Skip to main content

Surfactant Availability of Metals

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Commercial Surfactants for Remediation

Part of the book series: Advances in Geographical and Environmental Sciences ((AGES))

  • 255 Accesses

Abstract

The different concentration of the different metals removed after incubation with different surfactants is measured and compared. The results show that anionic and non-ionic surfactants like SDS, Triton X 100 and NATC are able to mobilize the metals from the sediment but cationic HDTMA surfactant is unable to mobilize the metals from the sediment because of the positive charge of surfactant bound to the sediment and blocked metals inside the sediment. SDS is the best surfactant as compared to the other surfactant and releases 14% for Ni; 11% for Cu and rest of the metals (Pb, Zn, Al, Fe, and Mn) ranges from 5 to 3%. This is because the metals bounded with the surface of sediments attracted towards the negative charge of anionic surfactant instead of sediment. Therefore, the complexation of metals with surfactant micelles take place and releases metals from the sediment. The detailed mechanism of metal release is discussed in the chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ahmad AL, Puasa SW, Zulkali MMD (2006) Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration for removal of reactive dyes from an aqueous solution. Desalination 191:153–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahrens MJ, Hertz J, Lamoureux EM, Lopez GR, McElroy AE, Brownawell BJ (2001) The role of digestive surfactants in determining bioavailability of sediment-bound hydrophobic organic contaminants to 2 deposit-feeding polychaetes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 212:145–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aoudia M, Alla N, Djennet A, Leila T (2003) Dynamic micellar enhanced ultrafiltration: use (SDS)–nonionic (NPE) system to remove low surfactant concentration. J Membr Sci 217:181–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Z, Mayer LM, Quetel C, Donard OFX, Self RFL, Jumars PA, Weston DP (2000) High concentrations of complexes metals in the guts of deposit feeders. Limnol Oceanogr 45(6):1358–1367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fillipi BR, Brant LW, Scamehorn JF, Christian SD (1999) Use of micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration at low surfactant concentrations and with anionic–nonionic surfactant mixtures. J Colloid Interface Sci 213:68–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalman J, Turner A (2007) An evaluation of metal bioaccessibility in estuarine sediments using the commercially available protein, bovine serum albumin. Mar Chem 107:486–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer LM, Schick LL, Self RFL, Jumars PA, Findlay RH, Chen Z, Sampson S (1997) Digestive environments of benthic macroinvertebrate guts: enzymes, surfactants and dissolved organic matter. J Mar Res 55:785–812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan CN (2005) Environmental applications for biosurfactants. Environ Pollut 133:183–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan CN, Yong RN, Gibbs BF, James S, Bennett HPJ (1999) Metal removal from contaminated soil and sediments by the biosurfactant surfactin. Environ Sci Technol 33:3812–3820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner A (2006) Enzymatic mobilization of trace metals from estuarine sediment. Mar Chem 98:140–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tung C-C, Yang Y-M, Chang C-H, Maa J-R (2002) Removal of copper ions and dissolved phenol from water using micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration with mixed surfactants. Waste Manag 22:695–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voparil IM, Mayer LM (2000) Dissolution of sedimentary polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons into the lugworm’s (Arenicola marina) digestive fluids. Environ Sci Technol 34:1221–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voparil IM, Mayer LM (2003) Interactions among contaminants and nutritional lipids during mobilization by digestive fluids of marine invertebrates. Environ Sci Technol 37:3117–3122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voparil IM, Mayer LM (2004) Commercially available chemicals that mimic a deposit feeder’s (Arenicola marina) digestive solubilization of lipids. Environ Sci Technol 38:4334–4339

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anu Singh Bisht .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bisht, A.S. (2019). Surfactant Availability of Metals. In: Commercial Surfactants for Remediation. Advances in Geographical and Environmental Sciences. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0221-3_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics