Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 24, Issue 10, pp 9820–9825 | Cite as

Soil moisture could enhance electrokinetic remediation of arsenic-contaminated soil

Short Research and Discussion Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Electrokinetic remediation (EKR) is the most efficient technique for remediation of fine-grained soil. The primary removal mechanisms of heavy metal in EKR are the electromigration and electroosmosis flow under appropriate electric gradients. Most EKR studies have researched the variation according to the electrolyte and electric voltage. Also, EKR could be influenced by the migration velocity of ions, while few studies have investigated the effect of moisture content. In this study, soil moisture was controlled by using tap water and NaOH as electrolytes to enhance electromigration and electroosmosis flow. In both electrolytes, the higher moisture content led to the more As removal efficiency, but there were no differences between tap water and NaOH. Therefore, tap water was the most cost-effective electrolyte to remove As from fine-grained soil.

Keywords

Electromigration Electroosmosis flow Pretreatment Zeta potential Electrolyte 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by KEITI through GAIA project (2016000550001) and partially funded by National Research Foundation of Korea (2015R1D1A1A09060537).

References

  1. Acar YB, Alshawabkeh AN (1993) Principles of electrokinetic remediation. Environ Sci Technol 27:2638–2647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acar YB, Gale RJ, Alshawabkeh AN, Marks RE, Puppala S, Bricka M, Parker R (1995) Electrokinetic remediation: basics and technology status. J Hazard Mater 40:117–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alshawabkeh AN, Gale RJ, Ozsu-Acar E, Bricka RM (1999) Optimization of 2-D electrode configuration for electrokinetic remediation. J Soil Contam 8:617–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asadi A, Huat BB, Keykhah HA (2013) Theory of electroosmosis in soil. Int J Electrochem Sci 8:1016–1025Google Scholar
  5. Baek K, Kim DH, Park SW, Ryu BG, Bajargal T, Yang JS (2009) Electrolyte conditioning-enhanced electrokinetic remediation of arsenic-contaminated mine tailing. J Hazard Mater 161:457–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ciblak A, Mao X, Padilla I, Vesper D, Alshawabkeh I, Alshawabkeh AN (2012) Electrode effects on temporal changes in electrolyte pH and redox potential for water treatment. J Environ Sci Health, Part A 47:718–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Corwin D, Lesch S (2005) Apparent soil electrical conductivity measurements in agriculture. Comput Electron Agric 46:11–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Helmholtz HV (1879) Studien über electrische Grenzschichten. Ann Phys 243:337–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Huweg AFS (2013) Modelling of electrokinetic phenomena in soils. Doctoral Thesis, University of Southern QueenslandGoogle Scholar
  10. Jeon E-K, Ryu S-R, Baek K (2015) Application of solar-cells in the electrokinetic remediation of As-contaminated soil. Electrochim Acta 181:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jeon Y-S, Yang J-S, Park E-R, Yang J-W, Baek K (2016) Continuous electrochemical removal of salts from Korean food wastes. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 64:142–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kim S-O, Kim W-S, Kim K-W (2005) Evaluation of electrokinetic remediation of arsenic-contaminated soils. Environ Geochem Health 27:443–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim EJ, Lee JC, Baek K (2015) Abiotic reductive extraction of arsenic from contaminated soils enhanced by complexation: arsenic extraction by reducing agents and combination of reducing and chelating agents. J Hazard Mater 283:454–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lee H-H, Yang J-W (2000) A new method to control electrolytes pH by circulation system in electrokinetic soil remediation. J Hazard Mater 77:227–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mitchell JK, Soga K (1976) Fundamentals of soil behavior. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Park G-Y, Kim W-S, Kim D-H, Yang J-S, Baek K (2013) Evaluation of electrolyte and electrode spacing for application of electrokinetic remediation. J Soil Groundwater Environ 18:6–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Reddy KR, Saichek RE, Maturi K, Ala P (2002) Effects of soil moisture and heavy metal concentrations on electrokinetic remediation. Indian Geotech J 32:258–288Google Scholar
  18. Rhoades J, Manteghi N, Shouse P, Alves W (1989) Soil electrical conductivity and soil salinity: new formulations and calibrations. Soil Sci Soc Am J 53:433–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ryu B-G, Park G-Y, Yang J-W, Baek K (2011) Electrolyte conditioning for electrokinetic remediation of As, Cu, and Pb-contaminated soil. Sep Purif Technol 79:170–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ryu S-R, Jeon E-K, Baek K (2017) A combination of reducing and chelating agents for electrolyte conditioning in electrokinetic remediation of As-contaminated soil. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 70:252–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shin S-Y, Park S-M, Baek K (2016) Electrokinetic removal of As from soil washing residue. Water Air Soil Pollut 227:223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Virkutyte J, Sillanpää M, Latostenmaa P (2002) Electrokinetic soil remediation—critical overview. Sci Total Environ 289:97–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zhou DM, Deng CF, Alshawabkeh AN, Cang L (2005) Effects of catholyte conditioning on electrokinetic extraction of copper from mine tailings. Environ Int 31:885–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental Engineering and Soil Environment Research CenterChonbuk National UniversityJeonbukRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Bioactive Material SciencesChonbuk National UniversityJeonbukRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations