Prediction of Metal Removal Efficiency from Contaminated Soils by Physical Methods
Publication: Journal of Environmental Engineering
Volume 127, Issue 4
Abstract
Six metal-contaminated soil samples were submitted to physical methods of treatment. A wet magnetic separator, Wilfley shaking table, and jig gravimetric separator were used on different soil fractions. A mineralogical model describing lead-bearing particles with and without iron oxide has been proposed. A significant part of the selected metals from each of the soil samples were removed by physical treatment. Linear regression analyses gave many relationships predicting the efficiency of the separation processes. The most useful variable to predict the magnetic process efficiency is the proportion of magnetic fraction removed. The density of fraction being removed was the most significant factor predicting the performance of the Wilfley table or the jig. The most significant variable predicting lead, copper, tin, and zinc removal was the initial metal concentration entering the process. Positive relationships between the results of the mineralogical study and the removal efficiency were found. These different relations confirm that the proposed scheme and the associated quantitative mineralogical study (identification of lead-bearing phase, carrying phase, and mean surface ratio of lead-bearing phase on total surface of lead-bearing particles) proved to be useful.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
American Public Health Association (APHA). ( 1995). Standard methods for examination of water and wastewater, 17th Ed., Washington, D.C.
2.
Davis, A., Drexler, J. W., Ruby, M. V., and Nicholson, A. ( 1993). “Mineralogy of mine waste in relation to lead bioavailability, Butte, Montana.” Envir. Sci. and Technol., 27, 1415–1425.
3.
Environnement Canada. ( 1992). Guide méthodologique de caractérisation des sédiments, Supply and Services Branch, Ottawa (in French).
4.
Hall, D., and Holbein, B. E. ( 1993). “Integrated treatment of heavy metal and organic contaminated industrial soils.” Proc., Soil Remediation Symp., 151–195.
5.
Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique-Géoressources (INRS), and Centre de Recherches Minérales (CRM). ( 1997). “Protocole d'évaluation de la traitabilité des sédiments, des sols et des boues à l'aide des technologies minéralurgiques.” Tech. Rep., Fiche technique d'Environnement Canada (in French).
6.
Lang, D. D., and Mourato, D. ( 1993). “Results of the Toronto harbour commissioners soil recycling demonstration project.”
7.
Marino, M. A., Brica, R. M., and Neale, C. N. ( 1997). “Heavy metal soil remediation: The effects of attrition scrubbing on a wet gravity concentration process.” Envir. Progress, 16(3), 208–214.
8.
Ministère de l'Environnement et Faune, Gouvernement du Québec (MEFQ). ( 1998). Politique de protection des sols et de réhabilitation des terrains contaminés, Annexe 2, Tableau 1 (in French).
9.
Murray, K., et al. ( 1997). “Distribution and mobility of lead in soils at an outdoor shooting range.” J. Soil Contamination, 6(1), 79–93.
10.
Nedwed, T., and Clifford, D. A. ( 1997). “A survey of lead battery recycling sites and soil remediation processes.” Waste Mgmt., 17(4), 257–269.
11.
Option Aménagement. ( 1992). “Caractérisation préliminaire de Pointe-Aux-Lièvres.” Rep. for the Ville de Québec.
12.
Perkins, D. ( 1998). Mineralogy, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
13.
Rikers, R. A., Rem, P., and Dalmijn, W. L. ( 1998a). “Improved method of prediction of heavy metal recoveries from soil using high magnetic process (HIMS).” Int. J. Mineral Process, 54, 165–182.
14.
Rikers, R. A., Rem, P., Dalmijn, W. L., and Holders, A. ( 1998b). “Characterization of heavy metals in soil by high gradient magnetic separator.” J. Soil Contamination, 7(2), 163–190.
15.
Rulkens, W. H., and Honders, A. ( 1996). “Clean-up of contaminated sites: Experiences in the Netherlands.” Water Sci. and Technol., 34(7-8), 293–301.
16.
Sigmastat statistical software users manual version 2.0 for Windows 9, NT and 3.1. (1995). Jandel Corp., San Rafael, Calif.
17.
Svoboda, J. ( 1987). Magnetic methods for the treatment of minerals, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.
18.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). ( 1994). “Assessment and remediation of contaminated sediments (ARCS program): Mineral processing pretreatment of contaminated sediments.” Rep. No. EPA 905-R94-022, Chicago.
19.
Van Benschoten, J. E., Matsumoto, M. R., and Young, W. H. (1997). “Evaluation and analysis of soil washing for seven lead-contaminated soils.”J. Envir. Engrg., ASCE, 123(3), 217–224.
20.
Villeneuve, J. P., Chartier, M., Mercier, G., and Roberge, G. ( 1998). “Mise au point d'un procédé de biolixiviation des métaux pour la décontamination des sols et des sédiments.” Scientific Rep. No. R509, Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique-Eau, Ste-Foy, Quebec, Canada (in French).
21.
Wagner, R. H. O., Stogran, S. W., and Plumpton, A. J. ( 1997). “Mineral processing technology for site remediation.” Tech. Document Distributed by Lakefield Research Ltd., Lakefield, Ont., Canada.
22.
Wills, B. A. ( 1992). Mineral processing technology, Pergamon, Tarrytown, N.Y.
23.
Wixon, B. G., and Davies, B. E. ( 1993). “Lead in soil, recommended guidelines.” Rep. Prepared for Society for Environmental Geochemistry and Health “Lead in Soil” Task Force, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
24.
Xintaras, C. ( 1992). “Analysis paper: Impact of lead contaminated soil on public health.” Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Ga.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Received: Feb 24, 2000
Published online: Apr 1, 2001
Published in print: Apr 2001
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.