DOI : 10.17577/IJERTCONV7IS02003
- Open Access
- Total Downloads : 22
- Authors : N. Pavithra Bai, Dr. R. Viji
- Paper ID : IJERTCONV7IS02003
- Volume & Issue : ICONEEEA – 2k19 (Volume 7 – Issue 02 )
- Published (First Online): 13-04-2019
- ISSN (Online) : 2278-0181
- Publisher Name : IJERT
- License:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Environmental Impact Assessment of Tire Industry Effluent on Water & Soil Quality in Perambalur District
N. Pavithra Bai1*, Dr. R. Viji2
1
Student, 2Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,
University College of Engineering (BIT Campus), Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu, India.
Abstract:- Environmental Impact Assessment is an assessment of the possible impact positive or negative that a proposed project may have on the natural environment. Large quantities of those industrial particles are dispersed into the surroundings due to tire wear. Waste water effluents from the tire enterprise are considered the important resources, which pollute the surroundings. Innovative approaches for treating business wastewater containing heavy metals. Frequently contain technology for discount of toxicity with the intention to meet technology-based remedy requirements. To explore most adsorption efficiency in the direction of Removal of normally occurring heavy metals from waste water with the aid of using numerous adsorbents.
-
INTRODUCTION
Uncontrolled burning of waste tires poses a critical public health and an environmental change. Since a large range of decomposition products may be given off from the out of control, open waste tire fires, its impact on soil, water and air is a major challenge.
Heavy metals are metallic, clearly going on compounds which have a totally excessive density as compared to other metals as minimum five instances the density of the water. To small doses could have severe effects they enter our bodies through food, drinking water and air.
Adsorption is a surface phenomenon, while absorption involves the agricultural residues can be used as adsorbent material in elimination of heavy metals as they're less high- priced, require little processing, without problems available and own right adsorption potential.
-
OBJECTIVES
Challenge is to deal with the water and soil from the tire industry surrounding region at Perambalur, Tamilnadu.
-
To collect the polluted water and soil
-
To characterize the physiochemical parameters
-
To put together the standard values for heavy metal evaluation
-
To use the agriculture waste for adsorption purpose
-
Adsorption limit the concentration of the samples
-
-
METHODOLOGY
-
Selection of industry
-
Collection of soil and water
-
Characterization of samples
-
Assess the impacts of the industry
-
Using Adsorption to remediate the impacts
-
Result and discussion
-
-
RESULT & DISCUSSION
The sample preparation and preliminary experiment used to study the spectrum of Physiochemical and heavy metal by Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy. The data were obtained, further data is used for analysis. Each use may have its own quality requirement. The physical and chemical parameters such as pH, BOD, COD, cadmium, chromium, cupper, manganese, iron, zinc, nickel were analyzed and their results are discussed below.
Tab 1: Physiochemical parameters for soil & water.
Parameters
Soil
Water
pH
7.58.3
7.68.8
BOD
9.6510.53
9.4212.6
COD
17.6219.33
18.719.74
Cd
0.390.78
1.942.89
Zn
2.193.98
5.066.18
Mn
0.190.36
0.230.3
Fe
0.360.48
0.310.48
Cu
0.560.66
0.270.81
Ni
0.120.65
0.230.49
Pb
0.110.19
0.120.21
-
PARAMETERS DISCUSSION
9
8.5
8
7.5
Soil
Water
9
8.5
8
7.5
Soil
Water
7
6.5
7
6.5
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Fig 1: pH levels of the samples
The pH of soil is one of the most important physicochemical parameter. It affects mineral nutrient soil quality and much microorganism activity. The pH was observed in the ranges from 7.5 to 8.9. The water samples are more slightly alkaline and soil samples are medium alkaline.
8
6
4
2
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Soil Water
25
20
25
20
Soil BOD
Soil BOD
Fig 4: Zn concentration
15
10
15
10
Water
BOD
Soil COD
Water
BOD
Soil COD
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Above graph shows the concentrations of Zinc in the samples were water has highly concentrated by this heavy metal.
5
0
Water
COD
5
0
Water
COD
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Fig 2:BOD&COD ranges of the samples
Both BOD and COD are key indicators of the environmental health of a surface water supply also commonly used in waste water treatment.
3.5
3
2.5
2 Soil
Soil
Water
Soil
Water
0
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Fig 5: Mn concentration
According to this above picture explains the details of the Manganese in the tested samples were water has the highly polluted
by industry effluent.
1.5
1
0.5
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Water
0.6
0.4
0.2
Soil Water
Fig 3: Cd concentration on polluted sample
This graph detailed the concentration of Cadmium is checked out by AAS apparatus. The both results were analyzed and the water is highly polluted by Cd heavy metal.
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Fig 6: Fe concentration
The above graph shows that the concentration of Fe were the soil has high concentration.
1
0.8
Lead, Pb, is a metal with atomic number 82 and molar mass 207.2 with its ions exist in Pb2+. The above figure shows that the concentration of Pb occurred in the samples were water has high concentration Pb
compare to soil samples.
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Soil Water
-
Adsorption process on minimizing heavy metals
The adsorption of the heavy metal ions by low cost adsorbents was evaluated under different conditions such as pH, heavy metal
concentration and adsorbent dose through
Fig 7: Cu concentration on polluted sample
The concentration of water is highly enrise by the Cu in the collected samples.
Kinetic and Isotherm studies. The optimum removal condition was identified for Cd, Pb and Zn and their adsorbents are Saw dust and Rice husk.
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Fig 8: Ni concentration
Nickel, Ni is a transition element with atomic number 28 and molar mass 58.69 with four oxidation state +1, +2, +3 and
+4.The above graph shows that the sample contamination of Ni.
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Fig 9: Pb concentration on polluted sample
Tab 2: Removal efficiency for different absorbent doage by using adsorbent
Heavy metal
Adsorbent dose
In heavy metals mg/l
Rice
husk
Saw dust
Outlet
Removal ratio %
Outlet
Removal ratio %
Pb
20
0.21
0.19
22.06
0.203
20.35
30
0.21
0.173
34.18
0.178
37.12
40
0.21
0.151
48.05
0.15
49.21
50
0.21
0.118
79.22
0.126
70.79
Cd
20
2.89
2.72
14.72
2.65
17.58
30
2.89
2.53
29.19
2.47
33.81
40
2.89
2.37
35.98
2.26
49.32
50
2.89
2.01
58.04
1.82
60.95
Zn
20
6.18
6.03
21.36
5.73
30.65
30
6.18
5.95
30.43
5.52
43.13
40
6.18
5.74
52.83
5.38
58.74
50
6.18
5.21
84.13
5.28
75.49
-
Pb removal of various absorbent doses
The amount of adsorbent on the removal of Pb ions by adsorbent were dosed 20, 30, 40,50mg/l. While the Pb removal using saw dust ranged from 20.35% to 70.79%. Pb removal with rice husk rising from 22.06% to 79.22% with the increase of the amount of absorbent concentration.
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rice husk
Saw dust
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rice husk
Saw dust
Fig 10: Comparison b/w rice husk and saw dust removal efficiency for Pb concentration.
-
Cd removal of different absorbents The effort of the amount of adsorbent on the removal of Cd ions Rice husk and Saw dust is same adsorbent doses. Their minimizing concentration by saw dust increased with 17.58% – 60.95% & Rice husk 14.72%-
58.04% with the increased amount of absorbent concentrated.
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Hice husk
Saw dust
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Hice husk
Saw dust
Fig 11: Cd removal efficiency by using Rice husk and Saw dust.
4.2.3Zn removal
The effort of adsorbent on the Zn removal of concentration can be reduced by rice husk and saw dust with different adsorbent doses like 20, 30, 40, 50mg/l. Zn removal by using Saw dust 30.65% – 75.49%, Rice husk varied from 21.36%- 84.13%.
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rice husk
Saw dust
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rice husk
Saw dust
Fig 12:Comparison between rice husk and fly ash removal efficiency for Zn.
-
-
CONCLUSION
Many investigations have attempted out diverse adsorbents to remove heavy toxic metals from waste water successfully. The mixture of a physicochemical technique becomes determined to be very effective in getting rid of the pollution present in the tire industry. Thus its miles necessary to finish the treatment manner with a technique inclusive of AAS, to attain the Industrial effluent requirements, complementary procedures such as agriculture waste can be used. Also this results are indicates the agriculture adssssorbents for the removal of Cd, Cr, Cu from wastewater. It could be helpful for anybody to discover the satisfactory and the greenest adsorbent for the removal of a specific heavy metal present inside the effluent.
-
REFERENCE
-
Allott RW, Hewitt CN, Kelly MR (1990) The environmental half-lives and mean residence times of contaminants in dust for an urban environment: Barrow-in- Furness. Science of the Total Environment; 93:40310.
-
IARC, (2010) IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, in Carbon black, Titanium dioxide and Talc, International Agency for Research on cancer (IARC), World health organization (WHO),Lyon, France, Vol 93.
-
Charlesworth SM, Lees JA. (1999) Particulate-associated heavy metals in the urban environment: their transport from source to deposit, Coventry,UK. Chemosphere 1999a; 39(5):833 48.
-
Charlesworth SM, Lees JA. (1999) The distribution of heavy metals in
deposited urban dusts and sediments, Coventry, England. Environmental Geochemistry and Health 1999b;21:97 115.
-
Chon H-T, Kim K-W, Kim J-
Y. (1995) Metal contamination of soils and dusts in Seoul metropolitan city, Korea. Environmental Geochemistry and Health;17:13946.
-
Arthanareeswaran, G., Thanikaivelan, P., Jaya, N., Mohana, D.,Raajenthiren, M., 2007. Removal of chromium from aqueous solution using cellulose acetate and sulfonated poly(ether ether ketone) blend ultrafiltration membranes. J. Hazard. Mater. B139, 4449.
-
Aziz, H.A., Adlan, M.N., Ariffin, K.S., (2008). Heavy metals (Cd, Pb, Zn, Ni, Cu and Cr(III)) removal from water in Malaysia: post treatment by high quality limestone. Bioresour. Technol. 99, 1578 1583.
-
Babel, S., Kurniawan, T.A., (2003). Low-cost adsorbents for heavy metals uptake from contaminated water: a review. J. Hazard.Mater. B97, 219243.
-
Febrianto J, Kosasih AH, Sunarso J, Ju YH, Indraswati N, Jsmadji S.(2009) Equilibrium and kinetic studies in adsorption of heavy metals using biosorbent: A summary of recent studies.Journal of Hazardous Materials; 162(2-3):616 45.Crossref PMid:18656309.
-
Barakat MA.(2011) New trends in removing heavy metals from industrial wastewater. Arabian Journal of Chemistry ;4(4):36177. Crossref.
-
Momodu MA, Anyakora CA. Heavy Metal Contaminants of ground water: The Surulere Case study. Research Journal Environmental and Earth Sciences. 2010; 2(1):39-43.
-
Babel S, Kurniawan TA, (2003)Various treatment technologies to remove arsenic and mercury from contaminated groundwater: an overview. In proceedings of the First International Symposium on Southeast Asian Water Environment,Bangkok, Thailand;. page. 43340.
-
Rahmani K, Mahvi AH, Vaezi F, Mesdaghinia AR, Nabizade R.(2009) Bioremoval of lead by use of waste activated sludge. International Journal of Environmental Research;3(3):4716.
-
Shah BA, Shah AV, Singh RR(2009) Sorption isotherms and kinetics of
chromium uptake from wastewater using natural sorbent material. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology; 6(1):7790.
-
Kwon JS, Yun ST, Lee JH, Kim SO, Jo HY(2010) Removal of divalent heavy metals (Cd, Cu, Pb, Zn) and arsenic
(III) from aqueous solutions using scoria: Kinetics and equilibrium of sorption. Journal of Hazardous Materials; 174(1-3):30713.
-
Jadia CD, Fulekar MH. Phytoremediation:( 2008) The Application of Vermicompost to Remove Zinc, Cadmium, Copper, Nickel and Lead by Sunflower Plant; 7(5):54758.
-