Geochemical Modeling of Trace Element Release from Biosolids

Abstract

Biosolids-borne trace elements may be released to the environment when biosolids are used as fertilizers in farm land. Trace element leachate concentrations from biosolids are known to be limited by both organic and inorganic sorbent surfaces; this experimental evidence has not been previously verified with geochemical modeling of sorption reactions. In this study, pH-dependent leaching experiments and sorption isotherm experiments were coupled with a multisurface geochemical modeling approach. Biosolids samples were obtained from Toledo and Chicago wastewater treatment plants; their sorbent surfaces were defined and modeled as a combination of organic matter (OM) and Fe-, Al-, and Mn-oxides. The multisurface geochemical modeling approach was partially successful in predicting the pH-dependent leachate concentrations of As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Mo, Ni, and Zn. Both modeled and experimental data indicated that As and Mo in biosolids were bound to Fe-oxides; Cd, Cr, and Cu were bound mainly to OM; and as pH increased the fractions of Cd and Cu bound to Fe-oxides in the biosolids matrix increased. Ni and Zn were distributed between OM and Fe-oxides, and the percentage of each fraction depended on the pH. This study showed that the multisurface geochemical model could be used to generate As (and to a lesser extent Cd) Freundlich isotherm parameters for biosolids. However, the composition and reactivity of solid and dissolved OM was identified as a source of uncertainty in the modeling results. Therefore, more detailed studies focusing on the reactivity of isolated biosolids OM fractions with regard to proton and metal binding are needed to improve the capability of geochemical models to predict the fate of biosolids-borne trace metals in the environment.

Recirculation of biomass ashes onto forest soils: ash composition, mineralogy and leaching properties

“…While the amounts of available (hydr)oxides may also be estimated via selective extractions (e.g. Apul et al, 2010;Dijkstra et al, 2006a), both approaches represent indirect estimations associated with some uncertainty. Here, estimations based on eluate concentrations at low pH were considered appropriate, while it is acknowledged that compared to dedicated selective extractions, the approach used herein may possibly cause an overestimation of reactive site concentrations, which may in turn overestimate the significance of adsorption in the geochemical model.…”