Arsenopyrite oxidation – A review

Corkhill, Claire L.; Vaughan, David J.

doi:10.1016/j.apgeochem.2009.09.008

Cited by 246 publications

(120 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Solid phase As species are not shown. In conditions of high As concentrations, subequal with Fe and S (As, Fe, and S 10 À6 mol) the predominance field of orpiment is below pH 5 and the predominance field of arsenopyrite is approximately concurrent with that of pyrite (Corkhill and Vaughan, 2009). Because the concentration of As in these waters is dilute, and the system is at near-surface temperature and pressure (conditions in which pyrite commonly forms and arsenopyrite does not) only the predominance field for pyrite is shown.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solid-phase arsenic speciation in aquifer sediments: A micro-X-ray absorption spectroscopy approach for quantifying trace-level speciation

Nicholas

Erickson

Woodruff

et al. 2017

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arsenic (As) is a geogenic contaminant affecting groundwater in geologically diverse systems globally. Arsenic release from aquifer sediments to groundwater is favored when biogeochemical conditions, especially oxidation-reduction (redox) potential, in aquifers fluctuate. The specific objective of this research is to identify the solid-phase sources and geochemical mechanisms of release of As in aquifers of the Des Moines Lobe glacial advance. The overarching concept is that conditions present at the aquifer-aquitard interfaces promote a suite of geochemical reactions leading to mineral alteration and release of As to groundwater. A microprobe X-ray absorption spectroscopy (lXAS) approach is developed and applied to rotosonic drill core samples to identify the solid-phase speciation of As in aquifer, aquitard, and aquifer-aquitard interface sediments. This approach addresses the low solid-phase As concentrations, as well as the fine-scale physical and chemical heterogeneity of the sediments. The spectroscopy data are analyzed using novel cosine-distance and correlation-distance hierarchical clustering for Fe 1s and As 1s lXAS datasets. The solid-phase Fe and As speciation is then interpreted using sediment and well-water chemical data to propose solid-phase As reservoirs and release mechanisms. The results confirm that in two of the three locations studied, the glacial sediment forming the aquitard is the source of As to the aquifer sediments. The results are consistent with three different As release mechanisms: (1) desorption from Fe (oxyhydr)oxides, (2) reductive dissolution of Fe (oxyhydr) oxides, and (3) oxidative dissolution of Fe sulfides. The findings confirm that glacial sediments at the interface between aquifer and aquitard are geochemically active zones for As. The diversity of As release mechanisms is consistent with the geographic heterogeneity observed in the distribution of elevated-As wells.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solid-phase arsenic speciation in aquifer sediments: A micro-X-ray absorption spectroscopy approach for quantifying trace-level speciation

Nicholas

Erickson

Woodruff

et al. 2017

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The binding energy (BE) of the C1s level from each sample at 284.6 eV was used as an internal reference to calibrate every spectrum. XPS data was processed using CasaXPS software, and BE references from other studies (Pratt et al, 1994;Heuer and Stubbins, 1999;Descostes et al, 2000;Yamashita and Hayes, 2008;Corkhill and Vaughan, 2009) were employed. The semiconcentration of the goethite in precipitation was determined roughly by using a Lambda 900 diffuse reflectance spectrophotometer (DRS) (Perkin-Elmer Corp., Norwalk, CT), which has been well demonstrated previously (Balsam and Deaton, 1991;Ji et al, 2002;Zhou et al, 2010).…”

Section: Sample Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduction of jarosite by Shewanella oneidensis MR-1 and secondary mineralization

Ouyang

Liu

et al. 2014

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Clearly, it is difficult if not impossible to apply the pyrite model to constitutionally and structurally differing sulfide minerals. There is a number of kinetic and surface studies on the weathering of other sulfides: orpiment and amorphous As 2 S 3 Tempel, 2001, 2002), realgar and amorphous AsS (Lengke and Tempel, 2003), galena (De Giudici et al, 2005), arsenopyrite (Nesbitt et al, 1995;Walker et al, 2006;Corkhill and Vaughan, 2009;Asta et al, 2010b), galena, chalcopyrite and sphalerite (Abraitis et al, 2004) and mackinawite (Jeong et al, 2010). A review of chalcopyrite dissolution rate laws was presented by Kimball et al, (2010) and theoretical studies of realgar dissolution by Renock and Becker (2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%