Application of electrochemical depassivation in PRB systems to recovery Fe⁰ reactivity

Abstract

Utilizing electrochemical depassivation to recovery Fe⁰ activity was effective, and minerals were cleaned layer by layer, with no ions secondary contamination, and no transformation from Cr(III) to Cr(VI).

Electrochemical depassivation process under various electrolysis conditions was revealed.

Electro-PRB configuration for caisson excavation construction technique was designed.

Permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) show remarkable Cr(VI) removal performance. However, the diminished removal rate because of mineral fouling over time is the bottleneck for application of PRBs. The present study demonstrated that electrochemical depassivation was effective for recovering the Fe⁰ reactivity, and minerals can be cleaned layer by layer with no secondary ion contamination and no transformation from Cr(III) to Cr(VI). The removal recovery rate increased with increasing electrolysis voltage before reaching the optimal electrolysis voltage, and then decreased as the electrolysis voltage further increased. The recovery effect at electrolysis voltages of 5, 10, and 15 V show the same trend as a function of electrolysis time, where recovery rate first increased and then decreased after reaching the optimal electrolysis time. The Cr(VI) removal rate significantly decreased with increasing electrolysis distance. Furthermore, Fe⁰ brush meshes electrode, Fe⁰ fillings, and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) meshes separators were combined to create an Electro-PRB configuration for the caisson excavation construction technique, which lays the foundation for establishment of promising Electro-PRB systems to treat Cr(VI)-contaminated groundwater.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

PRB / Cr(VI) / Fe / Passivation / Electrochemical depassivation

References

[1] Xu B, Xu Q, Liang C, Li L, Jiang L. Occurrence and health risk assessment of trace heavy metals via groundwater in Shizhuyuan Polymetallic Mine in Chenzhou City, China. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2015, 9(3): 482–493

[2] Wei X, Guo S, Wu B, Li F, Li G. Effects of reducing agent and approaching anodes on chromium removal in electrokinetic soil remediation. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2016, 10(2): 253–261

[3] Lo I M C, Lam C S C, Lai K C K. Competitive effects of trichloroethylene on Cr(VI) removal by zero-valent iron. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2005, 131(11): 1598–1606

[4] Manning B A, Kiser J R, Kwon H, Kanel S R. Spectroscopic investigation of Cr(III)- and Cr(VI)-treated nanoscale zerovalent iron. Environmental Science & Technology, 2007, 41(2): 586–592

[5] Qafoku N P, Dresel P E, Mckinley J P, Liu C, Heald S M, Ainsworth C C, Phillips J L, Fruchter J S. Pathways of aqueous Cr(VI) attenuation in a slightly alkaline oxic subsurface. Environmental Science & Technology, 2009, 43(4): 1071–1077

[6] Bourotte C, Bertolo R, Almodovar M, Hirata R. Natural occurrence of hexavalent chromium in a sedimentary aquifer in Urania, state of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias, 2009, 81(2): 227–242

[7] Henderson A D, Demond A H. Long-term performance of zero-valent iron permeable reactive barriers: a critical review. Environmental Science & Technology, 2007, 24(4): 401–423

[8] Blowes D W, Ptacek C J, Jambor J L. In-situ remediation of Cr(VI)-contaminated groundwater using permeable reactive walls: laboratory studies. Environmental Science & Technology, 1997, 31(12): 3348–3357

[9] Flury B, Eggenberger U, Maeder U. First results of operating and monitoring an innovative design of a permeable reactive barrier for the remediation of chromate contaminated groundwater. Applied Geochemistry, 2009, 24(4): 687–696

[10] Bang S, Korfiatis G P, Meng X. Removal of arsenic from water by zero-valent iron. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2005, 121(1–3): 61–67

[11] Kalinovich I, Rutter A, Poland J S, Cairns G, Rowe R K. Remediation of PCB contaminated soils in the Canadian Arctic: excavation and surface PRB technology. Science of the Total Environment, 2008, 407(1): 53–66

[12] Simon F G, Segebade C, Hedrich M. Behaviour of uranium in iron-bearing permeable reactive barriers: investigation with 237U as a radioindicator. Science of the Total Environment, 2003, 307(1–3): 231–238

[13] Mishra D, Farrell J. Understanding nitrate reactions with zerovalent iron using tafel analysis and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. Environmental Science & Technology, 2005, 39(2): 645–650

[14] Liu T, Tsang D C W, Lo I M C. Chromium(VI) reduction kinetics by zero-valent iron in moderately hard water with humic acid: iron dissolution and humic acid adsorption. Environmental Science & Technology, 2008, 42(6): 2092–2098

[15] Flury B, Frommer J, Eggenberger U, Mäder U, Nachtegaal M, Kretzschmar R. Assessment of long-term performance and chromate reduction mechanisms in a field scale permeable reactive barrier. Environmental Science & Technology, 2009, 43(17): 6786–6792

[16] Lai K C K, Lo I M C. Removal of chromium (VI) by acid-washed zero-valent iron under various groundwater geochemistry conditions. Environmental Science & Technology, 2008, 42(4): 1238–1244

[17] Lu X, Li M, Tang C, Feng C, Liu X. Electrochemical depassivation for recovering Fe⁰ reactivity by Cr(VI) removal with a permeable reactive barrier system. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2012, 213– 214(7): 355–360

[18] He W C, Shao H B, Chen Q Q, Wang J M, Mang J Q. Polarization characteristic of iron anode in concentrated NaOH solution. Acta Physico-Chimica Sinica, 2007, 23(10): 1525–1530

[19] Melitas N, Chuffe-Moscoso O, Farrell J. Kinetics of soluble chromium removal from contaminated water by zerovalent iron media: corrosion inhibition and passive oxide effects. Environmental Science & Technology, 2001, 35(19): 3948–3953

[20] Chen G H. Electrochemical technologies in wastewater treatment. Separation and Purification Technology, 2004, 38(1): 11–41

Funding

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2014 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg