• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Soil and Groundwater Environment Conference
• /
• 2005.04a
• /
• pp.13-16
• /
• 2005

Laboratory and field experiments were conducted to study the effectiveness of five adsorbents for the removal of arsenic. The adsorbents included activated alumina (AA), iron coated AA (ICAA), and granular ferric hydroxide (GFH), granular ferric oxide (GFO), and granular titanium dioxide (GTD). Laboratory experiments were conducted to investigate arsenic removal using challenge water prepared in accordance with NSF International Standards 53 (ANSl/NSF 53-2001). Field experiments were conducted using arsenic-contaminated groundwater In laboratory experiment, the treatment capacity decreased in the following order GTD > GFO > GFH. In contrast, the treatment capacity decreased in the following order GFO > GTD > GFH > ICAA > Ah in field experiments.

• Environmental Engineering Research
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.165-173
• /
• 2011

The equilibrium and kinetic adsorption of arsenic on six different adsorbents were investigated with one synthetic and four natural types (two surface and two ground) of water. The adsorbents tested included magnetic ion exchange resins (MIEX), hydrous ion oxide particles (HIOPs), granular ferric hydroxide (GFH), activated alumina (AA), sulfur modified iron (SMI), and iron oxide-coated microsand (IOC-M), which have different physicochemical properties (shape, charge, surface area, size, and metal content). The results showed that adsorption equilibriums were achieved within a contact period of 20 min. The optimal doses of adsorbents determined for a given equilibrium concentration of $C_{eq}=10\;{\mu}g/L$ were 500 mg/L for AA and GFH, 520-1,300 mg/L for MIEX, 1,200 mg/L for HIOPs, 2,500 mg/L for SMI, and 7,500 mg/L for IOC-M at a contact time of 60 min. At these optimal doses, the rate constants of the adsorbents were 3.9, 2.6, 2.5, 1.9, 1.8, and 1.6 1/hr for HIOPs, AA, GFH, MIEX, SMI, and IOC-M, respectively. The presence of silicate significantly reduced the arsenic removal efficiency of HIOPs, AA, and GFH, presumably due to the decrease in chemical binding affinity of arsenic in the presence of silicate. Additional experiments with natural types of water showed that, with the exception of IOC-M, the adsorbents had lower adsorption capacities in ground water than with surface and deionized water, in which the adsorption capacities decreased by approximately 60-95%.

• Economic and Environmental Geology
• /
• v.54 no.6
• /
• pp.689-698
• /
• 2021

Since the mine reclamation scheme was implemented from 2007 in Korea, various remediation programs have been decontaminated the pollution associated with mining and 254 mines were managed to reclamation from 2011 to 2015. However, as the total amount of contaminated mine drainage has been increased due to the discovery of potential hazards and contaminated zone, more efficient and economical treatment technology is required. Therefore, in this study, the adsorption properties of arsenic was evaluated according to the adsorbents which were derived from water treatment sludge(Alum based adsorbent, ABA-500) and granular ferric hydroxide(GFH), already commercialized. The alum sludge and GFH adsorbents consisted of aluminum, silica materials and amorphous iron hydroxide, respectively. The point of zero charge of ABA-500 and GFH were 5.27 and 6.72, respectively. The result of the analysis of BET revealed that the specific surface area of GFH(257 m²·g^-1) was larger than ABA-500(126~136 m²·g^-1) and all the adsorbents were mesoporous materials inferred from N₂ adsorption-desorption isotherm. The adsorption capacity of adsorbents was compared with the batch experiments that were performed at different reaction times, pH, temperature and initial concentrations of arsenic. As a result of kinetic study, it was confirmed that arsenic was adsorbed rapidly in the order of GFH, ABA-500(granule) and ABA-500(3mm). The adsorption kinetics were fitted to the pseudo-second-order kinetic model for all three adsorbents. The amount of adsorbed arsenic was increased with low pH and high temperature regardless of adsorbents. When the adsorbents reacted at different initial concentrations of arsenic in an hour, ABA-500(granule) and GFH could remove the arsenic below the standard of drinking water if the concentration was below 0.2 mg·g^-1 and 1 mg·g^-1, respectively. The results suggested that the ABA-500(granule), a low-cost adsorbent, had the potential to field application at low contaminated mine drainage.

• Korean Chemical Engineering Research
• /
• v.51 no.6
• /
• pp.745-754
• /
• 2013

This study evaluated the optimal soil washing conditions for toxic metals considering the removal efficiency of toxic metals from contaminated soils as well as from soil washing effluents. In the contaminated soils, As was the major contaminant and extracted by sodium hydroxide solution better than by sulfuric acid. However, in the case of the treatment of soil washing effluents, sodium hydroxide was less effective extractant because soil organic matter extracted by sodium hydroxide prevented the solid-liquid phase separation and toxic metal removal. In the treatment of soil washing effluents with sulfuric acid, toxic metals in the effluents were mostly precipitated at the pH above 6.5. In addition, granular ferric oxide (GFO) as an adsorbent enhanced the removal of As and Pb indicating that toxic metals in the washing effluents can be removed almost completely by the use of combined adsorption-neutralization process. This study suggests that soil washing techniques for toxic metals should be optimized based on the physical and chemical properties of the contaminated soils, the nature of chemical extractant, and the removal efficiency and effectiveness of toxic metals from the soils as well as soil washing effluents.