INTERFACIAL APPLICATIONS IN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING - CHAPTER 8 doc

To meet the federal and state guidelines for heavy metal discharge, companies commonly use methods to precipitate or chemically bind the metals before, dur-ing, or after discharge.. 128

Trang 1

Chemical Methods of Heavy

Metal Binding

MATTHEW MATLOCK and DAVID ATWOOD University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, U.S.A

Toxic heavy metals in air, soil, and water are problems that are constant and escalating threats to the environment in which we live There are a multitude of sources of heavy metal pollution, most of which the general population cannot avoid [1,2] In response to this continuing and growing threat, federal and state governments have instituted environmental regulations to protect the quality of surface water and groundwater from heavy metal pollutants [3]

To meet the federal and state guidelines for heavy metal discharge, companies commonly use methods to precipitate or chemically bind the metals before, dur-ing, or after discharge In order to be competitive economically, many of the commercially utilized reagents are not designed to target speciﬁc metals They are either simple to synthesize or easily obtained as byproducts of other chemical reactions

These readily available reagents offer minimal binding sites for heavy metals

It has been found, in fact, that their mode of action is simply to act as sources

of sulfide for the formation of metal sulfides This is not an acceptable process for metal removal and deactivation Metal sulfides are known to decompose and release heavy metals back into the environment over varying, but usually short, periods of time [4–6] Additionally, in forming the metal sulfides, some of the reagents produce toxic byproducts, such as carbon disulfide [4,7]

In an effort to provide an environmentally sound method for chemically re-moving heavy metals from the environment, new, speciﬁcally designed chelates for soft heavy metals have been reported These ligands are not only highly effec-tive for soft metal binding, but are also economical and soon to be produced on

a multiton scale

Trang 2

128 Matlock and Atwood

The present overview will summarize the various chemical methods that are currently being used to chemically bind heavy metals and precipitate them from aqueous sources Other technologies are available for heavy metal removal, such

as micelle-enhanced ﬁltration [8] and ion exchange [9] techniques, but these will not be covered here

One class of compounds that is commonly used for the precipitation of heavy metals is the thiocarbonates Thiocarbonates are presumed to bind heavy metals

how-ever, with copper, mercury, lead, and cadmium, taken from aqueous solutions, are metal sulfides (that is, CuS, HgS, PbS, and ZnS) [4,7,10] A byproduct of the metal sulfide precipitation with this reagent is carbon disulfide, a volatile and toxic liquid [4,7]

FIG 1 (a) Chemical structure of Thio-Red (a potassium or sodium thiocarbonate) (b) Predicted (and claimed) binding motif between Thio-Red and a divalent heavy metal (M)

Trang 3

Chemical Methods of Heavy Metal Binding 129

FIG 2 (a) Chemical structure of HMP-2000 (a sodium dimehtyldithiocarbamate) (b) Presumed binding motif between HMP-2000 and a divalent heavy metal (M)

A second class of chelating compounds is the thiocarbamates Typically, thiocar-bamates act as bidentate ligands One example of a commercially available thio-carbamate is HMP-2000 (Figs 2a and 2b) Several chemical distribution compa-nies, including Ulrich Chemical Inc., distribute this sodium thiocarbamate A serious downfall of this compound is its tendency to decompose into toxic sec-ondary products One major accident associated with the use of HMP-2000 oc-curred in December 1999, when the Guide Corporation (an auto parts manufactur-ing plant in Anderson, Indiana) accidentally released over 1.5 million gallons of contaminated wastewater laced with HMP-2000 into the city’s wastewater sys-tem Unable to control the chemical contaminate, the HMP-2000-laced wastewa-ter was discharged into local state wawastewa-ters [11] The compound reportedly decom-posed into toxic compounds (tetramethylthiuram and thiram), which ultimately resulted in the deaths of 117 tons of ﬁsh over a 50-mile stretch from Anderson

to Indianapolis, Indiana, as reported by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management [11]

A ﬁnal class of ligands used for heavy metal chelation is potentially multidenta, and bridge to form polymeric compounds One example of this type of compound

Trang 4

FIG 3 (a) Chemical structure of TMT-55 (2,4,6-trimercaptotiazine, trisodium salt non-ahydrate) (b) Binding motif between TMT-55 and a divalent heavy metal (M)

(Figs 3a and 3b) TMT is a byproduct of chemicals manufactured and distributed

by Degussa Corporation USA of Allendale and Ridgeﬁeld Park, New Jersey [12] Despite the widespread use of TMT, only limited information has been available

on how the product reacts with heavy metals in aqueous solutions and the chemis-try and stability of the resulting heavy metal–TMT precipitates Only recently has quantitative and systemic information become available on the chemistry of TMT with metals This included dissociation constants and the controlled for-mation of metal complexes [5,6,13–15] While this work demonstrates some limi-tations to the use of TMT as a remediation agent, one of the publications found

Trang 5

that the reagent could be used as a sacrificial sulfide source for the formation of transition metal sulfide solid-state materials

Manufacturers of commercial compounds supply dosage formulas that allow us-ers to quickly calculate the amount of compound needed to treat varying volumes

of contaminated water Often these dosage rates are inaccurate and generally lead

to an underdosing and consequent failure to meet the permitted discharge limits

(Eq 1):

where

serious problems that have been identiﬁed through the use of titration analyses followed by inductively coupled plasma spectroscopy (ICP-OES) or cold vapor atomic ﬂuorescence (CVAF) spectroscopy [4,7] In the experiments, titration ex-periments and computer modeling with MINTEQA2 indicate that the pH

solu-tions The pH decline associated with the precipitation of the divalent metals

[4,7]

Once the metals are precipitated, Reaction (2) is no longer dominant and an

sulﬁde reactions:

pH increase by shifting the equilibrium to the right in Reaction (4) According

Trang 6

to Reactions (2)–(4), then, the pH minimum should coincide with the optimal

on Metal Stock Solutions

In an effort to compare the effectiveness of the commercial metal-binding agents, the manufacturers’ dosage formulas were ignored and reactions were carried out using a stoichiometric molar ratio (and also a 10% increase in the stoichiometric molar dosage) between each commercial compound and solutions of mercury,

commercial compounds under pH conditions of 4.0 and 6.0 Results show that at

remove the cadmium, lead, copper, or iron from solutions of 50.00 ppm to meet the EPA discharge limits [3] Even with a 10.00% molar excess, no additional signiﬁcant removal was observed HMP-2000 displayed a higher afﬁnity for

were not achieved TMT displays similar results as compared with the

HMP-2000, with the highest removal seen for lead and copper Once again, it is seen that even at a 10% molar increase in dosage, TMT were unable to reduce lead

or cadmium concentrations to meet EPA standards [3] For the mercury analyses,

it was found that at stoichiometric and a 10% molar dose increase (in each com-mercially tested compound), mercury concentrations from the 50.00-ppm stock solutions were not reduced to meet the EPA limit of 0.2 ppm [3] Maximum

molar dose increase, with a final average value of 3.97 ppm At one hour the results of HMP-2000, at a 10% molar dose increase, indicated a reasonably high removal of mercury, with a final concentration of 0.69 ppm Within 20 hours at stoichiometric doses, TMT was able to reduce the 50.00-ppm mercury concentra-tions to an average final concentration of 9.82 ppm

For the metal concentrations that increased over time, the formation of more soluble metal–ligand complexes or the substantial decomposition of the metal– ligand complexes may explain the increase in metal concentration Additionally,

an increase in metal concentration may also contribute to the possible high leach-ing rates of the metal out of the ligand complexes (or, more accurately, leached out of the metal sulﬁdes produced by the ligand complexes) [5,6]

FOR HEAVY METAL CHELATION

Immediate concerns with the commercially available ligands focus on the weak potentially multidentate binding abilities for heavy metals Ligands with alkyl-thio

Trang 7

TABLE 1 ICP and CVAF Results of Thio-Redat Stoichiometric Doses and at 10% Molar Dosage Increases

EPA Initial metal Final metal discharge Chelating Time Solution concentration concentration limit (ppm) agent Metal Dose (hours) pH (ppm) (ppm) [3] Thio-Red Pb Stoichiometric 1 6.0 50.00 38.24 5.0

Pb Stoichiometric 6 6.0 50.00 44.83 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 1 5.5 50.00 33.67 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 6 5.5 50.00 41.55 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 20 5.5 50.00 47.99 5.0

Cu Stoichiometric 1 5.0 50.00 27.77

Cu 10% dose increase 1 4.5 50.00 27.08

Cu 10% dose increase 6 4.5 50.00 25.77

Cu 10% dose increase 20 4.5 50.00 26.79

Cd Stoichiometric 1 5.5 50.00 34.38 1.0

Cd 10% dose increase 1 5.0 50.00 27.09 1.0

Cd 10% dose increase 6 5.0 50.00 34.87 1.0

Cd 10% dose increase 20 5.0 50.00 41.50 1.0 Fe(II) Stoichiometric 1 6.0 50.00 35.15 2.0 Fe(II) Stoichiometric 6 6.0 50.00 34.38 2.0 Fe(II) Stoichiometric 20 6.0 50.00 32.98 2.0 Fe(II) 10% dose increase 1 5.0 50.00 34.79 2.0 Fe(II) 10% dose increase 6 5.0 50.00 34.56 2.0 Fe(II) 10% dose increase 20 5.0 50.00 33.56 2.0

Hg Stoichiometric 1 6.0 50.00 8.59 0.2

Hg 10% dose increase 1 6.0 50.00 6.72 0.2

Hg 10% dose increase 6 6.0 50.00 5.20 0.2

Hg 10% dose increase 20 6.0 50.00 3.97 0.2

TM

Trang 8

TABLE 2 ICP and CVAF Results of HMP-2000 at Stoichiometric Doses and at 10% Molar Dosage Increases

EPA Initial metal Final metal discharge Chelating Time Solution concentration concentration limit (ppm) agent Metal Dose (hours) pH (ppm) (ppm) [3] HMP-2000 Pb Stoichiometric 1 3.5 50.00 21.90 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 1 4.0 50.00 15.46 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 6 4.0 50.00 16.21 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 20 4.0 50.00 16.31 5.0

Cu 10% dose increase 1 4.0 50.00 7.08

Cu 10% dose increase 6 4.0 50.00 7.10

Cu 10% dose increase 20 4.0 50.00 7.19

Cd 10% dose increase 1 4.0 50.00 10.47 1.0

Cd 10% dose increase 6 4.0 50.00 10.54 1.0

Hg 10% dose increase 1 4.0 50.00 0.69 0.2

Hg 10% dose increase 6 4.0 50.00 1.24 0.2

Hg 10% dose increase 20 4.0 50.00 1.63 0.2

TM

Trang 9

TABLE 3 ICP and CVAF Results of TMT at Stoichiometric Doses and at 10% Molar Dosage Increases

EPA Initial metal Final metal discharge Chelating Time Solution concentration concentration limit (ppm) agent Metal Dose (hours) pH (ppm) (ppm) [3] TMT Pb Stoichiometric 1 5.0 50.00 18.21 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 1 5.5 50.00 16.06 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 6 5.5 50.00 16.58 5.0

Pb 10% dose increase 20 5.5 50.00 17.31 5.0

Cu 10% dose increase 1 5.5 50.00 16.19

Cu 10% dose increase 6 5.5 50.00 14.21

Cu 10% dose increase 20 5.5 50.00 12.59

Cd 10% dose increase 1 5.5 50.00 21.04 1.0

Cd 10% dose increase 6 5.5 50.00 21.04 1.0

Hg 10% dose increase 1 5.5 50.00 15.15 0.2

Hg 10% dose increase 6 5.5 50.00 16.90 0.2

Hg 10% dose increase 20 5.5 50.00 10.50 0.2

TM

Trang 10

chains that lack either chain length or sufﬁcient bonding sites may produce pre-cipitates that are unstable over time and under certain pH conditions For this reason our research has been focusing on the design and synthesis of ligands with extended binding sites that not only bind heavy metals, but also produce stable precipitates In order to create more effective and economical ligands, we have developed a series of new synthetic ligands which utilize biological heavy metal binding motifs As an example, research has led to the design and patenting

compound utilizes two extended alkyl chains at the 2,6-position to irreversibly bind metals Computer modeling suggests that the designed ligands have a sufﬁ-cient chain length for interactions between the metal and each terminal sulfur group (Fig 4)

Early results have shown that heavy metal concentrations from aqueous solu-tions can be reduced well below EPA discharge limits, and the resulting

precipi-FIG 4 Chemical structure of Hg-PyDET

Trang 11

tates have shown no solubility in common organic solvents or aqueous systems over a pH range of 0.0–14.0 [17–19] For example, the synthetic ligands have been able to reduce mercury concentrations from 50.00 ppm to 0.094 ppm and lead concentrations from 50.00 ppm to 0.050 ppm [17,18] The ligands have also been effective in immobilizing mercury from contaminated soils In recent tests with soils contaminated with 10,270 ppm of elemental mercury, the multidentate ligand was capable of immobilizing 99.6% of the mercury [19] The ligands has also proven to be highly effective in the gold heap leachate solutions by selec-tively reducing mercury levels from an initial concentration of 34.5 ppm to 0.014 ppm within 10 minutes and to 0.008 pm within 15 minutes [20] In addition to selectively removing mercury, the Hg-ligand compounds are highly stable even

in the adverse pH conditions used during the NaCN leaching process

There is a deﬁnite need for new and more effective reagents to meet growing environmental problems Many reagents on the market today either lack the nec-essary binding criteria or pose too many environmental risks to be effectively utilized For this reason, ligands utilizing multiple binding sites for heavy metals and mimicking biological systems for metal binding look to be a possible answer

to heavy metal remediation and wastewater treatment

REFERENCES

1 BJ Alloway, ed Heavy Metals in Soils 2nd ed Chapman and Hall, Glasgow, UK,

1995, Chaps 6, 8, 9, 11

2 KR Henke, V Ku¨hnel, DJ Stephan, RH Fraley, CM Robinson, DS Charlton, HM Gust, NS Bloom Gas Res Inst, Chicago, IL, 1993

3 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 40, 141, 261, 268.40, U.S Government Printing Ofﬁce, Superintendent of Documents, Washington, DC, 1994

4 KR Henke Wat Env Res 70(6):1178–1185, 1998

5 KR Henke, D Robertson, MK Krepps, DA Atwood Wat Res 34(11):3005–3013, 2000

6 MM Matlock, KR Henke, DA Atwood, JD Robertson Wat Res 35(15):3649–3655, 2001

7 KR Henkee Chemistry and Environmental Implications of Thio-Red and 2,4,6-Trimercaptotriazine Compounds PhD dissertation, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND, 1984

8 UR Dharmawardana, SD Christian, RW Taylor, JF Scamehorn Langmuir 8:414, 1992; M Tuncay, SD Christian, EE Tucker, RW Taylor, JF Scamehorn Langmuir 10:4688, 1994

9 AE Gash, AL Spain, LM Dysleski, CJ Flaschenriem, A Kalaveshi, PK Dorhout,

Định dạng
Số trang	12
Dung lượng	188,5 KB