 ppm(in central India) observed. Thereforethere is a dire need for the removal of arsenic from the soil. For these reasons, the removal of arsenic contaminants has been anongoing concern. Common methods of treatment typicallyinvolve excavating the contaminated soil/material and treating itwith a solidifying agent such as cement. However, suchtreatment is costly and results in a large net-volume increase of disposable material. In any event, there is evidence to suggestthat such treatments are not entirely effective in preventingleaching. Other methods include washing the effected soil or waste with a solution, then collecting the leachate for removaland disposal. However, such methods typically result in acollection of concentrated heavy metals which may themselves be hazardous. The other existing methods of arsenic removalinvolving coagulation/precipitation with lime, alum or ferricsulfate are costly, produce a wet bulky sludge and often requirefinal filters for polishing. Other technologies which have beeninvestigated include ion exchange, foam flotation and adsorption(onto activated carbon and activated alumina). Thesetechnologies, while advantageous in some respects, aredisadvantaged by requiring, inter alia, soil excavation.This invention is an improved method for removal of arsenic-contaminants in soil. It overcomes certain well-known problemsand deficiencies, including those outlined above, while providing an effective, cost-efficient solution to a wide-spreadenvironmental concern. In part, the present invention is a methodfor remediating an arsenic-contaminated soil medium withoutexcavating the soil, including (1) contacting the soil mediumwith an aqueous extractant solution wherein the extractant iscitric acid, Oxalic acid , sodium Hydroxide and SodiumCarbonate (2) directing the extractant solution through the soiland into a groundwater source below the soil, (3) transferring thegroundwater to the soil surface whereby the groundwater contains arsenic compounds and the extractant solution, (4)consolidating the arsenic compounds contained within thetransferred groundwater, and (5) stabilizing the consolidatedarsenic compounds to minimize leaching during storage
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
Clayey soil was collected from the agricultural land in St PetersEngineering College, Chennai. Arsenic Trioxide, As
2
O
3
LR Grade (Merck’s) was added to the soil in different proportionsand left for a week. The extractant solution comprising of Citricacid, Oxalic acid, Sodium Hydroxide and Sodium Carbonate(equal moles) was added to the soil and the amount of arsenicremoved was analyzed. Batch studies were performed withdifferent concentrations and pH of the extractant solution todetermine the optimum conditions that effect maximum arsenicremoval.
Concentration Studies
100 grams of the arsenic contaminated soil (10,000 ppm of arsenic) was treated with 100 ml of the extractant solution prepared at different concentrations ranging from .01M to .10Mare placed in a shaker at 150 rpm for 1 hour. The arsenicremoval was then analyzed in all the soil samples.
Figure 1 Effect of Concentration of the extractant solutionon the arsenic removal efficiency.
From the figure 1, it is seen that the efficiency of arsenicremoval is maximum at a concentration of .05M and theefficiency remains relatively constant for the other increasingsolutions concentrations. Since a solution of .05M is optimalwhen compared with the higher concentrated solutions (namely .06M, .07M, .08M, .09M and .10M) and it gives the same percentage removal, the above said concentration is the optimumconcentration for arsenic removal from the contaminated soil.
pH Studies
100 grams of the same soil (containing 10,000 ppm of arsenic)was treated with 100 ml of .05M extractant solution prepared atdifferent pH namely 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 and thearsenic removal efficiency was analyzed.
 
Figure 2 Effect of pH of the extractant solution on thearsenic removal efficiency.
From the figure 2, it is seen that the removal is maximum at8pH. At other pH below 8, the efficiency was found to increaseculminating at a value of 8. At the pH above 8, the efficiency isfound to decrease and so the extractant solution has to be prepared at a concentration of .05M and at 8pH.
Volume Recognition Studies
100 grams of the same soil (containing 10,000 ppm of arsenic)was treated with the extractant solution of .05M at a pH of 8with different volumes of the solution namely 25 ml, 50 ml, 75ml, 100 ml, 125 ml, 150 ml, 175 ml, 200 ml, 225 ml and 250 mlto find the optimum volume of the solution required to treat thegiven contaminated soil.From the figure 3, it is observed that the optimum volume of theextractant solution to treat 100 gram of the soil is 125 ml. The percentagr of arsenic removal is found to be maximum at 125 mland the efficiency stays relatively constant with increasingvolumes (upto 250 ml). As a lower volume is economical, itrepresents the optimum volume to be employed. Therefore thesaid extractant solution is to be prepared at a concentration of .05M, 8pH and a volume of 125 to treat 100 gram of the soil.
Figure 3
 
Effect of Volume of the extractant solution on thearsenic removal efficiency.
The solution prepared with optimum concentration, pH andvolume was then used to treat contaminated soil (100 gram) withdifferent concentrations of arsenic in it, such as 2000, 4000,6000, 8000, 10000, 12000, 14000, 16000, 18000 and 20000 (in ppm). The soil samples were then analyzed for the percentage of arsenic removal.
Figure 4 Effect of Concentration of arsenic in soil on itsremoval efficiency
.From the figure 4, it is seen that the efficiency of arsenicremoval is found to be appreciable with decrease inconcentrations. The extractant solution developed is thus capableof treating soils with higher degree of contamination as well asthose with a lower degree of contamination.
Scope for In-Situ Implementation
The present investigation can be used as a in-situ method for extracting arsenic contaminants from a soil matrix. The methodcomprises immobilizing the arsenic contaminant throughinteraction with a solution containing citric acid, oxalic acid,sodium hydroxide and sodium carbonate. Likewise, the solutionhas an extractant concentration of about 0.05 and 8pH. The stepsinvolved in the in-situ implementation are (1) contacting the soilwith an extractant solution to mobilize the arsenic compounds(2) directing the extractant solution through the soil and into agroundwater source below the soil, (3) transferring thegroundwater to the soil surface whereby the groundwater contains arsenic compounds and the extractant solution, (4)consolidating the arsenic compounds contained within thetransferred groundwater, and (5) stabilizing the consolidatedarsenic compounds to minimize leaching during storage.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->