Literature DB >> 34955596

In situ arsenic immobilisation for coastal aquifers using stimulated iron cycling: Lab-based viability assessment.

Alyssa Barron1,2, Jing Sun1,2,3, Stefania Passaretti4, Chiara Sbarbati4, Maurizio Barbieri4, Nicolò Colombani5, James Jamieson1,2, Benjamin C Bostick6, Yan Zheng7, Micòl Mastrocicco8, Marco Petitta4, Henning Prommer1,2.   

Abstract

Arsenic (As) is one of the most harmful and widespread groundwater contaminants globally. Besides the occurrence of geogenic As pollution, there is also a large number of sites that have been polluted by anthropogenic activities, with many of those requiring active remediation to reduce their environmental impact. Cost-effective remedial strategies are however still sorely needed. At the laboratory-scale in situ formation of magnetite through the joint addition of nitrate and Fe(II) has shown to be a promising new technique. However, its applicability under a wider range of environmental conditions still needs to be assessed. Here we use sediment and groundwater from a severely polluted coastal aquifer and explore the efficiency of nitrate-Fe(II) treatments in mitigating dissolved As concentrations. In selected experiments >99% of dissolved As was removed, compared to unamended controls, and maintained upon addition of lactate, a labile organic carbon source. Pre- and post experimental characterisation of iron (Fe) mineral phases suggested a >90% loss of amorphous Fe oxides in favour of increased crystalline, recalcitrant oxide and sulfide phases. Magnetite formation did not occur via the nitrate-dependent oxidation of the amended Fe(II) as originally expected. Instead, magnetite is thought to have formed by the Fe(II)-catalysed transformation of pre-existing amorphous and crystalline Fe oxides. The extent of amorphous and crystalline Fe oxide transformation was then limited by the exhaustion of dissolved Fe(II). Elevated phosphate concentrations lowered the treatment efficacy indicating joint removal of phosphate is necessary for maximum impact. The remedial efficiency was not impacted by varying salinities, thus rendering the tested approach a viable remediation method for coastal aquifers.

Entities:  

Keywords:  arsenic remediation; bioremediation; coastal aquifer; in situ mineral precipitation

Year:  2021        PMID: 34955596      PMCID: PMC8699153          DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2021.105155

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Geochem        ISSN: 0883-2927            Impact factor:   3.524


  57 in total

Review 1.  Spatial and temporal variations of groundwater arsenic in South and Southeast Asia.

Authors:  Scott Fendorf; Holly A Michael; Alexander van Geen
Journal:  Science       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Dominance of sulfur-fueled iron oxide reduction in low-sulfate freshwater sediments.

Authors:  Colleen M Hansel; Chris J Lentini; Yuanzhi Tang; David T Johnston; Scott D Wankel; Philip M Jardine
Journal:  ISME J       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 10.302

3.  Low-field magnetic separation of monodisperse Fe3O4 nanocrystals.

Authors:  Cafer T Yavuz; J T Mayo; William W Yu; Arjun Prakash; Joshua C Falkner; Sujin Yean; Lili Cong; Heather J Shipley; Amy Kan; Mason Tomson; Douglas Natelson; Vicki L Colvin
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-11-10       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  In Situ Magnetite Formation and Long-Term Arsenic Immobilization under Advective Flow Conditions.

Authors:  Jing Sun; Steven N Chillrud; Brian J Mailloux; Benjamin C Bostick
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 9.028

5.  Removal of arsenic(III) from groundwater by nanoscale zero-valent iron.

Authors:  Sushil Raj Kanel; Bruce Manning; Laurent Charlet; Heechul Choi
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2005-03-01       Impact factor: 9.028

6.  Fate of arsenic, phosphate and ammonium plumes in a coastal aquifer affected by saltwater intrusion.

Authors:  N Colombani; M Mastrocicco; H Prommer; C Sbarbati; M Petitta
Journal:  J Contam Hydrol       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 3.188

7.  Thioarsenates in geothermal waters of Yellowstone National Park: determination, preservation, and geochemical importance.

Authors:  Britta Planer-Friedrich; Jacqueline London; R Blaine McCleskey; D Kirk Nordstrom; Dirk Wallschläger
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2007-08-01       Impact factor: 9.028

8.  Arsenic(V) removal from underground water by magnetic nanoparticles synthesized from waste red mud.

Authors:  Ilker Akin; Gulsin Arslan; Ali Tor; Mustafa Ersoz; Yunus Cengeloglu
Journal:  J Hazard Mater       Date:  2012-06-23       Impact factor: 10.588

9.  Montmorillonite-supported magnetite nanoparticles for the removal of hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] from aqueous solutions.

Authors:  Peng Yuan; Mingde Fan; Dan Yang; Hongping He; Dong Liu; Aihua Yuan; JianXi Zhu; TianHu Chen
Journal:  J Hazard Mater       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 10.588

10.  Bioremoval of arsenic species from contaminated waters by sulphate-reducing bacteria.

Authors:  Daniel Teclu; George Tivchev; Mark Laing; Mike Wallis
Journal:  Water Res       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 11.236

View more
  1 in total

1.  Mercury and Arsenic Discharge from Circumneutral Waters Associated with the Former Mining Area of Abbadia San Salvatore (Tuscany, Central Italy).

Authors:  Marta Lazzaroni; Marino Vetuschi Zuccolini; Barbara Nisi; Jacopo Cabassi; Stefano Caliro; Daniele Rappuoli; Orlando Vaselli
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-04-23       Impact factor: 3.390

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.