Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 8, pp 7823–7833 | Cite as

Determination of point of zero charge of natural organic materials

  • Elisee Nsimba Bakatula
  • Dominique Richard
  • Carmen Mihaela Neculita
  • Gerald J. Zagury
Research Article

Abstract

This study evaluates different methods to determine points of zero charge (PZCs) on five organic materials, namely maple sawdust, wood ash, peat moss, compost, and brown algae, used for the passive treatment of contaminated neutral drainage effluents. The PZC provides important information about metal sorption mechanisms. Three methods were used: (1) the salt addition method, measuring the PZC; (2) the zeta potential method, measuring the isoelectric point (IEP); (3) the ion adsorption method, measuring the point of zero net charge (PZNC). Natural kaolinite and synthetic goethite were also tested with both the salt addition and the ion adsorption methods in order to validate experimental protocols. Results obtained from the salt addition method in 0.05 M NaNO3 were the following: 4.72 ± 0.06 (maple sawdust), 9.50 ± 0.07 (wood ash), 3.42 ± 0.03 (peat moss), 7.68 ± 0.01 (green compost), and 6.06 ± 0.11 (brown algae). Both the ion adsorption and the zeta potential methods failed to give points of zero charge for these substrates. The PZC of kaolinite (3.01 ± 0.03) was similar to the PZNC (2.9–3.4) and fell within the range of values reported in the literature (2.7–4.1). As for the goethite, the PZC (10.9 ± 0.05) was slightly higher than the PZNC (9.0–9.4). The salt addition method has been found appropriate and convenient to determine the PZC of natural organic substrates.

Keywords

Point of zero charge Point of zero net charge Isoelectric point Salt addition method Ion adsorption method Cation exchange capacity Zeta potential Organic materials 

Notes

Funding information

This study was funded by the NSERC (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada), grant no. 469489-14, and the industrial partners of the RIME UQAT-Polytechnique Montreal, including Agnico Eagle, Mine Canadian Malartic, Iamgold, Raglan Mine Glencore, and Rio Tinto.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Al-Mashaqbeh O, McLaughlan R (2015) Zinc sorption onto different particle sizes of compost from aqueous solution. Desalin Water Treat 57(29):13678–13689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson MA, Rubin AJ (1981) Adsorption of inorganic at solid liquid interfaces, Chapter 1. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, pp 91–160Google Scholar
  3. 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. Geoderma 113(1):77–93.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(02)00316-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bajpai SK, Bajpai M, Rai N (2012) Sorptive removal of ciprofloxacin hydrochloride from simulated wastewater using sawdust: kinetic study and effect of pH. Water SA 38(5):673–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balasubramanian R, Perumal SV, Vijayaraghavan K (2009) Equilibrium isotherm studies for the multi-component adsorption of lead, zinc, and cadmium onto Indonesian peat. Ind Eng Chem Res 48(4):2093–2099.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie801022p CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belviso C, Cavalcante F, Spartaco DG, Palma A, Ragone P et al (2014) Mobility of trace elements in fly ash and in zeolitised coal fly ash. Fuel 144:369–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhagavathi PT, Vijayaraghavan J, Sardhar Basha SJ, Sekaran V, Vijayaraghavan K et al (2015) Investigation on removal of malachite green using EM based compost as adsorbent. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 118:177–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2015.04.033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Calugaru LL, Neculita CM, Genty T, Bussière B, Potvin R (2017) Removal of Ni and Zn in contaminated neutral drainage by raw and modified wood ash. J Environ Sci Health A 52(2):117–126.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2016.1237120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapman HD (1965) Cation-exchange capacity. In: Black CA, Evans DD, White JL, Ensminger LE, Clark FE (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Part 1.Agronomy monograph 9. ASA, Madison, pp 891–901Google Scholar
  10. Cristiano E, Hu YJ, Siegfried M, Kaplan D, Nitsche H (2011) A comparison of point of zero charge measurement methodology. Clay Clay Miner 59(2):107–115.  https://doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2011.0590201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duquette M, Hendershot W (1987) Contribution of exchangeable aluminun to cation exchange capacity at low pH. Can J Soil Sci 67(1):175–185.  https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss87-015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Durán C, Flores I, Perozo C, Pernalete Z (2006) Immobilization of lead by a vermicompost and its effect on white bean (Vigna Sinenis var. Apure) uptake. Int J Environ Sci Technol 3(3):203–212.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03325927 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fernandez M M L, Meijer E L, Buurman P (1990) Variable charge in natural multi-component systems: line instead of point of zero charge, blocking effects. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress. Soil science, Kyoto, JapanGoogle Scholar
  14. Fernandez MML, Buurman P, Meijer EL (1998) Role of organic matter and sesquioxides on variable charge of three soils from Galicia, Spain. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 29:15–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gaboriaud F, Ehrhardt J (2003) Effects of different crystal faces on the surface charge of colloidal goethite (alpha-FeOOH) particles: an experimental and modeling study. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 67(5):967–983.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7037(02)00988-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gallez A, Juo A, Herbillon A (1976) Surface and charge characteristics of selected soils in the tropics. Soil Sci Soc Am J 40(4):601–608.  https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1976.03615995004000040039x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Izquierdo M, Marzal P, Gabaldón C, Silvetti M, Castaldi P (2012) Study of the interaction mechanism in the biosorption of copper(II) ions onto Posidonia oceanica and peat. Clean Soil Air Water 40(4):428–437.  https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.201100303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jiao YN, Hou WG (2007) Some interface electrochemical properties of kaolinite. Chin J Chem 25(60):756–764.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cjoc.200790140 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jirekar DB, Pathan AA, Farooqui M (2014) Adsorption studies of methylene blue dye from aqueous solution onto Phaseolus aureus biomaterials. Orient J Chem 30(3):1263–1269.  https://doi.org/10.13005/ojc/300342 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Knappe DRU, Belk RC, Briley DS, Gandy SR, Rastogi N, Rike AH, Glasgow H, Hannon E, Frazier WD, Kohl P, Pugsley S (2004) Algae detection and removal strategies for drinking water treatment plants. AWWA Research Foundation and the Water Resources Research Institute, American Water Works Association, Denver, p 466Google Scholar
  21. Kosmulski M (2009) Surface charging and points of zero charge. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kosmulski M (2011) The pH-dependent surface charging and points of zero charge. V. Update. J Colloid Interface Sci 353(1):1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2010.08.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kosmulski M (2012) The pH-dependent surface charging and points of zero charge. VI. Update. J Colloid Interface Sci 426:209–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kyziol-Komosinska J, Barba F, Callejas P, Rosik-Dulewska C (2010) Beidellite and other natural low-cost sorbent to remove chromium and cadmium from water and wastewater. Bol Soc Esp de Ceram V 49(2):121–128Google Scholar
  25. León-Torres A, Cuerda-Correa EM, Fernández-González C, Alexandre Franco MF, Gómez-Serrano V (2012) On the use of a natural peat for the removal of Cr(VI) from aqueous solutions. J Colloid Interface Sci 386(1):325–332.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2012.07.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lim LBL, Priyantha N, Tennakoon DTB, Hei C, Bandara C (2013) Sorption characteristics of peat of Brunei Darussalam I: characterization of peat and adsorption equilibrium studies of methylene blue—peat interactions. Ceylon J Sci 17:41–51Google Scholar
  27. Mahmood T, Saddique MT, Naeem A, Westerhoff P, Mustafa S, Alum A (2011) Comparison of different methods for the point of zero charge determination of NiO. Ind Eng Chem Res 50(17):10017–10023.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie200271d CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Malik DJ, Strelko V Jr, Streata M, Puziyb AM (2002) Characterisation of novel modified active carbons and marine algal biomass for the selective adsorption of lead. Water Res 36(6):1527–1538.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00348-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Marcano-Martinez E, McBride MB (1989) Comparison of the titration and ion adsorption methods for surface charge measurement in oxisols. Soil Sci Soc Am J 53(4):1040–1045.  https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1989.03615995005300040009x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maurya R, Ghosh T, Paliwal C, Shrivastav A, Chokshi K, Pancha I, Ghosh A, Mishra S (2014) Biosorption of methylene blue by de-oiled algal biomass: equilibrium, kinetics and artificial neural network modelling. PLoS One 9(10):e109545.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0109545 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meijer EL, Buurman P (1987) Salt effect in a multi-component variable charge system: curve of zero salt effect, registered in a pH-stat. J Soil Sci 38(2):239–244.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.1987.tb02141.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mott CJB (1981) Anion and ligand exchange. In: Greenland DJ, Hayes MHB (eds) The chemistry of soil processes. JohnWiley & Sons, pp 179–219Google Scholar
  33. Mukherjee A, Zimmerman AR, Harris W (2011) Surface chemistry variations among a series of laboratory-produced biochars. Geoderma 163(3-4):247–255.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.04.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ngah WSW, Hanafiah MAKM (2008) Adsorption of copper on rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) leaf powder: kinetic, equilibrium and thermodynamic studies. Biochem Eng J 39(3):521–530.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2007.11.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nordin N, Zakaria ZA, Ahmad WA (2001) Utilisation of rubber wood shavings for the removal of Cu(II) and Ni(II) from aqueous solution. Water Air Soil Pollut 223(4):1649–1659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ofomaja AE, Ho YS (2007) Effect of pH on cadmium biosorption by coconut copra meal. J Hazard Mater 139(2):356–362.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.06.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ofomaja AE, Ho YS (2008) Effect of temperatures and pH on methyl violet biosorption by Mansonia wood sawdust. Bioresour Technol 99(13):5411–5417.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.11.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peacock CL, Sherman DM (2005) Surface complexation model for multisite adsorption of copper (II) onto kaolinite. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 69(15):3733–3745.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2004.12.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Qi BC, Aldrich C (2008) Biosorption of heavy metals from aqueous solutions with tobacco dust. Bioresour Technol 99(13):5595–5601.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.10.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schroth BK, Sposito G (1997) Surface charge properties of kaolinite. Clay Clay Miner 45(1):85–91.  https://doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.1997.0450110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sepulveda LA, Santana CC (2013) Effect of solution temperature, pH and ionic strength on dye adsorption onto Magellanic peat. Environ Technol 34(8):967–977.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2012.724251 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sepulveda LA, Troncoso F, Contreras E, Palma C (2008) Competitive adsorption of textile dyes using peat: adsorption equilibrium and kinetic studies in monosolute and bisolute systems. Environ Technol 29(9):947–957.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330802015300 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Šillerova H, Komarek M, Chrastný V, Novak M, Vanĕk A et al (2013) Brewers draff as a new low-cost sorbent for chromium (VI): comparison with other biosorbents. J Colloid Interface Sci 396:227–233.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2013.01.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sing J, Mishra NS, Uma, Banerjee S, Sharma YC (2011) Comparative studies of physical characteristics of raw and modified sawdust for their use as adsorbents for removal of acid dye. BioResources 6(3):2732–2743Google Scholar
  45. Smičiklas I, Mitrić M, Pfendt P, Raičević S (2000) The point zero charge and sorption of cadmium (II) and strontium (II) ions on synthetic hydroxyapatite. Sep Purif Technol 18(3):185–194.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1383-5866(99)00066-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sposito G (1981) The operational definition of the zero-point of charge in soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 45(2):292–297.  https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1981.03615995004500020013x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sposito G (2008) The chemistry of soils, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Stumm W, Morgan JJ (1996) Aquatic chemistry, chemical equilibria and rates in natural waters, 3rd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, p 1022Google Scholar
  49. Tan WF, Lu SJ, Liu F, Feng XH, He JZ et al (2008) Determination of the point of zero charge of manganese oxides with different methods including an improved salt titration method. J Soil Sci 173(4):277–286.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SS.0b013e31816d1f12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Unuabonah EI, Adebowale KO, Olu-Owolabi BI, Yang LZ, Kong LX (2008) Adsorption of Pb (II) and Cd (II) from aqueous solutions onto sodium tetraborate-modified kaolinite clay: equilibrium and thermodynamic studies. Hydrometallurgy 93(1-2):1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hydromet.2008.02.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Witek-Krowiak A (2013) Application of beech sawdust for removal of heavy metals from water: biosorption and desorption studies. Eur J Wood Prod 71(2):227–236.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-013-0673-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zagury GJ, Kulnieks V, Neculita CM (2006) Characterisation and reactivity assessment of organic substrates for sulfate-reducing bacteria in acid mine drainage treatment. Chemosphere 64(6):944–954.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.01.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zehra T, Priyantha N, Linda LBL, Iqbal E (2015) Sorption characteristics of peat of Brunei Darussalam V: removal of Congo red dye from aqueous solution by peat. Desalin Water Treat 54(9):2592–2600.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2014.899929 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zelazny LW, He L, Vanwormhoudt A (1996) Charge analysis of soils and anion exchange. In: Sparks DL, Page AL, Helmke PA, Loeppert RH, Soltanpour PN, Tabatabai MA, Johnson CT, Sumer ME (eds) Methods of soil analysis: chemical methods. SSSA, Madison, pp 1231–1253Google Scholar
  55. Zhou Z, Gunter WD (1992) The nature of the surface charge of kaolinite. Clay Clay Miner 40(3):365–368.  https://doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.1992.0400320 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zou W, Bai H, Gao S, Li K (2013) Characterization of modified sawdust, kinetic and equilibrium study about methylene blue adsorption in batch mode. Korean J Chem Eng 30(10):111–122.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-012-0096-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisee Nsimba Bakatula
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dominique Richard
    • 1
    • 2
  • Carmen Mihaela Neculita
    • 3
  • Gerald J. Zagury
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.RIME-Research Institute on Mines and EnvironmentMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Department of Civil, Geological, and Mining Engineering-École Polytechnique de MontréalMontréalCanada
  3. 3.RIME-Université du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueRouyn-NorandaCanada

Personalised recommendations