Advertisement

Czechoslovak Journal of Physics

, Volume 56, Supplement 4, pp D381–D387 | Cite as

Radiation removal of lead and cadmium complexed with ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid from aqueous solutions

  • B. Drtinová
  • M. Pospíšil
  • V. Múčka
  • V. Čuba
Article
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

The removal of lead (100 mg/L) and cadmium (27 mg/L) complexed with ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) in presence of different scavengers has been investigated. The experiments show that in acidic solutions, the EDTA complexed lead may be reduced at a dose of 40 kGy up to 97 % without the addition of typical OH radical scavengers such as Na(K) formate. The addition of OH radical scavengers as 1×10−3 mol/L HCOOK, 2×10−3 mol/L carbonate or 2×10−3 mol/L bicarbonate (wide range of pH) results in no further improvement. The bubbling of the solution with nitrogen or oxygen also exhibits no positive effect. On the contrary, saturation with nitrous oxide in the presence of scavengers has a modest positive influence, whereas in the system which is scavenger-free, high negative effect (30 %) was observed. The presence of nitrate (e aq scavenger) appears to be important for an effective reduction of complexed lead. The efficient removal of cadmium complexed with EDTA proceeds up to 96 % at a dose of 40 kGy with an addition of 5×10−3 mol/L of carbonate as the OH radical scavenger and simultaneously pH buffer (pH 10.5). After irradiation, the cadmium is present in the final form of CdCO3.

Keywords

Cadmium Nitrous Oxide Radiation Chemical Yield Cadmium Nitrate Radiation Reduction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. [1]
    Getoff N.: Res. Chem. Intermed. 27 (2001) 343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Weber T. J.: In: Metal Finishing: Guidebook and Directory issue, New York 95, 1A (1997) 751.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Krapfenbauer K. and Getoff N.: Radiation Physics and Chemistry 55 (1999) 385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Su, Y. et al.: J. Adv. Oxid. Techno. 3 No. 1 (1998) 63.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Buitenhuis R., Bakker C. M. N., Stock F. R. and Louwrier P. W. F.: Radiochimica Acta, 24 (1977) 189.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Batacharyya S. R. and Kundu K. P.: Int. J. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 4 (1972) 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Pospíšil M. et al.: In: Sixth International Symposium and Exhibition on Environmental Contamination in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States, 1–4 September 2003, Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Pikaev, A. K.: Contemporary Radiation Chemistry. Radiolysis of Gases and Liquids. Nauka, Moscow, 1986 (in Russian).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Pospíšil M., Čuba V., Múčeka V. and Drtinová, B.: Rad. Phys. Chem., 75 (2006) 403.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of Czech Republic 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Drtinová
    • 1
  • M. Pospíšil
    • 1
  • V. Múčka
    • 1
  • V. Čuba
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear Chemistry, Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical EngineeringCzech Technical University in PraguePrague 1Czech Republic
  2. 2.Centre for Radiochemistry and Radiation ChemistryCzech Technical University in PraguePrague 1Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations