1. Introduction
The European Commission published in 2011 a first list of critical raw materials (CRMs) with the inclusion of 14 commodities that are considered critical for the European Union [
1], out of the 41 non-energy, non-agricultural candidate raw materials. The list included antimony, beryllium, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite, indium, magnesium, niobium, platinum group metals, rare earth metals, tantalum and tungsten. The list was updated in 2014 to include 20 CRMs out of 54 candidates and again in 2017, to then consider 27 CRMs among 78 candidates.
Figure 1 indicates the list of 30 CRMs considered presently by the European Commission.
The purpose of the list is for the European Commission to “flag the supply risks of important materials for the EU economy, … contributing … to secure the competitiveness of the EU industrial value chains starting with raw materials in line with the EU industrial policy”.
Fluorspar has been included since the first list in 2011. This material is used in metallurgy, namely in aluminum extraction and in steelmaking as a desulfurization agent. Other uses include gasoline, insulating foams, refrigerants, uranium fuel, steel castings, welding rod coatings, glass manufacture, cement and enamel production [
3]. It is the source for the manufacturing of hydrofluoric acid. China is currently the first producer of fluorspar with about 65% of the World’s production, followed by Mexico and Mongolia with around 10% each.
European production is limited to Spain and Germany with less than 3% of the World’s needs. Mexico is the country with the most significant known reserves [
3]. The European Union’s biggest importers are Italy, Belgium, Germany, Finland, France, Spain, Sweden, Greece and Poland, and the whole imports of the EU represent around 10% of the World’s total production [
4]. Fluorspar is hence an important raw material for the European industry and its dependence on imports makes it a critical raw material. Hydrofluoric acid, by its side, is also a critical chemical, used for the production of fluorocarbons, as a catalyst in petroleum alkylation, for the manufacture of inorganic fluorine compounds and in metal treatment, such as pickling of stainless steel.
The treatment of stainless steel rods to prepare their surface for hot rolling involves pickling with hydrofluoric/sulfuric acid solutions. The acidic solutions are recirculated till the acidity and the amount of iron rends it difficult for further pickling [
5]. Then, the wastewater is treated. In the plant of Bollinghaus Steel, SA, at Vieira de Leiria, Portugal, the treatment of the resulting wastewater is carried out by adding a slaked lime slurry to neutralize the acidity. By this procedure, sludge is precipitated and then dewatered in filter press units. The cake is then a final residue of the process, which is currently an object of disposal in landfills.
The neutralization process is performed till a pH value between 8.0 and 8.5 is reached. The involved reactions are:
and
In both cases, the compounds calcium fluoride and calcium sulfate are precipitated.
By means of the neutralization of wastewater, the solubility of metal hydroxides is reduced [
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11] as shown in
Figure 2.
As a consequence, iron and other heavy metal hydroxides are expected to precipitate along with calcium fluoride and calcium sulfate.
The so-obtained sludge is considered a waste, classified by the European Commission [
12] under code LER 11 01 09 or 11 01 10. The first of these is considered hazardous waste because it contains hazardous substances exceeding regulatory limits. The second code applies when there are no hazardous substances in the chemical composition of the sludge. Even when the sludge is considered non-hazardous, the environmental impact of its disposal is not negligible, even after a stabilization procedure [
13]. In view of these environmental aspects and because the metal and the calcium compound contents may be interesting, the potential to valorize this type of sludge is being studied by several researchers in the following directions:
Recovery of valuable metals by means of hydrometallurgical routes [
14,
15,
16];
Recovery of metals by pyrometallurgical and smelting processes [
17,
18,
19,
20];
Use in the manufacture of construction materials [
21,
22,
23,
24].
Due to the low content in valuable metals, such as Nickel and Chromium, and the high sulfur content of the sludges, its use as a secondary raw material for metal extraction is still doubtful economics. However, due to the increasing prices of metals, an economic interest in these procedures could increase. The use in the manufacture of construction materials is often a low-grade valorization scheme, as the main purpose is to replace other natural raw materials, avoiding disposal in landfills. The recovery of fluor compounds may be a promising route, as fluorspar is considered a critical raw material in the EU.
2. Materials and Methods
With the purpose of evaluating the recycling potential for this wastewater treatment residue, we performed a characterization under different techniques.
To have a representative source of produced sludges, samples of around 1 kg were collected at the wastewater treatment facilities of Bollinghaus Steel, S.A. manufacturing plant, in Vieira de Leiria, Portugal, on 5 different days. The samples were collected randomly at the exit of the filter press. The characterization involved the following methods:
Determination of the moisture content;
Determination of the loss on ignition at 900 and 1000 °C;
Chemical analysis determination;
X-ray diffraction;
Observation with scanning electron microscope;
Simultaneous Differential Thermal Analysis and Thermogravimetry (DTA/TGA);
Infrared spectroscopy;
Water leaching and analysis of eluate;
Ammonia citrate leaching test.
Sub-samples for above-indicated characterizations were obtained from the samples collected in the plant by dividing them into 4 parts. Then, 200 g were taken from each part and the 4 were mixed again by means of putting the whole in a rotary jar (30 rotations per minute) for 1 h to homogenize the material. The necessary material for each characterization was collected randomly from the as-prepared sub-samples.
For each type of characterization, the following methods were employed.
4. Conclusions and Prospects for Valorization
These characterization results indicate that the residue is a potential source of fluorine and calcium, and it also contains some interesting amounts of metals such as Nickel and Chromium. During a calcination procedure, there occurs a melting at around 950 °C, modifying relevantly some of the properties of the material.
In view of its possible use, we find that the presence of calcium fluoride is a major point of interest. As a matter of fact, this compound, also known in the industry as fluorspar, is a critical material in Europe. Some of the main uses are related to the making of hydrofluoric acid and in metallurgical operations, namely in the aluminum industry, as a flux compound for electrolysis, and in steelmaking, as a desulfurization agent [
26]. Besides other minor uses, it can also be employed in glassmaking to produce opalescence [
27].
For use in steelmaking, to modify the composition of ladle treatment slag to reduce viscosity and enhance the desulphurization efficiency [
28], the high content of calcium sulfate in the sludge is detrimental. However, the removal of sulfur to produce more concentrated calcium fluoride is possible by carbonation [
29], for example, in sodium carbonate aqueous solutions. This route is presently being studied by our research team.
For use in glassmaking, however, the employment of the residue in its original form, just after drying, could be a possibility in relatively small amounts. The presence of calcium sulfate should not be a problem, as its presence in the chemical composition of glasses may be accepted in small amounts. This possibility justifies further research and the definition of which types of glasses could accept material with this composition.
Its use in agriculture is also a possibility. However, the release of toxic metals, especially Cr, Cu and Ni, would reduce the applicability of the residue in its original form. However, the strong decrease in the release of these metals when the material is previously calcined, and the fact that it releases some molybdenum, an interesting element for some cultures [
30], makes this a possible route for valorization. In this case, the effect of pH on leaching and also the type of Cr ions that are released are relevant aspects to be taken into account.
The content of Nickel in the sludge presents a similar level as current ores [
31]. In this view, the residue could be considered a feedstock for Nickel metallurgy. However, the limited quantity of these types of residues when compared to the size of the nickel extraction industry may be a weakness for this possible route.
A lower grade valorization of this residue could also be incorporated in concrete or in ceramics. In this case, special attention has to be paid to the leachability of heavy metals in the final product. As a matter of fact, the residues from this material are normally judged as inert. The incorporation of this residue should not modify this characteristic.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, F.C. and N.M.G.P.; methodology, F.C.; investigation, F.C., P.B.T., N.C., J.F.G. and T.T.; writing, F.C. and P.B.T.; writing—review and editing, T.T.; supervision, F.C.; project administration, F.C.; funding acquisition, N.M.G.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research was funded by Bollinghaus Steel, S.A.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the participation of technicians Elsa Ribeiro, Leonor Carneiro and Miguel Abreu, from the University of Minho, in the running of some characterization activities.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
References
- EU Commission. Tackling the Challenges in Commodity Markets and on Raw Materials; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- EU Commission. Study on the EU’s List of Critical Raw Materials (2020) Final Report; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Available online: https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2021/mcs2021-fluorspar.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2022).
- Available online: https://oec.world/en/profile/hs/fluorspar-97-calcium-fluoride (accessed on 22 August 2022).
- Crookers, R. Pickling and passivating stainless steel, Materials and Applications Series. Euro. Inox 2007, 4, 2. [Google Scholar]
- Furcas, F.E.; Lothenbach, B.; Isgor, O.B.; Mundra, S.; Zhang, Z.; Angst, U.M. Solubility and speciation of iron in cementitious systems. Cem. Concr. Res. 2022, 151, 106620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menting, V.L. Solubility Studies of Iron (III) Oxides and Hydroxides. Master’s Thesis, Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Galarneau, E. Mechanisms of Phosphorous Removal from Wastewater by Aluminium. Master’s Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
- Schock, M.R.; Lytle, D.A.; Clement, J.A. Effect of pH, DIC, Orthophosphate and Sulfate on Drinking Water Cuprosolvency; EPA/600/R-95/085; United States Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 1995.
- Palmer, D.A.; Gamsjager, H. Solubility measurements of crystalline β-Ni(OH)2 in aqueous solution as a function of temperature and pH. J. Coord. Chem. 2010, 63, 2888–2908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sędłak, A.; Janusz, W. Specific adsorption of carbonate ions at the zinc oxide/ electrolyte solution interface. Physicochem. Probl. Miner. Process. 2008, 42, 57–66. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. 2014/955/EU: Commission Decision of 18 December 2014 amending Decision 2000/532/EC on the list of waste pursuant to Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council Text with EEA relevance. Off. J. Eur. Union 2014, 370, 44. [Google Scholar]
- Su, P.; Zhang, J.; Li, Y. Investigation of chemical associations and leaching behavior of heavy metals in sodium sulfide hydrate stabilized stainless steel pickling sludge. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2019, 123, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ji, Z.; Lou, X.; Wang, W.; Xu, Z.; Li, Y. Recovery of nickel from stainless steelmaking sludge by circular leaching and extraction. In AIP Conference Proceedings; AIP Publishing LLC: Melville, NY, USA, 2017; p. 030011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, P.; Tan, D.; Ding, W. A study on leaching heavy metals from stainless steel pickling sludge. Nonferrous Met. Mater. Eng. 2017, 38, 149–153. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, W.-S.; Chen, Y.-C.; Lee, C.-H. Hydrometallurgical Recovery of Iron, Nickel, and Chromium from Stainless Steel Sludge with Emphasis on Solvent Extraction and Chemical Precipitation. Processes 2022, 10, 748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, P.; Lindblom, B.; Bjorkman, B. Experimental studies on solid-state reduction of pickling sludge generated in the stainless steel production. Scand. J. Met. 2005, 34, 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, Z.; Ding, X.; Yan, X.; Dong, Y.; Liu, C. Recovery of Iron, Chromium, and Nickel from Pickling Sludge Using Smelting Reduction. Metals 2018, 8, 936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Zhang, J.; Li, T.; Li, Q.J. Expremental Study on Reduction Ni From Stainless Steel Sludge. Shanghai Met. 2016, 38, 64–68. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, C.-C.; Pan, J.; Zhu, D.-Q.; Guo, Z.-Q.; Li, X.-M. Pyrometallurgical recycling of stainless steel pickling sludge: A review. J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 2019, 26, 547–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Devi, A.; Gupta, R.; Singhal, A.; Verma, S.K. A Study on Application of Pickling Sludge in Pavements Tiles. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Recent Trends in Environmental Science and Engineering (RTESE’19), Ottawa, ON, Canada, 11 June 2019. Paper No. RTESE 108. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, J.; Zhang, S.; Pan, D.; Liu, B.; Wu, C.; Alex, A. Volinsky—Treatment method of hazardous pickling sludge by reusing as glass–ceramics nucleation agent. Rare Met. 2016, 35, 269–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, Y.-L.; Ko, G.-W. Recycling steel wastewater sludges as raw materials for preparing lightweight aggregates. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 165, 905–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pan, D.A.; Li, L.J.; Yang, J.; Bu, J.B.; Guo, B.; Liu, B.; Zhang, S.G.; Volinsky, A.A. Production of glass–ceramics from heavy metal gypsum and pickling sludge. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 12, 3047–3052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Extraction of Phosphorus by Neutral Ammonium Citrate, The Fertilizers (Sampling and Analysis) Regulations (Northern Ireland). 1991. Available online: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/nisr/1996/513/made (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Fluorpsar U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries, January 2022, USGS (Reston, VA, USA). Available online: https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2022/mcs2022-fluorspar.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2022).
- Kogel, J.E.; Trivedi, N.C.; Barker, J.M.; Krukowski, S.T. Industrial Minerals & Rocks: Commodities, Markets, and Uses; SME: Littleton, CO, USA, 2006; p. 1388. [Google Scholar]
- Ohta, M.; Kubo, T.; Morita, K. Effects of CaF2, MgO and SiO2 addition on sulfide capacities of the CaO-Al2O3 slag. Iron Steel Inst. Jpn. Tetsu Hagane 2003, 89, 742–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Takaya, Y.; Inoue, S.; Kato, T.; Fuchida, S.; Tsujimoto, S.; Tokoro, C. Purification of calcium fluoride (CaF2) sludge by selective carbonation of gypsum. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 104510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaiser, B.N.; Gridley, K.L.; Brady, J.N.; Phillips, T.; Tyerman, S. The Role of Molybdenum in Agricultural Plant Production. Ann. Bot. 2005, 96, 745–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nickel, British Geological Survey; Natural Environment Research Council: 2008 (Keyworth, United Kingdom). Available online: https://www2.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/download/mineralProfiles/nickel_profile.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2022).
Figure 1.
The 2020 List of Critical Raw Material [
2].
Figure 2.
Solubilities of some metal hydroxides as a function of pH. Our calculations based on data from [
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11].
Figure 3.
Diffractograms of the five samples dried at 60 °C with overlapping of the same. (a) Sample from 14-02-2022, (b) Sample from 15-02-2022, (c) Sample from 16-02-2022, (d) Sample from 17-02-2022, (e) Sample from 18-02-2022, (f) Overlapping of the previous diffractograms with identification of the main peaks.
Figure 4.
Diffractograms of the five samples calcined at 900 °C with overlapping of the same. (a) Sample from 14-02-2022, (b) Sample from 15-02-2022, (c) Sample from 16-02-2022, (d) Sample from 17-02-2022, (e) Sample from 18-02-2022, (f) Overlapping of the previous diffractograms with identification of the main peaks.
Figure 5.
General aspect of the sample dried at 105 °C.
Figure 6.
EDS spectra for the tubular-like crystals and for the round-shaped grains. (a) Spectrum of Z1 (tubular crystals); (b) Spectrum of Z2 (round shaped grains).
Figure 7.
General view of the sample calcined at 1000 °C.
Figure 8.
EDS spectra for the identified phases. (a) Spectrum of Z1; (b) Spectrum of Z2; (c) Spectrum of Z3.
Figure 10.
FTIR spectrum of dried sample.
Figure 11.
FTIR Spectrum of calcined sample.
Table 1.
Moisture content and loss on ignition of the samples collected on 5 consecutive days.
Sample | Moisture (%) | L.o.I. 900 °C (%) | L.o.I. 1000 °C (%) |
---|
14.02.2022 | 37.9 | 51.6 | 55.5 |
15.02.2022 | 48.1 | 55.3 | 57.9 |
16.02.2022 | 44.0 | 57.9 | 58.1 |
17.02.2022 | 40.5 | 62.0 | 60.7 |
18.02.2022 | 43.4 | 52.6 | 52.2 |
Average | 42.8 | 55.9 | 56.9 |
Standard Deviation | 3.8 | 4.2 | 3.2 |
Table 2.
Chemical analysis of the previously dried samples obtained by XRF spectrometry.
Component | 14.02.2022 | 15.02.2022 | 16.02.2022 | 17.02.2022 | 18.02.2022 | Average | Stand. Dev. |
---|
CaO | 34.8 | 35.2 | 35.3 | 34.7 | 34.8 | 35.0 | 0.27 |
Fe2O3 | 17.8 | 17.0 | 16.8 | 17.1 | 17.4 | 17.2 | 0.39 |
SO3 | 21.0 | 21.4 | 20.7 | 20.7 | 20.7 | 20.9 | 0.31 |
F | 17.6 | 16.4 | 16.9 | 17.2 | 17.2 | 17.1 | 0.45 |
Cl | 0.20 | 0.21 | 0.23 | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.01 |
SiO2 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.004 |
C | 0.25 | 0.22 | 0.25 | 0.26 | 0.30 | 0.26 | 0.03 |
Al2O3 | 0.43 | 0.75 | 1.11 | 0.85 | 0.28 | 0.68 | 0.33 |
MgO | 0.56 | 1.02 | 0.85 | 0.88 | 0.72 | 0.81 | 0.17 |
Na2O | 0.30 | 0.36 | 0.27 | 0.30 | 0.27 | 0.30 | 0.04 |
K2O | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.23 | 0.24 | 0.22 | 0.23 | 0.01 |
TiO2 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.004 |
MnO | 0.22 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.22 | 0.21 | 0.01 |
Cr2O3 | 2.97 | 3.64 | 3.70 | 3.80 | 3.93 | 3.61 | 0.37 |
NiO | 2.44 | 2.30 | 2.23 | 2.33 | 2.44 | 2.35 | 0.09 |
CuO | 0.66 | 0.56 | 0.62 | 0.72 | 0.86 | 0.68 | 0.11 |
CoO | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.01 |
MoO2 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0 |
Table 3.
Estimated compound compositions of the samples dried at 60 °C obtained by the Rietveld refinement method.
Compound | 14.02.2022 | 15.02.2022 | 16.02.2022 | 17.02.2022 | 18.02.2022 |
---|
CaSO4·2H2O | 57.8 | 54.3 | 49.8 | 49.6 | 49.2 |
Fluorite (CaF2) | 31.5 | 34.7 | 35.9 | 35.1 | 37.4 |
Magnetite (Fe3O4) | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.5 |
Calcite (CaCO3) | 9 | 9,4 | 13.1 | 14.4 | 11.8 |
Guyanaite (CrOOH) | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
Cr2O3 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.3 | n,d | 0.4 |
MgF2 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.5 |
Table 4.
Estimated compound compositions of the samples calcined at 900 °C obtained by the Rietveld refinement method.
Compound | 14.02.2022 | 15.02.2022 | 16.02.2022 | 17.02.2022 | 18.02.2022 |
---|
Anhydrite (CaSO4) | 53.4 | 48.2 | 47.7 | 46.6 | 45.8 |
Fluorite | 24.9 | 28.5 | 30.7 | 30.7 | 30.5 |
Magnetite | 11.5 | 11 | 10.4 | 10.4 | 11.5 |
Hematite | 9.1 | 11.2 | 11.4 | 11.4 | 11.3 |
NiCrF6 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.7 |
Srebrodolskite (Fe2Ca2O5) | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
Table 5.
Results of the water leaching expressed in terms of total solids and their chemical composition.
Sample | TDS (mg/kg) | S | Ca | Mg | K | Na | Mn | Ni | Mo |
---|
14.02.2022 dried | 25,700 | 22.1 | 26.1 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.010 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
15.02.2022 dried | 25,600 | 21.2 | 21.8 | 2.4 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.26 | 0.032 | 0.006 |
16.02.2022 dried | 25,900 | 21.7 | 25.3 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.40 | 0.045 | 0.005 |
17.02.2022 dried | 26,200 | 22.0 | 24.6 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.50 | 0.071 | 0.004 |
18.02.2022 dried | 26,400 | 21.9 | 24.8 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.083 | 0.028 | 0.008 |
Average dried | 25,960 | 21.8 | 24.5 | 1.7 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.251 | 0.036 | 0.006 |
14.02.2022 calc | 26,400 | 21.6 | 25.2 | < 0.1 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.034 |
15.02.2022 calc | 24,700 | 22.0 | 25.2 | < 0.1 | 2.2 | 2.8 | 0.001 | <0.001 | 0.054 |
16.02.2022 calc | 24,700 | 22.1 | 25.7 | < 0.1 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.090 |
17.02.2022 calc | 24,000 | 22.0 | 26.4 | < 0.1 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 0.002 | < 0.001 | 0.096 |
18.02.2022 calc | 23,900 | 22.2 | 26.7 | < 0.1 | 1.9 | 1.7 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.092 |
Average calcined | 24,740 | 22.0 | 25.8 | < 0.1 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.073 |
Table 6.
Estimated concentration of the eluates obtained after water leaching.
mg/kg | Dried | Calcined |
---|
Sulfates | 17,000 | 16,300 |
Ca | 6400 | 6400 |
Mg | 440 | <25 |
K | 230 | 450 |
Na | 50 | 490 |
Mn | 65 | 0.5 |
Ni | 9 | 0.25 |
Mo | 1.6 | 18 |
Cr | <0.25 | <0.25 |
Fe | <0.25 | <0.25 |
Table 7.
Results of the ammonium citrate test.
Parameter | Dried Sludge | Sludge Calcined at 1000 °C |
---|
Undissolved mass (%) | 52.8 | 52.7 |
Final pH | 6.73 | 6.66 |
Al (mg/kg) | 42 | 19 |
Sb (mg/kg) | <2 | <2 |
As (mg/kg) | <1 | 6 |
Ba (mg/kg) | 4 | 4 |
Be (mg/kg) | 0.02 | 0.02 |
B (mg/kg) | 7 | 6 |
Cd (mg/kg) | <0.2 | <0.2 |
Ca (mg/kg) | 55,400 | 55,600 |
Cr (mg/kg) | 692 | 155 |
Co (mg/kg) | 59 | <0.2 |
Cu (mg/kg) | 779 | 10 |
Fe (mg/kg) | 2840 | 56 |
Pb (mg/kg) | 1.6 | 1.3 |
Li (mg/kg) | <0.2 | <0.2 |
Mg (mg/kg) | 530 | 81 |
Mn (mg/kg) | 129 | 4 |
Hg (mg/kg) | <1 | <1 |
Mo (mg/kg) | 63 | 217 |
Ni (mg/kg) | 2410 | 2 |
P (mg/kg) | 34 | 443 |
K (mg/kg) | 351 | 382 |
Se (mg/kg) | <3 | <3 |
Ag (mg/kg) | <0.5 | <0.5 |
Na (mg/kg) | 242 | 471 |
Th (mg/kg) | <1 | <1 |
V (mg/kg) | 1 | 28 |
Zn (mg/kg) | 24 | 13 |
| Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).