4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

A comparison of technologies for remediation of heavy metal contaminated soils

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOCHEMICAL EXPLORATION
Volume 182, Issue -, Pages 247-268

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.gexplo.2016.11.021

Keywords

Heavy metal(loid)s; Soil remediation; Remediation techniques; Comparison

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Soil contamination with persistent and potentially (eco) toxic heavy metal(loid) s is ubiquitous around the globe. Concentration of these heavymetal(loid) s in soil has increased drastically over the last three decades, thus posing risk to the environment and human health. Some technologies have long been in use to remediate the hazardous heavy metal(loid) s. Conventional remediation methods for heavy metal(loid) s are generally based on physical, chemical and biological approaches, whichmay be used in combinationwith one another to clean-up heavy metal( loid) contaminated soils to an acceptable and safe level. This review summarizes the soil contamination by heavy metal(loid) s at a global scale, accumulation of heavy metal(loid) s in vegetables to toxic levels and their regulatory guidelines in soil. In this review, we also elucidate and compare the pool of available technologies that are currently being applied for remediation of heavymetal(loid) contaminated soils, aswell as the economic aspect of soil remediation for different techniques. This review article includes an assessment of the contemporary status of technology deployment and recommendations for future remediation research. Finally, the molecular and genetic basis of heavy metal(loid) (hyper) accumulation and tolerance in microbes and plants is also discussed. It is proposed that for effective and economic remediation of soil, a better understanding of remediation procedures and the various options available at the different stages of remediation is highly necessary. (C) 2016 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available