Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol.14, No.6, 732-738, November, 2008
Development of electrokinetic-flushing technology for the remediation of contaminated soil around nuclear facilities
The effects of a flushing by a pump on an electrokinetic-flushing remediation of contaminated soil were estimated. The soils were sampled from the sites around nuclear facilities which were built on a high hydro-conductivity of sandstone. An electrokinetic-flushing equipment with a pump
was manufactured to estimate the effect of a flushing on an electrokinetic-flushing remediation. In order to select an optimal reagent suitable to the characteristics of a soil near nuclear facilities, 4 experiments were executed with 4 candidate reagents selected from 12 reagents and the results of the experiments are as follows. The removal efficiencies of cobalt and cesium from the contaminated soil with the acetic acid were the highest, which were 92.1% and 83.1%, respectively. The effluent solution volume generated from an electrokinetic remediation was very smaller and it was 5% below that from a soil washing. Next, the results from a comparison of an electrokinetic-flushing remediation and an electrokinetic remediation revealed that the removal efficiencies of Co2+ and Cs+ by an electrokinetic-flushing remediation for 5 days were increased by 25% and 35% when compared to those by the electrokinetic remediation, but the effect of a flushing by the electrokinetic-flushing equipment started to decrease after 5 days. The removal efficiencies of Co2+ and Cs+ by an electrokinetic-flushing remediation for 15 days were increased by 6.8% and 7.7% when compared to that by an electrokinetic remediation. Namely, the higher the hydro-conductivity of a soil was, the larger the effect of a flushing was on an electrokinetic-flushing remediation.
- Reddy K, Xu CY, Chinthamreddy S, J. Hazard. Mater., B84, 279 (2001)
- Virkutyte J, Sillanpaa M, Latostenmaa P, Sci. Total Environ., 21, 289 (2002)
- Pamukcu S, J.K. Wittle, Environ. Prog., 11, 241 (1992)
- Reddy K, Chinthamreddy S, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 77, 263 (2003)
- Braud F, Fourcade MC, Tellier S, Astruc M, Int. J. Environ. Anal. Chem., 68, 105 (1998)
- Kim SO, Moon SH, Kim KW, Water Air Soil Pollut., 125, 259 (2001)
- Page MM, Page CL, J. Environ. Eng., ASCE, 128, 208 (2002)
- Shin CH, Bae JS, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 13(7), 1091 (2007)
- Lee HS, Lee K, Kim SS, Ko SH, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 9(4), 360 (2003)
- Chaiyaraksa C, Sriwiriyanuphap N, Chemosphere, 546, 1129 (2004)
- Neale CN, Bricka RM, Chac AC, Environ. Prog., 16, 274 (1997)
- Rampley CG, Ogden KL, Environ. Sci. Technol., 32, 987 (1988)
- Sun B, Zhao FJ, Lombi E, McGrath SP, Environ. Pollut., 113, 111 (2001)
- Kim GN, Choi WK, Jung CH, Moon JK, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 13(3), 406 (2007)
- Yamamoto T, Eiad-ua A, Kim SI, Ohmori T, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 13(7), 1142 (2007)
- Chao JC, Hong A, Peters RW, in: Proceedings of the Conference on Hazardous Wastes Research, Snowbird, UT, USA, (1998), p. 142
- Barona A, Aranguiz I, Elias A, Environ. Pollut., 113, 79 (2001)
- Bassi R, Prasher SO, Simpson BK, Environ. Prog., 19, 275 (2000)
- Tampouris S, Papassiopi N, Paspaliaris I, J. Hazard. Mater., B84, 297 (2001)
- Abmaizar RJ, Smith EH, J. Hazard. Mater., B70, 71 (1999)
- Elliot HA, Shastri NL, Water Air Soil Pollut., 110, 335 (1999)
- Stumm W, Chemistry of the Solid.Water Interface, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1992, p. 165
- Nystrom GM, Investigations of Soil Solution During Enhanced Electrodialytic Soil Remediation, Report No. BYG-DTU R009, Denmark Technical University, 2001, p. 21
- Shiau RJ, Smith RL, Aveller B, Wood Sci. Technol., 34, 377 (2000)
- Yang Y, Ratte D, Smets BF, Pignatello JJ, Grasso D, Chemosphere, 43, 1013 (2001)
- Kaya A, Yukselen Y, Can. Geotech. J., 42, 1280 (2005)