Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 14, Issue 5, pp 936–947 | Cite as

Comparing chemical-enhanced washing and waste-based stabilisation approach for soil remediation

  • Daniel C. W. Tsang
  • Alex C. K. Yip



This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of chemical-enhanced soil washing (with chelating agents, humic substances and inorganic acids) and soil stabilisation by inorganic industrial by-products (coal fly ash, acid mine drainage sludge and zero-valent iron) and organic resource (lignite) for timber treatment site remediation.

Materials and methods

Both remediation options were assessed in terms of extraction/leaching kinetics and residual leachability (toxicity characteristic leaching procedure, TCLP) of the major risk drivers, i.e. Cu and As.

Results and discussion

In chemical-enhanced soil washing, chelating agents only minimised the Cu leachability. Humic substances were ineffective while inorganic acids reduced the As leachability to the detriment of the soil quality. For the waste-stabilised soil, the short-term leaching potential (72 h) and long-term TCLP leachability (9 months) revealed that Fe-/Al-/Ca-rich AMD sludge and coal fly ash sequestered As through adsorption and (co-)precipitation, while carbonaceous lignite stabilised Cu with oxygen-containing functional groups. The short-term and long-term leaching of Cu and As into the soil solution was negligible in the presence of the waste materials. However, the waste-stabilised soil did not maintain sufficient Cu stability in the TCLP tests, in which acetate buffer induced significant mineral dissolution of the waste materials.


These results suggest that chelant-enhanced washing (significant reduction of Cu leachability) may be augmented with subsequent stabilisation with inorganic waste materials (effective control of As leachability), thus minimising the environmental risks of both Cu (heavy metal) and As (metalloid) while preserving the reuse value of the soil. Additional tests under field-relevant conditions are required to provide a holistic performance evaluation.


Chelating agents Industrial by-products Metal leachability Soil stabilisation Soil washing 



The authors appreciate the financial support from the Foundation for Research Science and Technology Fund (SENZ0901) and the provision of field soil sample from Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd for this study.

Supplementary material

11368_2013_831_MOESM1_ESM.doc (564 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 564 kb)


  1. Ahmad M, Lee SS, Dou X, Mohan D, Sung JK, Yang JE, Ok YS (2012) Effects of pyrolysis temperature on soybean stover- and peanut shell-derived biochar properties and TCE adsorption in water. Bioresource Technol 118:536–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almaroai YA, Usman ARA, Ahmad M, Kim KR, Vithanage M, Ok YS (2013) Role of chelating agents on release kinetics of metals and their uptake by maize from chromated copper arsenate-contaminated soil. Environ Technol 34:747–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson R, Rasor E, Van Ryn F (1999) Particle size separation via soil washing to obtain volume reduction. J Hazard Mater 66:89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arwidsson Z, Elgh-Dalgren K, von Kronhelm T, Sjoberg R, Allard B, van Hees P (2010) Remediation of heavy metal contaminated soil washing residues with amino polycarboxylic acids. J Hazard Mater 173:697–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baken S, Degryse F, Verheyen L, Merckx R, Smolders E (2011) Metal complexation properties of freshwater dissolved organic matter are explained by its aromaticity and by anthropogenic ligands. Environ Sci Technol 45:2584–2590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Begum ZA, Rahman IMM, Tate Y, Sawai H, Maki T, Hasegawa H (2012) Remediation of toxic metal contaminated soil by washing with biodegradable aminopolycarboxylate chelants. Chemosphere 87:1161–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown SL, Compton H, Basta NT (2007) Field test of in situ soil amendments at the Tar Creek National Priorities List Superfund Site. J Environ Qual 36:1627–1634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Council of the European Union (1999) Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of wasteGoogle Scholar
  9. Dermont G, Bergeron M, Mercier G, Richer-Lafleche M (2008) Soil washing for metal removal: a review of physical/chemical technologies and field applications. J Hazard Mater 152:1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Douglas L (2009) Olympic Watch—the main site. Engineering and Technology Magazine, The Institution of Engineering and Technology, London, 6, 4Google Scholar
  11. Fedje KK, Yillin L, Stromvall AM (2013) Remediation of metal polluted hotspot areas through enhanced soil washing—evaluation of leaching methods. J Environ Manage 128:489–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fernandez-Caliani JC, Barba-Brioso C (2010) Metal immobilization in hazardous contaminated minesoils after marble slurry waste application. A field assessment at the Tharsis mining district (Spain). J Hazard Mater 181:817–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harbottle MJ, Al-Tabbaa A, Evans CW (2007) A comparison of the technical sustainability of in situ stabilisation/solidification with disposal to landfill. J Hazard Mater 141:430–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Iqbal M, Puschenreiter M, Oburger E, Santner J, Wenzel WW (2012) Sulfur-aided phytoextraction of Cd and Zn by Salix smithiana combined with in situ metal immobilization by gravel sludge and red mud. Environ Pollut 170:222–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jelusic M, Grcman H, Vodnik D, Suhadolc M, Lestan D (2013) Functioning of metal contaminated garden soil after remediation. Environ Pollut 174:63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jucoski GO, Cambraia J, Ribeiro C, Oliveira JA, de Paula SO, Oliva MA (2013) Impact of iron toxicity on oxidative metabolism in young Eugenia uniflora L. plants. Acta Physiol Plant 35:1645–1657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kolodynska D (2010) The effect of the novel complexing agent in removal of heavy metal ions from waters and waste waters. Chem Eng J 165:835–845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Komarek M, Vanek A, Mrnka L, Sudova R, Szakova J, Tejnecky V, Chrastny V (2010) Potential and drawbacks of EDDS-enhanced phytoextraction of copper from contaminated soils. Environ Pollut 158:2428–2438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Komarek M, Michalkova Z, Szakova J, Vanek A, Grygar T (2011) Evolution of bioavailable copper and major soil cations in contaminated soils treated with ethylenediaminedisuccinate: a two-year experiment. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 86:525–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Komarek M, Vanek A, Ettler V (2013) Chemical stabilisation of metals and arsenic in contaminated soils using oxides—a review. Environ Pollut 172:9–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kumpiene J, Lagerkvist A, Maurice C (2008) Stabilization of As, Cr, Cu, Pb and Zn in soil using amendments—a review. Waste Manage 28:215–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Landrot G, Tappero R, Webb SM, Sparks DL (2012) Arsenic and chromium speciation in an urban contaminated soil. Chemosphere 88:1196–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee KY, Moon DH, Lee SH, Kim KW, Cheong KH, Park JH, Ok YS, Chang YY (2013) Simultaneous stabilisation of arsenic, lead, and copper in contaminated soil using mixed waste resources. Environ Earth Sci 69(6):1813–1820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu CC, Lin YC (2013) Reclamation of copper-contaminated soil using EDTA or citric acid coupled with dissolved organic matter solution extracted from distillery sludge. Environ Pollut 178:97–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lo IMC, Tsang DCW, Yip TCM, Wang F, Zhang W (2011) Significance of metal exchange in EDDS-flushing column experiments. Chemosphere 83:7–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mann MJ (1999) Full-scale and pilot-scale soil washing. J Hazard Mater 66:119–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Milacic R, Zuliani T, Scancar J (2012) Environmental impact of toxic elements in red mud studied by fractionation and speciation procedures. Sci Total Environ 426:359–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miretzky P, Cirelli AF (2010) Remediation of arsenic-contaminated soils by iron amendments: a review. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 40:93–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Neugschwandtner R, Tlustos P, Komarek M, Szakova J, Jakoubkova L (2012) Chemically enhanced phytoextraction of risk elements from a contaminated agricultural soil using Zea mays and Triticum aestivum: performance and metal mobilization over a three year period. Int J Phytoremediat 14:754–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nowack B, Schulin R, Robinson BH (2006) Critical assessment of chelant-enhanced metal phytoextraction. Environ Sci Technol 40:5225–5232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Noren K, Loring JS, Bargar JR, Persson P (2009) Adsorption mechanisms of EDTA at the water–iron oxide interface: implications for dissolution. J Phys Chem C 113:7762–7771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ok YS, Kim SC, Kim DK, Skousen JG, Lee JS, Cheong YW, Kim SJ, Yang JE (2011) Ameliorants to immobilize Cd in rice paddy soils contaminated by abandoned metal mines in Korea. Environ Geochem Health 33:23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Olds WE, Tsang DCW, Weber P (2013) Acid mine drainage treatment assisted by lignite-derived humic substances: metal removal and speciation modelling. Water Air Soil Pollut 224:1521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pilon-Smits EAH, Quinn CF, Tapken W, Malagoli M, Schiavon M (2009) Physiological functions of beneficial elements. Curr Opin Plant Biol 12:267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pociecha M, Lestan D (2009) EDTA leaching of Cu contaminated soil using electrochemical treatment of the washing solution. J Hazard Mater 165:533–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ramirez LM, Claassen N, Ubiera AA, Werner H, Moawad AM (2002) Effect of phosphorus, potassium and zinc fertilizers on iron toxicity in wetland rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Soil 239:197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Qi Y, Szendrak D, Yuen RTW, Hoadley AFA, Mudd G (2011) Application of sludge dewatered products to soil and its effects on the leaching behaviour of heavy metals. Chem Eng J 166:586–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Salati S, Quadri G, Tambone F, Adani F (2010) Fresh organic matter of municipal solid waste enhances phytoextraction of heavy metals from contaminated soil. Environ Pollut 158:1899–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Toquer G, Delchet C, Nemec M, Grandjean A (2011) Effect of leaching concentration and time on the morphology of pores in porous glasses. J Non-Cryst Solids 357:1552–1557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Trakal L, Komarek M, Szakova J, Tlustos P (2011) Biochar application to metal-contaminated soil: evaluating of Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn sorption behavior using single- and multi-element sorption experiment. Plant Soil Environ 57:372–380Google Scholar
  41. Tsang DCW, Zhang W, Lo IMC (2007) Copper extraction effectiveness and soil dissolution issues of EDTA-flushing of artificially contaminated soils. Chemosphere 68:234–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tsang DCW, Yip TCM, Lo IMC (2009) Kinetic interactions of EDDS with soils. 2. Metal–EDDS complexes in uncontaminated and metal-contaminated soils. Environ Sci Technol 43:837–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tsang DCW, Yip TCM, Lo IMC (2011) Simulation of kinetic extraction of heavy metals during chelant-enhanced soil washing. J Soils Sediments 11:1221–1233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tsang DCW, Lo IMC, Surampalli RY (2012) Design, implementation, and economic/societal considerations of chelant-enhanced soil washing. Chelating Agents for Land Decontamination Technologies. ISBN 978-0-7844-1218-3. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, pp 1–26Google Scholar
  45. Tsang DCW, Hartley NR (2013) Metal distribution and spectroscopic analysis after soil washing with chelating agents and humic substances. Environ Sci Pollut Res. doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-2300-y Google Scholar
  46. Tsang DCW, Olds WE, Weber P (2013a) Residual leachability of CCA-contaminated soil after treatment with biodegradable chelating agents and lignite-derived humic substances. J Soils Sediments 13:895–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tsang DCW, Olds WE, Weber PA, Yip ACK (2013b) Soil stabilisation using AMD sludge, compost and lignite: TCLP leachability and continuous acid leaching. Chemosphere 93:2839–2847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Uchimiya M, Chang SC, Klasson KT (2011) Screening biochars for heavy metal retention in soil: role of oxygen functional groups. J Hazard Mater 190:432–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Uchimiya M, Bannon DI, Wartelle LH, Lima IM, Klasson T (2012) Lead retention by broiler litter biochars in small arms range soil: impact of pyrolysis temperature. J Agr Food Chem 60:5035–5044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Udovic M, Lestan D (2009) Pb, Zn and Cd mobility, availability and fractionation in aged soil remediated by EDTA leaching. Chemosphere 74:1367–1373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Udovic M, Lestan D (2012) EDTA and HCl leaching of calcareous and acidic soils polluted with potentially toxic metals: remediation efficiency and soil impact. Chemosphere 88:718–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (US ACE) (2011) Remediation system evaluation—Vineland Chemical Company Superfund Site, Vineland, New Jersey. EPA-542-R-11-007, November 2011Google Scholar
  53. Voglar D, Lestan D (2012) Pilot-scale washing of metal contaminated garden soil using EDTA. J Hazard Mater 215–216:32–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Voglar D, Lestan D (2013) Pilot-scale washing of Pb, Zn and Cd contaminated soil using EDTA and process water recycling. Chemosphere 91:76–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wang YR, Tsang DCW (2013) Effects of solution chemistry on arsenic(V) removal by low-cost adsorbents. J Environ Sci 25:2291–2298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wang YR, Tsang DCW, Olds WE, Weber PA (2013) Utilizing acid mine drainage sludge and coal fly ash for phosphate removal from dairy wastewater. Environ Technol 34:3177–3182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. WHO (2011) Guidelines for drinking-water quality, 4th edn. World Health Organization, Switzerland. ISBN 978-92-4-154815-1Google Scholar
  58. Yang L, Luo C, Liu Y, Quan L, Chen Y, Shen Z (2013) Residual effects of EDDS leachates on plants during EDDS-assisted phytoremediation of copper contaminated soil. Sci Total Environ 444:263–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yip TCM, Yan DYS, Yui MMT, Tsang DCW, Lo IMC (2010a) Heavy metal extraction from an artificially contaminated sandy soil under EDDS deficiency: significance of humic acid and chelant mixture. Chemosphere 80:416–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yip TCM, Tsang DCW, Lo IMC (2010b) Interactions of chelating agents with Pb-goethite at the solid–liquid interface: Pb extraction and re-adsorption. Chemosphere 81:415–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zhang W, Tsang DCW (2013) Conceptual framework and mathematical model for the transport of metal–chelant complexes during in-situ soil remediation. Chemosphere 91:1281–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zhang W, Tsang DCW, Chen H, Long H (2013) Remediation of an electroplating contaminated soil by EDTA flushing: chromium release and soil dissolution. J Soils Sediments 13:354–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zhou YF, Haynes RJ (2010) Sorption of heavy metals by inorganic and organic components of solid wastes: significance to use of wastes as low-cost adsorbents and immobilizing agents. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 40:909–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Natural Resources EngineeringUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringHong Kong Polytechnic UniversityKowloonChina
  3. 3.Department of Chemical and Process EngineeringUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations