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

A Correction to this article is available

This article has been updated

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Change history

  • 07 February 2020

    Figure 4 is not correct in the PDF format of the originally published article. Please note that in the HTML or online format, the image is correct.

References

  1. Apeti DA, Hartwell SI (2016) Baseline assessment of organic contaminants in surficial sediment from Kachemak Bay, Alaska. Reg Stud Mar Sci 7:196–203

    Google Scholar 

  2. Apitz SE, Power EA (2002) From risk assessment to sediment management an international perspective. J Soils Sediments 2:61–66

    CAS  Google 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 7:326–341

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Arribas Jimeno S, Burriel Marti F, Hernendez Mendez J, Lucena Conde F (1992) Química analítica cualitativa. Paraninfo

  5. Baes CF Jr, Mesmer R (1981) Thermodynamics of cation hydrolysis. Am J Sci 281:935–962

    CAS  Google 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 92:3304–3310

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Barceló D, Petrovic M (eds) (2007) Sustainable management of sediment resources. Sediment quality and impact assessment of pollutants. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  8. Barnum DW (1983) Hydrolysis of cations. Formation constants and standard free energies of formation of hydroxy complexes. Inorg Chem 22:2297–2305

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bortone G, Palumbo L (eds) (2007) Sustainable management of sediment resources. Sediment and dredged material treatment. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brils J (2008) Sediment monitoring and the European water framework directive. Ann Ist Super Sanita 44:218–223

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brils J, de Deckere E (2003) SedNet—an evolving network aimed at sustainable sediment management. J Soils Sediments 3:127–128

    Google 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 163:1353–1359

    Google 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 40:1195–1208

    CAS  Google 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 147:852–861

    CAS  Google 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 3:144–162

    Google Scholar 

  16. Eggleton J, Thomas KV (2004) A review of factors affecting the release and bioavailability of contaminants during sediment disturbance events. Environ Int 30:973–980

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ferdinandy-van Vlerken MA (1998) Chances for biological techniques in sediment remediation. Water Sci Tech 37:345–353

    Google Scholar 

  18. Förstner U, Salomons W (2010) Sediment research, management and policy. J Soils Sediments 10:1440–1452

    Google 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 4:247–260

    Google 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 234:204–216

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Heise S (ed) (2007) Sustainable management of sediment resources. Sediment risk management and communication. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hunter RJ (2013) Zeta potential in colloid science: principles and applications. 2nd edn. Academic press

  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 6:27689

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kinraide TB (2009) Improved scales for metal ion softness and toxicity. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:525–533

    CAS  Google 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 267–281

    Google Scholar 

  26. Landner L (2006) Speciation of metals in water, sediment and soil systems: Proc Intern Workshop, Sunne. October 15–16(1986):11

    Google 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 107–149

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mulligan CN, Yong RN, Gibbs BF (2001) An evaluation of technologies for the heavy metal remediation of dredged sediments. J Hazard Mater 85:145–163

    CAS  Google 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 357:25–37

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Obhođaš J, Valković V (2010) Contamination of the coastal sea sediments by heavy metals. Appl Radiat Isot 68:807–811

    Google Scholar 

  31. Owens PN (2008) Sustainable management of sediment resources. Sediment management at the river basin scale. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google 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 21:693–717

    Google 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 22:241–246

    CAS  Google 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 19:932–937

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Pearson RG (1963) Hard and soft acids and bases. J Am Chem Soc 85:3533–3539

    CAS  Google 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 283:712–720

    CAS  Google 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 161:633–640

    CAS  Google 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 137:1458–1465

    CAS  Google 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 57:849–857

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Reddy KR, Cameselle C (2009) Electrochemical remediation technologies for polluted soils, sediments and groundwater. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  41. Reddy MR, Dunn SJ (1986) Distribution coefficients for nickel and zinc in soils. Env Pollut Series B, Chem Physical 11:303–313

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Ribeiro AB, Mateus EP, Couto N (2016) Electrokinetics across disciplines and continents, 1st edn. Springer, Berlin

    Google 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 15:930–946

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Rozas F, Castellote M (2012) Electrokinetic remediation of dredged sediments polluted with heavy metals with different enhancing electrolytes. Electrochimica Acta 86:102–109

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Rozas F, Castellote M (2015) Selecting enhancing solutions for electrokinetic remediation of dredged sediments polluted with fuel. J Env Manag 151:153–159

    CAS  Google 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 55:32–40

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Shaheen SM (2009) Sorption and lability of cadmium and lead in different soils from Egypt and Greece. Geoderma 153:61–68

    CAS  Google 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 201:43–56

    Google Scholar 

  49. Shaw DJ (1966) Introduction to colloid and surface chemistry. 1st edn, Butterworth-Heinemann

  50. Sposito G (2008) The chemistry of soils, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google 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 61:854–864

    Google Scholar 

  52. Yeung AT, C-n H, Menon RM (1997) Physicochemical soil-contaminant interactions during electrokinetic extraction. J Hazard Mater 55:221–237

    CAS  Google 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 145:155–168

    CAS  Google 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 73:270–281

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

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.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marta Castellote.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original version of this article was revised: Figure 4 is not correct in the PDF format of the originally published article. Please note that in the HTML or online format, the image is correct.

Responsible editor: Elena Romano

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Garcia-Blas, N., Jimenez-Relinque, E., Nevshupa, R. et al. Interaction dynamics between a contaminated dredged sediment and extracting solutions of different nature . J Soils Sediments 20, 2664–2671 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-019-02466-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Dredged sediment chemistry
  • Extracting solutions
  • Sediment decontamination
  • Sedimentation rate
  • Zeta potential