Research on Chemical Intermediates

, Volume 44, Issue 5, pp 2965–2981 | Cite as

Stabilization of Cd and Zn in soil using pairwise mixed amendments of three raw materials: nanohydroxyapatite, nanoiron and nanoalumina

Article
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

Cadmium (Cd) has been identified as a very toxic heavy metal, which is widely present in the environment due to natural and anthropogenic emissions. Currently, in China, slight pollution of cultivated land is widespread and Cd is one of the top ranked inorganic pollutants in soils, which results in a great impact on the development of the economy and society. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop an efficient and economical method to remediate Cd-polluted soil. This study focused on the development of new kinds of immobilizing soil amendments for the remediation of Cd-polluted soil. In addition, the immobilization capability of zinc (Zn) which may lead to increased toxicity of Cd was also investigated. The amendments, nanoiron–nanohydroxyapatite, nanoalumina–nanoiron and nanohydroxyapatite–nanoalumina, were prepared by the pairwise mixing of three raw materials: nanohydroxyapatite (nHAP), nanoiron (nFe) and nanoalumina (nAl2O3). The application rate, mixing ratio and pH of the amendments were studied to determine the optimal application conditions of the amendments. The results showed that, compared with the single materials of nHAP, nFe and nAl2O3, the immobilized efficiencies of Cd and Zn in soils by the pairwise mixed amendments were both significantly (p < 0.05) increased. Optimal immobilization rates of both Cd and Zn of water-soluble and available fractions were above 97.0%. Scanning electron microscopy illustrated a more uniform mixture can be obtained by wet-mixing compared with a dry-mixing method for nFe–nHAP and nHAP–nAl2O3, and the uniform mixture of nAl2O3–nFe can be obtained by both dry- and wet-mixing methods. Fourier-transform infrared analysis demonstrated that the mixed amendments retained the good capability of nHAP, nFe and nAl2O3 for the stabilization of Cd and Zn in soil. Generally, 4–8% application amount, 4:1 mixing ratio of nFe/nHAP, nAl2O3/nFe and nHAP/nAl2O3, respectively, and neutral or slightly acidic pH of the amendments were optional for the remediation of the studied soil. The order of the three raw nanomaterials that affected on the stabilization capacity of the pairwise mixed amendments was nAl2O3 > nFe > nHAP.

Keywords

Cadmium Zinc Stabilization Nano amendments Soil 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by National Key R&D Program of China (2017YFC0504903) and the Humin Technology Research and Development Project of Chengdu Science and Technology Bureau of China (No. 2015-HM01-00180-SF).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

The research does not involve Human Participants or Animals. All other authors have read the manuscript and have agreed to submit it in its current form for consideration for publication in Research on Chemical Intermediates.

References

  1. 1.
    Y. Cui, Y.G. Zhu, R. Zhai, Y. Huang, Y. Qiu, J. Liang, Environ. Int. 31, 784 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S.J. Ye, G.M. Zeng, H.P. Wu, C. Zhang, J. Liang, J. Dai, Z.F. Liu, W.P. Xiong, J. Wan, P. Xu, M. Cheng, Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 1528 (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M.J. Mclaughlin, D.R. Parker, J.M. Clarke, Field Crops Res. 60, 143 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M.T. Rafiq, R. Aziz, X. Yang, W. Xiao, M.K. Rafiq, B. Ali, T.Q. Li, Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 103, 101 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Wei, L. Yang, Microchem. J. 94, 99 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S.M. Mousavi, B. Motesharezadeh, H.M. Hosseini, H. Alikhani, A.A. Zolfaghari, Environ. Geochem. Health 5, 1 (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Dudka, M. Piotrowska, A. Chlopecka, Water Air Soil Pollut. 76, 333 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    T.H. Christensen, Water Air Soil Pollut. 34, 305 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    C.H. Williams, D.J. David, Soil Sci. 121, 86 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Schuhmacher, M.A. Basque, J.L. Domingo, J. Corbella, Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 46, 320 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Schuhmacher, J.L. Domingo, J.M. Llobet, J. Corbella, Sci. Total Environ. 132, 3 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    China's Ministry of Environmental Protection and the Ministry of Land and Resources. China alerted by serious soil pollution. (People’s Daily, China, 2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. Wang, X. Cui, H. Cheng, F. Chen, J. Wang, X. Zhao, C.Y. Lin, X. Pu, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 22, 16441 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S.J. Ye, G.M. Zeng, H.P. Wu, C. Zhang, J. Dai, J. Liang, J.G. Yu, X.Y. Ren, H. Yi, M. Cheng, C. Zhang, Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 37, 1062 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    H.P. Wu, C. Lai, G.M. Zeng, J. Liang, J. Chen, J.J. Xu, J. Dai, X.D. Li, J.F. Liu, M. Chen, L.H. Lu, L. Hu, J. Wan, Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 37, 754 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Rawat, J.P.N. Rai, Bioremediat. J. 16, 66 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Angronsveld, S.D. Cunningham, in Metal Contaminated Soils: In Situ Inactivation and Phytorestoration, ed. by J. Vangronsveld, S.D. Cunningham (Springer, Georgetown, 1998), p. 1Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D.C. Adriano, W.W. Wenzel, J. Vangronsveld, N.S. Bolan, Geoderma 122, 121 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    S.M. Mousavi, B. Motesharezadeh, H. Mirseyed Hosseini, H. Alikhani, A.A. Zolfaghari, Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 147, 206 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    K. Rajeshwar, C.R. Chenthamarakshan, S. Goeringer, M. Djukic, Pure Appl. Chem. 73, 1849 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Y. Xu, D. Zhao, Environ. Sci. Technol. 39, 2369 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    C. Yuan, H.L. Lien, Water Qual. Res. J. Can. 41, 210 (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Z. Zhang, M. Li, W. Chen, S. Zhu, N. Liu, L. Zhu, Environ. Pollut. 158, 514 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    W.X. Zhang, J. Nanopart. Res. 5, 323 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    D.H. Moon, D. Dermatas, J. Hazard. Mater. 141, 388 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    R.K. Lu, Methods for Soil and Agricultural Chemistry, 1st edn. (Beijing, China Agriculture Science and Technology, 1999), p. 12Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    S.J. Hong, Methods for Environmental Pollution, 2nd edn. (Chinese Science, Beijing, 1987)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    A. Buccolieri, G. Buccolieri, A. Dell’Atti, G. Strisciullo, R. Gaglianocandela, Environ. Monit. Assess. 168, 547 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    G.M. Huang, K.M. Zhou, Z.Y. Tang, Y.P. Wang, X.L. Gao, L. Xiao, Y. Jiang, Soils 41, 201 (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    R. Zhu, R. Yu, J. Yao, D. Mao, C. Xing, D. Wang, Catal. Today 139, 94 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Q.X. Leupin, S.J. Hug, Water Res. 39, 1729 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Q. Zaman, R.S. Shiel, A.W. Schumann, Pak. J. Agric. Sci. 40, 1 (2003)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    W.L. Lindsay, Chemical Equilibria in Soils, 1st edn. (Wiley, New York, 1979)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Y. Xiong, J.F. Chen, Soils of China, 2nd edn. (Chinese Science, Beijing, 1986)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    T.R. Yu, Electrochemistry of Variable Charge Soils, 1st edn. (Chinese Science, Beijing, 1996)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    M.C. Amacher, J. Kotuby-Amacher, H.M. Selim, I.K. Iskandar, Geoderma 38, 131 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Architecture and EnvironmentSichuan UniversityChengduChina

Personalised recommendations