Environmental Chemistry Letters

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 91–94

Surface characteristics of shales and implication on metal sorption

  • Susanta Paikaray
  • Santanu Banerjee
  • Suparna Mukherji
Original Paper

Abstract

Differences in surface characteristics between alkaline and acidic shales are demonstrated in the present study. The alkaline shales are characterized by convex surface titration profiles, while the acidic shale exhibits a concave titration profile. Analysis of surface functional groups reveal that carboxylic acids predominate in alkaline shales and the acidic shale is characterized by C=S, C=N (pyridine derivative) and urea (C=O) functional groups, while it lacks –COOH group. The close proximity between pH and point of zero charge for the most acidic and alkaline shales indicate that surface complexation may not play a dominant role in sorption when the system pH is controlled by these sediments.

Keywords

Point of zero charge Heavy metals Geosorbents Surface functional groups Vindhyan 

References

  1. Appel C, Ma LQ, Rhue RD, Kennelley E (2003) Point of zero charge determination in soils and minerals via traditional methods and detection of electroacoustic mobility. Geoder 113:77–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benguella B, Bennaissa H (2002) Cadmium removal from aqueous solutions by citin: kinetic and equilibrium studies. Water Res 36:2463–2474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chvedov D, Ostap S, Le T (2001) Surface properties of red mud particles from potentiometric titration. Colloids Surf A 182:131–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gharaibeh SH, AbuEl-Sha-r WY, Al-Kofahi MM (1998) Removal of selected heavy metals from aqueous solutions using a solid by product from the Jordanian oil shale refining. Environ Geol 39:113–116Google Scholar
  5. Jackson ML (1958) Soil chemical analysis. Printice Hall, Englewood cliffGoogle Scholar
  6. Kononova ON, Kholmogorov AG, Lukianov AN, Kachin SV, Pashkov GL, Kononov YS (2001) Sorption of Zn(II), Cu(II), Fe(III) on carbon adsorbents from manganese sulfate solutions. Carbon 39:383–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Paikaray S, Banerjee S, Mukherji S (2005a) Sortion behavior of heavy metal pollutants onto shales and correlation with shale geochemistry. Environ Geol 47:1162–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Paikaray S, Banerjee S, Mukherji S (2005b) Sorption of arsenic on to Vindhyan shales: role of pyrite and organic carbon. Curr Sci 88:1580–1585Google Scholar
  9. Pesavento M, Profumo A, Alberti G, Conti F (2003) Adsorption of lead (II) and copper (II) on activated carbon by complexation with surface functional groups. Anal Chem Acta 480:171–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Roy Moulik M, Banerjee S, Mukherji S (2005) Correlation between sorbent characteristics and metal sorption capacity of soils around Mumbai: implications on nvironmental hazards management. J Geol Soc India 66:445–452Google Scholar
  11. Serrano S, Garrido F, Campbell CG, Garcia-Gonzalez MT (2004) Competitive sorption of cadmium and lead in acid soils of central Spain. Geoder 124:91–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Smičiklas ID, Milonjić SK, Pfendt P, Raičević S (2000) The point of zero charge and sorption of cadmium (II) and strontium (II) ions on synthetic hydroxyapatite. Separ Purif Technol 18:185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Smith EJ (1998) Surface complexation modeling of metal removal by recycled iron Sorbent. J Environ Eng 124:913–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susanta Paikaray
    • 1
  • Santanu Banerjee
    • 1
  • Suparna Mukherji
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Earth SciencesIIT BombayPowai, MumbaiIndia
  2. 2.Center for Environmental Science and EngineeringIIT BombayPowai, MumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations