| Literature DB >> 29757943 |
Antonio Molinari1, Celia Margarita Mayacela Rojas2, Amerigo Beneduci3, Adalgisa Tavolaro4, Maria Fernanda Rivera Velasquez5, Carmine Fallico6.
Abstract
A series of experimental batch tests has been carried out with the aim of improving the knowledge of fundamental processes related to the fate and behavior of heavy metals that can be of environmental concern in groundwater. The analysis of contaminants (i.e., Cu, Zn, Cd and Pb) dynamics in different environmental compartments is specifically addressed by comparing the removal efficiencies of different types of reactive materials, three natural (i.e., vegetal fibers, natural limestone and natural zeolite) and one synthetic (i.e., synthetic zeolite). Results stemming from these reactive media has been compared with the outcomes related to the same test performed using zero valent iron which is the reactant usually employed for heavy metals remediation. All tested reactants exhibited important removal percentages, even larger than 90% in most cases, achieved in a contact time ranging between about 12 h and slightly longer than a day (i.e., 30 h). Maximum adsorption percentages are observed for pH ranging between 4 and 8 for all tested materials and contaminants. Our findings provided relevant evidence, to both researchers and technicians, on the competitiveness of the explored alternative mediums with respect to the classical reactants usually employed for heavy metals remediation.Entities:
Keywords: batch test; contaminants dynamics; heavy metals in groundwater; natural fibers; zeolite; zero valent iron
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29757943 PMCID: PMC5982019 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15050980
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Cabuya or maguey (scientific name: Furcraea andina).
Figure 2Observed trends for copper investigations for the five tested materials.
Removal performances for the five tested materials with respect to each heavy metal considered.
| Tested Materials | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cabuya Fibers | Ecuador Limestone | Natural Zeolite | Zero Valent Iron (ZVI) | Synthetic Zeolite | ||
| Cu | Removal % | 99.24 | 96.33 | 99.89 | 93.42 | 98.98 |
| Contact time (hours) | 14 | 10 | 24 | 24 | 30 | |
| Optimum pH | 5.75 | 6.18 | 6.58 | 5.04 | 7 | |
| Zn | Removal % | 90.14 | 89.52 | 99.9 | 94.17 | 91.65 |
| Contact time (hours) | 24 | 10 | 10 | 14 | 24 | |
| Optimum pH | 6.85 | 6.67 | 6.81 | 5.87 | 7.19 | |
| Cd | Removal % | 96.67 | 73.43 | 49.09 | 87.83 | 52.66 |
| Contact time (hours) | 30 | 30 | 26 | 30 | 30 | |
| Optimum pH | 7.26 | 7.46 | 7.75 | 4.87 | 8.01 | |
| Pb | Removal % | 100 | 74.23 | 100 | 100 | 77.67 |
| Contact time (hours) | 22 | 30 | 22 | 30 | 30 | |
| Optimum pH | 6.45 | 7.04 | 6.78 | 4.06 | 8.16 | |
Figure 3Observed trends for zinc investigations for the five tested materials.
Figure 4Observed trends for cadmium investigations for the five tested materials.
Figure 5Observed trends for lead investigations for the five tested materials.
Point of zero charge (PZC) values for reactive media used in our study.
| Tested Material | pH |
|---|---|
| Cabuya fibers | 6.79 |
| Natural zeolite | 6.81 |
| ZVI | 8.00 |
| Ecuador limestone | 8.10 |
| Synthetic zeolite | 9.57 |