Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 23, pp 23205–23214 | Cite as

Spent MgO-carbon refractory bricks as a material for permeable reactive barriers to treat a nickel- and cobalt-contaminated groundwater

  • Carl de Repentigny
  • Benoît Courcelles
  • Gérald J. Zagury
Research Article
  • 73 Downloads

Abstract

Spent magnesia (MgO)-carbon refractory bricks were repurposed as a permeable reactive barrier reactive media to treat a nickel (5 mg l−1)- and cobalt (0.3 mg l−1)-contaminated groundwater. MgO has been used for decades as a heavy metal precipitating agent as it hydrates and buffers the pH in a range of 8.5–10 associated with the minimum solubility of various divalent metals. The contaminated groundwater site’s conditions are typical of contaminated neutral drainage with a pH of 6 as well as high concentrations of iron (220 mg l−1) and sulphates (2500 mg l−1). Using synthetic contaminated water, batch and small-scale column tests were performed to determine the treatment efficiency and longevity. The increase and stabilization of the pH at 10 observed during the tests are associated with the hydration and dissolution of the MgO and promoted the removal not only of a significant proportion of the contaminants but also of iron. During the column test, this accumulation of precipitates over time clogged and passivated the MgO resulting in a loss of chemical performance (pH lowering, metal breakthrough) after 210 pore volumes of filtration. Precipitation also affected the hydraulic conductivity values which dropped from 2.3·10−3 to 4.2·10−4 m s−1 at the end of test. Saturation indices and XRD analyses suggest the precipitates formed are likely composed of goethite as well as iron, cobalt and nickel hydroxides. Recycled MgO-C refractory bricks were demonstrated to be an efficient reactive material for the removal of Co and Ni, but careful considerations should be taken of the potential clogging and passivation phenomena given particular physicochemical conditions.

Keywords

Permeable reactive barriers Magnesium oxide Metal precipitation Contaminated neutral drainage Batch and column tests 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Quebec Fonds de Recherche Nature et Technologies, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and BluMetric Environmental Inc. for supporting this research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bildstein O (1998) Modélisation géochimique des interactions eau-gaz-roche Application a la diagenèse minérale dans les réservoirs géologiques. Université de Strasbourg 1 (in French)Google Scholar
  2. Blowes DW, Ptacek CJ, Benner SG, McRae CWT, Bennett TA, Puls RW (2000) Treatment of inorganic contaminants using permeable reactive barriers. J Contam Hydrol 45:123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Calugaru IL, Neculita CM, Genty T, Bussière B, Potvin R (2016) Performance of thermally activated dolomite for the treatment of Ni and Zn in contaminated neutral drainage. J Hazard Mater 310:48–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Calugaru IL, Neculita CM, Genty T, Zagury GJ (2018) Metals and metalloids treatment in contaminated neutral effluents using modified materials. J Environ Manag 212:142–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caraballo MA, Rötting TS, Silva V (2010) Implementation of an MgO-based metal removal step in the passive treatment system of Shilbottle, UK: Column experiments. J Hazard Mater 181:923–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chimenos J, Fernandez A, Villalba G, Segarra M, Urruticoechea A, Artaza B, Espiell F (2003) Removal of ammonium and phosphates from wastewater resulting from the process of cochineal extraction using MgO-containing by-product. Water Res 37:1601–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cortina J-L, Lagreca I, De Pablo J, Cama J, Ayora C (2003) Passive in situ remediation of metal-polluted water with caustic magnesia: evidence from column experiments. Environ Sci Technol 37:1971–1977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Courcelles B, Modaressi-Farahmand-Razavi A, Gouvenot D, Esnault-Filet A (2011) Influence of precipitates on hydraulic performance of permeable reactive barrier filters. Int J Geomech 11:142–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davies PJ, Bubela B (1973) The transformation of nesquehonite into hydromagnesite. Chem Geol 12:289–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. de Repentigny C, Courcelles B (2014) A simplified model to predict clogging of reactive barriers. Environ Geotechn 3:166–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. del Valle-Zermeño R, Giró-Paloma J, Formosa J, Chimenos J (2015) Low-grade magnesium oxide by-products for environmental solutions: characterization and geochemical performance. J Geochem Explor 152:134–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Faghihi-Sani M-A, Yamaguchi A (2002) Oxidation kinetics of MgO–C refractory bricks. Ceram Int 28:835–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gibert O, de Pablo J, Luis Cortina J, Ayora C (2003) Evaluation of municipal compost/limestone/iron mixtures as filling material for permeable reactive barriers for in-situ acid mine drainage treatment. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 78:489–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gustafsson J (2011) Visual MINTEQ ver. 3.0 KTH Department of Land and Water Resources Engineering, Stockholm, Sweden Based on de Allison JD, Brown DS, Novo-Gradac KJ, MINTEQA2 ver 4, 1991Google Scholar
  15. Hänchen M, Prigiobbe V, Baciocchi R, Mazzotti M (2008) Precipitation in the Mg-carbonate system—effects of temperature and CO2 pressure. Chem Eng Sci 63:1012–1028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ITRC (2011) Permeable reactive barrier: technology update. The Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council, PRB: Technology Update Team, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  17. Jin F, Al-Tabbaa A (2014) Characterisation of different commercial reactive magnesia. Adv Cem Res 26:101–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kojima Y, Sadotomo A, Yasue T, Arai Y (1992) Control of crystal shape and modification of calcium carbonate prepared by precipitation from calcium hydrogencarbonate solution. J Ceram Soc Jpn 100:1145–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Macías F, Caraballo MA, Rötting TS, Pérez-López R, Nieto JM, Ayora C (2012) From highly polluted Zn-rich acid mine drainage to non-metallic waters: implementation of a multi-step alkaline passive treatment system to remediate metal pollution. Sci Total Environ 433:323–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. MOE (2011) Soil, ground water and sediment standards for use under part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. Table 9—generic site condition standards for use within 30 m of a water body in a non-potable ground water condition. Ontario Ministry of the EnvironmentGoogle Scholar
  21. Navarro A, Chimenos JM, Muntaner D, Fernandez AI (2006) Permeable reactive barriers for the removal of heavy metals: lab-scale experiments with low-grade magnesium oxide. Ground Water Monit Remediat 26:142–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Obiri-Nyarko F, Grajales-Mesa SJ, Malina G (2014) An overview of permeable reactive barriers for in situ sustainable groundwater remediation. Chemosphere 111:243–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Oustadakis P, Agatzini-Leonardou S, Tsakiridis PE (2006) Nickel and cobalt precipitation from sulphate leach liquor using MgO pulp as neutralizing agent. Miner Eng 19:1204–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rocha SD, Mansur MB, Ciminelli VS (2004) Kinetics and mechanistic analysis of caustic magnesia hydration. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:816–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rötting TS, Ayora C, Carrera J (2008) Improved passive treatment of high Zn and Mn concentrations using caustic magnesia (MgO): particle size effects. Environ Sci Technol 42:9370–9377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rötting TS, Cama J, Ayora C, Cortina J-L, De Pablo J (2006) Use of caustic magnesia to remove cadmium, nickel, and cobalt from water in passive treatment systems: column experiments. Environ Sci Technol 40:6438–6443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schiller JE, Tallman DN, Khalafalla SE (1984) Mineral processing water treatment using magnesium oxide. Environ Prog 3:136–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Terringo J III (1987) Magnesium hydroxide reduces sludge/improves filtering. Pollut Eng 19:78–83Google Scholar
  29. USEPA (2008) Incorporating sustainable environmental practices into remediation of contaminated sites. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency ResponseGoogle Scholar
  30. Wray JL, Daniels F (1957) Precipitation of calcite and aragonite. J Am Chem Soc 79:2031–2034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zagury GJ, Colombano SM, Narasiah KS, Ballivy G (1997) Neutralization of acid mine tailings by addition of alkaline sludges from pulp and paper industry. Environ Technol 18:959–973Google Scholar
  32. Zagury GJ, Kulnieks VI, Neculita CM (2006) Characterization and reactivity assessment of organic substrates for sulphate-reducing bacteria in acid mine drainage treatment. Chemosphere 64:944–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carl de Repentigny
    • 1
  • Benoît Courcelles
    • 1
  • Gérald J. Zagury
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil, Geological and Mining EngineeringPolytechnique MontréalMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations