Advertisement

Environmental Geochemistry and Health

, Volume 40, Issue 6, pp 2453–2464 | Cite as

Improving arsenopyrite oxidation rate laws: implications for arsenic mobilization during aquifer storage and recovery (ASR)

  • Chelsea W. Neil
  • M. Jason Todd
  • Y. Jeffrey Yang
Original Paper
  • 103 Downloads

Abstract

Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) and aquifer recharge (AR) provide technical solutions to address water supply deficits and growing future water demands. Unfortunately, the mobilization of naturally present arsenic due to ASR/AR operations has undermined its application on a larger scale. Predicting arsenic mobility in the subsurface during ASR/AR is further complicated by site-specific factors, including the arsenic mobilization mechanisms, groundwater flow conditions, and multi-phase geochemical interactions. In order to ensure safe and sustainable ASR/AR operation, a better understanding of these factors is needed. The current study thus aims to better characterize and model arsenic remobilization at ASR/AR sites by compiling and analyzing available kinetic data on arsenic mobilization from arsenopyrite under different aqueous conditions. More robust and widely applicable rate laws are developed for geochemical conditions relevant to ASR/AR. Sensitivity analysis of these new rate laws gives further insight into the controlling geochemical factors for arsenic mobilization. When improved rate laws are incorporated as the inputs for reactive transport modeling, arsenic mobilization in ASR/AR operations can be predicted with an improved accuracy. The outcomes will be used to guide groundwater monitoring and specify ASR/AR operational parameters, including water pretreatment requirements prior to injection.

Keywords

Aquifer storage and recovery Arsenic mobilization Arsenopyrite Groundwater Rate law Oxidation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research effort in this paper is a part of the EPA’s Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) and Air Climate and Energy (ACE) research program. Funding and resources from these programs are acknowledged. CWN acknowledges the generous support of the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) program. Furthermore, we thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. This paper has been subjected to the Agency’s administrative review and has been approved for external publication. Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency or ORISE; therefore, no official endorsement should be inferred. Any mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

Supplementary material

10653_2018_111_MOESM1_ESM.docx (70 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 69 kb)

References

  1. Asta, M. P., Cama, J., Ayora, C., Acero, P., & de Giudici, G. (2010). Arsenopyrite dissolution rates in O2-bearing solutions. Chemical Geology, 273(3), 272–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baghvand, A., Nasrabadi, T., Bidhendi, G. N., Vosoogh, A., Karbassi, A., & Mehrdadi, N. (2010). Groundwater quality degradation of an aquifer in Iran central desert. Desalination, 260(1), 264–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brenčič, M. (2009). Hydrogeochemistry of coastal carbonate aquifer in Lucija–Portorož (Gulf of Trieste, Northern Adriatic Sea, Slovenia). Acta Carsologica, 38(2–3), 179–196.Google Scholar
  4. Corkhill, C. L., & Vaughan, D. J. (2009). Arsenopyrite oxidation–a review. Applied Geochemistry, 24(12), 2342–2361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Craw, D., Falconer, D., & Youngson, J. H. (2003). Environmental arsenopyrite stability and dissolution: theory, experiment, and field observations. Chemical Geology, 199(1), 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deditius, A. P., Reich, M., Kesler, S. E., Utsunomiya, S., Chryssoulis, S. L., Walshe, J., et al. (2014). The coupled geochemistry of Au and As in pyrite from hydrothermal ore deposits. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 140, 644–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jones, G. W., & Pichler, T. (2007). Relationship between pyrite stability and arsenic mobility during aquifer storage and recovery in southwest central Florida. Environmental Science and Technology, 41(3), 723–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lazareva, O., Druschel, G., & Pichler, T. (2015). Understanding arsenic behavior in carbonate aquifers: Implications for aquifer storage and recovery (ASR). Applied Geochemistry, 52, 57–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. McKibben, M. A., Tallant, B. A., & del Angel, J. K. (2008). Kinetics of inorganic arsenopyrite oxidation in acidic aqueous solutions. Applied Geochemistry, 23(2), 121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mirecki, J. E., Campbell, B. G., Conlon, K. J., & Petkewich, M. D. (1998). Solute changes during aquifer storage recovery testing in a limestone/clastic aquifer. Groundwater, 36(3), 394–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Moses, C. O., & Herman, J. S. (1991). Pyrite oxidation at circumneutral pH. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 55(2), 471–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Neil, C. W., & Jun, Y. S. (2015). Fe3 + addition promotes arsenopyrite dissolution and iron (III)(Hydr) oxide formation and phase transformation. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 3(1), 30–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Neil, C. W., Yang, Y. J., & Jun, Y. S. (2012). Arsenic mobilization and attenuation by mineral–water interactions: implications for managed aquifer recharge. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 14(7), 1772–1788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Neil, C. W., Yang, Y. J., Schupp, D., & Jun, Y. S. (2014). Water chemistry impacts on arsenic mobilization from arsenopyrite dissolution and secondary mineral precipitation: implications for managed aquifer recharge. Environmental Science and Technology, 48(8), 4395–4405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Page, D. W., Peeters, L., Vanderzalm, J., Barry, K., & Gonzalez, D. (2017). Effect of aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) on recovered stormwater quality variability. Water Research, 117, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Paktunc, D. (2008). Speciation of arsenic in pyrite by micro-X-ray absorption fine-structure spectroscopy (XAFS). Advanced Photon Source: Advanced Photon Source (APS), Argonne National Laboratory (ANL).Google Scholar
  17. Reich, M., & Becker, U. (2006). First-principles calculations of the thermodynamic mixing properties of arsenic incorporation into pyrite and marcasite. Chemical Geology, 225(3), 278–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rosenman, K. D. (2011). Cardiovascular disorders. In B. Levy, D. Wegman, S. Baron, & R. Sokas (Eds.), Occupational and environmental health: Recognizing and preventig disease and injury (pp. 492–504). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Sacks, L. A., & Tihansky, A. B. (1996). Geochemical and isotopic composition of ground water, with emphasis on sources of sulfate, in the Upper Floridan Aquifer and Intermediate Aquifer System in Southwest Florida. US Geological Survey: US Department of the Interior.Google Scholar
  20. Schlieker, M., Schüring, J., Hencke, J., & Schulz, H. D. (2001). The influence of redox processes on trace element mobility in a sandy aquifer—An experimental approach. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 73(3), 167–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Seibert, S., Descourvieres, C., Skrzypek, G., Deng, H., & Prommer, H. (2017). Model-based analysis of δ34S signatures to trace sedimentary pyrite oxidation during managed aquifer recharge in a heterogeneous aquifer. Journal of Hydrology, 548, 368–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shiklomanov, I. A., & Rodda, J. C. (Eds.). (2004). World water resources at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Smedley, P. L., & Kinniburgh, D. G. (2002). A review of the source, behaviour and distribution of arsenic in natural waters. Applied Geochemistry, 17(5), 517–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smith, W. B., Miller, G. R., & Sheng, Z. (2017). Assessing aquifer storage and recovery feasibility in the Gulf Coastal Plains of Texas. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies, 14, 92–108.Google Scholar
  25. Vacher, H. L., Hutchings, W. C., & Budd, D. A. (2006). Metaphors and models: The ASR bubble in the Floridan aquifer. Groundwater, 44(2), 144–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vanderzalm, J. L., Dillon, P. J., Barry, K. E., Miotlinski, K., Kirby, J. K., & La Salle, C. L. G. (2011). Arsenic mobility and impact on recovered water quality during aquifer storage and recovery using reclaimed water in a carbonate aquifer. Applied Geochemistry, 26(12), 1946–1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Walker, F. P., Schreiber, M. E., & Rimstidt, J. D. (2006). Kinetics of arsenopyrite oxidative dissolution by oxygen. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 70(7), 1668–1676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wallis, I., Prommer, H., Pichler, T., Post, V. B., Norton, S., Annable, M. D., et al. (2011). Process-based reactive transport model to quantify arsenic mobility during aquifer storage and recovery of potable water. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(16), 6924–6931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Welch, A., Ryker, S., Helsel, D., & Hamilton, P. (2001). Arsenic in Ground Water of the United States: An overview. Water Well Journal, February 2001, 30–33.Google Scholar
  30. Yaron, B., Dror, I., & Berkowitz, B. (2012). Soil-subsurface change: Chemical pollutant impacts. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yu, Y., Zhu, Y., Gao, Z., Gammons, C. H., & Li, D. (2007). Rates of arsenopyrite oxidation by oxygen and Fe(III) at pH 1.8– 12.6 and 15–45 C. Environmental Science and Technology, 41(18), 6460–6464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yuan, J., Van Dyke, M. I., & Huck, P. M. (2017). Identification of critical contaminants in wastewater effluent for managed aquifer recharge. Chemosphere, 172, 294–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yunmei, Y., Yongxuan, Z., Williams-Jones, A. E., Zhenmin, G., & Dexian, L. (2004). A kinetic study of the oxidation of arsenopyrite in acidic solutions: implications for the environment. Applied Geochemistry, 19(3), 435–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zektser, S., Loáiciga, H. A., & Wolf, J. T. (2005). Environmental impacts of groundwater overdraft: selected case studies in the southwestern United States. Environmental Geology, 47(3), 396–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© This is a U.S. government work and its text is not subject to copyright protection in the United States; however, its text may be subject to foreign copyright protection 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chelsea W. Neil
    • 1
  • M. Jason Todd
    • 2
    • 3
  • Y. Jeffrey Yang
    • 1
  1. 1.Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research LaboratoryU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyCincinnatiUSA
  2. 2.Prevention Branch, Office of Ground Water and Drinking WaterU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Risk Assessment Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and ToxicsU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations