4.7 Article

Quantitative evaluation of environmental risks of flotation tailings from hydrothermal sulfidation-flotation process

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 20, 期 9, 页码 6050-6058

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-013-1643-8

关键词

Hydrothermal sulfidation; Floatation tailings; Environmental risk; Heavy metal; Stabilization

资金

  1. China's National Funds for Distinguished Young Scientists [50925417]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2010AA065203]
  3. Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry [2010-609]
  4. Key Project of Science and Technology of Hunan Province [2012FJ1080]
  5. Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University [ncet-10-0840]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Floatation tailings (FT) are the main by-products of the hydrothermal sulfidation-flotation process. FT (FT1 and FT2) were obtained by treating two different neutralization sludges (NS) (NS1 and NS2). This paper quantitatively evaluated the environmental risks of heavy metals (Zn, Cd, Cu, Pb, and As) in FT versus NS. The total concentration and leaching rates (R (2)) of heavy metals in FT were much lower than those in NS, demonstrating that the hydrothermal sulfidation-flotation process was able to effectively suppress the mobility and leachability of heavy metals. The BCR-three sequence leaching procedure of FT confirmed that all metals were transformed into more stable forms (residue and oxidizable forms) than were found that in NS. The potential ecological risk index indicated that the overall risks caused by heavy metals decreased significantly from 6627.59 and 7229.67 (very serious risk) in NS1 and NS2, respectively, to 80.26 and 76.27 (low risk) in FT1 and FT2, respectively. According to the risk assessment code, none of the heavy metals in FT posed significant risk to the natural environment except Zn (with low risk). In general, the risk of heavy metals in FT had been well controlled.

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