Influence of groundwater composition on subsurface iron and arsenic removal

2012 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 173-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. H. Moed ◽  
D. van Halem ◽  
J. Q. J. C. Verberk ◽  
G. L. Amy ◽  
J. C. van Dijk

Subsurface arsenic and iron removal (SAR/SIR) is a novel technology to remove arsenic, iron and other groundwater components by using the subsoil. This research project investigated the influence of the groundwater composition on subsurface treatment. In anoxic sand column experiments, with synthetic groundwater and virgin sand, it was found that several dissolved substances in groundwater compete for adsorption sites with arsenic and iron. The presence of 0.01 mmol L−1 phosphate, 0.2 mmol L−1 silicate, and 1 mmol L−1 nitrate greatly reduced the efficiency of SAR, illustrating the vulnerability of this technology in diverse geochemical settings. SIR was not as sensitive to other inorganic groundwater compounds, though iron retardation was limited by 1.2 mmol L−1 calcium and 0.06 mmol L−1 manganese.

2005 ◽  
pp. 263-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Mosb√¶k ◽  
A Sharma ◽  
J Tjell
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 53 ◽  
pp. 161-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Debasish Kumar Kundu ◽  
Aarti Gupta ◽  
Arthur P.J. Mol ◽  
Mohammad Moshiur Rahman ◽  
Doris van Halem

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 193-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. H. Moed ◽  
D. van Halem ◽  
J. Q. J. C. Verberk ◽  
J. A. M. van Paassen ◽  
L. C. Rietveld

<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> Previous laboratory column experiments have given evidence of competitive effects between different groundwater constituents in the process of subsurface arsenic removal, a process in which arsenic is removed from groundwater by injecting water with oxygen into the subsurface. The presence of phosphate and other anions significantly limited arsenic removal. To investigate the influence of phosphate in natural groundwater, pumping stations in Loosdrecht (the Netherlands) and Subotica (Serbia) both with low phosphate concentrations (&amp;lt;0.1 mg l<sup>−1</sup>) and considerable arsenic concentrations (30 and 110 μg l<sup>−1</sup>) were chosen, to perform experiments identical to the previous laboratory work. Despite of the absence of phosphate, the subsurface arsenic removal process performed poorly in Subotica, with 50% arsenic breakthrough occurring after 2 to 4 column pore volumes of abstracted water. In Loosdrecht subsurface arsenic removal showed more promising results, 50% breakthrough after 6 to 7 pore volumes, while having a lower pH than Subotica and similar silicate concentrations. The water composition of both locations gives reason to suggest that natural organic matter has a limiting effect on subsurface arsenic removal as well. The presented results have shown the complexity of factors influencing subsurface arsenic removal, making it very challenging to select appropriate sites.</p>


2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. F. D. Lehimas ◽  
J. I. Chapman ◽  
F. P. Bourgine
Keyword(s):  

2004 ◽  
Vol 71 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 155-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chantal St-Pierre ◽  
Richard Martel ◽  
Uta Gabriel ◽  
René Lefebvre ◽  
Thomas Robert ◽  
...  

Desalination ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 265 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 60-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Md. Shafiquzzaman ◽  
Md. Shafiul Azam ◽  
Jun Nakajima ◽  
Quazi Hamidul Bari

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-243
Author(s):  
Yacouba Sanou ◽  
Raymond Kabore ◽  
Samuel Pare

This work was focused on laterite soil as adsorbent for the removal of arsenic and phosphate from groundwater using column experiments. Results revealed a decrease of arsenic removal efficiency from 100 to 79% with flow rate increasing. Maximum removal of 100% for arsenic and 85% for phosphates was obtained for pH values between 3.5 and 6. The increase of initial arsenic concentration and phosphate amount caused an increase of arsenic adsorption up to 24 µg/g while 58.5 µg/g for phosphate. NaOH solution could desorb 86.8% of arsenic and the reuse of regenerated laterite indicated its efficiency in same experimental conditions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document