Search

Chromium has become an important soil contaminant at many sites, and facilitating in situ reduction of toxic Cr(VI) to nontoxic Cr(III) is becoming an attractive remediation strategy. Acceleration of Cr(VI) reduction in soils by addition of organic carbon was tested in columns pretreated with solutions containing 1000 and 10 000 mg L(-1) Cr(VI) to evaluate potential in situ remediation of highly contaminated soils. Solutions containing 0,800, or 4000 mg L(-1) organic carbon in the form of tryptic soy broth or lactate were diffused into the Cr(VI)-contaminated soils. Changes in Cr oxidation state were monitored through periodic micro-XANES analyses of soil columns. Effective first-order reduction rate constants ranged from 1.4 x 10(-8) to 1.5 x 10(-7) s(-1), with higher values obtained for lower levels of initial Cr(VI) and higher levels of organic carbon. Comparisons with sterile soils showed that microbially dependent processes were largely responsible for Cr(VI) reduction, except in the soils initially exposed to 10 000 mg L(-1) Cr(VI) solutions that receive little (800 mg L(-1)) or no organic carbon. However, the microbial populations (< or = 2.1 x 10(5) g(-1)) in the viable soils are probably too low for direct enzymatic Cr(VI) reduction to be important. Thus, synergistic effects sustained in whole soil systems may have accounted for most of the observed reduction. These results show that acceleration of in situ Cr(VI) reduction with addition of organic carbon is possible in even heavily contaminated soils and suggest that microbially dependent reduction pathways can be dominant.

Biogeochemical transformations of redox-sensitive chemicals in soils can be strongly transport-controlled and localized. This was tested through experiments on chromium diffusion and reduction in soil aggregates that were exposed to chromate solutions. Reduction of soluble Cr(VI) to insoluble Cr(III) occurred only within the surface layer of aggregates with higher available organic carbon and higher microbial respiration. Sharply terminated Cr diffusion fronts develop when the reduction rate increases rapidly with depth. The final state of such aggregates consists of a Cr-contaminated exterior, and an uncontaminated core, each having different microbial community compositions and activity. Microbial activity was significantly higher in the more reducing soils, while total microbial biomass was similar in all of the soils. The small fraction of Cr(VI) remaining unreduced resides along external surfaces of aggregates, leaving it potentially available to future transport down the soil profile. Using the Thiele modulus, Cr(VI) reduction in soil aggregates is shown to be diffusion rate- and reaction rate-limited in anaerobic and aerobic aggregates, respectively. Thus, spatially resolved chemical and microbiological measurements are necessary within anaerobic soil aggregates to characterize and predict the fate of Cr contamination. Typical methods of soil sampling and analyses that average over redox gradients within aggregates can erase important biogeochemical spatial relations necessary for understanding these environments.

Uranium(VI) sorption onto a soil collected at the Melton Branch Watershed (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TN) is strongly influenced by the pH of the soil solution and, to a lesser extent, by the presence of calcium, suggesting specific chemical interactions between U(VI) and the soil matrix. Batch experiments designed to evaluate factors controlling desorption indicate that two anionic surfactants, AOK and T77, at concentrations ranging from 60 to 200 mM, are most suitable for U(VI) removal from acidic soils such as the Oak Ridge sediment. These surfactants are very efficient solubilizing agents at low uranium concentrations: ca. 100% U(VI) removal for [U(VI)] o,sorbed = 10 -6 mol kg -1 . At greater uranium concentrations (e.g., [U(VI)] o,serbed = ca. 10 -5 mol kg -1 ), the desorption efficiency of the surfactant solutions increases with an increase in surfactant concentration and reaches a plateau of 75 to 80% of the U(VI) initially sorbed. The most probable mechanisms responsible for U(VI) desorption include cation exchange in the electric double layer surrounding the micelles and, to a lesser extent, dissolution of the soil matrix. Limitations associated with the surfactant treatment include loss of surfactants onto the soil (sorption) and greater affinity between U(VI) and the soil matrix at large soil to liquid ratios. Parallel experiments with H 2 SO 4 and carbonate-bicarbonate (CB) solutions indicate that these more conventional methods suffer from strong matrix dissolution with the acid and reduced desorption efficiency with CB due to the buffering capacity of the acidic soil.