4.7 Article

Effects of particle size and acid addition on the remediation of chromite ore processing residue using ferrous sulfate

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 168, 期 1, 页码 121-128

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.02.012

关键词

Chromite ore processing residue (COPR); Ferrous sulfate; Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP); X-ray absorption near edge structure (XANES); X-ray powder diffraction (XRPD)

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [2008-56529] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A bench-scale treatability study was conducted to assess the effects of particle size and acid addition on the remediation of chromite ore processing residue (COPR) using ferrous sulfate. The remediation scheme entailed the chemical reduction of hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] and the mitigation of swell potential. Leaching tests and the EQ3/6 geochemical model were used to estimate the acid dosage required to destabilize Cr(VI)-bearing and swell-causing minerals. The model predicted greater acid dosage than that estimated from the batch leaching tests. This indicated that mass transfer limitation may be playing a significant role in impeding the dissolution of COPR minerals following acid addition and hence hindering the remediation of COPR. Cr(VI) concentrations determined by alkaline digestion for the treated samples were less than the current NJDEP standard. However, Cr(VI) concentrations measured by X-ray absorption near edge structure (XANES) were greater than those measured by alkaline digestion. Greater Cr(VI) percentages were reduced for acid pretreated and also for smaller particle size CON samples. Upon treatment, brownmillerite content was greatly reduced for the acid pretreated samples. Conversely, ettringite, a swell-causing mineral, was not observed in the treated COPR. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据