Advertisement

Interaction dynamics between a contaminated dredged sediment and extracting solutions of different nature

  • Nieves Garcia-Blas
  • Eva Jimenez-Relinque
  • Roman Nevshupa
  • Marta CastelloteEmail author
Sediments as a Dynamic Natural Resource – From Catchment to Open Sea
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this work is to study the dynamics between the matrix of a contaminated marine sediment, its contaminants and various desorbing solutions by means of equilibrium tests, sedimentation trials and zeta potential, with the focus on assessing optimum enhancing solutions for decontamination purposes.

Materials and methods

The sediment samples were analysed to determine their physico-chemical characteristics: particle size distribution, solids concentration, total organic carbon (TOC), content of heavy metals, organic contaminants, mineralogical phases, zeta potential and buffer capacity. Twelve extracting solutions of different nature were used for equilibrium tests, in which the dynamic behaviour of the sediment was evaluated. Elemental analysis was carried out for the sediment samples and the solutions before and after the tests.

Results and discussion

The sediment was mainly composed of clay and lime, with a high content of iron, which has a strong influence on sorption-desorption processes. The sediment had a considerable buffer capacity at low and high pH values. The desorption of the metals was not proportional to pH. The highest decrease in the concentration of metals from the sediment was obtained with 0.2 M ethylenediaminetetra-acetic acid (EDTA) and 1 M nitric acid, while the lowest degree of metal extraction occurred in pure water and potassium iodide (KI).

Conclusions

The most important parameters for contaminant release were complexation ability of the solution for the sediment components and pH of the solution. A promising design for the remediation treatment for the investigated sediment includes complexation and strong acid agents.

Keywords

Dredged sediment chemistry Extracting solutions Sediment decontamination Sedimentation rate Zeta potential 

Notes

Funding information

The authors want to acknowledge the support of the Community of Madrid through the program “Garantía Juvenil” for the doctoral grant of the first author of this research.

References

  1. Apeti DA, Hartwell SI (2016) Baseline assessment of organic contaminants in surficial sediment from Kachemak Bay, Alaska. Reg Stud Mar Sci 7:196–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Apitz SE, Power EA (2002) From risk assessment to sediment management an international perspective. J Soils Sediments 2:61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Apitz SE, Barbanti A, Bernstein AG, Bocci M, Delaney E, Montobbio L (2007) The assessment of sediment screening risk in Venice Lagoon and other coastal areas using international sediment quality guidelines. J Soils Sediments 7:326–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arribas Jimeno S, Burriel Marti F, Hernendez Mendez J, Lucena Conde F (1992) Química analítica cualitativa. ParaninfoGoogle Scholar
  5. Baes CF Jr, Mesmer R (1981) Thermodynamics of cation hydrolysis. Am J Sci 281:935–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Balamurugan B, Mehta BR, Avasthi DK, Singh F, Arora AK, Rajalakshmi M, Raghavan G, Tyagi AK, Shivaprasad SM (2002) Modifying the nanocrystalline characteristics—structure, size, and surface states of copper oxide thin films by high-energy heavy-ion irradiation. J Appl Phys 92:3304–3310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barceló D, Petrovic M (eds) (2007) Sustainable management of sediment resources. Sediment quality and impact assessment of pollutants. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  8. Barnum DW (1983) Hydrolysis of cations. Formation constants and standard free energies of formation of hydroxy complexes. Inorg Chem 22:2297–2305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bortone G, Palumbo L (eds) (2007) Sustainable management of sediment resources. Sediment and dredged material treatment. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  10. Brils J (2008) Sediment monitoring and the European water framework directive. Ann Ist Super Sanita 44:218–223Google Scholar
  11. Brils J, de Deckere E (2003) SedNet—an evolving network aimed at sustainable sediment management. J Soils Sediments 3:127–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Casado-Martínez M, Forja J, DelValls TA (2009) A multivariate assessment of sediment contamination in dredged materials from Spanish ports. J Hazard Mater 163:1353–1359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Castellote M, Botija S, Andrade C (2010) Assessment of electrophoresis and electroosmosis in construction materials: effect of enhancing electrolytes and heavy metals contamination. J Appl Electrochem 40:1195–1208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Covelo EF, Vega FA, Andrade ML (2007) Simultaneous sorption and desorption of Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Zn in acid soils: I. Selectivity sequences. J Hazard Mater 147:852–861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Den Besten PJ, De Deckere E, Babut MP, Power B, DelValls TA, Zago C, Oen AM, Heise S (2003) Biological effects-based sediment quality in ecological risk assessment for European waters. J Soils Sediments 3:144–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eggleton J, Thomas KV (2004) A review of factors affecting the release and bioavailability of contaminants during sediment disturbance events. Environ Int 30:973–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ferdinandy-van Vlerken MA (1998) Chances for biological techniques in sediment remediation. Water Sci Tech 37:345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Förstner U, Salomons W (2010) Sediment research, management and policy. J Soils Sediments 10:1440–1452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Förstner U, Heise S, Schwartz R, Westrich B, Ahlf W (2004) Historical contaminated sediments and soils at the river basin scale. J Soils Sediments 4:247–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goldberg S, Johnston CT (2001) Mechanisms of arsenic adsorption on amorphous oxides evaluated using macroscopic measurements, vibrational spectroscopy, and surface complexation modeling. J Colloid Inter Sci 234:204–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heise S (ed) (2007) Sustainable management of sediment resources. Sediment risk management and communication. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  22. Hunter RJ (2013) Zeta potential in colloid science: principles and applications. 2nd edn. Academic pressGoogle Scholar
  23. Khan MF, Ansari AH, Hameedullah M, Ahmad E, Husain FM, Zia Q, Baig U, Zaheer MR, Alam MM, Khan AM, AlOthman ZA, Ahmad I, Ashraf GM, Aliev G (2016) Sol-gel synthesis of thorn-like ZnO nanoparticles endorsing mechanical stirring effect and their antimicrobial activities: potential role as nano-antibiotics. Sci Rep 6:27689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kinraide TB (2009) Improved scales for metal ion softness and toxicity. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:525–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kloprogge T (2016) Infrared and Raman spectroscopy of minerals and inorganic materials. In: Lindon J, Tranter GE, Koppenaal D (eds) Encyclopedia of Spectroscopy and Spectrometry, 3rd edn. Academic Press, London, pp 267–281Google Scholar
  26. Landner L (2006) Speciation of metals in water, sediment and soil systems: Proc Intern Workshop, Sunne. October 15–16(1986):11Google Scholar
  27. Madejová J, Gates WP, Petit S (2017) IR spectra of clay minerals. In: Gates WP, Kloprogge JT, Madejová J, Bergaya F (eds) Developments in clay science. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 107–149Google Scholar
  28. Mulligan CN, Yong RN, Gibbs BF (2001) An evaluation of technologies for the heavy metal remediation of dredged sediments. J Hazard Mater 85:145–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nystroem GM, Pedersen AJ, Ottosen LM, Villumsen A (2006) The use of desorbing agents in electrodialytic remediation of harbour sediment. Sci Total Environ 357:25–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Obhođaš J, Valković V (2010) Contamination of the coastal sea sediments by heavy metals. Appl Radiat Isot 68:807–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Owens PN (2008) Sustainable management of sediment resources. Sediment management at the river basin scale. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  32. Owens PN, Batalla RJ, Collins AJ, Gomez B, Hicks DM, Horowitz AJ, Kondolf GM, Marden M, Page MJ, Peacock DH, Petticrew EL, Salomons W, Trustrum NA (2005) Fine-grained sediment in river systems: environmental significance and management issues. River Res Applic 21:693–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ownby DR, Newman MC (2003) Advances in quantitative ion character-activity relationships (QICARs): Using metal-ligand binding characteristics to predict metal toxicity. QSAR Comb Sci 22:241–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pazos M, Iglesias O, Gómez J, Rosales E, Sanromán MA (2013) Remediation of contaminated marine sediment using electrokinetic–Fenton technology. J Ind Eng Chem 19:932–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pearson RG (1963) Hard and soft acids and bases. J Am Chem Soc 85:3533–3539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pedersen KB, Kirkelund GM, Ottosen LM, Jensen PE, Lejon T (2015) Multivariate methods for evaluating the efficiency of electrodialytic removal of heavy metals from polluted harbour sediments. J Hazard Mater 283:712–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Peng J- f, Song Y-h, Yuan P, X-y C, Qiu G (2009) The remediation of heavy metals contaminated sediment. J Hazard Mater 161:633–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Polettini A, Pomi R, Rolle E, Ceremigna D, De Propris L, Gabellini M, Tornato A (2006) A kinetic study of chelant-assisted remediation of contaminated dredged sediment. J Hazard Mater 137:1458–1465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raposo JC, Sanz J, Zuloaga O, Olazabal MA, Madariaga JM (2002) The thermodynamic model of inorganic arsenic species in aqueous solutions: Potentiometric study of the hydrolitic equilibrium of arsenic acid. Talanta 57:849–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Reddy KR, Cameselle C (2009) Electrochemical remediation technologies for polluted soils, sediments and groundwater. John Wiley & Sons, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Reddy MR, Dunn SJ (1986) Distribution coefficients for nickel and zinc in soils. Env Pollut Series B, Chem Physical 11:303–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ribeiro AB, Mateus EP, Couto N (2016) Electrokinetics across disciplines and continents, 1st edn. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Romano E, Bergamin L, Celia Magno M, Ausili A (2013) Sediment characterization of the highly impacted Augusta harbour (Sicily, Italy): modern benthic foraminifera in relation to grain-size and sediment geochemistry. Env Sci Process Impact 15:930–946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rozas F, Castellote M (2012) Electrokinetic remediation of dredged sediments polluted with heavy metals with different enhancing electrolytes. Electrochimica Acta 86:102–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rozas F, Castellote M (2015) Selecting enhancing solutions for electrokinetic remediation of dredged sediments polluted with fuel. J Env Manag 151:153–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rusanov A, Nevshupa R, Martin J-M, Garrido MÁ, Roman E (2015) Tribochemistry of hydrogenated amorphous carbon through analysis of mechanically stimulated gas emission. Diam Relat Mater 55:32–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shaheen SM (2009) Sorption and lability of cadmium and lead in different soils from Egypt and Greece. Geoderma 153:61–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shaheen SM, Tsadilas CD, Rinklebe J (2013) A review of the distribution coefficients of trace elements in soils: influence of sorption system, element characteristics, and soil colloidal properties. J Colloid Inter Sci 201:43–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shaw DJ (1966) Introduction to colloid and surface chemistry. 1st edn, Butterworth-HeinemannGoogle Scholar
  50. Sposito G (2008) The chemistry of soils, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  51. Vdović N, Obhođaš J, Pikelj K (2010) Revisiting the particle-size distribution of soils: comparison of different methods and sample pre-treatments. Eur J Soil Sci 61:854–864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yeung AT, C-n H, Menon RM (1997) Physicochemical soil-contaminant interactions during electrokinetic extraction. J Hazard Mater 55:221–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yukselen Y, Kaya A (2003) Zeta potential of kaolinite in the presence of alkali, alkaline earth and hydrolyzable metal ions. Water Air Soil Pollut 145:155–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang C, Yu Z-g, G-m Z, Jiang M, Yang Z-z, Cui F, Zhu M-y, Shen L-q HL (2014) Effects of sediment geochemical properties on heavy metal bioavailability. Environ Int 73:270–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Construction Science Eduardo Torroja (IETcc-CSIC)MadridSpain
  2. 2.National Distance Education University (UNED)MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations