Disposal of water treatment wastes containing arsenic — A review

Sullivan, Colin; Tyrer, Mark; Cheeseman, Christopher R.; Graham, Nigel

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.01.010

Cited by 208 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

105

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…9 Generally, As(III) is the common species under anaerobic conditions, while the As(V) species occurs under aerobic conditions. 10 Speciation and solubility of inorganic arsenic is sensitive to both redox conditions and pH of the environment, which affects the toxicity and mobility of arsenic in soils.…”

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Removal of Arsenic and Phosphate from Aqueous Solution by Metal (Hydr-)oxide Coated Sand

Huang

Yang

Keller

2014

ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arsenic contamination is a major concern in many drinking water supplies around the world. One low-cost approach for removing arsenic and other oxyanions such as phosphate is to use metal (hydro-)oxide coated sands. In this study, solution pH, sand grain size, coating efficiency, and mineral type for iron-coated sand (ICS), manganese-coated sand (MCS), and iron-and manganese-coated sand (IMCS) were evaluated. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis were used to investigate the surface properties of the coated layer. The mineral type of ICS prepared at different solution pH was identified as a mixture of FeOOH and Fe 2 O 3 . The mineral type of MCS prepared at pH 4 and 7 was identified as MnO 2 and changed to ramsdellite (γ-MnO 2 , a mixture of α-MnO 2 and β-MnO 2 ) at pH 10. ICS exhibited a greater phosphate removal capacity, and phosphate removal increased with increasing iron oxide on the sand. ICS was also shown to have a greater removal capacity for phosphate than chemical precipitation methods by FeCl 3 , especially below neutral pH. In contrast, IMCS(Fe:Mn = 7:3) was better for removing As(III), which occurs through oxidation to As(V) and adsorption of As(III) and As(V) and can reach >98% removal rate (residual concentration <0.02 mg/L) at neutral pH. IMCS(7:3) is an efficient adsorbent for arsenic, as >50% can be removed within 60 min; 66% adsorption was reached after 24 h. Removal of arsenic and phosphate by these metal (hydro-)oxide coated sand adsorbents followed a pseudo-second-order rate and Langmuir as well as Freundlich adsorption isotherms. Removal under different conditions (e.g., pH, ionic strength) was also evaluated to provide information to optimize the process.

show abstract

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Removal of Arsenic and Phosphate from Aqueous Solution by Metal (Hydr-)oxide Coated Sand

Huang

Yang

Keller

2014

ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hydrolysis and precipitation of Fe(III)-hydroxides resulted in the release of H + as described in Eq. (8). Higher concentration of H + decrease the concentrations of alkalinities and thus increase the arsenic adsorption capacity of iron or alumina oxide.…”

Section: Leachability Test Of Arsenic In the Rmsfmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There were numerous studies that focused on aqueous arsenic removal or immobilization [7][8][9]. Up to now, many approaches such as coagulation/precipitation, adsorption, membrane treatment and biological methods were increasingly being used for aqueous arsenic removal or immobilization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of arsenic immobilization in red mud by CO2 or waste acid acidification combined ferrous (Fe2+) treatment

Wang

Peng

et al. 2012

Journal of Hazardous Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The World Health Organization sets the maximum permissible concentration for arsenic in drinking water at 10 lg/l. However, long term exposure through drinking water to even low concentrations of arsenic ( 50 lg/l) can cause carcinogenic diseases of skin, lungs, blood and kidneys [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Traditionally, iron hydroxide precipitates encountered in the co-precipitation process have been described as amorphous ferric hydroxide, colloidal ferric hydroxide, Fe(OH) 3 , etc. However, the precipitates do not have the composition Fe(OH) 3 , and they are not amorphous although their X-ray diffracting properties are poor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coagulation of arsenic adsorbed ferrihydrite with the use of polyaluminium chloride (PAC) or polyferric sulfate (PFS)

Li¹,

Wang

et al. 2012

Desalination and Water Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2012) Coagulation of arsenic adsorbed ferrihydrite with the use of polyaluminium chloride (PAC) or polyferric sulfate (PFS), Desalination and Water Treatment, 49:1-3, 157-164, DOI: 10.1080/19443994.2012.708222 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1080/19443994.2012.708222 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLETaylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Ferrihydrite is effective in arsenic removal because of the considerable amount of active hydroxyl groups. Solid-liquid separation of the arsenic adsorbed ferrihydrite from aqueous solution is important for the arsenic treatment technology. Coagulation is a promising process for ferrihydrite separation. Effects of different coagulants on arsenic adsorbed ferrihydrite settlement were investigated. Surface charge significantly decreased after arsenic was adsorbed on ferrihydrite. Turbidity, iron and arsenic removal efficiencies were used to characterize the ferrihydrite settling process. Turbidity removal efficiency with polyferric sulfate (PFS) added was 98.2% when pH was 5.0. Meanwhile, the turbidity removal rate with polyaluminium chloride (PAC) added was 96.3-97.3% when the pH of colloidal suspensions was 7.0-9.0. Arsenic or iron removal rate after 30 min settling was improved from about 40 to 80% with coagulants added. The mean size of flocs after coagulation process was 61.8 lm after PFS was added, or 71.6 lm after PAC was added when the pH was 6.5. The floc structure of ferrihydrite became more compact and stable with PAC or PFS added.

show abstract

Disposal of water treatment wastes containing arsenic — A review

Cited by 208 publications

References 40 publications

Removal of Arsenic and Phosphate from Aqueous Solution by Metal (Hydr-)oxide Coated Sand

Removal of Arsenic and Phosphate from Aqueous Solution by Metal (Hydr-)oxide Coated Sand

Evaluation of arsenic immobilization in red mud by CO2 or waste acid acidification combined ferrous (Fe2+) treatment

Coagulation of arsenic adsorbed ferrihydrite with the use of polyaluminium chloride (PAC) or polyferric sulfate (PFS)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About