Evaluation of Strategies to Minimize Ecotoxic Side-effects of Sorbent-based Sediment Remediation

Overview

Journal J Chem Technol Biotechnol

Specialty Biotechnology

Date 2017 Aug 8

PMID 28781403

Citations 3

Authors

Zhantao Han

Sebastian Abel

Jarkko Akkanen

David Werner

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: In situ sorbent amendment for persistent organic pollutant sequestration in sediment has over the past 15 years steadily progressed from bench-scale trials to full-scale remediation applications. Hindering a wider technology uptake are, however, concerns about ecotoxic side-effects of the most commonly used sorbent, activated carbon, on sensitive, sediment dwelling organisms like Lumbriculus variegatus. Using River Tyne sediment polluted with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and L. variegatus as a case study, sorbent alternatives and magnetic sorbent-recovery were investigated as potential engineering strategies to mitigate such ecotoxic side-effects. The potential benefits of contacting the treated sediment with fresh River Tyne water, as would naturally occur over time in the intended applications, were studied.

Results: Magnetic biochar was identified as an effective PAH sorbent with less ecotoxic side-effects than magnetic activated carbon. After 85.1-100% magnetic recovery of this biochar, no ecotoxic side-effects on L. variegatus were measurable in the treated sediment. Results show that ecotoxic effects of magnetic activated carbon can be alleviated through sorbent recovery. In contrast, contacting treated sediment repeatedly with River Tyne water had no measurable benefits.

Conclusions: Magnetic biochar is a promising sorbent material for the remediation of PAH polluted sediment. © 2017 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

Citing Articles

Passive Sampling-Based versus Conventional-Based Metrics for Evaluating Remediation Efficacy at Contaminated Sediment Sites: A Review.

Grundy J, Lambert M, Burgess R Environ Sci Technol. 2023; 57(28):10151-10172.

PMID: 37364241 PMC: 10404352. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.3c00232.

Sorption, separation and recycling of ammonium in agricultural soils: A viable application for magnetic biochar?.

Gillingham M, Gomes R, Ferrari R, West H Sci Total Environ. 2021; 812:151440.

PMID: 34742971 PMC: 8811483. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151440.

A Combined Field and Laboratory Study on Activated Carbon-Based Thin Layer Capping in a PCB-Contaminated Boreal Lake.

Abel S, Akkanen J Environ Sci Technol. 2018; 52(8):4702-4710.

PMID: 29606006 PMC: 6150667. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b05114.

References

Kupryianchyk D, Reichman E, Rakowska M, Peeters E, Grotenhuis J, Koelmans A . Ecotoxicological effects of activated carbon amendments on macroinvertebrates in nonpolluted and polluted sediments. Environ Sci Technol. 2011; 45(19):8567-74. DOI: 10.1021/es2014538. View

Lin D, Cho Y, Werner D, Luthy R . Bioturbation delays attenuation of DDT by clean sediment cap but promotes sequestration by thin-layered activated carbon. Environ Sci Technol. 2013; 48(2):1175-83. DOI: 10.1021/es404108h. View

Han Z, Sani B, Akkanen J, Abel S, Nybom I, Karapanagioti H . A critical evaluation of magnetic activated carbon's potential for the remediation of sediment impacted by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. J Hazard Mater. 2015; 286:41-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.12.030. View

Choi Y, Cho Y, Werner D, Luthy R . In situ sequestration of hydrophobic organic contaminants in sediments under stagnant contact with activated carbon. 2. Mass transfer modeling. Environ Sci Technol. 2014; 48(3):1843-50. DOI: 10.1021/es404209v. View

Jonker M, Suijkerbuijk M, Schmitt H, Sinnige T . Ecotoxicological effects of activated carbon addition to sediments. Environ Sci Technol. 2009; 43(15):5959-66. DOI: 10.1021/es900541p. View

Cornelissen G, Amstaetter K, Hauge A, Schaanning M, Beylich B, Gunnarsson J . Large-scale field study on thin-layer capping of marine PCDD/F-contaminated sediments in Grenlandfjords, Norway: physicochemical effects. Environ Sci Technol. 2012; 46(21):12030-7. DOI: 10.1021/es302431u. View

Beckingham B, Ghosh U . Field-scale reduction of PCB bioavailability with activated carbon amendment to river sediments. Environ Sci Technol. 2011; 45(24):10567-74. DOI: 10.1021/es202218p. View

Zimmerman J, Werner D, Ghosh U, Millward R, Bridges T, Luthy R . Effects of dose and particle size on activated carbon treatment to sequester polychlorinated biphenyls and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in marine sediments. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2005; 24(7):1594-601. DOI: 10.1897/04-368r.1. View

Beckingham B, Buys D, Vandewalker H, Ghosh U . Observations of limited secondary effects to benthic invertebrates and macrophytes with activated carbon amendment in river sediments. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2013; 32(7):1504-15. DOI: 10.1002/etc.2231. View

10.

Han Z, Sani B, Mrozik W, Obst M, Beckingham B, Karapanagioti H . Magnetite impregnation effects on the sorbent properties of activated carbons and biochars. Water Res. 2015; 70:394-403. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.12.016. View

11.

Janssen E, Croteau M, Luoma S, Luthy R . Measurement and modeling of polychlorinated biphenyl bioaccumulation from sediment for the marine polychaete Neanthes arenaceodentata and response to sorbent amendment. Environ Sci Technol. 2010; 44(8):2857-63. DOI: 10.1021/es901632e. View

12.

Cornelissen G, Elmquist Krusa M, Breedveld G, Eek E, Oen A, Arp H . Remediation of contaminated marine sediment using thin-layer capping with activated carbon--a field experiment in Trondheim harbor, Norway. Environ Sci Technol. 2011; 45(14):6110-6. DOI: 10.1021/es2011397. View

13.

Janssen E, Beckingham B . Biological responses to activated carbon amendments in sediment remediation. Environ Sci Technol. 2013; 47(14):7595-607. DOI: 10.1021/es401142e. View

14.

Hale S, Martin T, Goss K, Arp H, Werner D . Partitioning of organochlorine pesticides from water to polyethylene passive samplers. Environ Pollut. 2010; 158(7):2511-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2010.03.010. View

15.

Janssen E, Choi Y, Luthy R . Assessment of nontoxic, secondary effects of sorbent amendment to sediments on the deposit-feeding organism Neanthes arenaceodentata. Environ Sci Technol. 2012; 46(7):4134-41. DOI: 10.1021/es204066g. View

16.

Hale S, Werner D . Modeling the mass transfer of hydrophobic organic pollutants in briefly and continuously mixed sediment after amendment with activated carbon. Environ Sci Technol. 2010; 44(9):3381-7. DOI: 10.1021/es903582n. View

17.

Sparrevik M, Saloranta T, Cornelissen G, Eek E, Fet A, Breedveld G . Use of life cycle assessments to evaluate the environmental footprint of contaminated sediment remediation. Environ Sci Technol. 2011; 45(10):4235-41. DOI: 10.1021/es103925u. View

18.

Nybom I, Waissi-Leinonen G, Maenpaa K, Leppanen M, Kukkonen J, Werner D . Effects of activated carbon ageing in three PCB contaminated sediments: Sorption efficiency and secondary effects on Lumbriculus variegatus. Water Res. 2015; 85:413-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2015.08.044. View

19.

Millward R, Bridges T, Ghosh U, Zimmerman J, Luthy R . Addition of activated carbon to sediments to reduce PCB bioaccumulation by a polychaete (Neanthes arenaceodentata) and an amphipod (Leptocheirus plumulosus). Environ Sci Technol. 2005; 39(8):2880-7. DOI: 10.1021/es048768x. View

20.

Nybom I, Werner D, Leppanen M, Siavalas G, Christanis K, Karapanagioti H . Responses of Lumbriculus variegatus to activated carbon amendments in uncontaminated sediments. Environ Sci Technol. 2012; 46(23):12895-903. DOI: 10.1021/es303430j. View