Advertisement

Effects of Complexes and pH Buffer Solution in Electrokinetic Oxidation Treatment on Sediments Chromium Removal

  • Hua Jiang
  • Guangrong Liu
  • Shan He
  • Jingxiao Guo
Chemistry and Biology

Abstract

Three electrokinetic (EK) experiments were designed to study the remediation efficiency of Cr(III) by EK-oxidation method and to investigate the influence of complexes and pH buffer solution in EK-oxidation process. Sediments Cr (III) can be oxidized into Cr(VI) effectively by KMnO4, but the oxidation efficiency is not proportional to the dose of oxidant, and chemical oxidation process leads to a bit lower buffering capacity of the sediment. Compared with the simple EK remediation, the removal efficiency of total Cr in the sediments increased 32.6% by EK-oxidation method, and the concentrations of total chromium in the sediment showed increasing trend from the cathode to the anode after EK-oxidation treatment. The pH control and KMnO4 improved the removal of Cr(VI) and total Cr from the sediments. Due to stronger complexation action of citric acid with Cr(III) in sediments, citric acid in the catholyte obviously increased the removal rate of total Cr in sediments. Finally, the removal rate of total Cr from sediments reached 60.9% by adding complex and controlling the pH of cathode and anode pond solution on EK-oxidation processes.

Key words

electrokinetic-oxidation chromium complexes pH buffer solution 

CLC number

X 524 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Wang G H, Luo J, Deng N S. Enhancement of electrokinetic removal of simazine and cadmium from co-contaminated soils by glycine-beta-cyclodextrin[J]. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2013, 22(7):1904–1912.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Rai U N, Tripathi R D, Vajpayee P. Bioaccumulation of toxic metals (Cr, Cd, Pb and Cu) by seeds of Euryale ferox Salisb. (Makhana) [J]. Chemosphere, 2002, 46(2): 267–272.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Chandra S K, Chary N S, Kamala C T, et al. Fractionation studies and bioaccumulation of sediment-bound heavy metals in Kolleru lake by edible fish[J]. Environment International, 2004, 29(7):1001–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Liu G R, Zhou W, Zhang X, et al. Electrokinetic bioremediation of electric field on sediment microbial activity[J]. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2013, 22(5):1458–1462.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Kali S, Das R P, Shekhar R, et al. Electroosmotic pump: Rate controlling mechanism for unusually fast electroremediation kinetics of Cr(VI) in basic Kanpur soil[J]. Electrochimica Acta, 2012, 86:80–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Reddy K R, Chinthamreddy S. Sequentially enhanced electrokinetic remediation of heavy metals in low buffering clayey soil[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2003, 129(3): 263–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Lin L, Lu X H, Yuan S H. Effect of electric field on the electrokinetic flushing removal of hexachlorobenze from soils[J]. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2011, 20(4): 910–917.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Cabreraguzmán D, Swartzbaugh J T, Welsman A W, et al. The use of electrokinetics for hazardous waste site remediation[ J]. Air Repair, 1990, 40(12): 1670–1676.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Amrate S, Akretche D E, Innocent C, et al. Use of cation-exchange membranes for simultaneous recovery of lead and EDTA during electrokinetic extraction[J]. Desalination, 2006, 193: 405–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Virkutyte J, Sillanp M. Latostenmaa P. Electrokinetic soil remediation-critical overview[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2002, 289(1-3): 97–121.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Hicks R E, Tondorf S. Electrorestoration of metal contaminated soils[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 1994, 28 (12): 2203–2210.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Reddy K R, Chinthamreddy S. Effects of initial form of chromium on electrokinetic remediation in clays[J]. Advances in Environmental Research, 2003, 7(2): 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Li G, Guo S H, Li S C. Comparison of approaching and fixed anodes for avoiding the ‘focusing’ effect during electrokinetic remediation of chromium-contaminated soil [J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2012, 203: 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Tsai T H. Removal of metal impurities from cutting slurry waste using a modified electrokinetic system[J]. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2011, 20(1): 99–103.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Reddy K R, Sha S P, Srinivas N D. Effects of soil composition on the removal of chromium by electrokinetics [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1997, 55(1-3): 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Chinthamreddy S, Reddy K R. Oxidation and mobility of trivalent chromium in manganese-enriched clays during electrokinetic remediation [J]. Journal of Soil Contamination, 1999, 8(2):197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Wuhan University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hua Jiang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Guangrong Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shan He
    • 1
  • Jingxiao Guo
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Power & Mechanical EngineeringWuhan UniversityWuhan, HubeiChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Water Jet Theory & New TechnologyWuhan UniversityWuhan, HubeiChina
  3. 3.School of SociologyCentral China Normal UniversityWuhan, HubeiChina

Personalised recommendations