4.7 Article

Characterization of acid tars

Journal

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Volume 175, Issue 1-3, Pages 382-392

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.10.015

Keywords

Acid tars; Leaching; PAH; Aliphatic hydrocarbons; Heavy metals; Analytical techniques

Funding

  1. UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
  2. Scottish Power for the Dorothy Hodgkin's Postgraduate Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Acid tars from the processing of petroleum and petrochemicals using sulfuric acid were characterized by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS), inductively coupled plasma/optical emission spectrometry (ICP/OES), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometry, and scanning electron microscopy/energy dispersive X-ray (SEM/EDX) micro-analysis. Leaching of contaminants from the acid tars in 48 h batch tests with distilled water at a liquid-to-solid ratio 10: 1 was also studied. GC/MS results show that the samples contained aliphatic hydrocarbons, cyclic hydrocarbons, up to 12 of the 16 USEPA priority polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and numerous other organic groups. including organic acids (sulfonic acids, carboxylic acids and aromatic acids), phenyl, nitrile, amide, furans, thiophenes, pyrroles. and phthalates, many of which are toxic. Metals analysis shows that Pb was present in significant concentration. DSC results show different transition peaks in the studied samples, demonstrating their complexity and variability. FTIR analysis further confirmed the presence of the organic groups detected by GC/MS. The SEM/EDX micro-analysis results provided insight on the surface characteristics of the samples and show that contaminants distribution was heterogeneous. The results provide useful data on the composition, complexity, and variability of acid tars; information which hitherto have been scarce in public domain. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available