Evaluation of soil microbial toxicity of waste foundry sand for soil-related reuse

Abstract

The relationship between the chemical contaminants and soil microbial toxicity of waste foundry sand (WFS) was investigated. Five different types of WFS from typical ferrous, aluminum, and steel foundries in China were examined for total metals, leachable metals, and organic contaminants. The soil microbial toxicity of each WFS was evaluated by measuring the dehydrogenase activity (DHA) of a blended soil and WFS mixture and then comparing it to that of unblended soil. The results show that the five WFSs had very different compositions of metal and organic contaminants and thus exhibited very different levels of soil microbial inhibition when blended with soil. For a given WFS blended with soil in the range of 10 wt.%–50 wt.% WFS, the DHA decreased almost linearly with increased blending ratio. Furthermore, for a given blending ratio, the WFSs with higher concentrations of metal and organic contaminants exhibited greater microbial toxicity. Correlation analysis shows that the relationship between ecotoxicity and metal and organic contaminants of WFSs can be described by an empirical logarithmic linear model. This model may be used to control WFS blending ratios in soil-related applications based on chemical analysis results to prevent significant inhibition of soil microbial activity.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

waste foundry sand / toxicity / bioassay / soil microbial activity / waste reuse

References

[1] USEPA. EPA Office of Compliance Sector Notebook Project: Profile of the Metal Casting Industry. EPA/310-R-97–004. Wasington, DC: USEPA, 1998

[2] USEPA and USDT. Foundry Sand Facts for Civil Engineers. FHWA-IF-04–004. Wasington, DC: USEPA and USDT, 2004

[3] USEPA. Beneficial Reuse of Foundry Sand: A Review of State Practices and Regulations. Washington, DC: USEPA, 2002

[4] Owens G. CRC CARE Technical Report 7: Development of policies for the handling, disposal and/or beneficial reuse of used foundry sand-a literature review, 2008.

[5] Wang Y, Cannon F S, Salama M, Goudzwaard J, Furness J C. Characterization of hydrocarbon emissions from green sand foundry core binders by analytical pyrolysis. Environmental Science & Technology, 2007, 41(22): 7922−7927

[6] Wang Y, Huang H, Cannon F S, Voigt R C, Komarneni S, Furness J C. Evaluation of volatile hydrocarbon emission characteristics of carbonaceous additives in green sand foundries. Environmental Science & Technology, 2007, 41(8): 2957−2963

[7] Wang Y, Zhang Y, Su L, Li X, Duan L, Wang C, Huang T. Hazardous air pollutant formation from pyrolysis of typical Chinese casting materials. Environmental Science & Technology, 2011, 45(15): 6539−6544

[8] Wang Y, Cannon F S, Li X. Comparative analysis of hazardous air pollutant emissions of casting materials measured in analytical pyrolysis and conventional metal pouring emission tests. Environmental Science & Technology, 2011, 45(19): 8529−8535

[9] Dungan R S. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and phenolics in ferrous and non-ferrous waste foundry sands. Journal of Residuals Science & Technology, 2006, 3(4): 203−209

[10] Ji S, Wan L, Fan Z. The toxic compounds and leaching characteristics of spent foundry sands. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 2001, 132(3): 347−364

[11] Dungan R S, Kukier U, Lee B. Blending foundry sands with soil: effect on dehydrogenase activity. Science of the Total Environment, 2006, 357(1−3): 221−230

[12] Dungan R S, Dees N H. The characterization of total and leachable metals in foundry molding sands. Journal of Environmental Management, 2009, 90(1): 539−548

[13] USEPA. Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure. Method 1311. Washington, DC: USEPA, 1992

[14] USEPA. Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure. Method 1312. Washington, DC: USEPA, 1994

[15] Rodríguez H, Fraga R. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion. Biotechnology Advances, 1999, 17(4−5): 319−339

[16] van der Heijden M G A, Bardgett R D, van Straalen N M. The unseen majority: soil microbes as drivers of plant diversity and productivity in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecology Letters, 2008, 11(3): 296−310

[17] Bastian K C, Alleman J E. Microtox (TM) characterization of foundry sand residuals. Waste Management (New York, N.Y.), 1998, 18(4): 227−234

[18] USEPA.Acid Digestion of Sediments, Sludges, and Soils. Method 3050B. Washington, DC: USEPA, 1996

[19] USEPA. USEPA Contract Laboratory Program. Statement of Work for Inorganics Analysis, Multi-Media Multi-Concentration. Document ILMO 4.0. EPA/540/R95/121 PB95−963545.Washington, DC: USEPA, 1999

[20] Ma T, Teng Y, Christie P, Luo Y, Chen Y, Ye M, Huang Y. A new procedure combining GC-MS with accelerated solvent extraction for the analysis of phthalic acid esters in contaminated soils. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2013, 7(1): 31−42

[21] Popp P, Keil P, Moder M, Paschke A, Thuss U. Application of accelerated solvent extraction followed by gas chromatography, high-performance liquid chromatography and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry for the determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated pesticides and polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans in solid wastes. Journal of Chromatography. A, 1997, 774(1−2): 203−211

[22] Wei F, Chen J, Wu Y, Zheng C. Study on the soil background value in China. Environmental Sciences, 1991, 12(4): 12−19

[23] Ministry of Environmental Protection, General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine. GB5085. 3−2007. Identification Standards for Hazardous Wastes-Identification for Extraction Toxicity. Beijing: Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China, General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and uarantine of the People’s Republic of China, 2007 (in Chinese)

[24] Fahnline D, Regan R Sr. Leaching of metals from beneficially used foundry residuals into soils. In: Proceedings of the 50th Industrial Waste Conference, 1995, West Lafayette. Chelsea: Ann Arbor Press, 1996, 5: 339−347

[25] Winkler E, Bol’shakov A. Characterization of Foundry Sand Waste. MA: Chelsea Center for Recycling and Economic Development, University of Massachusetts at Lowell, USA, 2000

[26] Dungan R S. Headspace solid−phase microextraction (HS‐SPME) for the determination of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) in foundry molding sand. Analytical Letters, 2005, 38(14): 2393−2405

[27] Wang Y, Cannon F S, Salama M, Fonseca D A, Giese S. Characterization of pyrolysis products from a biodiesel phenolic urethane binder. Environmental Science & Technology, 2009, 43(5): 1559−1564

[28] Dungan R S, Reeves J B. Pyrolysis of carbonaceous foundry sand additives: seacoal and gilsonite. Thermochimica Acta, 2007, 460(1): 60−66

[29] Ministry of Environmental Protection, General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine. GB5085.6−2007. Identification Standards for Hazardous Wastes−Identification for Toxic Substance Content. Beijing: Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China, General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China, 2007 (in Chinese)

[30] Obbard J P. Measurement of dehydrogenase activity using 2-p-iodophenyl-3-p-nitrophenyl-5-phenyltetrazolium chloride (INT) in the presence of copper. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2001, 33(4): 328−330

[31] Shan Q, Yu Y, Yu J, Zhang J. Soil enzyme activities and their indication for fertility of urban forest soil. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering in China, 2008, 2(2): 218−223

[32] Coz A, Andrés A, IrabienÁ. Ecotoxicity assessment of stabilized/solidified foundry sludge. Environmental Science & Technology, 2004, 38(6): 1897−1900

[33] Heijerick D G, Janssen C R, Karlèn C, Odnevall Wallinder I, Leygraf C. Bioavailability of zinc in runoff water from roofing materials. Chemosphere, 2002, 47(10): 1073−1080

[34] Ren S, Frymier P D. Kinetics of the toxicity of metals to luminescent bacteria. Advances in Environmental Research, 2003, 7(2): 537−547

[35] Dearden J C, Cronin M T D, Dobbs A J. Quantitative structure-activity relationships as a tool to assess the comparative toxicity of organic chemicals. Chemosphere, 1995, 31(1): 2521−2528

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg