Advertisement

Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 1610–1619 | Cite as

Arsenic immobilization in soil using starch-stabilized Fe/Cu nanoparticles: a case study in treatment of a chromated copper arsenate (CCA)-contaminated soil at lab scale

  • Yassaman Babaee
  • Catherine N. Mulligan
  • Md. Saifur Rahaman
Soils, Sec 4 • Ecotoxicology • Research Article
  • 143 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The present study investigates the possible use and effectiveness of starch-stabilized Fe/Cu nanoparticles for in situ immobilization of arsenic in contaminated soils.

Materials and methods

For this purpose, 0.04 wt.% starch-stabilized Fe/Cu nanoparticles were synthesized and tested through batch and column tests for the immobilization of arsenic in a loamy soil contaminated by chromated copper arsenate (CCA).

Results and discussion

When the CCA-contaminated loamy soil was treated with 0.4 g/L of starch-stabilized Fe/Cu nanoparticles (0.04 wt.%) at a soil-to-liquid ratio of 0.1, water-leachable arsenic was reduced by 92% and the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) leachability was reduced by 98%. Column elution experiments showed that through application of starch-stabilized Fe/Cu nanoparticles to CCA-contaminated soil, nearly all water-soluble arsenic was transferred to the nanoparticle phase. The TCLP leachability of arsenic remaining in the soil column was reduced by 70% due to the immobilization of arsenic by nanoparticles.

Conclusions

In addition to an extremely high arsenic sorption capacity, starch-stabilized Fe/Cu nanoparticles exhibited excellent mobility in the soil environment. Both the high sorption capacity and the excellent mobility in the soil environment suggest potential for application of these nanoparticles to the contaminated soil for potential in situ arsenic immobilization.

Keywords

Arsenic Immobilization Soil Stabilized Fe/Cu nanoparticles 

Supplementary material

11368_2017_1882_MOESM1_ESM.docx (18 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 17 kb)

References

  1. Altavilla C, Ciliberto E (2011) Inorganic nanoparticles. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  2. An B, Steinwinder TR, Zhao DY (2005) Selective removal of arsenate from drinking water using a polymeric ligand exchanger. Water Res 39(20):4993–5004.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2005.10.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. An B, Zhao D (2012) Immobilization of As(III) in soil and groundwater using a new class of polysaccharide stabilized Fe–Mn oxide nanoparticles. J Hazard Mater 212:332–341  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.10.062
  4. ASTM (2013) D4972-13: standard test method for pH of soils. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA www.astm.org Google Scholar
  5. ASTM (2014) D2974-14: standard test methods for moisture, ash, and organic matter of peat and other organic soils. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA www.astm.org Google Scholar
  6. ASTM (2006) D7100-06: standard test method for hydraulic conductivity compatibility testing of soils with aqueous solutions. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA www.astm.org Google Scholar
  7. Azcue JM, Nriagu JO (1994) Arsenic: historical perspectives. In: Nriagu JO (ed) Arsenic in the environment, part I: cycling and characterization. John Wiley and Sons, Inc, New York, NY, pp 1–16Google Scholar
  8. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (1999) Canadian soil quality guidelines for the protection of environmental and human health: chromium (total 1997) (VI 1999). In: Canadian environmental quality guidelines, 1999, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, WinnipegGoogle Scholar
  9. Ding M, Jong BHWS, Roosendaal SJ, Vredenberg A (2000) XPS studies on the electronic structure of bonding between solid and solutes: adsorption of arsenate, chromate, phosphate, Pb21, and Zn21 ions on amorphous black ferric oxyhydroxide. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 64(7):1209–1219.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7037(99)00386-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. El-Temsah YS, Joner EJ (2013) Effects of nano-sized zero-valent iron (nZVI) on DDT degradation in soil and its toxicity to collembola and ostracods. Chemosphere 92(1):131–137.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.02.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. EPA (1994) EPA-902-B-94-001: technical assistance document for complying with the TC rule and implementing the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP). United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, RCRA Outreach Program, http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P1007NTD.PDF?Dockey=P1007NTD.PDF
  12. Hartley W, Edwards R, Lepp NW (2004) Arsenic and heavy metal mobility in iron oxide-amended contaminated soils as evaluated by short- and long-term leaching test. Environ Pollut 131(3):495–504.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2004.02.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Health Canada (2014) Guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality—summary table. Water and Air Quality Bureau, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  14. He F, Zhang M, Qian TW, Zhao DY (2009) Transport of carboxymethyl cellulose stabilized iron nanoparticles in porous media: column experiments and modeling. J Colloid Interf Sci 334(1):96–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2009.02.058 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. IPCS (2001) Arsenic and arsenic compounds, 2nd ed. Geneva, World Health Organization, International Program on Chemical Safety (Environmental Health Criteria 224; http://whqlibdoc.who.int/ehc/WHO_EHC_224.pdf
  16. Khin MM, Sreekumaran Nair A, Jagadeesh Babu V, Murugan R, Ramakrishna S (2012) A review on nanomaterials for environmental remediation. Energy Environ Sci 5(8):8075–8109.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c2ee21818f CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klaine SJ, Alvarez PJJ, Batley GE, Fernandes TF, Handy RD, Lyon DY, Mahendra S, McLaughlin MJ, Lead JR (2008) Nanomaterials in the environment: behavior, fate, bioavailability, and effects. Environ Toxicol Chem 27(9):1825–1851.  https://doi.org/10.1897/08-090.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kretzschmar R, Borkovec M, Grolimund D, Elimelech M (1999) Mobile subsurface colloids and their role in contaminant transport. Adv Agron 66:121–193.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60427-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liang QQ, Zhao DY, Qian TW, Freeland K, Feng YC (2012) Effects of stabilizers and water chemistry on arsenate sorption by polysaccharide-stabilized magnetite nanoparticles. Ind Eng Chem Res 51(5):2407–2418.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie201801d CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liang W, Dai C, Zhou X, Zhang Y (2014) Application of zero-valent iron nanoparticles for the removal of aqueous zinc ions under various experimental conditions. PLoS One 9(1):e85686.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085686 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liang Q, Zhao D (2014) Immobilization of arsenate in a sandy loam soil using starch-stabilized magnetite nanoparticles. J Hazard Mater 271:16–23.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.01.055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu CH, Chuang YH, Chen TY, Tian Y, Li H, Wang MK, Zhang W (2015) Mechanism of arsenic adsorption on magnetite nanoparticles from water: thermodynamic and spectroscopic studies. Environ Sci Technol 49(13):7726–7734.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b00381 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maharjan M, Watanabe C, Aktar Ahmad SK, Ohtsuka R (2005) Short report: arsenic contamination in drinking water and skin manifestations in lowland Nepal: the first community-based survey. American Journal of Tropical Medicine Hygiene 73(2):477–479Google Scholar
  24. Morales-Luckie RA, Sanchez-Mendieta V, Arenas-Alatorre JA, López-Castañares R, Perez-Mazariego JL, Marquina-Fabrega V, Wayne Gómez R (2008) One-step aqueous synthesis of stoichiometric Fe–Cu nanoalloy. Material Letters 62(26):4195–4197.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2008.06.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mulligan CN, Yong RN, Gibbs BF (2001) Remediation technologies for metal contaminated soils and groundwater: an evaluation. Eng Geol 60(1–4):193–207.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7952(00)00101-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. O’Carroll D, Sleep B, Krol M, Boparai H, Kocur C (2013) Nanoscale zero valent iron and bimetallic particles for contaminated site remediation. Adv Water Resour 51:104–122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.02.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peters GR, McCurdy RF, Thomas J, Hindmarch JT (1996) Environmental aspects of arsenic toxicity. CRC Cr Rev Cl Lab Sci 33(6):457–493.  https://doi.org/10.3109/10408369609080055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Petosa AR, Jaisi DP, Quevedo IR, Elimelech M, Tufenkji N (2010) Aggregation and deposition of engineered nanomaterials in aquatic environments: role of physicochemical interactions. Environ Sci Technol 44(17):6532–6549.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es100598h CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Phenrat T, Saleh N, Sirk K, Kim HJ, Tilton RD, Lowry GV (2008) Stabilization of aqueous nanoscale zerovalent iron dispersions by anionic polyelectrolytes: adsorbed anionic polyelectrolyte layer properties and their effect on aggregation and sedimentation. J Nanopart Res 10(5):795–814.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-007-9315-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Raj Kanel S, Manning B, Charlet L, Choi H (2005) Removal of arsenic (III) from groundwater by nanoscale zero-valent iron. Environ Sci Technol 39(5):1291–1298.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es048991u CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Raveendran P, Fu J, Wallen SL (2003) Complete “green” synthesis and stabilization of metal nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc 125(46):13940–13941.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja029267j CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sadiq M, Zaidi TH, Mian AA (1983) Environmental behavior of arsenic in soils: theoretical. Water Air Soil Pollut 20(4):369–377.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00208511 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sirk KM, Saleh NB, Phenart T et al (2009) Effect of adsorbed polyelectrolytes on nanoscale zerovalent iron particle attachment to soil surface models. Environ Sci Technol 43(10):3803–3808.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es803589t CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wang S, Mulligan CN (2009) Effect of natural organic matter on arsenic mobilization from mine tailings. J Hazard Mater 168(2–3):721–726.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.02.088 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wang Y, Liu W, Wanga T, Ni J (2015) Arsenate adsorption onto Fe-TNTs prepared by a novel water–ethanol hydrothermal method: mechanism and synergistic effect. J Colloid Interf Sci 440:253–262.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2014.10.036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Welch AH, Lico MS, Hughes JL (1988) Arsenic in groundwater of the western United States. Groundwater 26(3):333–347.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1988.tb00397.x
  37. Wiesner MR, Bottero JY (2007) Environmental nanotechnology. The McGraw-Hill Companies, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Wu TH (1976) Soil mechanics. Allyn and Bacon, BostonGoogle Scholar
  39. Xu Y, Zhao D (2007) Reductive immobilization of chromate in water and soil using stabilized iron nanoparticles. Water Res 41(10):2101–2108.  10.1016/j.watres.2007.02.037
  40. Yong RN, Galvez-Cloutier R, Phadungchewit Y (1993) Selective sequential extraction analysis of heavy-metal retention in soil. Can Geotech J 30(5):834–847.  https://doi.org/10.1139/t93-074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zhang W (2003) Nanoscale iron particles for environmental remediation: an overview. J Nanopart Res 5(3/4):323–332.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025520116015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang Y, Yang M, Dou X-M, He H, Wang D-S (2005) Arsenate adsorption on an Fe-Ce bimetal oxide adsorbent: role of surface properties. Environ Sci Technol 39(18):7246–7253.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es050775d CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhang S, Li X, Chen JP (2010) An XPS study for mechanisms of arsenate adsorption onto a magnetite-doped activated carbon fiber. J Colloid Interf Sci 343(1):232–238.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2009.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BuildingCivil and Environmental Engineering-Concordia UniversityQuebecCanada

Personalised recommendations