The role of Al-Goethites on arsenate mobility

Silva, Juscimar; Mello, Jaime Wilson Vargas de; Gasparon, Massimo; Abrahão, Walter Antônio Pereira; Ciminelli, Virgínia S. T.; Jong, Tony J.

doi:10.1016/j.watres.2010.06.056

Cited by 54 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When the solid's specific surface area is also considered, the differences in the arsenic uptake amongst the various iron oxide and oxy-hydroxides and aluminum hydroxide are not so evident. Corroborating with this observation, Silva et al (2010) found that, on a weight basis, the maximum As(V) uptake by various minerals followed the sequence: Ferrihydrite (1.258 ± 0.034 mmol g À1 ) > Gibbsite (0.228 ± 0.006 mmol g À1 ) > Hematite (0.193 ± 0.006 mmol g À1 ) > Goethite (0.101 ± 0.002 mmol g À1 ). On the other hand, when the specific surface area of the solids was also taken into account, all the Fe and Al oxy-hydroxides tested reached a maximum adsorption capacity of approximately 0.005 mmol m À2 .…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 57%

As(III) immobilization on gibbsite: Investigation of the complexation mechanism by combining EXAFS analyses and DFT calculations

Duarte

Ciminelli

Dantas

et al. 2012

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 57%

As(III) immobilization on gibbsite: Investigation of the complexation mechanism by combining EXAFS analyses and DFT calculations

Duarte

Ciminelli

Dantas

et al. 2012

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The effects of co-existing AsO 4 3− or Cd 2+ were also studied. Because aqueous Cd 2+ can form Cd(OH) 2 and precipitate with OH − when pH increases, its precipitation curves were made to compare with the real Cd adsorption on goethite.…”

Section: Adsorption Edgementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Arsenic contamination can come from geological, industrial and agricultural sources [1,2]. Cadmium exerts pressure on the environment mainly through anthropogenic discharge [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arsenate and cadmium co-adsorption and co-precipitation on goethite

Jiang

Luo

et al. 2013

Journal of Hazardous Materials

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…the surface of oxides and hydroxides in clearly acid environments (pH between 3.5 and 5.5; Silva et al, 2010), whereas increased pH values (from above 5 for clay minerals to above 12 for calcite) favor desorption (Golberg and Glaubig 1988). Any case, most of the adsorbed As(V) did not desorb, indicating notable irreversibility of the process.…”

Section: Adsorption/desorption As a Function Of Added As(v) Concentramentioning

confidence: 99%

Adsorption, desorption and fractionation of As(V) on untreated and mussel shell-treated granitic material

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. As(V) adsorption and desorption were studied on granitic material, coarse and fine mussel shell and granitic material amended with 12 and 24 t ha −1 fine shell, investigating the effect of different As(V) concentrations and different pH as well as the fractions where the adsorbed As(V) was retained. As(V) adsorption was higher on fine than on coarse shell. Mussel shell amendment increased As(V) adsorption on granitic material. Adsorption data corresponding to the unamended and shell-amended granitic material were satisfactory fitted to the Langmuir and Freundlich models. Desorption was always < 19 % when the highest As(V) concentration (100 mg L −1 ) was added. Regarding the effect of pH, the granitic material showed its highest adsorption (66 %) at pH < 6, and it was lower as pH increased. Fine shell presented notable adsorption in the whole pH range between 6 and 12, with a maximum of 83 %. The shellamended granitic material showed high As(V) adsorption, with a maximum (99 %) at pH near 8, but decreased as pH increased. Desorption varying pH was always < 26 %. In the granitic material, desorption increased progressively when pH increased from 4 to 6, contrary to what happened to mussel shell. Regarding the fractionation of the adsorbed As(V), most of it was in the soluble fraction (weakly bound). The granitic material did not show high As(V) retention capacity, which could facilitate As(V) transfer to water courses and to the food chain in case of As(V) compounds being applied on this material; however, the mussel shell amendment increased As(V) retention, making this practice recommendable.

show abstract

The role of Al-Goethites on arsenate mobility

Cited by 54 publications

References 45 publications

As(III) immobilization on gibbsite: Investigation of the complexation mechanism by combining EXAFS analyses and DFT calculations

As(III) immobilization on gibbsite: Investigation of the complexation mechanism by combining EXAFS analyses and DFT calculations

Arsenate and cadmium co-adsorption and co-precipitation on goethite

Adsorption, desorption and fractionation of As(V) on untreated and mussel shell-treated granitic material

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About