Adsorption of arsenic (V) on magnetite-enriched particles separated from the mill scale

  • Muhammad Kashif Shahid
  • San Phearom
  • Young-Gyun ChoiEmail author
Thematic Issue
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Water Sustainability: A Spectrum of Innovative Technology and Remediation Methods


The magnetite-enriched particles (MEP) were separated from the mill scale on low magnetic intensity ranging from 300 to 500 gauss. The characterization of the MEP was done with scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) and X-ray diffraction (XRD). The adsorption efficiency of MEP was investigated with batch tests and column operation. The maximum adsorption capacity was observed about 12.69 mg of arsenate on 1 g of adsorbent. Langmuir and Freundlich isotherm models were used to explain the experimental data and it was found that adsorption followed the Langmuir model more closely. Four columns were operated based on empty bed contact time (0.5 h and 1 h) and particle size (75–150 µm and 150–300 µm). The operated columns successfully removed arsenate from influent (0.5 mg/L concentration) during continuous operation for 6 weeks. This study introduces a cost effective and ecofriendly process for arsenate removal with MEP separated at low intensity of magnetic field.


Arsenate Adsorption Kinetics Magnetite Mill scale 



This work was supported by “Development of Eco-Smart Waterworks System” Program by the Ministry of Environment (MOE), Republic of Korea (Project #: 2016002110009).

Supplementary material

12665_2019_8066_MOESM1_ESM.docx (733 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 732 KB)


  1. Aredes S, Klein B, Pawlik M (2012) The removal of arsenic from water using natural iron oxide minerals. J Clean Prod 29–30:208–213. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bassil M, Daou F, Hassan H et al (2018) Lead, cadmium and arsenic in human milk and their socio-demographic and lifestyle determinants in Lebanon. Chemosphere 191:911–921. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chakraborti D, Rahman MM, Ahamed S et al (2016) Arsenic groundwater contamination and its health effects in Patna district (capital of Bihar) in the middle Ganga plain, India. Chemosphere 152:520–529. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chatterjee S, De S (2017) Adsorptive removal of arsenic from groundwater using chemically treated iron ore slime incorporated mixed matrix hollow fiber membrane. Sep Purif Technol 179:357–368. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen J, Qian H, Wu H et al (2017) Assessment of arsenic and fluoride pollution in groundwater in Dawukou area, Northwest China, and the associated health risk for inhabitants. Environ Earth Sci 76:1–15. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. de Buzin PGWK, Vigânico EM, Silva RDA et al (2014) Production of ferrous sulfate from steelmaking mill scale. Int J Sci Eng Res 5:353–359Google Scholar
  7. Dubey CS, Mishra BK, Shukla DP et al (2012) Anthropogenic arsenic menace in Delhi Yamuna flood plains. Environ Earth Sci 65:131–139. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farrell JW, Fortner J, Work S et al (2014) Arsenic removal by nanoscale magnetite in Guanajuato, Mexico. Environ Eng Sci 31:393–402. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Freitas ETF, Stroppa DG, Montoro LA et al (2016) Arsenic entrapment by nanocrystals of Al-magnetite: the role of Al in crystal growth and As retention. Chemosphere 158:91–99. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Giménez J, Martínez M, de Pablo J et al (2007) Arsenic sorption onto natural hematite, magnetite, and goethite. J Hazard Mater 141:575–580. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Giraldo L, Moreno-piraján JC (2013) Synthesis of magnetite nanoparticles and exploring their application in the removal of Pt2+ and Au3+ ions from aqueous solutions. Eur Chem Bull 2:445–452. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Han X, Song J, Li YL et al (2016) As(III) removal and speciation of Fe (oxyhydr)oxides during simultaneous oxidation of As(III) and Fe(II). Chemosphere 147:337–344. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Iskandar I, Koike K, Sendjaja P (2012) Identifying groundwater arsenic contamination mechanisms in relation to arsenic concentrations in water and host rocks. Environ Earth Sci 65:2015–2026. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Keyhanian F, Shariati S, Faraji M, Hesabi M (2016) Magnetite nanoparticles with surface modification for removal of methyl violet from aqueous solutions. Arab J Chem 9:S348–S354. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lata S, Samadder SR (2016) Removal of arsenic from water using nano adsorbents and challenges: a review. J Environ Manag 166:387–406. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Legodi MA, de Waal D (2006) The preparation of magnetite, goethite, hematite and maghemite of pigment quality from mill scale iron waste. Dye Pigment 74:161–168. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu C, Chuang Y, Chen T et al (2015) Mechanism of arsenic adsorption on magnetite nanoparticles from water: thermodynamic and spectroscopic studies. Environ Sci Technol 49:7726–7734. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Marchant BP, Saby NPA, Arrouays D (2017) A survey of topsoil arsenic and mercury concentrations across France. Chemosphere 181:635–644. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Martín MI, López FA, Torralba JM (2012) Production of sponge iron powder by reduction of rolling mill scale. Ironmak Steelmak 39:155–162. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McDonald KJ, Reddy KJ, Singh N et al (2015) Removal of arsenic from groundwater in West Bengal, India using CuO nanoparticle adsorbent. Environ Earth Sci 73:3593–3601. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mohamed A, Osman TA, Toprak MS et al (2017) Surface functionalized composite nanofibers for efficient removal of arsenic from aqueous solutions. Chemosphere 180:108–116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mohan D, Pittman CU (2007) Arsenic removal from water/wastewater using adsorbents—a critical review. J Hazard Mater 142:1–53. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Molinari R, Argurio P (2017) Arsenic removal from water by coupling photocatalysis and complexation–ultrafiltration processes: a preliminary study. Water Res 109:327–336. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Potapova E, Yang X, Westerstrand M et al (2012) Interfacial properties of natural magnetite particles compared with their synthetic analogue. Miner Eng 36–38:187–194. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Raven KP, Jain A, Loeppert RH (1998) Arsenite and arsenate adsorption on ferrihydrite: kinetics, equilibrium, and adsorption envelopes. Environ Sci Technol 32:344–349. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Salazar-Camacho C, Villalobos M, Luz Rivas-Sánchez M de la et al (2013) Characterization and surface reactivity of natural and synthetic magnetites. Chem Geol 347:233–245. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sarkar A, Paul B (2016) The global menace of arsenic and its conventional remediation—a critical review. Chemosphere 158:37–49. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sarkar S, Blaney LM, Gupta A et al (2008) Arsenic removal from groundwater and its safe containment in a rural environment: validation of a sustainable approach. Environ Sci Technol 42:4268–4273. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shahid MK, Phearom S, Choi Y-G (2018) Synthesis of magnetite from raw mill scale and its application for arsenate adsorption from contaminated water. Chemosphere 203:90–95. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shipley HJ, Yean S, Kan AT, Tomson MB (2009) Adsorption of arsenic to magnetite nanoparticles: effect of particle concentration, pH, ionic strength, and temperature. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:509–515. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shipley HJ, Yean S, Kan AT, Tomson MB (2010) A sorption kinetics model for arsenic adsorption to magnetite nanoparticles. Environ Sci Pollut Res 17:1053–1062. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Smedley PL, Nicolli HB, Macdonald DMJ et al (2002) Hydrogeochemistry of arsenic and other inorganic constituents in groundwaters from La Pampa, Argentina. Appl Geochem 17:259–284. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith AH, Marshall G, Yuan Y et al (2006) Increased mortality from lung cancer and bronchiectasis in young adults after exposure to arsenic in utero and in early childhood. Environ Health Perspect 114:1293–1296. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sun J, Quicksall AN, Chillrud SN et al (2016) Arsenic mobilization from sediments in microcosms under sulfate reduction. Chemosphere 153:254–261. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yavuz CT, Prakash A, Mayo JT, Colvin VL (2009) Magnetic separations: from steel plants to biotechnology. Chem Eng Sci 64:2510–2521. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yean S, Cong L, Yavuz CT et al (2005) Effect of magnetite particle size on adsorption and desorption of arsenite and arsenate. J Mater Res 20:3255–3264. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zhang G, Li X, Wu S, Gu P (2012) Effect of source water quality on arsenic (V) removal from drinking water by coagulation/microfiltration. Environ Earth Sci 66:1269–1277. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Kashif Shahid
    • 1
  • San Phearom
    • 2
  • Young-Gyun Choi
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Environmental and Chemical Convergence EngineeringDaegu UniversityGyeongsanRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Environmental EngineeringChungnam National UniversityDaejeonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations