4.7 Article

Efficacy of dredging engineering as a means to remove heavy metals from lake sediments

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 665, Issue -, Pages 181-190

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.057

Keywords

Sediment; Dredging engineering; Heavy metals; Passive sampling

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [41701568, 41621002, BK20171518, 41571465]
  3. CAS Interdisciplinary, Innovation Team
  4. Chinese Academy of Sciences [YJKYYQ20170016]
  5. One-Three-Five Strategic Planning of Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences [NIGLAS2017GH05]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Dredging is used worldwide to remove polluted sediments from water bodies. However, the dredging efficacy remains hard to identify. Here, we studied the efficacy of dredging engineering as a means to remove Cu, Cd, and Pb from polluted lake sediments, after six years of completion. Dissolved metals and DGT-labile metals were quantified in the non-dredged and post-dredged sediments by high-resolution dialysis (HR-Peeper) and diffusive gradients (DGT) in thin films techniques. April and July measurements showed that dredging was effectively remediate the polluted sediments. The dissolved Pb, Cd, and Cu contents decreased up to 30%, 44%, and 26%, and the DGT-labile contents decreased up to 51%, 27%, and 33% compared with the contents in the non-dredged zone. Dredging was thus proven efficient in decreasing the labile metal fractions, increasing the capacity of available solids to bind metals, and slowing the leaching of metals from available solids in the post-dredged sediments. In October and January, the dredging efficacy was counteracted by the decomposition of algae, which increased the dissolved and DGT-labile metal concentrations in the post-dredged zone. (c) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available