Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 2414–2436 | Cite as

Pollution due to hazardous glass waste

  • Deepak Pant
  • Pooja Singh
Review Article


Pollution resulting from hazardous glass (HG) is widespread across the globe, both in terms of quantity and associated health risks. In waste cathode ray tube (CRT) and fluorescent lamp glass, mercury and lead are present as the major pollutants. The current review discusses the issues related to quantity and associated risk from the pollutant present in HG and proposes the chemical, biological, thermal, hybrid, and nanotechniques for its management. The hybrid is one of the upcoming research models involving the compatible combination of two or more techniques for better and efficient remediation. Thermal mercury desorption starts at 100 °C but for efficient removal, the temperature should be >460 °C. Involvement of solar energy for this purpose makes the research more viable and ecofriendly. Nanoparticles such as Fe, Se, Cu, Ni, Zn, Ag, and WS2 alone or with its formulation can immobilize heavy metals present in HG by involving a redox mechanism. Straight-line equation from year-wise sale can provide future sale data in comparison with lifespan which gives future pollutant approximation. Waste compact fluorescent lamps units projected for the year 2015 is 9,300,000,000 units and can emit nearly 9,300 kg of mercury. On the other hand, CRT monitors have been continuously replaced by more improved versions like liquid crystal display and plasma display panel resulting in the production of more waste. Worldwide CRT production was 83,300,000 units in 2002 and can approximately release 83,000 metric tons of lead.


Hazardous glass pollutant Hybrid method Thermal remediation Nanoremediation Future waste approximation CFL CRT 


  1. Ahluwalia PK, Nema AK (2006) Multi-objective reverse logistics model for integrated computer waste management. Waste Manage Res 24:514–527Google Scholar
  2. Ajmal M, Rifaqt AK, Siddiqui BA (1995) Adsorption studies and removal of dissolved metals using pyrolusite as adsorbent. Environ Monit Ass 38:25–35Google Scholar
  3. Al-Garni SM, Ghanem KM, Ibrahim AS (2010) Biosorption of mercury by capsulated and slime layer forming Gram nagative bacilli from an aqueous solution. African J Biotech 9:6413–6421Google Scholar
  4. Al-Qahtani KM (2012) Biosorption of Cd+2 and Pb+2 on Cyperus laevigatus: application of factorial design analysis. Life Sci J 9:860–868Google Scholar
  5. Ambashta RD, Sillanpaa M (2010) Water purification using magnetic assistance: a review. J Hazard Mater 180:38–49Google Scholar
  6. Anderson CG, Twidwell LG (2008). The alkaline sulfide hydrometallurgical separation, recovery and fixation of tin, arsenic, antimony, mercury and gold. South Afric Instit Min and Metalur. pp 121–132Google Scholar
  7. Andreola F, Barbieri L, Corradi A, Lancellotti I, Falcone R, Hreglich S (2005a) Glass-ceramics obtained by the recycling of end of life cathode ray tubes glasses. Waste Manage 25:183–189Google Scholar
  8. Andreola F, Barbieri L, Corradi A, Lancellotti I (2005b) Cathode ray tubes recycling: an example of clean technology. Waste Manage Res 23:314–321Google Scholar
  9. Andreola F, Barbieri L, Karamanova E, Lancellotti I, Pelino M (2008) Recycling of CRT panel glass as fluxing agent in the porcelain stoneware tile production. Ceram Int 34:1289–1295Google Scholar
  10. Anjum NA, Ahmad I, Valega M, Pacheco M, Figueira E, Duarte AC, Pereira E (2011) Impact of seasonal fluctuations on the sediment-mercury, its accumulation and partitioning in Halimione portulacoides and Juncus maritimus collected from Ria de Aveiro Coastal Lagoon (Portugal). Water, Air, Soil Pollut 222:1–15Google Scholar
  11. Arulrajah A, Ali M, Piratheepan J, Bo M (2013) Geotechnical performance of recycled glass-waste rock blends in footpath bases. J Mater Civ Eng 25:653–661Google Scholar
  12. Arwidsson Z, Allard B (2009) Remediation of metal-contaminated soil by organic metabolites from fungi II-metal redistribution. Water Air Soil Pollut 207:5–18Google Scholar
  13. Aucott M, McLinden M, Winka M (2003) Release of mercury from broken fluorescent bulbs. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 53:143–151Google Scholar
  14. Azhar N, Ashraf MY, Hussain M, Hussain F (2006) Phytoextraction of lead (Pb) by EDTA application through sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) cultivation: seedling growth studies. Pak J Bot 38:1551–1560Google Scholar
  15. Baba AA, Adekola FA, Atata RF, Ahemad RN, Panda S (2011) Bioleaching of Zn(II) and Pb(II) from Nigerian sphalerite and galena ores by mixed culture of acidophilic bacteria. Trans Nonf Met Soc Chi 21:2535–2541Google Scholar
  16. Balcar GP, Dunkirk NY (1997). Glass beads having improved fracture toughness. US patent number 5674616Google Scholar
  17. Barbosa FJ, Tanus-Santos JE, Gerlach RF, Parsons PJ (2005) A critical review of biomarkers used for monitoring human exposure to lead: advantages, limitations, and future needs. Environ Health Perspect 113:1669–1674Google Scholar
  18. Barkay T, Susan MM, Summers AO (2003) Bacterial mercury resistance from atoms to ecosystems. FEMS Microbiol Rev 27:355–384Google Scholar
  19. Barrer RM, Whiteman JL (1967) Mercury uptake in various cationic forms of several zeolites. J Chem Soc A Inorg Phys Theor 13:19–25Google Scholar
  20. Bayat B, Sari B (2010a) Bioleaching of dewatered metal plating sludge by Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans using shake flask and completely mixed batch reactor. African J Biotechnol 9:7504–7512Google Scholar
  21. Bayat B, Sari B (2010b) Comparative evaluation of microbial and chemical leaching processes for heavy metal removal from dewatered metal plating sludge. J Hazard Mater 174:763–769Google Scholar
  22. Bernardo E, Albertini F (2006) Glass foams from dismantled cathode ray tubes. Ceram Int 32:603–608Google Scholar
  23. Bernardo E, Castellan R, Hreglich S, Lancellotti I (2006) Sintered sanidine glass ceramics from industrial wastes. J Eur Ceram Soc 26:3335–3341Google Scholar
  24. Bernardo E, Scarinci G, Hreglich S (2003) Mechanical properties of metal–particulate lead–silicate glass matrix composites obtained by means of powder technology. J Eur Ceram Soc 23:1819–1827Google Scholar
  25. Bernardo E, Scarinci G, Hreglich S (2005) Foam glass as a way of recycling glasses from cathode ray tubes. Glass Sci Technol 8:7–11Google Scholar
  26. Bizily SP, Rugh CL, Meagher RB (2000) Phytodetoxification of hazardous organomercurials by genetically engineered plants. Nat Biotechnol 18:213–217Google Scholar
  27. Bizily SP, Rugh CL, Summers AO, Meagher RB (1999) Phytoremediation of methylmercury pollution: merB expression in Arabidopsis thaliana confers resistance to organomercurials. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96:6808–6813Google Scholar
  28. Blaylock MJ, Elless MP, Huang JW, Dushenkov SM (1999) Phytoremediation of lead-contaminated soil at a New Jersey brownfield site. Remediation 9:93–101Google Scholar
  29. Blaylock MJ, Huang JW (1999) Phytoextraction of metals. In: Raskin I, Ensley BD (eds) Phytoremediation of toxic metals: using plants to clean up the environment. Wiley, New York, pp 53–70Google Scholar
  30. Blaylock MJ, Huang JW (2000) Phytoextraction of metals. In: Raskin I, Ensley BD (eds) Phytoremediation of toxic metals: using plants to clean up the environment. Wiley, New York, pp 53–70Google Scholar
  31. Blaylock MJ, Salt DE, Dushenkov S, Zakharova O, Gussman C (1997) Enhanced accumulation of Pb in Indian mustard by soil-applied chelating agents. Environ Sci Technol 31:860–865Google Scholar
  32. Boening DW (2000) Ecological effects, transport, and fate of mercury: a general review. Chemosphere 40:1335–1351Google Scholar
  33. Bower J, Savage KS, Weinman B, Barnett MO, Hamilton WP, Harper WF (2008) Immobilization of mercury by pyrite (FeS2). Environ Pollut 156:504–514Google Scholar
  34. Brain J (1990) From cups to CAD: a history of glass with CRTs in mind. Inform Display 6:12–15Google Scholar
  35. Brandl H, Bosshard R, Wegmann M (2001) Computer-munching microbes: metal leaching from electronic scrap by bacteria and fungi. Hydrometallurgy 59:319–326Google Scholar
  36. Brenni P (2007) Uranium glass and its scientific uses. Bull Sci Inst Soc 92:34–39Google Scholar
  37. Busto Y, Cabrera X, Tack FMG, Verloo MG (2011) Potential of thermal treatment for decontamination of mercury containing wastes from chlor-alkali industry. J Hazard Mater 186:114–118Google Scholar
  38. Cabrejo E, Phillips E (2010). In situ remediation and stabilization technologies for mercury in clay soils. Student summer internship technical report, DOE-FIU Science & Technology Workforce Development Program, U.S. Department of EnergyGoogle Scholar
  39. Carpi A (1997) Mercury from combustion sources: a review of the chemical species emitted and their transport in the atmosphere. Water Air Soil Pollut 98:241–245Google Scholar
  40. Chang T, Yen J (2006) On-site mercury-contaminated soils remediation by using thermal desorption technology. J Hazard Mater 128:208–217Google Scholar
  41. Chatterjee S, Kumar K (2009) Effective electronic waste management and recycling process involving formal and non-formal sectors. Internat J Physical Sci 4:893–905Google Scholar
  42. Cheikh M, Magnin JP, Gondrexon N, Willisn J, Hassen A (2010) Zinc and lead leaching from contaminated industrial waste sludges using coupled processes. Environ Technol 31:1577–1585Google Scholar
  43. Chen A, Dietrich KN, Huo X, Ho SM (2011) Developmental neurotoxicants in E waste: an emerging health concern. Environ Health Perspect 119:431–433Google Scholar
  44. Chen C, Leea H, Younga KL, Yuea PL, Wong A, Taob T, Choib KK (2002) Glass recycling in cement production—an innovative approach. Waste Manage 22:747–753Google Scholar
  45. Chen M, Zhang F-S, Zhu J (2009) Lead recovery and the feasibility of foam glass production from funnel glass of dismantled cathode ray tube through pyrovacuum process. J Hazard Mater 161:1109–1113Google Scholar
  46. Chen Y (2010) Status and trend of the lighting industry. Zhejiang Zhaoming Dianqi Xinxi 11:12–13 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  47. Cheng TW, Huang MZ, Tzeng CC, Cheng KB, Ueng TH (2007) Production of coloured glass–ceramics from incinerator ash using thermal plasma technology. Chemosphere 68:1937–1945Google Scholar
  48. Clarkson TW (1993) Mercury: major issues in environmental health. Environ Health Perspect 100:31–38Google Scholar
  49. Conrad K, Hansen HCB (2007) Sorption of zinc and lead on coir. Biores Technol 98:89–97Google Scholar
  50. Coolidge AS (1927) The adsorption of mercury vapor by charcoal. J American Chemical Society 49:1949–1952Google Scholar
  51. Corcoran CH (2001). Communication in Western Electronic Product Stewardship Initiative (WEPSI) Multi-Stakeholder Meeting 3, Portland, OR, USAGoogle Scholar
  52. CPCB (2008). Technical guidelines for environmentally sound mercury management in FL Sector Central Pollution Control Board, Delhi.
  53. Culver A (2008). Mercury content in lamps. Conference Presentation. EBB Conference. Mercury Containing Lamps under the Spotlight. Brussels. Available at:
  54. Cunningham SD, Ow DW (1996) Promises and prospects of phytoremediation. Plant Physiol 110:715–719Google Scholar
  55. Czako M, Feng X, He Y, Liang D, Marton L (2006) Transgenic Spartina alterniflora for phytoremediation. Environ Geochem Health 28:103–110Google Scholar
  56. Dastoor AP, Larocque Y (2004) Global circulation of atmospheric mercury: a modeling study. Atmos Environ 38:147–161Google Scholar
  57. Deng L, Sua Y, Sua H, Wanga X, Zhua X (2007) Sorption and desorption of lead (II) from wastewater by green algae Cladophora fascicularis. J Hazard Mater 143:220–225Google Scholar
  58. Dermont G, Bergeron M, Mercier G, Richer-Lafleche M (2008a) Soil washing for metal removal: a review of physical/chemical technologies and field applications. J Hazard Mater 152:1–31Google Scholar
  59. Dermont G, Bergeron M, Mercier G, Richer-Lafleche M (2008b) Metal-contaminated soils: remediation practices and treatment technologies. Pract Period Hazard Tox Radioact Waste Manage 12:188–210Google Scholar
  60. Dillon P (1998). Potential markets for CRTs and plastics from electronics demanufacturing: an initial scoping report. Chelsea Center for Recycling and Economic Development: Chelsea. pp 1–2Google Scholar
  61. Disfani MM, Arulrajah A, Ali M, Bo M (2011a) Fine recycled glass: a sustainable alternative to natural aggregates. Internat J Geotech Engineer 12:255–266Google Scholar
  62. Disfani MM, Arulrajah A, Bo MW, Hankour R (2011b) Recycled crushed glass in road work applications. Waste Manag 31:2341–2351Google Scholar
  63. Disfani MM, Arulrajah A, Bo MW, Sivakugan N (2012) Environmental risks of using recycled crushed glass in road applications. J Cleaner Production 20:170–179Google Scholar
  64. Dondi M, Guarini G, Raimondo M, Zanelli C (2009) Recycling PC and TV waste glass in clay bricks and roof tiles. Waste Manage 29:1945–1951Google Scholar
  65. Duff JT (2012) An examination into the use of compact fluorescent lamps in the domestic environment. J Sust Eng Des 7:1–12Google Scholar
  66. Durga DK, Veeraiah N (2003) Role of manganese ions on the stability of ZnF2–P2O5–TeO2 glass system by the study of dielectric dispersion and some other physical properties. J Phys Chem of Solids 64:133–146Google Scholar
  67. Dushenkov V, Kumar PBAN, Motto H, Raskin I (1995) Rhizofiltration: the use of plants to remove heavy metals from aqueous streams. Environ Sci Technol 29:1239–1245Google Scholar
  68. Ehrlich HL (1997) Microbes and metals. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 48:687–692Google Scholar
  69. Elliott HA, Shastri NL (1999) Extractive decontamination of metal-polluted soils using oxalate. Water Air Soil Pollut 110:335–346Google Scholar
  70. Feng Q, Lin Q, Gong F, Sugita S, Shoya S (2004) Adsorption of lead and mercury by rice husk ash. J Colloid Interface Sci 278:1–8Google Scholar
  71. Flora SJS, Flora G, Saxena G (2006) Environmental occurrence, health effects and management of lead poisoning. In: Cascas SB, Sordo J (eds) Lead chemistry, analytical aspects, environmental impacts and health effects. Elsevier, Netherlands, pp 158–228Google Scholar
  72. Fox B, Walsh CT (1982) Mercuric reductase: purification and characterisation of a transposon-encoded flavoprotein containing an oxidation-reduction active disulfide. J Biol Chem 257:2498–2503Google Scholar
  73. Fuhrmann M, Melamed D, Kalb PD, Adams JW, Milian LW (2002) Sulfur polymer solidification/stabilization of elemental mercury waste. Waste Manage 22:327–333Google Scholar
  74. George C, Azwell DE, Adams PA, Rao GVN, Averett DE (1995) Evaluation of steam as a sweep gas in low temperature thermal desorption processes used for contaminated soil clean up. Waste Manage 15:407–416Google Scholar
  75. Geskin ES, Goldenberg B, Caudill R (2002). Development of advanced CRT disassembly technology. In: Proceeding of the international symposium on electronics and the environment. pp. 249–253Google Scholar
  76. Ghorishi B, Gullett BK (1998). An experimental study on mercury sorption by activated carbons and calcium hydroxide. Acurex Environmental Corp., Research Triangle Park, NC; Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. Air Pollution Prevention and Control Div. EPA-68-D4-0005; EPA/600/A-98/011, 99 795–808Google Scholar
  77. Ghosh M, Singh SP (2005) A review on phytoremediation of heavy metals and utilization of its byproducts. Appl Ecol Environ Res 3:1–18Google Scholar
  78. Gomez-Serrano V, Macias-Garcia A, Espinosa-Mansilla A, Valenzuela-Calahorro A (1998) Adsorption of mercury, cadmium and lead from aqueous solution on heat-treated and sulphurized activated carbon. Water Res 32:1–4Google Scholar
  79. Grcman H, Velinkonja-Bolta S, Vodnik D, Lestan D (2001) EDTA enhanced heavy metal phytoextraction: metal accumulation, leaching and toxicity. Plant Soil 235:105–114Google Scholar
  80. Grcman H, Vodnik D, Velinkonja-Bolta S, Lestan D (2003) Ethylenediaminedisussuccinate as a new chelate for environmentally safe enhanced lead phytoextraction. J Environ Qual 32:500–506Google Scholar
  81. Gregory J, Nadeau M-C, Kirchain R (2009) Evaluating the economic viability of a material recovery system: the case of cathode ray tube glass. Environ Sci Technol 43:9245–9251Google Scholar
  82. Gupta RK (2007). E-waste recycling and health effects: a review. Centre for Education and Communication—working paper (
  83. Gupta VK, Rastogi A (2008) Biosorption of lead from aqueous solutions by green algae Spirogyra species: kinetics and equilibrium studies. J hazard Mater 152:407–441Google Scholar
  84. Ha NTH, Sakakibara M, Sano S, Nhuan MT (2011) Uptake of metals and metalloids by plants growing in a lead–zinc mine area Northern Vietnam. J Hazard Mater 186:1384–1391Google Scholar
  85. Hafshejani MK, Khandani F, Heidarpour R, Sedighpour A, Fuladvand H, Shokuhifard R, Arad A (2012) Study of the health threatening mercury effective parameters for its removal from the aqueous solutions by using activated carbons. Life Sci J 9:1789–1791Google Scholar
  86. Hall MJ (1998) Kaolinite sorbent for the removal of heavy metals from incinerated lubricating oils. Project, University of TexasGoogle Scholar
  87. Harikumar PS, Dhruvan A, Sabna V, Babitha A (2011) Study on the leaching of mercury from compact fluorescent lamps using stripping voltammetry. J Toxicol Environ Health Sci 3:8–13Google Scholar
  88. Hartenstein R, Neuhauser EF, Collier J (1980) Accumulation of heavy metals in the earthworm E. foetida. J Environ Qual 9:23–26Google Scholar
  89. He W, Li G, Ma X, Wang H, Huang J, Xu M, Huang C (2006) WEEE recovery strategies and the WEEE treatment status in China. J Hazard Mater 136:502–512Google Scholar
  90. Heaton ACP, Rugh CL, Wang NJ, Meagher RB (1998) Phytoremediation of mercury and methylmercury-polluted soils using genetically engineered plants. J Soil Cont 7:497–509Google Scholar
  91. Henry JR (2000) An overview of the phytoremediation of lead and mercury, National Network of Environmental Management Studies (NNEMS) Status Report. U.S. EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response and Technology Innovation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  92. Hildenbrand VD, Denissen CJM (2000) Interactions of thin oxide films with a low-pressure mercury discharge. Thin Solid Films 371:295–302Google Scholar
  93. Holan ZR, Volesky B (1994) Biosorption of lead and nickel by biomass of marine algae. Biotechnol Bioeng 43:1001–1009Google Scholar
  94. Hong KJ, Tokunaga S, Kajiuchi T (2000) Extraction of heavy metals from MSW incinerator fly ashes by chelating agents. J Hazard Mater 75:57–73Google Scholar
  95. Hong PKA, Li C, Banerji SK, Wang Y (2002) Feasibility of metal recovery from soil using DTPA and its biostability. J Hazard Materi 94:253–272Google Scholar
  96. Hsu E, Kuo C-M (2005) Recycling rates of waste home appliances in Taiwan. Waste Manage 25:53–65Google Scholar
  97. Hu Y, Cheng H (2012) Mercury risk from fluorescent lamps in China: current status and future perspective. Environ Internat 44:141–150Google Scholar
  98. Huang CC, Chen MW, Hsieh JL, Lin WH, Chen PC, Chien LF (2006) Expression of mercuric reductase from Bacillus megaterium MB1 in eukaryotic microalga Chlorella sp. DT: an approach for mercury phytoremediation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 72:197–205Google Scholar
  99. Huang JW, Chen J, Berti WR, Cunningham SD (1997) Phytoremediation of lead contaminated soils: role of synthetic chelates in lead phytoextraction. Environ Sci Technol 31:800–805Google Scholar
  100. Huang JW, Cunningham SD (1996) Lead phytoextraction: species variation in lead uptake and translocation. New Phytol 134:75–84Google Scholar
  101. Huang YT, Hseu ZY, Hsi HC (2011) Influences of thermal decontamination on mercury removal, soil properties, and repartitioning of coexisting heavy metals. Chemosphere 84:1244–1249Google Scholar
  102. ICER (2004). Materials recovery from waste cathode ray tubes (CRTs). In: The waste and resource action programme, UK.
  103. ICF Incorporated Fairfax (1999) General background document on cathode ray tube glass-to-glass recycling. ICF Incorporated Fairfax VA Office of Solid Waste US Environmental Protection AgencyGoogle Scholar
  104. Imteaz MA, Ali MM, Arulrajah A (2012) Possible environmental impacts of recycled glass used as a pavement base material. Waste Manag Res 30:917–921Google Scholar
  105. Inbaraj BS, Sulochana N (2006) Mercury adsorption on a carbon sorbent derived from fruit shell of Terminalia catappa. J Hazard Mater 133:283–290Google Scholar
  106. INSA (2011). A position paper. Hazardous metals and minerals pollution in India: Sources, toxicity and management. Indian National Science Academy, New Delhi.
  107. Ireland MP (1979) Metal accumulation by the earthworms Lumbricus rubellus, Dendrobaena veneta and Eiseniella tetraedra living in heavy metal polluted sites. Environ Pollut 19:201–206Google Scholar
  108. Ireland MP (1983) Heavy metals uptake in earthworms; earthworm ecology. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  109. Issitt DM (2005). Substance used in making of coloured glass.
  110. Jalali R, Ghafourian H, Asef Y, Davarpanah SJ, Sepehr S (2002) Removal and recovery of lead using nonliving biomass of marine algae. J Hazard Mater 92:253–262Google Scholar
  111. Jang M, Hong SM, Park JK (2005) Characterization and recovery of mercury from spent fluorescent lamps. Waste Manage 25:5–14Google Scholar
  112. Jarup L (2003) Hazards of heavy metal contamination. Br Med Bull 68:167–182Google Scholar
  113. Jefferies E (2006) E-wasted. Toys and gadgets become toxic junk thanks to the circuit bored. Worldwatch 19:21–25, Worldwatch Institute www.worldwatch.orgGoogle Scholar
  114. Johnson NC, Manchester S, Sarin L, Gao Y, Kulaots I, Hurt RH (2008) Mercury vapor release from broken compact fluorescent lamps and in situ capture by new nanomaterial sorbents. Environ Sci Technol 42:5772–5778Google Scholar
  115. Kagi JHR (1991) Overview of metallothionein. Methods Enzymol 205:613–626Google Scholar
  116. Kannan N, Kanimozhi R, Xavier A (2010) Studies on the removal of mercury (II)-EDTA complex by coal and coal-flyash belends. Internat J Environ Pollut 30:719–724Google Scholar
  117. Karagiannidis A, Perkoulidis G, Papadopoulos A, Moussiopoulos N, Tsatsarelis T (2005) Characteristics of wastes from electric and electronic equipment in Greece: results of a field survey. Waste Manage Res 23:381–388Google Scholar
  118. Karn B, Kuiken T, Otto M (2009) Nanotechnology and in situ remediation: a review of the benefits and potential risks. Environ Health Perspect 117:1813–1831Google Scholar
  119. Kelly DJA, Budd K, Lefebvre DD (2007) Biotransformation of mercury in pH-stat cultures of eukaryotic freshwater algae. Arch Microbiol 187:45–53Google Scholar
  120. Kim D, Pertrisor IG, Yen TF (2005) Evaluation of biopolymer-modified concrete systems for disposal of cathode ray tube glass. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 55:961–969Google Scholar
  121. King P, Rakesh N, Beenalahari S, Kumar YP, Prasad VSRK (2007) Removal of lead from aqueous solution using Syzygium cumini L.: equilibrium and kinetic studies. J Hazard Mater 142:340–347Google Scholar
  122. Kiyono M, Sone Y, Nakamura R, Pan-Hou H, Sakabe K (2009) The Mer E protein encoded by transposon Tn21 is a broad mercury transporter in Escherichia coli. FEBS Lett 583:1127–1131Google Scholar
  123. Klasson KT, Koran LJ, Jr. Gates DD, Cameron PA (1998). Removal of mercury from solids using the potassium iodide/iodine leaching process. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of EnergyGoogle Scholar
  124. Kocialkowski WZ, Diatta JB, Grzebisz W (1999) Evaluation of chelating agents as heavy metals extractants in agricultural soils under threat of contamination polish. J Environ Stud 8:149–154Google Scholar
  125. Komura I, Izaki K (1971) Mechanism of mercuric chloride resistance in microorganisms I. Vaporization of a mercury compound from mercuric chloride by multiple drug resistance strain of Escherichia coli. J Biochem 70:885–893Google Scholar
  126. Kos B, Lestan D (2003) Influence of a biodegradable ([S, S]-EDDS) and nondegradable (EDTA) chelate and hydrogel modified soil water sorption capacity on Pb phytoextraction and leaching. Plant Soil 253:403–411Google Scholar
  127. Kotnala RK (2009) New nanotechniques, ethical issues of nanotechnology. Nova Science, New York (Chapter 7). ISBN 978-1-60692-516-4Google Scholar
  128. Kucharski R, Zielonka U, Sas-Nowosielska A, Kuperberg JM, Worsztynowicz A, Szdzuj J (2005) A method of mercury removal from topsoil using low-thermal application. Environ Monit Assess 104:341–351Google Scholar
  129. Kumar J, Srivastava A, Singh VP (2011) EDTA enhanced phytoextraction of Pb by Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Plant Sci Feed 1:160–166Google Scholar
  130. Kumar PBAN, Dushenkov S, Salt DE, Raskin I (1994) Crop Brassicas and phytoremediation—a novel environmental technology. Cruciferae Newsl Eucarpia 16:18–19Google Scholar
  131. Kumar PBAN, Dushenkov V, Motto H, Raskin I (1995) Phytoextraction: the use of plants to remove heavy metals from soils. Environ Sci Technol 29:1232–1238Google Scholar
  132. Kunkel AM, Seibert JJ, Elliott LJ, Ricci-Kelley KLE, Pope GA (2006) Remediation of elemental mercury using in situ thermal desorption (ISTD). Environ Sci Technol 40:2384–2389Google Scholar
  133. Lai HY, Chen ZS (2004) Effects of EDTA on solubility of cadmium, zinc, and lead and their uptake by rainbow pink and vetiver grass. Chemosphere 55:421–430Google Scholar
  134. Lai HY, Chen ZS (2005) The effect of EDTA on phytoextraction of single and combined metals-contaminated soils by rainbow pink. Chemosphere 60:1062–1071Google Scholar
  135. Lai HY, Chen ZS (2007) The effect of multi-dose EDTA application on the phytoextraction of Cd, Zn and Pb by rainbow pink (Dianthus chinensis) in contaminated soil. Desalination 210:236–247Google Scholar
  136. Lairaksa N, Moon AR, Makul N (2013) Utilization of cathode ray tube waste: encapsulation of PbO-containing funnel glass in Portland cement clinker. J Environ Manag 117:180–186Google Scholar
  137. Langford LJ, Ferner RE (1999) Toxicity of mercury. J Human Hypertension 13:651–656Google Scholar
  138. Lee C-H, Chang S-L, Wang K-M, Wen L-C (2007) Present status of the recycling of waste electrical and electronic equipment in Korea. Res Conserv Recycl 50:380–397Google Scholar
  139. Leonard TL, Taylor GE, Gustin MS, Fernandez GCJ (1998) Mercury and plants in contaminated soils: uptake, partitioning, and emission to the atmosphere. Environ Toxicol Chem 17:2063–2071Google Scholar
  140. Li X, Chang C, Kubota T, Qin C, Makino A, Inoue A (2008) Effect of Cr addition on the glass-forming ability, magnetic, mechanical and corrosion properties of (Fe0:76Si0:096b0:096p0:048)100-xCrx bulk glassy alloys. Mater Transac 49:2887–2890Google Scholar
  141. Liebert CA, Watson AL, Summers AO (2000) The quality of merC, a module of the Mer mosaic. J Mol Evol 51:607–622Google Scholar
  142. Lim S-R, Kang D, Ogunseitan OA, Schoenung JM (2013) Potential environmental impacts from the metals in incandescent, compact fluorescent lamp (CFL), and light-emitting diode (LED) bulbs. Environ Sci Technol 47:1040–1047Google Scholar
  143. Liu Y, Su G, Zhang B, Jiang G, Yan B (2011) Nanoparticle-based strategies for detection and remediation of environmental pollutants. Analyst (Cambridge, U K) 136:872–877Google Scholar
  144. Lloyd JR (2002) Bioremediation of metals; the application of micro-organisms that make and break minerals. Microbiol Today 29:67–69Google Scholar
  145. Luo CL, Shen ZG, Baker AJM, Li XD (2006a) A novel strategy using biodegradable EDDS for the chemically enhanced phytoextraction of soils contaminated with heavy metals. Plant Soil 285:67–80Google Scholar
  146. Luo CL, Shen ZG, Li XD, Baker AJM (2006b) Enhanced phytoextraction of Pb and other metals from artificially contaminated soils through the combined application of EDTA and EDDS. Chemosphere 63:1773–1784Google Scholar
  147. Luo F, Liu Y, Li X, Xuan Z, Ma J (2007) Biosorption of lead ion by chemically modified biomass of marine brown alga Laminaria japonica. Chemosphere 64:1122–1127Google Scholar
  148. Luther L (2008). Compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs): issues with use and disposal. CRS report for congress.Google Scholar
  149. Luz AP, Ribeiro S (2007) Use of glass waste as a raw material in porcelain stoneware tile mixtures. Ceramics Int 33:761–765Google Scholar
  150. Maddah SM, Moraghebi F (2013) The comparisons between Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris in respect of lead phytoremediation potential. Internat J Biosci 3:35–41Google Scholar
  151. Manousaki E, Kalogerakis N (2009) Phytoextraction of Pb and Cd by the Mediterranean saltbush (Atriplex halimus L.): metal uptake in relation to salinity. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 16:844–854Google Scholar
  152. Marques B, Lillebo AI, Pereira E, Duarte AC (2011) Mercury cycling and sequestration in salt marshes sediments: an ecosystem service provided by Juncus maritimus and Scirpus maritimus. Environ Pollut 159:1869–1876Google Scholar
  153. Marschner H (1995) Mineral nutrition of higher plants. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  154. Maschio S, Tonello G, Furlani E (2013) Recycling glass cullet from waste CRTs for the production of high strength mortars. J Waste Manag. doi: 10.1155/2013/102519 Google Scholar
  155. Massacci P, Piga L, Ferrini M (2000) Applications of physical and thermal treatment for the removal of mercury from contaminated materials. Miner Eng 13:963–967Google Scholar
  156. Matheickal JT, Yu Q (1996) Biosorption of lead from aqueous solutions by marine algae Ecklonia radiate. Water Sci Technol 34:1–7Google Scholar
  157. Matteucci F, Dondi M, Guarini G (2002) Effect of soda-lime glass on sintering and technological properties of porcelain stoneware tiles. Ceramics Internat 28:873–880Google Scholar
  158. Mattigod SV, Fryxell GE, Skaggs R, Parker KE (2006) Functionalized nanoporous ceramic sorbents for removal of mercury and other contaminants. NSTI-Nanotech 1:355–357Google Scholar
  159. McLellan GW, Shand EB (1984) Glass engineering handbook. McGraw-Hill, IncGoogle Scholar
  160. Meagher RB (2000) Phytoremediation of toxic elemental and organic pollutants. Curr Opin Plant Biol 3:153–162Google Scholar
  161. Mear F, Yot P, Cambon M, Ribes M (2006) The characterization of waste cathode-ray tube glass. Waste Manage 26:1468–1476Google Scholar
  162. Mear FO, Yot PG, Kolobov AV, Ribes M, Guimon G-M, Gonbeau D (2007) Local structure around lead, barium and strontium in waste cathode-ray tube glasses. J Non-Crystalline Solids 353:4640–4646Google Scholar
  163. Meers E, Hopgood M, Lesage E, Vervaeke P, Tack FMG, Verloo MG (2004) Enhanced phytoextraction: in search of EDTA alternatives. Int J Phytoremediat 6:95–109Google Scholar
  164. Meers E, Lesage E, Lamsal S, Hopgood M, Vervaeke P, Tack FMG, Verloo MG (2005) Enhanced phytoextraction: I. Effect of EDTA and citric acid on heavy metal mobility in a calcareous soil. Int J Phytoremediat 7:129–142Google Scholar
  165. Meers E, Qadir M, De-Caritat P, Tack F, Du-Laing G, Zia M (2009) EDTA-assisted Pb phytoextraction. Chemosphere 74:1279–1291Google Scholar
  166. Menad N (1999) Cathode ray tube recycling. Res Conserv Recycl 26:143–154Google Scholar
  167. Misra TK (1992) Bacterial resistance to inorganic mercury salts and organomercurials. Plasmid 27:4–16Google Scholar
  168. Mizuki C, Pitts G, Aanstoos T, Nichols S (1997). CRT disposition: an assessment of limitations and opportunities in reuse, refurbishment, and recycling. In: U.S. Proceedings of the 1997 I.E. International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. 73–78Google Scholar
  169. Monchamp A, Evans H, Nardone J, Wood S, Proch E, Wagner T (2001). Cathode ray tube manufacturing and recycling: analysis of industry survey. Electronic Industries Alliance Arlington, VA, USAGoogle Scholar
  170. Monika JK (2010) E-waste management: as a challenge to public health in India. Indian J Community Med 35:382–385Google Scholar
  171. Monitor of the electronics recycling issues (2001) CRT glass to CRT glass recycling. In: Materials for the Future Foundation Issue #1, September 2001.
  172. Morby AP, Hobman JL, Brown NL (1995) The role of cysteine residues in the transport of mercuric ions by the Tn501 MerT and MerP mercury-resistance proteins. Mol Microbiol 17:25–35Google Scholar
  173. Moreno FN, Anderson CWN, Stewart RB, Robinson BH, Ghomshei M, Meech JA (2005a) Induced plant uptake and transport of mercury in the presence of sulphur-containing ligands and humic acid. New Phytol 166:445–454Google Scholar
  174. Moreno FN, Anderson CWN, Stewart RB, Robinson BH, Nomura R, Ghomshei M, Meech JA (2005b) Effect of thioligands on plant–Hg accumulation and volatilisation from mercury-contaminated mine tailings. Plant Soil 275:233–246Google Scholar
  175. Moreno FN, Anderson CWN, Stewart RB, Robinson FN (2004) Phytoremediation of mercury-contaminated mine tailings by induced plant–mercury accumulation. Environ Pract 6:165–175Google Scholar
  176. Moreno-Jimenez E, Gamarra R, Carpena-Ruiz RO, Millan R, Pealosa JM, Esteban E (2006) Mercury bioaccumulation and phytotoxicity in two wild plant species of Almaden area. Chemosphere 63:1969–1973Google Scholar
  177. Morris M, Sams R, Gillis G, Helsel R, Alperin E, Geisler T, Groen A, Root D (1995) Bench and pilot-scale demonstration of thermal desorption for removal of mercury from the Lower East Fork Poplar Creek Floodplain soils CONF-950216-129. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Oak Ridge, TNGoogle Scholar
  178. Mostaghel S, Samuelsson C (2010) Metallurgical use of glass fractions from waste electric and electronic equipment (WEEE). Waste Manag 30:140–144Google Scholar
  179. Mueller JR, Boehm MW, Drummond C (2012) Direction of CRT waste glass processing. Electron Recycl Ind Commun 32:1560–1565Google Scholar
  180. Mulligan CN, Kamali M (2003) Bioleaching of copper and other metals from low grade oxidized mining ores by Aspergillus niger. J Chem Technol Biotech 78:497–503Google Scholar
  181. Musson SE, Jang Y-C, Townsend TG, Chung I-H (2000) Characterization of lead leachability from cathode ray tubes using the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure. Environ Sci Technol 34:4376–4381Google Scholar
  182. Nagib S, Inoue K (2000) Recovery of lead and zinc from fly ash generated from municipal incineration plants by means of acid and/or alkaline leaching. Hydrometallurgy 56:269–292Google Scholar
  183. Naiya TK, Bhattacharya AK, Mandal S, Das SK (2009) The sorption of lead(II) ions on rice husk ash. J Hazard Mater 163:1254–1264Google Scholar
  184. Nakamura K, Hagimine M, Sakai M, Furukawa K (1999) Removal of mercury from mercury contaminated sediments using a combined method of chemical leaching and volatilization of mercury by bacteria. Biodegradation 10:443–444Google Scholar
  185. Nance P, Patterson J, Willis A, Foronda N, Dourson M (2012) Human health risks from mercury exposure from broken compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 62:542–552Google Scholar
  186. Nassar NN (2010) Rapid removal and recovery of Pb(II) from wastewater by magnetic nanoadsorbents. J Hazard Mater 184:538–546Google Scholar
  187. Navarro A, Caadas I, Martinez D, Rodriguez J, Mendoza J (2009) Application of solar thermal desorption to remediation of mercury-contaminated soils. Sol Energy 83:1405–1414Google Scholar
  188. Newmoa (2008). Northeast Waste Management Officials Association. mercury use in lighting. Factsheet. Northeast Waste Management Officials’ Association, Boston, USA.
  189. Ngah WSW, Hanafia MAKM (2008) Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewater by chemically modified plant wastes as adsorbents: a review. Bioresour Technol 99:3935–3948Google Scholar
  190. Nhapi I, Banadda N, Murenzi R, Sekomo CB, Wali UG (2011) Removal of heavy metals from industrial wastewater using rice husks. Open Environ Eng J 4:170–180Google Scholar
  191. Niinae M, Nishigaki K, Aoki K (2008) Removal of lead from contaminated soils with chelating agents. Mater Trans 49:2377–2382Google Scholar
  192. Nnorom IC, Osibanjo O (2009) Toxicity characterization of waste mobile phone plastics. J Hazard Mater 161:183–188Google Scholar
  193. Nnorom IC, Osibanjo O, Nnorom SO (2007) Achieving resource conservation in electronic waste management: a review of options available to developing countries. J Appl Sci 20:2918–2933Google Scholar
  194. Nnorom IC, Osibanjo O, Okechukwu K, Nkwachukwu O, Chukwuma RC (2010) Evaluation of heavy metal release from the disposal of waste computer monitors at an open dump. Internat J Environ Sci Dev 1:227–233Google Scholar
  195. Nnorom IC, Osibanjob O, Ogwuegbua MOC (2011) Global disposal strategies for waste cathode ray tubes. Resour Conserv Recycl 55:275–290Google Scholar
  196. Noon MS, Lee S-J, Cooper JS (2011) A life cycle assessment of end-of-life computer monitor management in the Seattle metropolitan region. Resour Conserv Recycl 57:22–29Google Scholar
  197. Nortemann B (2005) Biodegradation of chelating agents: EDTA, DTPA, PDTA, NTA, and EDDA, Chapter 8: biogeochemistry of chelating agents. In: Nowack B, VanBriesen JM (eds) ACS Symposium Series 910. American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., pp pp 150–pp 169Google Scholar
  198. Nurmi JT, Tratnyek PG, Sarathy V, Baer DR, Amonette JE, Pecher K, Wang C, Linehan JC, Matson DW, Penn RL, Driessen MD (2009) Characterization and properties of metallic iron nanoparticles: spectroscopy, electrochemistry, and kinetics. Environ Sci Technol 39:1221–1230Google Scholar
  199. Ohki A, Iwashita A, Tanamachi S, Nakajima T, Takanashi H (2003) Removal of mercury from coal by mild pyrolysis and chelate extraction. Fuel Chem Division Preprints 48:354–355Google Scholar
  200. Ojea-Jimenez I, Lopez X, Arbiol J, Puntes V (2012) Citrate-coated gold nanoparticles smart scavengers for mercury(II) removal from polluted waters. ACS Nano 6:2253–2260Google Scholar
  201. Okada T, Yonezawa S (2013) Energy-efficient modification of reduction-melting for lead recovery from cathode ray tube funnel glass. Waste Manag 33:1758–1763Google Scholar
  202. Orumwense FFO (1996) Removal of lead from water by adsorption on a kaolinitic clay. J Chem Tech Biotech 65:63–69Google Scholar
  203. Otani Y, Kanaoka C, Emi H, Uchijima I, Nishino H (1998) Removal of mercury vapor from air with sulfur-impregnated adsorbents. Environ Sci Technol 22:708–711Google Scholar
  204. Oubagaranadin JU, Sathyamurthy N, Murthy ZVP (2007) Evaluation of Fuller’s earth for the adsorption of mercury from aqueous solutions: A comparative study with activated carbon. J Hazard Mater 142:165–174Google Scholar
  205. Ozer D, Asksu Z, Kutsal T, Caglar A (1994) Adsorption isotherms of lead(II) and chromium(VI) on Cladophora crispate. Environ Technol 15:439–448Google Scholar
  206. Pacholewska M (2004) Bioleaching of galena flotation concentrate. Physicochem Pro Min Process 38:281–290Google Scholar
  207. Paez-Hernandez ME, Aguilar-Arteaga K, Galan-Vidal CA, Palomar-Pardave M, Romero-Romo M, Ramirez-Silva MT (2005) Mercury ions removal from aqueous solution using an activated composite membrane. Environ Sci Technol 39:7667–7670Google Scholar
  208. Pant D (2009) Waste glass as absorbent for thin layer chromatography (TLC). Waste Manage 29:2040–2041Google Scholar
  209. Pant D (2013a) E-waste projection using life span and population statistics. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1465–1469Google Scholar
  210. Pant D (2013b). A review of electronic waste management microbial participation: a green technology. Int J Env Waste Manag.
  211. Pant D, Joshi D, Upreti MK, Kotnala RK (2012) Chemical and biological extraction of metals present in E waste: a hybrid technology. Waste Manage 32:979–990Google Scholar
  212. Pant D, Singh P (2013) Chemical modification of waste glass from cathode ray tubes (CRTs) as low cost adsorbent. J Environ Chem Engineer 1:226–232Google Scholar
  213. Parham H, Zargar B, Shiralipour R (2012) Fast and efficient removal of mercury from water samples using magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles modified with 2-mercaptobenzothiazole. J Hazard Mater 205–206:94–100Google Scholar
  214. Parsons D (2006) The environmental impact of compact fluorescent lamps and incandescent lamps for Australian conditions. Environ Eng 7:8–14Google Scholar
  215. Pattnaik S, Reddy MV (2011) Heavy metals remediation from urban wastes using three species of earthworm (Eudrilus eugeniae, Eisenia fetida and Perionyx excavatus). J Environ Chem Ecotoxicol 3:345–356Google Scholar
  216. Pavasant P, Apiratikul R, Sungkhum V, Suthiparinyanont P, Wattanachira S, Marhaba TF (2006) Biosorption of Cu2+, Cd2+, Pb2+ and Zn2+ using dried marine green macroalga Caulerpa lentillifera. Biores Technol 97:2321–2329Google Scholar
  217. Pedroso ACS, Gomes LER, De Carvalho JMR (1994) Mercury removal from process sludge via hypochlorite leaching. Environ Technol 15:657–667Google Scholar
  218. Perez-Sanz A, Millan R, Sierra MJ, Alarcon R, Garcia P, Gil-Diaz M, Vazquez S, Lobo MC (2012) Mercury uptake by Silene vulgaris grown on contaminated spiked soils. J Environ Manage 95:233–237Google Scholar
  219. Perveen N, Hanif AM, Noureen SH, Ansari TM, Bhatti HN (2011) Phytoremediation of Pb (II) by Jasminum sambac. J Chem Society Pakistan 33:592–597Google Scholar
  220. Peters RW (1999) Chelant extraction of heavy metals from contaminated soils. J Hazard Mater 66:151–210Google Scholar
  221. Piao H, Bishop PL (2006) Stabilization of mercury-containing wastes using sulfide. Environ Pollut 139:498–506Google Scholar
  222. Podgorkova VN, Melnikov VG (1976) Effect of additions of copper on the strength properties of sintered metal-glass materials and method of its introduction. Powder Metall Met Ceram 15:898–900Google Scholar
  223. Ponder SM, Darab JG, Bucher J, Caulder D, Craig I, Davis L, Edelstein N, Mallouk TE (2001) Surface chemistry and electrochemistry of supported zerovalent iron nanoparticles in the remediation of aqueous metal contaminants. Chem Mater 13:479–486Google Scholar
  224. Ponder SM, Darab JG, Mallouk TE (2000) Remediation of Cr(VI) and Pb(II) aqueous solutions using nanoscale zerovalent iron. Environ Sci Technol 34:2564–2569Google Scholar
  225. Poon CS (2008) Management of CRT glass from discarded computer monitors and TV sets. Waste Manage 28:1499–1499Google Scholar
  226. Puschenreiter M, Stoger G, Lombi E, Horak O, Wenzel WW (2001) Phytoextraction of heavy metal contaminated soils with Thlaspi goesingense and Amaranthus hybridus: rhizosphere manipulation using EDTA and ammonium sulfate. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 164:615–621Google Scholar
  227. Qu LY, Fu SZ, Liu L, An YM, Li M (2004) A study on the soil improvement polluted by mercury. J Guizhou Normal Univ (Nat Sci) 22:49–51 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  228. Quaterman J (1986) Lead. In: Mertz W (ed) Trace metals in human and animal nutrition, vol 2. Academic, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  229. Ramasamy RK, Congeevaram S, Thamaraiselvi K (2011) Evaluation of isolated fungal strain from e-waste recycling facility for effective sorption of toxic heavy metal Pb (II) ions and fungal protein molecular characterization—a mycoremediation approach Asian. J Exp Biol Sci 2:342–347Google Scholar
  230. Raposo C, Roeser MH (2001) Contamination of the environment by the current disposal methods of mercury-containing lamps in the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Waste Manage 21:661–670Google Scholar
  231. Raskin I, Ensley BD (2000) Phytoremediation of toxic metals: using plants to clean up the environment. Wiley, New York, pp 53–70Google Scholar
  232. Reeder RJ (1996) Interaction of divalent cobalet, zinc, cadmium and barium with calcite surface during layer growth. Geochem Cosmo Chem Acta 60:1543–1552Google Scholar
  233. Rey-Raap N, Gallardo A (2013) Removal of mercury bonded in residual glass from spent fluorescent lamps. J Environ Manag 115:175–178Google Scholar
  234. Rezaee A, Ramavandi B, Ganati M, Ansari F, Solimanian A (2006) Biosorption of mercury by biomass of filamentous algae Spirogyra species. J Biol Sci 6:695–700Google Scholar
  235. Rodriguez L, Lopez-Bellido F, Carnicer A, Alcalde-Morano V (2003) Phytoremediation of mercury-polluted soils using crop plants. Fresen Environ Bull 12:967–971Google Scholar
  236. Rodriguez L, Rincon J, Asencio I, Rodriguez-Castellanos L (2007) Capability of selected crop plants for shoot mercury accumulation from polluted soils: phytoremediation perspectives. Int J Phytoremediat 9:1–13Google Scholar
  237. Romero D, James J, Mora R, Hays CD (2013) Study on the mechanical and environmental properties of concrete containing cathode ray tube glass aggregate. Waste Manag 33:1659–1666Google Scholar
  238. Romero M, Rincon JM, Acosta A (2002) Effect of iron oxide content on the crystallisation of a diopside glass–ceramic glaze. J Eur Cer Soc 22:883–890Google Scholar
  239. Rugh CL, Senecoff JF, Meagher RB, Merkle SA (1998) Development of transgenic yellow poplar for mercury phytoremediation. Nat Biotechnol 16:925–928Google Scholar
  240. Rugh CL, Wilde HD, Stack NM, Thompson DM, Summers AO, Meagher RB (1996) Mercuric ion reduction and resistance in transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana plants expressing a modified bacterial merA gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 93:3182–3187Google Scholar
  241. Ruiz ON, Daniell H (2009) Genetic engineering to enhance mercury phytoremediation. Curr Opin Chem Biol 20:213–219Google Scholar
  242. Rybarikova L, Dvorska L, Hradecka H, Jiricek P (2001) Surface treatment of lead glasses for reducing the leaching of lead. Ceram-Silik 45:31–34Google Scholar
  243. Saifullah EM, Qadir M, deCaritat P, Tack FMG, Laing GD, Zia MH (2009) EDTA assisted Pb phytoextraction. Chemosphere 74:1279–1291Google Scholar
  244. Salt DE, Smith RD, Raskin I (1998) Phytoremediation. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 49:643–668Google Scholar
  245. Sams CE (2007) Methylmercury contamination: impacts on aquatic systems and terrestrial species. USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region Air Quality Program, Milwaukee, WIGoogle Scholar
  246. Sari B (2012) Modeling effluent heavy metal concentrations in a bioleaching process using an artificial neural network technique. African J Biotechnol 11:16196–16204Google Scholar
  247. Sasaki Y, Hayakawa T, Inoue C, Miyazaki A, Silver S, Kusano T (2006) Generation of mercury-hyperaccumulating plants through transgenic expression of the bacterial mercury membrane transport protein MerC. Transgenic Res 15:615–625Google Scholar
  248. Satroutdinov AD, Dedyukhina EG, Chistyakova TI, Witschel M, Minkevich IG, Eroshin VK, Egli T (2000) Degradation of metal–EDTA complexes by resting cells of the bacterial strain DSM 9103. Environ Sci Technol 34:1715–1720Google Scholar
  249. Schmitt D, Miiller A, Csogor Z, Frimmel FH, Posten C (2001) The adsorption kinetics of metal ions onto different microalgae and siliceous earth. Water Res 35:779–785Google Scholar
  250. Schroeder WH, Munthe J (1998) Atmospheric mercury: an overview. Atmos Environ 32:809–822Google Scholar
  251. Schue M, Dover LG, Besra GS, Parkhill J, Brown NL (2009) Sequence and analysis of a plasmid encoded mercury resistance operon from Mycobacterium marinum identifies MerH, a new mercuric ion transporter. J Bacteriol 19:439–444Google Scholar
  252. Seo Y-C, Cho S-J, Lee J-S, Kim B-S, Oh, C (2011). A study on recycling of CRT glass waste. International Conference on Environment and Industrial Innovation IPCBEE, Singapore. p 12Google Scholar
  253. Shabudeen PSS, Daniel S, Indhumathi P (2013) Utilising the pods of Delonix regia activated carbon for the removal of mercury (II) by adsorption technique. Int J Res Chem Environ 3:60–65Google Scholar
  254. Shen ZG, Li XD, Wang CC, Chen HM, Chua H (2002) Lead phytoextraction from contaminated soil with high biomass plant species. J Environ Qual 31:1893–1900Google Scholar
  255. Shi C, Zheng K (2007) A review on the use of waste glasses in the production of cement and concrete. Resour Conserv Recycl 52:234–247Google Scholar
  256. Sierra C, Menendez-Aguado J, Afif E, Carrero M, Gallego J (2011) Feasibility study on the use of soil washing to remediate the As–Hg contamination at an ancient mining and metallurgy area. J Hazard Mater 196:93–100Google Scholar
  257. Siikamaki R, Doring E, Manninen J (2002) Closed-loop and open-loop applications for end-of-life cathode-ray-tube glass recycling. Going Green Care Innovation, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  258. Silver S (1996) Bacterial resistances to toxic metals—a review. Gene 179:9–19Google Scholar
  259. Sinha A, Pant KK, Khare SK (2012) Studies on mercury bioremediation by alginate immobilized mercury tolerant Bacillus cereus cells. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 71:160–166Google Scholar
  260. Sinha RK, Bharambe G, Ryan D (2008) Converting wasteland into wonderland by earthworms: a low-cost nature’s technology for soil remediation: a case study of vermi remediation of PAH contaminated soil. The Environmentalist UK 28:466–475Google Scholar
  261. Skodrasa G, Diamantopouloua I, Sakellaropoulos GP (2007) Role of activated carbon structural properties and surface chemistry in mercury adsorption. Desalination 210:281–286Google Scholar
  262. Sladek C, Gustin MS (2003) Evaluation of sequential and selective extraction methods for determination of mercury speciation and mobility in mine waste. Applied Geochem 18:567–576Google Scholar
  263. Smith D, Small M, Dodds R, Amagai S, Strong T (1996) Computer monitor recycling: a case study. Eng Sci Educ J 4:159–164Google Scholar
  264. Smolinska B, Cedzynska K (2007) EDTA and urease effects on Hg accumulation by Lepidium sativum. Chemosphere 69:1388–1395Google Scholar
  265. Socolof ML, Overly JG, Geibig JR (2005) Environmental life-cycle impacts of CRT and LCD desktop computer displays. J Cleaner Prod 13:1281–1294Google Scholar
  266. Srinivasarao G, Veeraiah N (2001) Study on various physical properties of PbO–AsO glasses containing manganese ions. J Alloys Compounds 327:52–65Google Scholar
  267. Stahler D, Ladner S, Jackson H (2008). Maine compact fluorescent lamp study. Maine Department of Environmental Protection.
  268. Steijns M, Peppelenbos A, Mars P (1976) Mercury chemisorption by sulfur adsorbed in porous materials. J Colloid Interface Sci 57:181–186Google Scholar
  269. Stone V, Nowack B, Baun A, van den Brink N, von der Kammer F, Dusinska M, Handy R, Hankinh S, Hassellov M, Joner E, Fernandes TF (2010) Nanomaterials for environmental studies: classification, reference material issues, and strategies for physico-chemical characterisation. Sci Total Environ 408:1745–1754Google Scholar
  270. Strzalkowska A, Wojtala M, Siwka J (2012) Pb(II) leaching from waste CRT funnel glass in nitric acid solutions. J Achievements Mater Manufactur Engineer 55:825–828Google Scholar
  271. Summers AO (1986) Organization, expression and evolution of genes for mercury resistance. Ann Rev Microbiol 40:607–634Google Scholar
  272. Suthar S, Singh S, Dhawan S (2008) Earthworms as bioindicator of metals (Zn, Fe, Mn, Cu, Pb and Cd) in soils: is metal bioaccumulation affected by their ecological category? Ecological Engineer 32:99–107Google Scholar
  273. Suzuki Y, Kametani T, Maruyama T (2005) Removal of heavy metals from aqueous solution by nonliving Ulva seaweed as biosorbent. Water Res 39:1803–1808Google Scholar
  274. Svehla G (2004) Vogel’s quantitative inorganic analysis, 7th edn. Pearson, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  275. Tan Z, Xiang J, Su S, Zeng H, Zhou C, Sun L, Hu S, Qiu J (2012) Enhanced capture of elemental mercury by bamboo-based sorbents. J Hazard Mater 239–240:160–166Google Scholar
  276. Tandy S, Schulin R, Nowack B (2006) The influence of EDDS on the uptake of heavy metals in hydroponically grown sunflowers. Chemosphere 62:1454–1463Google Scholar
  277. Tasaki T, Takasuga T, Osako M, Sakai S (2004) Substance flow analysis of brominated flame retardants and related compounds in waste TV sets in Japan. Waste Manage 24:571–580Google Scholar
  278. Taube F, Pommer L, Larsson T, Shchukarev A, Nordin A (2008) Soil remediation–mercury speciation in soil and vapor phase during thermal treatment. Water Air Soil Pollut 193:155–163Google Scholar
  279. Tchounwou PB, Ayensu WK, Ninashvili N, Sutton D (2003) Environmental exposure to mercury and its toxicopathologic implications for public health. Environ Toxicol 18:149–175Google Scholar
  280. Terro MJ (2006) Properties of concrete made with recycled crushed glass at elevated temperatures. Balding Environ 41:633–639Google Scholar
  281. Tien CJ (2002) Biosorption of metal ions by freshwater algae with different surface characteristics. Process Biochem 38:605–613Google Scholar
  282. Tiwari D, Singh D, Saksena D (1995) Hg (II) adsorption from aqueous solutions using rice-husk ash. J Environ Eng 121:479–481Google Scholar
  283. Tratnyek PG, Johnson RL (2006) Nanotechnologies for environmental cleanup. Nanotoday 1:44–48Google Scholar
  284. Tsydenova O, Bengtsson M (2011) Chemical hazards associated with treatment of waste electrical and electronic equipment. Waste Manag 31:45–58Google Scholar
  285. Turgut P (2008) Properties of masonry blocks produced with waste limestone sawdust and glass powder. Construction Building Mater 22:1422–1427Google Scholar
  286. Tuzun I, Bayramoglu G, Alcin YE, Basaran G, Celik G, Arica MY (2005) Equilibrium and kinetic studies on biosorption of Hg(II), Cd(II) and Pb(II) ions onto microalgae Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. J Environ Manage 77:85–92Google Scholar
  287. Udovic M, Lestan D (2007) The effect of earthworms on the fractionation and bioavailability of heavy metals before and after soil remediation. Environ Pollut 148:663–668Google Scholar
  288. USEPA (1998). Peer Review of the USEPA analytical model: mercury emissions from the disposal of fluorescent lamps. Comment response document. Comment no. 3–8.
  289. USEPA (1999). Analysis of five community consumer/residential collections: end-of-life electronic and electrical equipment. In: Report, Washington, D.C., USAGoogle Scholar
  290. Vassil AD, Kapulnik Y, Raskin I, Salt DE (1998) The role of EDTA in lead transport and accumulation in Indian mustard. Plant Physiol 117:447–453Google Scholar
  291. Vesely T, Tlustos P, Szakova J (2011) The use of water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes L.) for rhizofiltration of a highly polluted solution by cadmium and lead. Int J Phytoremediation 13:859–872Google Scholar
  292. Vilar VJP, Botelho CMS, Boaventura RAR (2005) Influence of pH, ionic strength and temperature on lead biosorption by Gelidium and agar extraction algal waste. Process Biochem 40:3267–3275Google Scholar
  293. Wagner - dobler I, Canstein HV, Li Y, Timmis KN, Deckwer W-D (2000) Removal of mercury from chemical wastewater by microoganisms in technical scale. Environ Sci Technol 34:4628–4634Google Scholar
  294. Wallschlger D, Desai MVM, Spengler M, Wilken RD (1998) Mercury speciation in floodplain soils and sediments along a contaminated river transect. J Environ Qual 27:1034–1044Google Scholar
  295. Wang J, Feng X, Anderson CWN, Xing Y, Shang F (2012) Remediation of mercury contaminated sites—a review. J Hazard Mater 221–222:1–18Google Scholar
  296. Wang J, Feng X, Anderson CWN, Zhu W, Yin R, Wang H (2011a) Mercury distribution in the soil–plant–air system at the Wanshan mercury mining district in Guizhou, Southwest China. Environ Toxicol Chem 30:2725–2731Google Scholar
  297. Wang JX, Feng XB, Anderson CWN, Qiu GL, Ping L, Bao ZD (2011b) Ammonium thiosulphate enhanced phytoextraction from mercury contaminated soil—results from a greenhouse study. J Hazard Mater 186:119–127Google Scholar
  298. Wang LB, Ma W, Xu LG, Chen W, Zhu YY, Xu C, Xu NA (2010) Nanoparticle-based environmental sensors. Mater Sci Eng, R 70:265–274Google Scholar
  299. Wang Y, Greger M (2006) Use of iodide to enhance the phytoextraction of mercury contaminated soil. Sci Total Environ 368:30–39Google Scholar
  300. Wang Y, Stauffer C, Keller C (2005) Changes in Hg fractionation in soil induced by willow. Plant Soil 275:67–75Google Scholar
  301. Wasay SA, Barrington SF, Tokunaga S (1998) Remediation of soils polluted by heavy metals using salts of organic acids and chelating agents. Environ Technol 19:369–379Google Scholar
  302. Washburn C, Hill E (2003) Mercury retorts for the processing of precious metals and hazardous wastes. J Min Met Mater Soc 55:45–50Google Scholar
  303. Wehrheim B, Wettern M (1994) Biosorption of cadmium, copper and lead by isolated mother cell walls and whole cells of Chlorella fusca. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 41:725–728Google Scholar
  304. Weitzman DH (2003). Is CRT glass-to-lead recycling safe and environmentally friendly? In: ISEE Proceedings of the Electronics and the Environment. IEEE International Symposium, 329–334Google Scholar
  305. Welz T, Hischier R, Hilty LM (2011) Environmental impacts of lighting technologies—life cycle assessment and sensitivity analysis. Environmen Impact Assess Rev 31:334–343Google Scholar
  306. Wenzel WW, Unterbrunner R, Sommer P, Sacco P (2003) Chelate-assisted phytoextraction using canola (Brassica napus L) in outdoors pot and lysimeter experiments. Plant Soil 249:83–96Google Scholar
  307. Widmer R, Oswald-Krapf H, Sinha-Khetriwal A, Scnellmann M, Boni H (2005) Global perspectives on the e-waste. Environ Impact Assess Rev 25:436–458Google Scholar
  308. Wijesekara RJS, Navarro RR, Matsumura M (2011) Removal and recovery of mercury from used fluorescent lamp glass by pyrolysis. J Natn Sci Foundation Sri Lanka 39:235–241Google Scholar
  309. Wilson JR, Leang C, Morby AP, Hobman JL, Brown NL (2000) MerF is a mercury transport protein: different structures but a common mechanism for mercuric ion transporters? FEBS Lett 472:78–82Google Scholar
  310. Wu G, Kang H, Zhang X, Shao H, Chu L, Ruan C (2010) A critical review on the bio-removal of hazardous heavy metals from contaminated soils: issues, progress, eco environmental concerns and opportunities. J Hazard Mater 174:1–8Google Scholar
  311. Xiong Z, He F, Zhao D, Barnett MO (2009) Immobilization of mercury in sediment using stabilized iron sulfide nanoparticles. Water Res 43:5171–5179Google Scholar
  312. Xu P, Zeng GM, Huang DL, Feng CL, Hu S, Zhao MH, Lai C, Wei Z, Huang C, Xie GX, Liu ZF (2012) Use of iron oxide nanomaterials in wastewater treatment: a review. Sci Total Environ 424:1–10Google Scholar
  313. Xu Q, Yu M, Kendall A, He W, Li G, Schoenung JM (2013) Environmental and economic evaluation of cathode ray tube (CRT) funnel glass waste management options in the United States. Resour Conser Recycl 78:92–104Google Scholar
  314. Yadav BK, Siebel MA, Bruggen JJAV (2011) Rhizofiltration of a heavy metal (lead) containing wastewater using the wetland plant Carex pendula. Clean Soil Air Water 39:467–474Google Scholar
  315. Yamaguchi Y, Kaku S, Chaki K (2005). Mercury-removal process in distillation tower. US Patent No. 7563360Google Scholar
  316. Yang H, Nairn J, Ozias-Akins P (2003) Transformation of peanut using a modified bacterial mercuric ion reductase gene driven by an actin promoter from Arabidopsis thaliana. J Plant Physiol 160:945–952Google Scholar
  317. Yardim MF, Budinova T, Ekinci E, Petrov N, Razvigorova M, Minkova V (2003) Removal of mercury (II) from aqueous solution by activated carbon obtained from furfural. Chemosphere 52:835–841Google Scholar
  318. Yavuz H, Denizli A, Gungunes H, Safarikova M, Safarik I (2006) Biosorption of mercury on magnetically modified yeast cells. Separat Purificat Technol 52:253–260Google Scholar
  319. Yoshida A, Atsushi T (2010) Reuse of secondhand TVs exported from Japan to the Philippines. Waste Manage 30:1063–1072Google Scholar
  320. Yu Q, Matheickal JT, Kaewsarn P (1999) Heavy metal uptake capacities of common marine macro-algal biomass. Water Res 33:1534–1537Google Scholar
  321. Yuan G, Seyama H, Soma M, Theng BKG, Tanaka A (1999) Adsorption of some heavy metals by natural zeolities. J Environ Sci and Health Part A 34:625–648Google Scholar
  322. Yuan W, Li J, Zhang Q, Saito F, Yang B (2013a) A novel process utilizing mechanochemical sulfidization to remove lead from cathode ray tube funnel glass. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 63:418–423Google Scholar
  323. Yuan W, Li J, Zhang Q, Saito F, Yang B (2013b) Lead recovery from cathode ray tube funnel glass with mechanical activation. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 63:2–10Google Scholar
  324. Yun YH, Yoon C-H, Oh J-S, Kim S-B, Kang B-A, Hwang K-S (2002) Waste fluorescent glass and shell derived glass-ceramics. J Mater Sci 37:3211–3215Google Scholar
  325. Zahra N (2012) Lead removal from water by low cost adsorbents: a review. Pak J Anal Environ Chem 13:1–8Google Scholar
  326. Zhang J, Bishop PL (2002) Stabilization/solidification (S/S) of mercury-containing wastes using reactivated carbon and Portland cement. J Hazard Mater 92:199–212Google Scholar
  327. Zhang S, Forssberg E, van Houwelingen J, Rem P, Wei L-Y (2000) End-of-life electric and electronic equipment management towards the 21st century. Waste Manage Res 18:73–85Google Scholar
  328. Zhang W (2003) Nanoscale iron particles for environmental remediation: an overview. J Nanopart Res 5:323–332Google Scholar
  329. Zhang X, Lin S, Lu XQ, Chen ZL (2010) Removal of Pb(II) from water using natural kaolin loaded with synthesized nanoscale zero-valent iron. Chem Eng J 163:243–248Google Scholar
  330. Zhang XY, Wang QC, Zhang SQ, Sun XJ, Zhang ZS (2009) Stabilization/ solidification (S/S) of mercury-contaminated hazardous wastes using thiol-functionalized zeolite and Portland cement. J Hazard Mater 168:1575–1580Google Scholar
  331. Zhang Z, Wang X, Wang Y, Xia S, Chen L, Zhang Y, Zhao J (2013) Pb(II) removal from water using Fe-coated bamboo charcoal with the assistance of microwaves. J Environ Sci 25:1044–1053Google Scholar
  332. Zulkali MMD, Ahmad AL, Norulakmal NH (2006) Oryza sativa L. husk as heavy metal adsorbent: optimization with lead as model solution. Biores Technol 97:21–25Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental SciencesCentral University of Himachal PradeshDharamshalaIndia
  2. 2.Uttarakhand Technical UniversityDehradunIndia

Personalised recommendations