Wataru Yoshida1, Fukiko Kubota1, Yuzo Baba1, Spas D Kolev2, Masahiro Goto1,1. 1. Department of Applied Chemistry, Graduate School of Engineering and Center for Future Chemistry, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan. 2. School of Chemistry, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia.
Abstract
We report on the separation and recovery of scandium(III) from sulfate solutions using solvent extraction and a membrane transport system utilizing newly synthesized amic acid extractants. Scandium(III) was quantitatively extracted with 50 mmol dm-3 N-[N,N-di(2-ethylhexyl)aminocarbonylmethyl]glycine (D2EHAG) or N-[N,N-di(2-ethylhexyl)aminocarbonylmethyl]phenylalanine (D2EHAF) in n-dodecane at pH 2 and easily stripped using a 0.5 mol dm-3 sulfuric acid solution. The extraction mechanisms of scandium(III) extraction with D2EHAG and D2EHAF were examined, and it was established that scandium(III) formed a 1:3 complex with both extractants (HR), that is, Sc(SO4)2 - aq + 1.5(HR)2org ⇄ Sc(SO4)R(HR)2org + H+ aq + SO4 2- aq. The equilibrium constants of extraction were evaluated to be 4.87 and 9.99 (mol dm-3)0.5 for D2EHAG and D2EHAF, respectively. D2EHAG and D2EHAF preferentially extracted scandium(III) with a high selectivity compared to common transition metal ions under high acidic conditions (0 < pH ≤ 3). In addition, scandium(III) was quantitatively transported from a feed solution into a 0.5 mol dm-3 sulfuric acid receiving solution through a polymer inclusion membrane (PIM) containing D2EHAF as a carrier. Scandium(III) was completely separated thermodynamically from nickel(II), aluminum(III), cobalt(II), manganese(II), chromium(III), calcium(II), and magnesium(II), and partially separated from iron(III) kinetically using a PIM containing D2EHAF as a carrier. The initial flux value for scandium(III) (J 0,Sc = 1.9 × 10-7 mol m-2 s-1) was two times higher than that of iron(III) (J 0,Fe = 9.3 × 10-8 mol m-2 s-1).
We report on the separation and recovery of scandium(III) from sulfatesolutions using solvent extraction and a membrane transport system utilizing newly synthesized amic acid extractants. Scandium(III) was quantitatively extracted with 50 mmol dm-3N-[N,N-di(2-ethylhexyl)aminocarbonylmethyl]glycine (D2EHAG) or N-[N,N-di(2-ethylhexyl)aminocarbonylmethyl]phenylalanine (D2EHAF) in n-dodecane at pH 2 and easily stripped using a 0.5 mol dm-3 sulfuric acidsolution. The extraction mechanisms of scandium(III) extraction with D2EHAG and D2EHAF were examined, and it was established that scandium(III) formed a 1:3 complex with both extractants (HR), that is, Sc(SO4)2 - aq + 1.5(HR)2org ⇄ Sc(SO4)R(HR)2org + H+ aq + SO4 2- aq. The equilibrium constants of extraction were evaluated to be 4.87 and 9.99 (mol dm-3)0.5 for D2EHAG and D2EHAF, respectively. D2EHAG and D2EHAF preferentially extracted scandium(III) with a high selectivity compared to common transition metal ions under high acidic conditions (0 < pH ≤ 3). In addition, scandium(III) was quantitatively transported from a feed solution into a 0.5 mol dm-3 sulfuric acid receiving solution through a polymer inclusion membrane (PIM) containing D2EHAF as a carrier. Scandium(III) was completely separated thermodynamically from nickel(II), aluminum(III), cobalt(II), manganese(II), chromium(III), calcium(II), and magnesium(II), and partially separated from iron(III) kinetically using a PIM containing D2EHAF as a carrier. The initial flux value for scandium(III) (J 0,Sc = 1.9 × 10-7 mol m-2 s-1) was two times higher than that of iron(III) (J 0,Fe = 9.3 × 10-8 mol m-2 s-1).
Recently, scandium (Sc)
has been widely used in optical, electronic, and chemical industries,
aerospace, nuclear technology, and other fields and its demand has
continued to grow.[1−3] Demand
for Sc has been expected to increase in the future because it is also
used in fuel cells.[4−6] Nevertheless,
Sc-rich ores are rare and the average abundance of Sc in the Earth’s
crust is not high, with an average of only 22 mg kg–1.[1] Therefore, efficient recovery methods
for Sc are required to sustain the rapidly growing demand for this
metal in the global market. Sc can be mainly recovered as a byproduct
from leachates in the manufacture of other metals such as rare earths,
nickel, and aluminum.[1,4] However, in many cases, large
amounts of undesired base metals such as iron and aluminum are codissolved
along with scandium.[1,7] Therefore, multipurification steps
for the manufacturing of Sc are generally required.[4,8]Solvent extraction (SX) has been widely used for the recovery of
Sc from leachates with traditional extractants such as organophosphorus
and carboxylic acids or neutralorganophosphorus compounds.[4] However, organophosphorus acids, carboxylic acids,
and neutralorganophosphorus extractants have the following drawbacks:
difficulty of stripping of Sc(III),[9,10] weak affinity
to Sc(III),[11,12] and lack of selectivity for Sc(III).[13] Therefore, extractants offering high affinity
and selectivity for Sc, and allowing easy stripping with acids are
important for the efficient recovery of Sc.[14−16] In recent years,
three new amic acid extractants N-[N,N-di(2-ethylhexyl)aminocarbonylmethyl]glycine
(D2EHAG), N-[N,N-di(2-ethylhexyl)aminocarbonylmethyl]sarcosine (D2EHAS), and N-[N,N-di(2-ethylhexyl)aminocarbonylmethyl]phenylalanine
(D2EHAF) have been synthesized in our laboratory and applied to the
extraction of criticalmetals such as nickel and cobalt,[17] indium and gallium,[18] platinum group metals,[19] and gold.[20] In addition, it was found that D2EHAG can selectively
extract Sc(III) from nitratesolutions containing other rare earth
metals.[21] In this study, we investigate
the extraction of Sc(III) from sulfatesolutions with amic acid extractants
and compare it with the extraction of Sc(III) involving commercial
extractants (i.e., D2EHPA, Versatic 10, and TOPO).Although SX is an effective separation technique, the use
of large
amounts of organic diluents, which can adversely affect the environment,
is required.[22] In recent years, a separation
technique involving the use of polymer inclusion membranes (PIMs)
has attracted much attention as a green alternative to SX because
organic diluents are not required.[23,24] Also, much
smaller amounts of extractants (often referred to as carriers) are
required, thus allowing the utilization of relatively advanced extractants
without significant impact on the cost of the separation process.[25,26] In this technique, the extractant is anchored between the entangled
chains of the base polymer and the corresponding PIMs have shown excellent
transport properties and high stability.[23,25] Although
PIMs have already been applied to the transport of many metal ions,[27−45] only a few studies on the separation of
Sc(III) using PIMs have been reported so far.[46−48] Successful
transport of Sc(III) was reported
using a PIM containing 2-thenoyltrifluoroacetone (HTTA) as a carrier.[46] In a previous study we have reported on the
selective transport of Sc(III) from solutions of rare earth metal
ions across a PIM containing a mixture of 2-ethylhexyl hydrogen (2-ethylhexyl)phosphonate
(PC-88A) and Versatic 10 as the membrane carriers.[47] Recently, we have also reported on the separation of Sc(III)
from Y(III) and lanthanides using a PIM incorporating D2EHAG and D2EHAF.[48] However, these studies have only focused on
the separation of Sc(III) from rare earth metal ions, and there are
no reports on the PIM-based separation of Sc(III) from other metal
ions present in ore leachates such as iron and aluminum ions.This paper reports on the performance of amic acid extractants in
the selective SX and PIM-based separation and recovery of Sc(III)
from sulfatesolutions containing various common metal ions [i.e.,
Fe(III), Ni(II), Al(III), Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II)].
The potential of amic acid derivatives as industrial extractants and
PIM carriers for Sc(III) and their mechanism of Sc(III) extraction
are also discussed.
Results and Discussion
Solvent Extraction and Stripping of Sc(III)
Three amic acids (D2EHAG, D2EHAS, and DE2HAF), an organophosphorus
acid (D2EHPA), a carboxylic acid (Versatic 10), and a solvating extractant
(TOPO) were tested to identify suitable scandium extraction systems.
The chemical structure of these extractants is shown in Figure . Figure a shows the plots of the degree of extraction
for Sc(III) from its sulfatesolutions with these extractants in n-dodecane as a function of the equilibrium pH in the feed
aqueous solution. Extraction of Sc(III) by D2EHAG was promoted by
increasing the pH, and Sc(III) was found to be quantitatively extracted
around pH 2. D2EHAF, where a phenyl group was introduced in the molecular
structure, showed a similar extraction behavior and the efficiency
of Sc(III) extraction was improved. The pKa values of the carboxyl group of D2EHAG and D2EHAF are 2.89 and 2.74,
respectively,[48] and it is considered that
this decrease in the pKa value as a result
of the introduction of the phenyl group contributes to the improvement
of the Sc(III) extraction efficiency of D2EHAF. On the other hand,
quantitative extraction was not achieved by D2EHAS below pH 3. Similarly,
lower extraction efficiency of D2EHAS compared to D2EHAG has been
observed with respect to In(III) and Ga(III).[18] These observations can be explained by the fact that the N donor
atom in the center of the amic acid extractants studied plays a crucial
role in the extraction of the metal ions, and it should be pointed
out that the secondary amine group in D2EHAG and D2EHAF has a higher
affinity to Sc(III) than the tertiary amine group in D2EHAS. D2EHPA
quantitatively extracted Sc(III) even under very high acidic conditions
(Sc(III).
On the other hand, Versatic 10 and TOPO were found to show poor extraction
ability below pH 3 where only 6–23% of Sc(III) could be extracted.
Figure 1
Chemical
structures of (a) D2EHAG, (b) D2EHAS, (c) D2EHAF,
(d) D2EHPA, (e) Versatic 10, and (f) TOPO.
Figure 2
Extraction and stripping of Sc(III). (a) Influence of
the equilibrium pH of the aqueous solution on the extraction of Sc(III)
with 100 mmol dm–3 Versatic 10, and 50 mmol dm–3 D2EHPA, D2EHAG, D2EHAS, D2EHAF, and TOPO in n-dodecane. (b) Stripping
of the loaded with 0.1 mmol dm–3 Sc(III) organic
phase using sulfuric acid at different concentrations (0.5–5
mol dm–3).
Chemical
structures of (a) D2EHAG, (b) D2EHAS, (c) D2EHAF,
(d) D2EHPA, (e) Versatic 10, and (f) TOPO.Extraction and stripping of Sc(III). (a) Influence of
the equilibrium pH of the aqueous solution on the extraction of Sc(III)
with 100 mmol dm–3 Versatic 10, and 50 mmol dm–3 D2EHPA, D2EHAG, D2EHAS, D2EHAF, and TOPO in n-dodecane. (b) Stripping
of the loaded with 0.1 mmol dm–3 Sc(III) organic
phase using sulfuric acid at different concentrations (0.5–5
mol dm–3).The stripping of Sc(III) from the extracting phase
containing D2EHAG,
D2EHAF, or D2EHPA was carried out using H2SO4solutions with varying concentrations (0.5–5 mol dm–3). Figure b shows
the plots of the degree of stripping of Sc(III) as a function of the
sulfuric acid concentration. These results indicate that over 90%
of Sc(III) can be stripped into a 0.5 mol dm–3 of
H2SO4solution from the extraction phases containing
D2EHAG and D2EHAF and loaded with 0.1 mmol dm–3 of
Sc(III), whereas in the case of D2EHPA, stripping of Sc(III) with
the same sulfuric acid concentration was unsuccessful. It can be concluded
that D2EHAG and D2EHAF are more suitable for the recovery of Sc(III)
than conventional extractants because of the high efficiency of the
corresponding extraction and stripping processes.
Extraction Equilibrium of Sc(III)
In order to elucidate the extraction mechanism of Sc(III) with D2EHAG
and D2EHAF, slope analysis was performed. In the cases of 10 mmol
dm–3 D2EHAG or D2EHAF organic phases, the corresponding
plots of log D of Sc(III) versus equilibrium pH were
both linear with slopes of 0.98 and 1.04, respectively (Figure a). These values indicated
that one hydrogen ion was released into the aqueous solution during
the extraction of Sc(III) with D2EHAG and D2EHAF. Figure b shows the plots of the distribution
ratio of Sc(III) at pH 2.15 as a function of the concentration of
the extractant. D2EHAG and D2EHAF are assumed to form dimers ([(HR)2]) in aliphatic diluents such as n-dodecane
because some alkyl monocarboxylic acids are known to exist as dimers
in such hydrophobic diluents.[17,49] The plots of log D versus log [(HR)2] were linear with slopes
of 1.36 and 1.39 for D2EHAG and D2EHAF, respectively, indicating that
1.5 mol of the dimer (i.e., three extractant molecules) were involved
in the formation of the Sc(III)-extractant complex.
Figure 3
Sc(III) extraction dependence
on (a) pH in the case of
10 mmol dm–3 D2EHAG or D2EHAF, (b) concentration
of the dimeric extractant at pHeq = 2.15, and (c) concentration
of the sulfate ion in the cases of 10 mmol dm–3 D2EHAG
or D2EHAF at pHeq = 2.15. (d) Distribution of the Sc(III)
species as a function of the concentration of the sulfate ion. (e)
Loading test for Sc(III) in an organic phase of 10 mmol dm–3 D2EHAG or D2EHAF in n-dodecane. (f) Extracted complex
stoichiometry estimation by Job’s continuous variation method.
Sc(III) extraction dependence
on (a) pH in the case of
10 mmol dm–3 D2EHAG or D2EHAF, (b) concentration
of the dimeric extractant at pHeq = 2.15, and (c) concentration
of the sulfate ion in the cases of 10 mmol dm–3 D2EHAG
or D2EHAF at pHeq = 2.15. (d) Distribution of the Sc(III)
species as a function of the concentration of the sulfate ion. (e)
Loading test for Sc(III) in an organic phase of 10 mmol dm–3 D2EHAG or D2EHAF in n-dodecane. (f) Extracted complex
stoichiometry estimation by Job’s continuous variation method.Figure c shows the plots
of the distribution ratio of Sc(III) as a function of the concentration
of the sulfate ion in the cases of D2EHAG and D2EHAF. Linear relationships
with slopes of −0.91 and −1.03 for [SO42–] > 0.1 mol dm–3 were obtained
for D2EHAG and D2EHAF, respectively. It should be pointed out that
according to the speciation graphs of Sc(III) in aqueous sulfatesolutions,
calculated by using the corresponding stability constants[50] (Figure d), Sc(III) forms mainly the anionic sulfate complex [Sc(SO4)2]− for [SO42–] > 0.1 mol dm–3. Therefore,
one sulfate anion should be released into the aqueous solution during
the extraction of Sc(III) with D2EHAG and D2EHAF.To clarify
the extraction stoichiometry, a loading test and Job’s continuous
variation method were performed. Figure e shows the relationship between the initialSc(III) concentration on one hand and the molar ratio of the initial
extractant concentration to the loaded Sc(III) concentration in the
organic phase on the other in the cases of D2EHAG or D2EHAF. The molar
ratio decreased with increasing the initialSc(III) concentration
in the aqueous phase and approached a constant value of 3 (i.e., 2.95
and 3.06, respectively). Figure f shows the results of Job’s continuous variation
method for the extraction of Sc(III). The extracted Sc(III) concentration
reached a maximum when the molar ratio of the extractant concentration
to the total concentration of Sc(III) and extractant was 0.75. These
results support the hypothesis that one Sc(III) ion present as the
[Sc(SO4)2]− complex is extracted
into the organic solution with three extractant molecules, that is,
1.5 dimeric D2EHAG or D2EHAF. Therefore, the stoichiometry of Sc(III)
to D2EHAG or D2EHAF in the corresponding metal complexes was determined
to be 1:3.Based on the results outlined above, the extraction
equilibrium of Sc(III) with D2EHAG or D2EHAF, relevant to high aqueous
SO42– concentrations (e.g., >0.1 mol
dm–3) such as those typical for Sc(III) sulfate
leachates, can be described by the following equationwhere the bars denote the species in the organic
phase.The extraction equilibrium constant Kex can be expressed as followsThe distribution ratio of Sc(III) between
the organic and the aqueous solutions is defined aswhere α2 = β2[SO42–]2/(1 + ∑2β[SO42–]) (i = 1–2),
log β1 = 4.04 [mol dm–3]−1 and log β2 = 5.70 [mol dm–3]−2.[50]The mass balance
for the extractant and the sulfate ion under the experimental conditions
in this study is represented by the following equationswhere Ka = [H+][SO42–]/[HSO4–] = 1.02 × 10–2 [mol dm–3].[51] and [SO42–]0 refer to the initial concentrations of the extractant
and the sulfate ion in the organic and aqueous phases, respectively.By combining eqs –6, the following expression for log D can be derivedThe experimental results for both D2EHAG
and D2EHAF were plotted according to eq (Figure ) and fitted by a linear equation. A correlation coefficient of 0.95
and 1.02 was obtained for D2EHAG and D2EHAF, respectively, indicating
that the extraction equilibria of Sc(III) with the two extractants
can be described by eq . The extraction equilibrium constants (Kex) for Sc(III) with D2EHAG or D2EHAF (i.e., 4.87 and 9.99 (mol dm–3)0.5, respectively) were obtained as the
intercepts of the corresponding lines with the ordinate (Figure ).
Figure 4
Logarithmic plots of
the distribution ratios of Sc(III)
as a function of log([(HR)2]01.5α2(Ka + [H+])/Ka[H+][SO42–]0) (solid lines are the best theoretical fits).
Logarithmic plots of
the distribution ratios of Sc(III)
as a function of log([(HR)2]01.5α2(Ka + [H+])/Ka[H+][SO42–]0) (solid lines are the best theoreticalfits).It should
be pointed out that at low sulfate concentrations (i.e., <0.1 mol
dm–3) the dominant Sc–sulfate complex is
ScSO4+aq (Figure d). Under such conditions, which are not
relevant to sulfate Sc(III) leachates, log D is independent
of the sulfate concentration as observed in Figure c. This result suggests the following extraction
stoichiometry at low sulfate concentrations
Extraction Selectivity of D2EHAG and D2EHAF
for Sc(III) and Common Metal Ions
Solvent extraction of various
metal ions [i.e., Sc(III), Fe(III), Ni(II), Al(III), Co(II), Mn(II),
Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II)] was performed using D2EHAG and D2EHAF.
The interference of Si(IV) was not studied because it is generally
not present in the sulfuric acid leachate of Sc(III).[8,16,52,53]Figure shows the
plots
of the degree of extraction of the metal ions listed above from a
0.1 mol dm–3 H2SO4/(NH4)2SO4solution with 50 mmol dm–3 D2EHAG or D2EHAF as a function of the equilibrium pH.
Figure 5
Degree of extraction
of Sc(III), Fe(III), Ni(II), Al(III),
Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II) with 50 mmol dm–3 (a) D2EHAG and (b) D2EHAF in n-dodecane as a function
of equilibrium aqueous pH. The initial concentration of each metal
ion in the aqueous phase was 0.1 mmol dm–3.
Degree of extraction
of Sc(III), Fe(III), Ni(II), Al(III),
Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II) with 50 mmol dm–3 (a) D2EHAG and (b) D2EHAF in n-dodecane as a function
of equilibrium aqueous pH. The initial concentration of each metal
ion in the aqueous phase was 0.1 mmol dm–3.The
degree of extraction in the case of D2EHAG followed the order: Sc(III)
≈ Fe(III) > Ni(II) > Cr(III) > Co(II) > Al(III)
≫ Mn(II) ≈ Ca(II) ≈ Mg(II), while in the case
of D2EHAF the order was: Sc(III) ≈ Fe(III) > Ni(II) >
Co(II) > Al(III) ≫ Cr(III) ≈ Mn(II) ≈ Ca(II)
≈ Mg(II). For both extractants Al(III), Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III),
Ca(II), and Mg(II) were extracted less than 10% at equilibrium at
pH 2 while Sc(III) was extracted quantitatively. Ni(II) was extracted
less than 10% at equilibrium at pH 1.5, while over 80% Sc(III) was
extracted at the same time using each extractant. The extraction of
Fe(III), abundantly contained in ores, showed a similar degree of
extraction as Sc(III) and up to 99% of Fe(III) was extracted at equilibrium
at pH 2. These extraction results indicate that Sc(III) can be separated
from the other metal ions except for Fe(III) using D2EHAG or D2EHAF.Co-extraction of Fe(III)along with Sc(III) is often reported,[7,8,15,16] and
separation of these metal ions is challenging because of the same
charge and closer values of hydration enthalpies.[54] Masking Fe(III) with orthophosphate[31] or reducing it to Fe(II) can eliminate co-extraction of
Fe(III).[7,8] Fe(II) is easier to separate from Sc(III)
by solvent extraction with acidic extractants because it has a lower
charge density than Fe(III).[7,8] However, addition of
a masking or reducing agent could contaminate the aqueous feed solution
because they are difficult to recover after the completion of the
masking/redox reaction. Furthermore, these steps make the process
more costly.[43,55]
Membrane Transport through a PIM Containing
D2EHAF
The results from the SX selectivity experiments, outlined
above, indicated that it was not possible to completely separate Sc(III)
and Fe(III) thermodynamically. However, extraction and stripping kinetics
of Sc(III) and Fe(III) using D2EHAF are significantly different (Figure S1). Several researchers have reported
on the slow extraction rate for Fe(III),[56,57] and
on separation of yttrium(III), which has similar properties to Sc(III),
from Fe(III) based on extraction kinetics.[58] Kinetic PIM-based separation of UO22+ from
Fe(III) has also been reported.[43] These
results suggest the possibility of kinetic separation of Sc(III) from
Fe(III) using a PIM containing D2EHAF. In addition, the potential
of the PIMs containing D2EHAF for the separation of Sc(III) from other
rare earth metal ions was already demonstrated in our previous study,
where it was shown that D2EHAF was more suitable as a carrier of PIMs
compared to D2EHAG in terms of selectivity for Sc(III) and membrane
stability.[48] PIM transport experiments,
therefore, were performed to investigate the possibility of separating
Sc(III) from the other common metal ions [i.e., Fe(III), Ni(II), Al(III),
Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II)] using PIMs containing
D2EHAF.Figure a shows the competitive transport of the metal ions mentioned above
across a PIM consisting of 30 wt % CTA, 40 wt % D2EHAF, and 30 wt
% 2NPOE. It was found that Sc(III) was quantitively transported from
the feed to the receiving solution and was partially separated from
Fe(III) kinetically. Only a small amount of the other metal ions studied
[i.e., Ni(II), Al(III), Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II)]
were transported through the PIM during the same period. After 96
h, the recovery factors for Sc(III) and Fe(III) were calculated as
94 and 32%, respectively.
Figure 6
Transport of various common metal ions through
a PIM containing
40 wt % D2EHAF, 30 wt % CTA, and 30 wt % 2NPOE. (a) Normalized metal
concentrations in the feed and receiving solutions as a function of
time. (b) Kinetic plots of the transport of metal ions. Experimental
conditions: feed solution volume and composition—50 mL, 0.1
mmol L–1 each of Sc(III), Fe(III), Ni(II), Al(III),
Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II) in 0.1 mol L–1 sulfuric acid/ammonium sulfate buffer solution adjusted to pH 3.0;
receiving solution volume and composition—50 mL, 0.5 mol L–1 H2SO4; membrane thickness:
54 ± 4 μm.
Transport of various common metal ions through
a PIM containing
40 wt % D2EHAF, 30 wt % CTA, and 30 wt % 2NPOE. (a) Normalized metal
concentrations in the feed and receiving solutions as a function of
time. (b) Kinetic plots of the transport of metal ions. Experimental
conditions: feed solution volume and composition—50 mL, 0.1
mmol L–1 each of Sc(III), Fe(III), Ni(II), Al(III),
Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II) in 0.1 mol L–1 sulfuric acid/ammonium sulfate buffer solution adjusted to pH 3.0;
receiving solution volume and composition—50 mL, 0.5 mol L–1 H2SO4; membrane thickness:
54 ± 4 μm.The numerical value of first order
rate constant k was evaluated as the slope of ln(CM,f/CM,f) versus time for the
feed solution (Figure b). The initial flux J0, the ratio of
initial flux values of Sc(III) on one hand and the other metal ions
on the other, and the corresponding recovery factors were calculated
(Table ). These results
demonstrated the potential of the D2EHAF-based PIM for the selective
separation of Sc(III) from aqueous solutions containing other common
metal ions.
Table 1
First Order Rate Constant (k), Initial Flux (J0), Ratios
of the Initial Flux Values of Sc(III) on One Hand and Each One of
Other Metal Ions Studied on the Other, and Recovery Factors (RF) for
Transport Across a PIM Containing D2EHAF of the Metal Ions Studied
metal
k [h–1]
J0 [mol m–2 s–1]
J0,Sc/J0,M
RFa [%]
Sc(III)
6.67 × 10–2
1.9 × 10–7
94
Fe(III)
3.27 × 10–2
9.3 × 10–8
2.04
32
Ni(II)
1.70 × 10–3
4.8 × 10–9
39.3
<0.1
Al(III)
9.01 × 10–4
2.6 × 10–9
74.1
<0.1
Co(II)
4.15 × 10–3
1.2 × 10–8
16.1
<0.1
Mn(II)
2.90 × 10–3
8.2 × 10–9
23.0
<0.1
Cr(III)
5.98 × 10–3
1.7 × 10–8
11.2
<0.1
Ca(II)
2.00 × 10–3
5.7 × 10–9
33.3
<0.1
Mg(II)
1.30 × 10–3
3.7 × 10–9
51.2
<0.1
Recovery factors after 96 h of transport.
Recovery factors after 96 h of transport.Based on other PIM studies indicating the similarity
between solvent extraction and membrane transport mechanisms using
the same extractants and feed solutions,[29,37]eq was assumed to
be able
to explain the extraction and stripping of Sc(III) at the corresponding
membrane/solution interfaces. Figure shows the proposed mechanism for the transport of
Sc(III) through the PIM containing D2EHAF as the carrier. It should
be noted that based on results obtained by us in a previous study,
the rate determining step in the overall PIM transport process is
the diffusion of the Sc(III)-carrier adduct within the membrane.[48]
Figure 7
Proposed mechanism for the transport of Sc(III) through
the PIM containing D2EHAF.
Proposed mechanism for the transport of Sc(III) through
the PIM containing D2EHAF.
Conclusions
The results obtained in
this study demonstrate that the recently synthesized two amic acid
extractants D2EHAG and D2EHAFallow easier extraction and stripping
of Sc(III) in comparison with frequently used industrial extractants
such as Versatic 10, TOPO and D2EHPA. Sc(III) was quantitatively extracted
with D2EHAG or D2EHAF from 0.1 mol dm–3 sulfatesolutions (pH > 2) and stripped from the extracting phases quantitatively
using a 0.5 mol dm–3 H2SO4solution. The extraction of Sc(III) with D2EHAG and D2EHAF (HR)
can be described by the following stoichiometric equation: Sc(SO4)2–aq + 1.5(HR)2org ⇄ Sc(SO4)R(HR)2org + Haq+ + SO42–aq. D2EHAG and D2EHAFalsoallowed the efficient separation of Sc(III)
from sulfatesolutions containing a variety of common base metal ions.
Although Sc(III) could not be thermodynamically separated from Fe(III)
by solvent extraction, it was successfully separated kinetically using
a D2EHAF-based PIM. The PIM composed of 30% CTA, 40% D2EHAF, and 30%
2NPOEallowed quantitative and selective transport of Sc(III) from
0.1 mol dm–3 sulfatefeed solution at pH 3 and containing
Fe(III), Ni(II), Al(III), Co(II), Mn(II), Cr(III), Ca(II), and Mg(II)
ions to a receiving solution containing 0.5 mol dm–3 H2SO4. This result indicates that the PIM
containing D2EHAF is promising for applications such as hydrometallurgical
processing of ore leachates containing Sc(III) and other base metal
ions. Studies aiming at improving the separation efficiency of Sc(III)
from Fe(III) using actualSc leachates will be conducted to facilitate
the industrial implementation of the newly synthesized extractants
and the associated PIM-based separation technology.
Experimental
Reagents
Three amic acid extractants
were synthesized using the procedure described previously.[17,19] TOPO and D2EHPA were purchased from Kanto Chemical Co., Inc. and
Tokyo Chemical Industry Co., Ltd., respectively. Versatic 10 was supplied
by Japan poxy resin and used as received. Scandium(III) sulfate n-hydrate was purchased from Mitsuwa Chemicals. Iron(III)sulfaten-hydrate, aluminum(III) sulfate, calcium(II)sulfate dihydrate, and magnesium(II) sulfate were purchased from Wako
Pure Chemical Industries. Cobalt(II) sulfate heptahydrate, chromium(III)ammonium sulfate dodecahydrate, manganese(II) sulfate pentahydrate,
nickel(II) sulfate hexahydrate, sulfuric acid, ammonium sulfate, and
a special grade n-dodecane were purchased from Kishida
Chemical. Cellulose triacetate (CTA) and 2-nitrophenyloctyl ether
(2NPOE) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and Dojindo Laboratories,
respectively. All of the aqueous solutions in this study were prepared
in deionized water (resistivity > 18.2 MΩ cm, Millipore,
Milli-Q Integral 3, Merck).
The extracting organic phase containing D2EHAG,
D2EHAS, D2EHAF, D2EHPA, Versatic 10, or TOPO was prepared by dissolving
the corresponding extractant in n-dodecane. The aqueous
solution containing 0.1 mmol dm–3 of each metal
ion was prepared by dissolving their metalsalts in 0.1 mol dm–3 sulfuric acid/ammonium sulfatesolution. Sulfatesolutions were selected because sulfuric acid is widely used in the
hydrometallurgical process of Sc leaching because of its high leaching
efficiency from ores and minerals[4,8,9] and its relatively low cost. The pH was adjusted
by using 0.1 mol dm–3 sulfuric acid and ammonium
sulfatesolution. Equal volumes (2.5 cm3) of the aqueous
metalsolution and the organic solution containing an extractant were
added in a glass centrifuge tube, mixed with a vortex mixer, and shaken
(160 rpm) on a shaker for 3 h to attain extraction equilibrium at
25.0 ± 0.5 °C. After phase separation, the organic phase
was contacted with 0.1–5 mol dm–3 sulfuric
acid solution to strip the extracted metal ions. In a loading test,
equal volumes of the organic phase containing 10 mmol dm–3 D2EHAG or D2EHAF and aqueous phases with varying Sc(III) concentrations
were equilibrated. In Job’s continuous variation method, the
extraction of Sc(III) was performed at various molar ratios of the
extractant to the totalSc(III) concentration. The pH in the aqueous
solution was measured using a pH meter (HM-30R, DKK-TOA). The concentrations
of the metal ions in the aqueous solutions were determined using an
inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometer (Optima 8300,
PerkinElmer).The degree of extraction E (%),
the distribution ratio D (−), and the degree
of stripping S (%) were calculated by using eqs –11where CM represents
the concentration of a metal ion and aq, org, init, eq, and strip
denote the aqueous phase, organic phase, initial state, equilibrium
state, and the stripping phase at equilibrium, respectively.
Membrane Transport Experiments (Dynamic Separation)
PIMs were prepared by a casting method reported previously.[20,28,47] First, 120 mg of CTA, 160 mg
of D2EHAF, and 120 mg of 2NPOE were dissolved in 10 mL of dichloromethane.
This membrane composition was optimized in our previous study.[48] The solution was poured into a glass ring (7.5
cm diameter) on a glass plate, and covered with a filter paper and
a watch glass for 24 h at room temperature. After evaporation of dichloromethane,
the membrane was peeled off the glass plate. The average thickness
of the PIMs obtained in this way was determined as 54 ± 4 μm
using a digital caliper (MDC-25MX, Mitutoyo). A circular disc of 45
mm in diameter was cut from the central part of the PIM and used in
the transport experiments.A transport system (PERMCELL KH-55P,
Vidrex) with the PIM sandwiched between the feed and receiving compartment
was used for membrane transport experiments and is shown in Figure .[48,59] The
membrane surface area exposed to the solutions was 4.9 × 10–4 m2. The initialfeed solution was prepared
in the same manner as in the solvent extraction experiments. The feed
and receiving solutions (50 cm3 each) were added in the
two compartments of the transport system and mechanically stirred
at 1200 rpm using magnetic stirrers and small cross-head magnets (8
× φ10). Water maintained at 25.0 ± 0.5 °C using
a thermoregulator was circulated through the jacket of the transport
system. Samples (1 cm3) of the feed and receiving solutions
were taken at regular time intervals. The solution removed for sampling
was replaced by the same volume of the corresponding initialsolution.
The concentrations of the metal ions were measured by inductively
coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES).
Figure 8
Schematic diagram
of the PIM transport system.
Schematic diagram
of the PIM transport system.The
transport kinetics k (h–1), initial
flux J0 (mol m–2 s–1), and recovery factor RF (%) were calculated by eqs –14, respectively.where t is time (h), CM,f, and CM,f are the concentrations
of the metal ions in the feed aqueous solution (mol m–3) at t = 0 and t > 0, respectively, V (m3) is the volume of the feed solution, and A (m2) is the surface area of the membranes exposed
to each of the two solutions.