实际污染土壤和模拟污染土壤垂直电动修复效果对比

马强; 吴启堂; 冯志刚; 唐振平; 谢焱石; 龙新宪; 陈亦铎; 许佳澄; 孙岩

doi:10.13205/j.hjgc.202101028

实际污染土壤和模拟污染土壤垂直电动修复效果对比

doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202101028

1. 南华大学稀有金属矿产开发与废物地质处置技术湖南省重点实验室, 湖南衡阳 421001;
2. 华南农业大学广东省高校土壤环境与废物资源农业利用重点实验室, 广州 510642;
3. 广东省生态环境技术研究所, 广州 510650

基金项目:

中国科技重大专项（2015BAD05B05；2017YFD0801002）；广东省科学技术厅研究项目（2018B030324003）；广东省自然科学基金（2018A030313696）；湖南省教育厅科学院研究项目（16C1385）。

详细信息

作者简介:
马强(1986-),男,博士,讲师,主要研究方向为重金属污染土壤修复。276269161@qq.com

通讯作者:
吴启堂(1962-),男,博士,教授,主要研究方向为土壤污染防治、城市污水污泥的处理与利用。wuqitang@scau.edu.cn

计量
- 文章访问数: 145
- HTML全文浏览量: 16
- PDF下载量: 7
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2019-11-28
- 网络出版日期: 2021-04-23

REMEDIATION PERFORMANCE OF REAL AND ARTIFICIAL SOIL CONTAMINATED BY HEAVY METALS WITH VERTICAL ELECTROKINETIC TECHNOLOGY

1. Hunan Key Laboratory of Rare Metal Minerals Exploitation and Geological Disposal of Wastes, University of South China, Hengyang 421001, China;
2. Key Laboratory of Soil Environment and Waste Reuse in Agricultural of Guangdong High Education Institutes, South China Agricultural University, Guanzhou 510642, China;
3. Guangdong Institute of Eco-environment Science & Technology, Guanzhou 510650, China

摘要

摘要: 为加深对电动修复技术理论的理解及提供实际污染土壤修复技术科学依据，以实际污染土壤和人为污染土壤为研究对象，采用垂直电动修复技术，着重对比了实际污染土壤和人为污染土壤的电流强度、pH和土壤中重金属迁移率。结果表明：1）电动修复过程中，实际污染土壤和人为污染土壤具有相似的电流峰形，但是人为污染土壤电流值约为实际污染土壤电流值的2倍，指示人为污染发生了更多的离子迁移。2）电动修复结束后，距离阳极越近的土壤pH越低，阴极附近区域的土壤pH显著升高，实际污染土壤和人为污染土壤pH变化规律相似，阴极pH的升高可起到深层固定重金属的效果。3）对于实际污染土壤，垂直电动修复技术对0~5 cm土层Cd、Pb、Cu和Zn造成一定的向下迁移，Cd和Zn在5~10 cm土层也有一定迁移，但该土层中Pb和Cu产生积累，其余土层变化不明显。4）对于人为污染土壤，Cd迁移明显且在最底层（35~40 cm）积累，Zn、Cu在表层（0~20 cm）有一定迁移，但是Pb只在最表层（0~5 cm）有一定迁移，其余土层变化不明显。5）对比实际污染土壤和人为污染土壤，实际污染土壤具有明显较低的重金属迁移率，人为污染土壤重金属由于老化时间较短（2个月），Cd和Zn具有较高的迁移率。因此，人为污染土壤的研究结果不一定适用于实际污染土壤。
- 人为污染土壤 /
- 实际污染土壤 /
- 重金属 /
- 垂直电动修复技术 /
- 迁移率
Abstract: In order to understand the theory of electrokinetic remediation (EKR) and provide scientific basis for the remediation of the contaminated sites, the vertical electrokinetic remediation technology was used to the real and artificial contaminated soil and compared the current intensity, pH and heavy metal translocation between the two types of soil. The main experimental results could be listed as follows:1) During the process of EKR, the real and artificial contaminated soil had similar current peak shape, but the current value of artificial soil was about twice of that of the real soil, indicating that the artificial soil contained more mobile ions than the real soil. 2) After the EKR, the real and artificial contaminated soil had similar pH changing trend:the soil pH near the anode was lowered, but the soil pH near the cathode was increased. The increase of the cathode pH could fix the heavy metals in deep layers of soil. 3) For the real soil, the vertical EKR removed Cd, Pb, Cu and Zn from 0~5 cm to deeper layers, and similarly from 5~10 cm soil layer for Cd and Zn, but Pb and Cu accumulated in the 5~10 cm soil layer, and the other soil layer did not change significantly. 4) For the artificial soil, Cd migrated obviously and accumulated at the deepest layer (35~40 cm). Zn and Cu were removed from the 0~20 cm layer, but Pb was only removed from the 0~5 cm layer. The other soil layers did not significantly change. 5) The real soil had a significantly lower heavy metals translocation rates than the artificial soil, probably due to the heavy metals in artificial soil had shorter aging time (for 2 months), and Cd and Zn had a high mobility. Therefore, the experimental results obtained from artificial soil might not be able to be applied to the actually contaminated soil.
- artificial contaminated soil /
- real contaminated soil /
- heavy metals /
- electrokinetic remediation /
- translocation rate

HTML全文

参考文献(27)

骆永明. 中国污染场地修复的研究进展、问题与展望[J]. 环境监测管理与技术, 2011, 23(3):1-6.

陈卫平, 杨阳, 谢天,等. 中国农田土壤重金属污染防治挑战与对策[J]. 土壤学报, 2018, 55(2):1-11.

陈卫平, 谢天, 李笑诺,等. 中国土壤污染防治技术体系建设思考[J]. 土壤学报, 2018, 55(3):1-14.

SONG B, ZENG G M, GONG J L, et al. Evaluation methods for assessing effectiveness of in situ remediation of soil and sediment contaminated with organic pollutants and heavy metals[J]. Environment International, 2017, 105:43-55.

LOFRANO G, LIBRALATO G, MINETTO D, et al. In situ remediation of contaminated marinesediment:an overview[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017, 24(6):5189-5206.

丁玲,吕文英,姚琨,等. 电动增强技术修复镉污染土壤及其修复机理[J]. 环境工程学报, 2017, 11(4):2554-2559.

YUAN L Z, LI H Y, XU X J, et al. Electrokinetic remediation of heavy metals contaminated kaolin by a CNT-covered polyethylene terephthalate yarn cathode[J]. Electrochimica Acta, 2016, 213:140-147.

李亚林,刘蕾,段万超,等. 电动修复技术对土壤中镉迁移的影响[J]. 环境工程学报, 2016, 10(10):6021-6027.

肖惠萍, 涂琴韵,吴龙华,等. 几种典型土壤对电动修复镉污染效果的影响[J]. 环境工程学报, 2017, 11(2):1205-1210.

张涛,邹华,王娅娜,等. 铅污染土壤电动修复增强技术的研究[J]. 环境工程学报, 2013, 7(9):3619-3623.

LOPEZ-VIZCAINO R, NAVARRO V, ALONSO J, et al. Geotechnical behavior of low-permeability soils in surfactant-enhanced electrokinetic remediation[J]. Journal of Environment Science and Health, 2016, 51(1):44-51.

FU R B, WEN D D, XIA X Q, et al. Electrokinetic remediation of chromium (Cr)-contaminated soil with citric acid (CA) and polyaspartic acid (PASP) as electrolytes[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, 316:601-608.

KRCMAR D, VARGA N, PRICA M, et al. Application of hexagonal two-dimensional electrokinetic system on the nickel contaminated sediment and modelling the transport behavior of nickel during electrokinetic treatment[J]. Separation and Purification Technology, 2018, 192:253-261.

ZULFIQAR W, IQBAL M A, BUTT M K. Pb²⁺ ions mobility perturbation by iron particles during electrokinetic remediation of contaminated soil[J]. Chemosphere, 2017, 169:257-261.

徐龙云, 张英杰, 董鹏,等. 阴极电解液对Cd污染红壤电动修复的影响[J]. 环境科学研究, 2017, 30(2):267-274.

冷伶俐,谢琼,李晗绪,等. 镉污染高岭土电动修复试验研究[J]. 环境科学与管理, 2015, 40(2):17-20.

熊钡, 邵友元, 易筱筠. 外加电场下镍污染土壤离子迁移过程及机理[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2015, 38(6):33-38.

袁立竹. 强化电动修复重金属复合污染土壤的研究[D]. 长春:中国科学院东北地理与农业生态研究所, 2017.

李实, 张翔宇, 潘利祥. 重金属污染土壤淋洗修复技术研究进展[J]. 化工技术与开发, 2014, 43(11):28-31

,53.

郭伟, 张焕祯, 王明超, 等. 淋洗法修复重金属污染土壤研究进展[J]. 环境工程, 2018, 36(增刊):775-778.

朱桂芬, 王莉, 田野, 等. 化学淋洗联合油葵植物修复土壤中Cd[J]. 河南师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 44(1):100-105.

李柱,周嘉文,吴龙华. 2017年土壤重金属污染与修复研究热点回眸[J].科技导报, 2018, 36(1):189-198.

方振东,汪家权, 盛晶梦. 不同电极电动修复铜镉复合污染土壤的研究[J]. 广东化工, 2014, 13(31):23-25.

温东东, 付融冰, 张卫, 等. 不锈钢电极对重金属污染土壤的强化电动修复及电极腐蚀结晶现象与机制[J]. 环境科学, 2017, 28(3):1209-1217.

徐磊, 刘国, 许文来. 低污染浓度重金属Cd污染土壤的电动修复研究[J]. 工业安全与环保, 2015, 41(3):4-7.

ZHAI X Q, LI Z W, HUANG B, et al. Remediation of multiple heavy metal-contaminated soil through the combination of soil washing and in situ immobilization[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2018, 635:92-99.

宋长青. 土壤学若干前言领域研究进展[M]. 北京:商务印书馆, 2016.

施引文献

资源附件(0)

访问统计