3rd AMIREG International Conference (2009): Assessing the Footprint of 206

Resource Utilization and Hazardous Waste Management, Athens, Greece

Determination of Hg in selected Greek soils and sea sediments

D. Katsimicha, D. Pentari, V. Perdikatsis and K. Komnitsas

Department of Mineral Resources Engineering, Technical University of Crete, Hania, Greece

ABSTRACT mass Hg poisoning in Minamata Bay of Japan.

The aim of the present work was the determina-
tion of mercury contamination derived from
human activities in local geochemical systems
in different areas in Greece. For this purpose, 27
soil and sea sediment samples were collected,
prepared appropriately and subjected to acid
treatment. The content in Hg, major and trace
elements was determined by ICPMS, while
XRD analyses were conducted in order to inves-
tigate the relationship between the mineralogy
of the samples and the corresponding Hg con-
tent. The mean Hg concentrations for the sam-
ples of each area were defined as follows:
38 μg.kg-1 Hg for Chania, 36 μg.kg-1 Hg for Ak-
rotiri, 19 μg.kg-1 Hg for Souda, 4 μg.kg-1 Hg for
Paleochora and 39 μg.kg-1 Hg for Lavrion (At-
tica). The high Hg concentration (~500 μg.kg-1)
which has been detected in 3 samples requires
an additional study using sequential leaching
experiments to assess its mobilization possibil-
ity. It is believed that the accurate determination
of the concentrations and geochemical forms of
Hg in the environment will contribute to moni-
toring of Hg contamination in the country.
1. INTRODUCTION
The metal mercury is known since antiquity and
the Chinese used its basic ore, cinnabar, to pro-
duce a brilliant red pigment over 3000 years
ago. In the Middle Ages, mercury was also ap-
plied but only in little doses for the treatment of
syphilis and other infections, as its lethal se-
quences were already well known (Clarkson and
Magos, 2006; Tack et al., 2005). During the
1950s, humanity faced a dramatic incident of
Hundreds of citizens were seriously ill or died
after consuming fishes that had bioaccumulated
methyl-mercury. Scientists have then concluded
that the toxicity of Hg is firmly depended on its
chemical form, with the organic forms being
always more noxious to living organisms than
the inorganic (MassDEP, 1996; Xinmin et al.,
2006). Nowadays, more and more governments
and international organizations are involved in
mercury research and have listed it among the
most significant environmental pollutants. Many
projects focus on the great toxicity and biocon-
centration ability of Hg and study its biogeo-
chemical cycle and potential impacts to the en-
vironment, biota and public health.
An important step in evaluation of such envi-
ronmental contamination is the identification of
natural sources and human activities that con-
tribute to high Hg concentrations in certain ar-
eas. Mercury can be found in important mining
deposits of cinnabar (HgS), for example in Al-
madén (Spain), Idria (Slovenia), Monte Amiata
(Italy) and Huancavelica (Peru), but in general,
naturally occurring Hg is directly related to vol-
canic eruptions, rock weathering, crustal de-
gassing, emissions from lakes-oceans and forest
fires (Rodrigues et al., 2006, MassDEP, 1996).
On the other hand, there are many human activi-
ties releasing Hg to the environment such as
mining and smelting of ores (particularly those
of Au, Ag, Cu and Zn), fossil fuel combustion
and petroleum refining, industrial production
processes (Hg cell chlor-alkali process), waste
incineration and crematoria operation, use of ag-
ricultural mercurial fertilisers-fungicides and
land spreading of sewage sludge. In anthropo-
genic activities should be added and all these
3rd AMIREG International Conference (2009): Assessing the Footprint of 207
Resource Utilization and Hazardous Waste Management, Athens, Greece

Table 1: Mercury concentrations reported in literature

Median/mean Range
Soil type/land use Location Reference
(mg kg-1) (mg kg-1)
Kabata-Pendias and Pendias
Background Worldwide <0.4 -
(1984)
Soil world Worldwide Median: 0.05 - Reimann and Caritat (1998)
Unpolluted soils Korea Median: 0.045 - Kim and Kim (1999)
Urban soil, town gardens Wexford, Ireland Mean: 0.68 0.09 - 2.97 McGrath (1995)
Urban soil Palermo, Italy Median:0.68 0.04 - 6.96 Manta et al. (2002)
Urban soil Trondheim, Norway Median: 0.13 <0.2 - 4.49 Reimann and Caritat (1998)
Urban soil Pittsburg, USA Mean: 0.51 - Carey et al. (1980)
Urban soil Cornwall, Canada Mean: 0.689 0.04 - 5.1 Sherbin (1979)
Urban soils, industrial cen- Kot and Matyushkina
Amursk, Russia Median: 0.175 0.004 - 0.464
ter (2002)
Topsoil, industrial center Beijin, China 0.22 / 0.5096 0.07 - 2.75 Liu et al.(1998)
Agricultural soil Belgium 0.12 / 0.24 0.03 - 4.19 Tack et al. (2005)
Urban soil Berlin, Germany Median: 0.19 - Birke and Rauch (2000)
Urban soil Jakobstad, Finland Median: 0.093 0.011 - 0.093 Peltola and Astrom (2003)

consumer, medical and industrial products such
as fluorescent lamps, dental amalgams, clinical
thermometers, electrical-electronic switches,
batteries, paints/pigments and many other prod-
ucts that release mercury during their life cycle
(Rodrigues et al., 2006; MassDEP, 1996). Ob-
viously, the discrimination between natural and
non-natural Hg contributions as well as point
and non-point sources of such contamination in
atmosphere, aquatic and terrestrial environment
is not always definite and absolute (Manta et al.,
2002). It is estimated that human emissions of
Hg are 1.5 to 3 times higher than those during
pre-industrial times and that around industrial
areas the deposition rates have increased by 2 to
10 times during the last 200 years (UNEP,
2002).
In November 2002, the United Nations com-
posed a “Global Mercury Assessment” and in
January 2005, the European Commission
adopted a “Community Strategy Concerning
Mercury” (EC, 2005). Both documents, given
the fact that natural Hg emissions are beyond
human control, suggest a number of actions for
the monitoring of emissions, production, use,
export and release of Hg derived from human
activities. Legislation provides maximum ac-
ceptable Hg levels in different media: water
(drinking, surface, ground, irrigation), air (ur-
ban, indoor, background), soil and food catego-
ries (fish, milk, meat etc.).
In recent years, several studies were carried
out to determine Hg contamination in soils and
sediments as there is great evidence of its long
residence time in these environmental media.
These studies have shown that worldwide Hg
concentrations in soils range between 0.01 and
0.2 mg.kg-1 (Tack et al., 2005). Some of the soil
Hg contents reported in literature for various
countries are listed in Table 1. What is more is
that due to its volatility and chemical persis-
tence, Hg can be involved in extensive air-soil
exchange processes and once released to the at-
mosphere may be transported over long dis-
tances (Rodrigues et al., 2006). As a conse-
quence, soils and sediments can be considered
as very important pools acting both as source
and sink in the global biogeochemical cycle of
Hg (Xinmin et al., 2006).
The present work is focused on the evalua-
tion of total Hg content in surface soils and
sediments from different areas of Greece. Sam-
ples were obtained from regions considered
both potentially contaminated and uncontami-
nated (natural background Hg levels). The aim
was to investigate the magnitude of human ac-
tivities causing serious Hg pollution in specific
vicinities. It is clear that such studies are very
helpful for future monitoring of Hg contamina-
tion in the country.
2. METHODS AND MATERIALS
2.1 Sampling and preparation
Sample collection was realized in mid summer
to early fall of 2008 and included 27 soil and
3rd AMIREG International Conference (2009): Assessing the Footprint of
Resource Utilization and Hazardous Waste Management, Athens, Greece
Figure 1: Sampling locations in Attica and Crete.
sea sediment samples from different areas of
Crete and Attica that could be possibly con-
taminated from mercury. Each specific sam-
pling location was geographically determined
using a GPS (Fig. 1). The samples were coded
respectively as follows: Ai (Akrotiri), Ci (Cha-
nia), Pi (Paleochora), Si (Souda) for the samples
from Crete and Li (Lavrion) for these from At-
tica. The samples, free of tree leaves, roots,
branch lets or shells, were crushed in agate mor-
tar, dried at 40o C for 48 h and were subse-
quently pulverized in porcelain and agate plane-
tary mills. The homogenized fractions were col-
lected and stored in plastic air-tight containers
as stock samples.
2.2 Analytical procedures
The mineralogy of the samples was investigated
by powder X-ray diffraction (XRD, D8 Ad-
vance Bruker apparatus) using CuKα radiation,
while the generator conditions were set at 35 kV
and 35 mA. The qualitative evaluation of the
obtained data was carried out using the software
Diffrac Plus, while the Autoquan software was
used for quantitative analysis.
The determination of the total mercury con-
centrations and the content of the samples in
major and trace elements were performed in the
208
International Scientific Laboratory OMAC, Ire-
land. The samples were primarily subjected to
aqua regia digestion and afterwards analyzed by
Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
(ICPMS). The lower detection limit for mercury
is 0.005 mg.kg-1.
For quality control/assurance and precision
purposes, two Standard Reference Soil Samples
from United States Geological Survey were also
analyzed (GXR2 with 2.9 mg.kg-1 certified Hg
and GXR6 with 0.068 mg.kg-1 certified Hg).
Two more Standard Materials indicating higher
and lower mercury levels respectively (In-house
Standard ICP-5 with 50 mg.kg-1 certified Hg and
Standard Till-4 with 0.039 mg.kg-1 certified Hg)
were included in the analyses. It is reported that
recovery percentages were higher than 95% and
that reagent blanks and randomly selected du-
plicated samples were also considered. All de-
terminations were expressed on a solid dry
weight basis and data processing was carried out
using the Microsoft Office Excel 2003 and the
Minpet 2.02 Software.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The mineralogy of samples was dominated by
carbonates (calcite, magnesian calcite and
dolomite), quartz and alumino-silicates (illite,
kaolinite C1, plagioclase-albite).
Total Hg, major and trace elements concen-
trations in all soil and sea sediment samples are
listed in Table 2, while the statistical summary
of Hg data grouped by region is illustrated in
Figure 2. The lower Hg values were reported in
the sampling area of Paleochora (Crete) and
ranged from below the detection limit
(<0.005 mg.kg-1) to 0.010 mg.kg-1. Correspond-
ing mid-low concentrations were also identified
in the Akrotiri area (Crete), where Hg values
ranged from 0.012 mg.kg-1 to 0.080 mg.kg-1.
The mean Hg concentrations were calculated as
0.004 mg.kg-1 and 0.036 mg.kg-1 respectively
and can be considered normal as background
levels for uncontaminated soils.
The Hg content in Chania and Souda, the
other two sampling areas of Crete, ranged in
similar levels with the previously mentioned.
Particularly in Chania, measured Hg values
ranged between 0.015 mg.kg-1 and 0.063mg.kg-1
while in Souda, Hg values ranged from below
0.005 mg.kg-1 to 0.040 mg.kg-1. Despite the
3rd AMIREG International Conference (2009): Assessing the Footprint of 209
Resource Utilization and Hazardous Waste Management, Athens, Greece

Table 2: Total Hg, major and trace elements concentrations of each sample (in mg.kg-1 unless otherwise stated)
Ag Al As B Ba Be Bi Ca Cd Ce Co Cr Cu Fe Ga Ge Hg K La Li Mg Mn
Sample
% % % % %
Α1 0.30 0.11 12.0 17 6.3 <0.1 0.03 24.70 0.05 16.1 1.2 6 3.2 0.20 0.2 0.2 0.012 0.04 9.6 3 1.26 127
Akrotiri

Α2a 0.06 0.14 8.2 12 8.5 <0.1 0.03 10.45 0.02 9.5 0.8 5 1.2 0.25 0.3 0.2 0.016 0.04 5.6 3 0.69 135
A2b 0.06 2.01 26.6 16 35.8 1.1 0.20 2.13 0.22 31.2 8.0 36 10.8 2.21 6.0 0.2 0.080 0.28 20.8 22 0.51 388
C1 0.06 0.99 7.1 7 78.2 0.4 0.18 15.64 0.22 21.8 7.6 24 27.2 1.90 3.3 0.1 0.063 0.13 11.4 12 0.62 234
C2a 0.61 0.28 10.3 17 92.4 0.1 0.06 19.21 0.12 9.0 2.1 15 84.9 0.58 0.7 <0.1 0.561 0.04 5.1 3 0.77 105
Chania

C2b 0.14 0.24 12.7 11 48.6 <0.1 0.03 24.83 0.09 6.7 2.8 9 19.5 0.61 0.6 <0.1 0.058 0.05 4.3 4 1.14 152
C3a 0.04 0.20 8.8 10 13.6 <0.1 <0.02 29.35 0.14 6.2 2.5 14 7.6 0.90 0.6 <0.1 0.016 0.05 5.2 3 0.76 109
C3b 0.04 0.74 13.3 9 19.7 0.3 0.06 15.46 0.05 19.3 4.3 18 7.2 1.52 2.4 0.1 0.015 0.16 11.4 8 0.30 130
L1 20.30 2.11 2132.7 42 503.7 1.3 1.28 11.86 15.92 37.0 19.8 79 1295.4 24.35 9.1 2.6 0.080 0.65 29.4 14 0.92 17832
L2 3.74 1.05 305.2 8 145.6 0.3 0.42 8.60 18.85 15.0 10.2 91 55.2 3.06 2.8 0.2 0.263 0.14 9.8 9 0.80 1763
Lavrion

L3 1.22 2.31 45.9 10 61.3 0.7 0.31 2.78 1.66 27.8 27.5 260 39.6 3.43 6.1 0.2 0.022 0.36 15.2 15 1.31 1019
L4 0.10 0.56 36.9 13 18.4 0.2 0.08 18.52 0.67 8.3 13.2 161 17.4 2.00 1.2 <0.1 <0.005 0.12 5.5 4 1.68 1314
L5 0.10 0.43 6.8 18 16.2 0.1 0.04 12.53 0.11 8.3 4.6 79 7.4 0.60 1.1 <0.1 0.053 0.09 5.6 5 0.66 297
P1a 0.02 0.29 2.6 7 12.0 0.1 0.05 11.87 0.09 8.0 3.5 10 6.1 0.56 0.8 <0.1 <0.005 0.07 5.0 4 0.73 494
Palaiochora

P1b 0.01 1.02 6.5 9 37.9 0.5 0.13 9.92 0.19 18.0 8.7 28 24.7 2.04 2.9 0.1 0.010 0.20 10.6 10 1.14 382
P2 0.02 0.96 5.7 12 24.7 0.4 0.10 12.60 0.15 14.2 8.5 34 15.5 1.52 2.5 0.1 0.008 0.18 8.8 10 0.92 720
P3 0.01 0.28 7.4 9 9.9 0.1 0.03 19.97 0.14 5.6 2.6 13 3.4 0.59 0.8 <0.1 <0.005 0.07 3.6 5 4.14 483
P4 0.01 0.66 11.3 6 14.3 0.2 0.09 3.25 0.02 6.5 5.4 9 5.8 1.86 2.1 0.1 <0.005 0.07 3.5 8 0.50 183
S1a 0.07 1.02 7.8 41 23.7 0.4 0.15 10.72 0.26 27.4 7.7 22 27.6 2.29 3.6 0.2 0.021 0.22 13.9 20 4.26 184
S1b 0.07 1.21 8.4 8 41.0 0.5 0.14 10.84 0.14 24.8 7.6 30 22.4 1.90 4.0 0.1 0.033 0.19 14.0 18 1.44 272
S2 0.04 1.68 10.5 33 69.0 0.7 0.23 10.45 0.10 34.4 9.8 30 37.6 2.62 5.6 0.2 0.040 0.34 16.9 21 0.56 329
S3a 0.02 0.36 21.1 10 13.4 0.2 0.06 11.57 0.18 10.2 3.2 10 3.8 0.90 1.2 <0.1 0.008 0.07 6.1 4 0.63 226
Souda

S3b 0.04 0.59 14.4 7 16.5 0.3 0.10 5.08 0.23 11.4 4.6 15 6.9 1.42 1.8 <0.1 0.556 0.09 7.0 6 0.31 238
S4 0.07 1.96 7.2 15 122.3 0.8 0.13 20.67 0.45 25.2 15.6 76 28.2 2.01 4.9 0.2 0.007 0.31 15.7 13 0.60 613
S5 0.02 0.16 8.4 13 19.1 <0.1 <0.02 31.11 0.10 6.9 1.9 9 3.1 0.27 0.4 0.2 <0.005 0.05 5.0 2 0.90 160
S6a <0.01 0.13 2.4 11 12.4 <0.1 <0.02 30.68 0.04 2.7 1.6 5 4.6 0.26 0.4 0.1 0.039 0.04 2.1 2 0.82 62
S6b 0.04 0.40 <0.1 28 15.5 0.1 0.02 33.27 0.07 5.3 3.3 12 7.1 0.30 1.0 0.1 0.005 0.14 3.6 8 0.58 57

Table 2 (Continued)
Mo Na Nb Ni P Pb Rb S Sb Sc Se Sn Sr Te Th Ti Tl U V Y Zn Zr
Sample
% % %
Α1 0.25 0.62 0.13 6.7 0.012 7.7 1.3 0.19 <0.05 1.1 0.4 0.3 1297 0.31 0.3 21 <0.02 1.2 7 13.74 15.3 0.5
Akrotiri

Α2a 0.13 0.47 0.20 3.9 0.008 4.1 1.4 0.10 <0.05 0.7 <0.2 0.2 581 0.13 0.3 49 <0.02 0.4 6 5.54 5.4 0.3
A2b 1.20 0.18 1.30 20.5 0.036 34.5 21.2 0.06 0.60 4.5 0.5 1.0 87 <0.02 2.3 295 0.18 0.4 42 18.31 32.7 1.5
C1 1.70 0.06 0.53 23.5 0.081 20.9 9.8 0.38 0.97 2.5 0.8 2.1 201 0.02 1.8 129 0.08 0.9 23 7.62 89.8 0.5
C2a 2.04 0.23 0.20 9.3 0.045 87.6 2.2 0.18 1.11 1.2 <0.2 5.5 766 0.11 0.6 66 0.05 1.4 9 5.94 77.8 0.9
Chania

C2b 0.88 0.23 0.12 10.7 0.030 17.4 2.2 0.13 0.11 1.2 0.2 0.9 546 0.08 0.5 54 <0.02 0.9 11 5.41 26.2 0.6
C3a 0.79 0.34 0.11 11.6 0.019 10.4 2.1 0.11 0.24 1.4 0.4 2.5 426 <0.02 0.6 35 <0.02 1.2 10 5.95 30.5 0.7
C3b 1.48 0.07 0.41 16.9 0.025 9.6 7.2 0.03 0.49 2.1 0.2 0.4 118 <0.02 1.6 108 0.05 0.9 23 7.02 23.6 0.8
L1 13.04 0.24 1.94 48.7 0.121 >20000.0 31.2 1.74 155.64 8.9 2.5 54.8 405 0.21 6.0 709 0.06 5.9 44 17.17 59054.6 45.7
L2 1.12 0.28 0.39 76.4 0.026 3164.5 7.6 0.05 52.96 3.1 <0.2 1.7 180 0.03 2.3 204 0.20 0.8 22 5.88 4265.7 1.4
Lavrion

L3 0.79 0.02 0.64 266.1 0.052 1048.2 21.5 0.02 9.57 8.1 0.6 0.6 34 <0.02 2.5 266 0.18 0.3 64 9.62 374.5 1.1
L4 0.66 0.28 0.08 150.8 0.015 128.1 6.4 0.05 1.62 5.9 0.3 <0.2 260 0.03 1.0 50 0.05 0.2 22 7.46 196.8 0.4
L5 0.69 0.45 0.56 43.7 0.014 22.0 5.8 0.19 0.21 1.9 <0.2 0.3 715 0.21 0.6 264 0.15 0.5 10 6.00 40.5 0.6
P1a 0.27 0.09 <0.05 23.6 0.018 10.6 3.4 0.02 0.08 1.4 0.2 <0.2 226 <0.02 0.4 31 <0.02 0.3 7 5.32 16.4 0.2
Palaiochora

P1b 1.88 0.08 0.40 40.4 0.049 16.7 11.7 0.07 0.40 3.6 0.4 0.5 231 <0.02 1.6 102 0.07 0.5 21 7.16 91.9 0.8
P2 0.83 0.11 0.34 51.5 0.030 10.0 10.5 0.03 0.21 3.2 0.3 0.3 308 0.07 1.2 103 0.04 0.4 19 7.18 37.8 1.1
P3 0.60 0.94 <0.05 20.0 0.012 5.5 2.1 0.12 0.07 1.7 0.2 <0.2 323 <0.02 0.4 18 <0.02 1.4 11 4.42 17.1 0.2
P4 0.58 0.36 0.07 14.7 0.020 6.5 2.8 0.04 0.21 1.8 <0.2 0.3 100 <0.02 1.3 31 <0.02 0.2 11 2.51 29.1 0.2
S1a 2.31 1.79 0.54 23.1 0.056 32.2 10.1 0.28 0.78 2.9 0.3 1.3 288 0.06 3.0 118 0.05 1.2 25 5.49 94.6 1.0
S1b 1.99 0.03 0.54 24.0 0.082 25.4 13.0 0.04 0.54 2.6 0.3 2.0 124 <0.02 1.5 136 0.09 0.8 26 7.54 57.4 0.4
S2 1.91 1.22 0.49 27.8 0.024 27.1 19.6 0.30 0.57 5.1 0.5 1.4 501 0.08 4.3 189 0.16 0.9 41 8.24 65.1 5.0
S3a 0.51 0.40 0.30 9.8 0.016 3.2 3.4 0.08 0.07 1.5 <0.2 <0.2 387 0.06 1.1 93 <0.02 0.7 14 6.45 14.7 0.8
Souda

S3b 0.83 0.02 0.40 12.8 0.050 9.8 6.3 0.02 0.25 1.7 0.2 1.0 141 <0.02 1.3 114 <0.02 0.5 19 5.68 30.5 1.4
S4 2.90 0.05 0.75 96.0 0.075 17.8 28.7 0.05 0.85 5.1 0.5 0.6 305 0.10 1.9 290 0.15 0.9 52 13.99 78.7 1.7
S5 0.26 0.37 0.17 12.9 0.017 7.1 2.5 0.11 <0.05 1.4 0.3 <0.2 1382 0.31 0.5 51 <0.02 1.2 9 6.46 9.9 0.9
S6a 0.17 0.36 0.07 12.0 0.023 9.6 1.6 0.08 <0.05 1.1 0.3 3.0 746 0.15 0.3 35 <0.02 1.3 8 3.03 10.8 0.5
S6b 0.43 1.22 0.12 23.0 0.016 3.9 4.9 0.17 <0.05 1.4 0.4 <0.2 368 0.04 0.4 50 0.02 2.0 19 5.00 10.3 1.0

mid-low concentrations, samples with high Hg old Venetian harbor of Chania, contained
content were present in both regions. The first 0.561 mg.kg-1 Hg, while the second one, a soil
sample, a sand sediment from the bottom of the sample from the larger area of the Souda port,
3rd AMIREG International Conference (2009): Assessing the Footprint of
Resource Utilization and Hazardous Waste Management, Athens, Greece
Figure 2: Statistical summary of Hg concentrations
grouped by region.
-1
contained 0.556 mg.kg Hg. Given the back-
ground geology that does not justify such ele-
vated levels, the measured concentrations sug-
gest anthropogenic inputs of Hg in these spe-
cific areas (uncontrolled emissions and marine
activities respectively). The mean Hg concentra-
tion for Chania (0.038 mg.kg-1) and Souda
(0.019 mg.kg-1) were calculated excluding the
two extreme values.
In the same way, the samples from Lavrion, a
well known polymettalic sulfide mineralization
area of Attica, presented comparable results.
Mercury concentration ranged from below
0.005 mg.kg-1 to 0.080 mg.kg-1 except from one
sea sediment sample in the coast of Thorikos
that contained 0.263 mg.kg-1 Hg. This probably
indicates a natural affinity of Hg to the back-
ground geology assisted by anthropogenic con-
tamination (historical mining and smelting as
well as slag production and disposal in coastal
areas). The mean Hg concentration for Lavrion
(0.039 mg.kg-1) was determined excluding the
extreme Hg value from Thorikos. It is noted that
the potential association between Hg and other
elements for the entire dataset was examined us-
ing the Linear Correlation Coefficients. The re-
sults indicated that mercury had a very good
correlation (r>0.73) with Pb, Cu and a good one
with Cd, Se, Zn, P and Sn (r>0.40).
It is mentioned that only a few environmental
studies mapping Hg content in Greek soils are
available (Haidouti et al., 1985). The area of
Lavrion is an exception as it has been studied
extensively due to its geological and mining sig-
nificance in order to assess environmental im-
pacts (Kontopoulos et al., 1995; Xenidis et al.,
2003). Comparatively the findings of the present
210
work are in accordance with previous observa-
tions (FOREGS, 2005). What is important is
that Hg contents determined in each region do
not exceed in general the environmental critical
level of 0.2 mg.kg-1 Hg recommended for soils
in Greece and other European Community
countries (UNEP, 2002). Despite this, research
has to be continued and focus on localized Hg
enrichments in order to determine all possible
contamination sources, identify potential path-
ways and assess its fate.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Total Hg contents in selected Greek soil and sea
sediment samples may be considered as mid-
low when compared to values measured in other
soils. However, the detection of elevated Hg
concentrations in three samples emphasized the
very important environmental impacts of human
activities. Work is in progress to investigate the
mobility of Hg using sequential leaching ex-
periments and identify its correlation with Total
Organic Carbon (TOC). For a complete map-
ping of Hg concentration in potentially con-
taminated areas more samples are required. In
conclusion, a future research target should be
the creation of a mercury baseline database for
Greek soils and sediments that would include
Hg background levels for more areas.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research project was financially supported
by the Special Research Fund Account of the
Technical University of Crete. The authors
would like to express their thanks.
REFERENCES
Birke, M. and U. Rauch, 2000. Urban geochemistry: in-
vestigations in the Berlin metropolitan area. Environ-
mental Geochemistry and Health 22, pp. 233-248.
Carey, A.E., J.A. Gowen, T.J. Forehand, H. Tai and G.B.
Wiersma, 1980. Heavy metal concentrations in soils of
5 United State cities, 1972, urban soils monitoring
program. Pesticides Monitoring Journal 13, pp. 150-
154.
Clarkson, T.W. and L. Magos, 2006. The Toxicology of
Mercury and Its Chemical Compounds. Critical Re-
views in Toxicology 36, pp. 609-662.
EC, European Commission, 2005. Extended Impact As-
sessment, Annex to the Communication to the Council
and the European Parliament on Community Strategy
3rd AMIREG International Conference (2009): Assessing the Footprint of 211
Resource Utilization and Hazardous Waste Management, Athens, Greece

Concerning Mercury, Brussels, (SEC) 101pp. Xenidis, A., N. Papassiopi and K. Komnitsas (2003). Car-
FOREGS, Forum of the European Geological Surveys, bonate rich mine tailings in Lavrion: Risk assessment
2005. Geochemical Atlas of Europe. Geochemical and proposed rehabilitation schemes. Advances in En-
Baseline Mapping programme. On web: vironmental Research 7(2), pp. 207-222.
http://www.gsf.fi/publ/foregsatlas/map_compare.html Xinmin, Z., L. Kunli, S. Xinzhang, T. Jian’an and L.
Haidouti, C., V. Skarlou and F. Tsouloucha, 1985. Mer- Yilun, 2006. Mercury in the topsoil and dust of Bei-
cury contents of some Greek soils. Geoderma 35, pp. jing City. The Science of the Total Environment 368,
251-256. pp. 713-722.
Kabata-Pendias, A. and H. Pendias, 1984. Trace Elements
in Soils and Plants. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Kim, K.H. and S.H. Kim, 1999. Heavy metal pollution of
agricultural soils in central regions of Korea. Water
Air Soil Pollution 111, pp. 109-122.
Kontopoulos. A., K. Komnitsas, A. Xenidis and N. Papas-
siopi, 1995. Environmental characterization of the
sulphidic tailings in Lavrion. Minerals Engineering
8(10), pp. 1209-1219.
Kot, F.S. and L.A. Matyushkina, 2002. Distribution of
mercury in chemical fractions of contaminated urban
soils of Middle Amur, Russia. Journal of Environ-
mental Monitoring 4, pp. 803-808.
Liu, J.H., W.H. Wang and A. Peng, 1998. Pollution and
sources of Hg in topsoil in two district of Beijing City.
Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae 18, pp. 331-336.
MassDEP, Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection, 1996. Toxics & Hazards: Mercury in Mas-
sachusetts, An Evaluation of Sources, Emissions, Im-
pacts and Controls. On web:
http://www.mass.gov/dep/toxics/stypes/hgch2.htm.
Manta, D.S., M. Angelone, A. Bellanca, R. Neri and M.
Sprovieri, 2002. Heavy metals in urban soils: a case
study from the city of Palermo (Sicily), Italy. The Sci-
ence of the Total Environment 300, pp. 229-243.
McGrath, D., 1995. Organic micropollutant and trace
element pollution of Irish soils. The Science of the To-
tal Environment 164, pp. 125-133.
Peltola, P. and M. Astrom, 2003. Urban Geochemistry: a
multimedia and multielement survey of a small town
in Northern Europe. Environmental Geochemistry and
Health 25, pp. 397-419.
Reinmann, C. and P. Caritat, 1998. Chemical elements in
the environment: fact sheets for the geochemist and
environmental scientist. Springer, Berlin.
Rodrigues, S., M.E. Pereira, A.C. Duarte, F. Ajmone-
Marsan, C.M. Davidson, H. Grčman, I. Hossack, A.S.
Hursthouse, K. Ljung, C. Martini, E. Otabbong, R.
Reinoso, E. Ruiz-Cortés, G.J. Urquhart and B. Vrščaj,
2006. Mercury in urban soils: A comparison of local
spatial variability in six European cities. The Science
of the Total Environment 368, pp. 926-936.
Sherbin, I.G., 1979. Mercury in the Canadian environ-
ment - Ottawa: minister of supply and services Canada
- report/environmental protection service Canada, 3-
EC-79-6.
Tack, F.M.G., T. Vanhaesebroeck, M.G. Verloo, K. Van
Rompaey and E. Van Ranst, 2005. Mercury baseline
levels in Flemish soils (Belgium). Environmental Pol-
lution 134, pp. 173-179.
UNEP, United Nations Environmental Programme
Chemicals, 2002. Global Mercury Assessment. GMA,
Geneva, Switzerland, 270pp.