Next Article in Journal
Machine Learning Powered Microalgae Classification by Use of Polarized Light Scattering Data
Next Article in Special Issue
BioH2 from Dark Fermentation of OFMSW: Effect of the Hydraulic Retention Time and Organic Loading Rate
Previous Article in Journal
ANN-Based Inverse Goal-Oriented Design Method for Targeted Final Properties of Materials
Previous Article in Special Issue
Dairy Waste and Potential of Small-Scale Biogas Digester for Rural Energy in India
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Impact of Natural Weathering on Stabilization of Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) in MSWI Bottom Ash

by
Saulius Vasarevičius
*,
Jurgita Seniūnaitė
and
Vaidotas Vaišis
Department of Environment Protection and Water Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(7), 3419; https://doi.org/10.3390/app12073419
Submission received: 9 February 2022 / Revised: 25 March 2022 / Accepted: 25 March 2022 / Published: 28 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Trends in Waste Management Models)

Abstract

:

Featured Application

We identified the impacts of natural weathering on the quality parameters of bottom ash from municipal solid waste incineration, which are important for the use of bottom ash in civil engineering. Our findings will help reduce the amount of waste in landfills as well as handling costs.

Abstract

Bottom ash (BA) is the main residue left by municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI). As the circular economy is strengthened, the use of BA in civil engineering is increasing, but its successful use is hampered by heavy metal leaching. In this study, we investigated the influence of natural weathering (6 months) on the stabilization of heavy metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) with different particle sizes in MSWI BA. Natural weathering is the most popular and cost-effective treatment method for BA. During this process, calcium carbonate (CaCO3) is produced, which causes a reduction in heavy metal leaching. We used the following methods in the analysis: The fractionation of BA, XRF, and XRD; an extraction test (LST EN 12457-2:2003); and AAS. The results showed that the concentrations of all elements in BA decreased during natural weathering. An analysis of the mineralogical composition showed a very high (>20%) content of calcium carbonate (CaCO3). The calcium carbonate content increased by 3.2% during weathering because the Ca(OH)2 in fractions <5.6 mm and <40.0 mm was hydrolyzed to CaCO3. Our analysis showed that the metal concentrations (Cu and Pb) in untreated MSWI bottom ash eluate exceeded the limit values, and thus it cannot be used in civil engineering. After three months of stabilization, the heavy metal concentrations were less than the limit values.

1. Introduction

Incineration is one of the most effective technologies used for the treatment of municipal solid waste (MSW) in many industrialized countries [1,2,3]. After MSWI, several types of solid residue, such as bottom ash (BA), fly ash (FA), and boiler ash (BLA), are formed [4,5,6,7]. BA constitutes 85–90% of the total weight of all furnace residues [8,9,10,11].
BA is a highly heterogeneous mixture of slag, nonferrous and ferrous metals, glass and ceramics, other noncombustible matter, and a small amount of unburned organic matter (plastic, fiber, wood, etc.) [5,12]. The incineration process parameters, such as the furnace configuration, combustion temperature, quenching process, incineration waste composition, etc., affect the properties of BA [13,14]. Although BA is classified as nonhazardous waste by the European Waste Catalogue [15], most furnace ashes are disposed of in landfills because some elements, such as soluble salts (sulfates and chlorides) or heavy metals (Cu, Zn, Pb, and Ba), are often present in high concentrations in untreated (fresh) bottom ash [8,16,17,18]. BA can be used in civil engineering after pretreatment. The following pretreatment technologies can be applied: Water washing [17,19], full metal separation [20], vitrification [21,22], or weathering (natural and accelerated) [1,16,23,24,25]. Almost all of these technologies incur substantial additional costs. Natural weathering is the most ecologically and economically beneficial method for the treatment of BA.
During natural or accelerated weathering processes, some characteristics (chemical and mineralogical) of BA particles undergo changes. BA is not an inert material, having a complex set of interactions with the ambient atmosphere and undergoing further chemical and mineralogical transformations [26]. When additional contact with atmospheric air (and thus atmospheric CO2) occurs, various chemical reactions begin, resulting in the solidification, volume stability, and reactivity of BA [27]. The main reactions are hydrolysis, oxidation of some metals (e.g., iron, copper, and aluminum), carbonation, dissolution/precipitation of hydroxides and salts, complexation, sorption, neutralization of pH, formation of solid solutions, and mineral neoformation [28,29,30]. The stabilization processes depend on various conditions, including mineral composition, reaction temperature, the amount of CO2 in the atmospheric air, BA particle size, etc. Furthermore, the moisture level (amount of water) in BA is an important parameter [11].
Natural weathering leads to chemical stabilization and reductions in the solubility and mobility of toxic elements through carbonation, oxidation, precipitation, and pH neutralization reactions [31]. However, certain chemical, legal, and technological barriers linked to the potential leaching of toxicity hamper its valorization in many countries because of the heavy metals contained in BA [32]. The environmental characterization we performed demonstrated the effect of increasing the curing time on decreasing the concentrations of leached metals. More detailed research on natural weathering processes should be conducted to ensure the metals remain stabilized over longer periods [33].
In this study, we investigated the influence of natural weathering on heavy metal (Cu, Zn, and Pb) stabilization for different particle sizes of MSWI bottom ash. We used the following methods in the analysis: Fractionation of BA, XRF, XRD, AAS, and extraction (leaching) tests.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. BA Sampling and Characterization

We collected the BA samples from an MSW incinerator located in Klaipeda, Lithuania. The main stream was composed of household waste with a smaller proportion of commercial waste. The grate furnace incinerator operated at temperatures between 850 and 1100 °C with a capacity of 255,000 tons of waste per year. The BA samples were collected from different parts of the BA stockpiles in the storage room.
We determined the granulometric composition of BA according to the standards of LST EN 933-2:2001 [34] and LST EN 933-1:2012 [35]. For granulometric determination, we sieved the BA through 5.6, 11.2, 24.4, and 40.0 mm mesh sieves. We used a vibrating sieve shaker to facilitate fraction separation. Figure 1 shows the average percentage distribution of BA particles of the three samples and the accumulated distribution of BA particles in the samples.
We determined the moisture content in triplicate using the oven-drying method: After homogenization and weighting, a test portion (2 kg) was dried in the oven at 105 °C until it reached a constant mass. The moisture content (Figure 2) of the BA was then determined according to Willits (1951) [36].
The chemical compositions of the major and minor elements in MSWI BA were determined in triplicate by X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF) using an Axios mAX X-ray spectrophotometer. We performed the mineral composition analysis using a SmartLab X-ray diffractometer (Rigaku) with a 9 kW rotating Cu anode X-ray tube. X-rays were recorded in the 20-10-75 degree range using the Bragg–Brentano method.
We performed compliance leaching tests according to the standard LST EN 12457-2:2003 [37]. The samples, which were below 4 mm in size both originally and after pretreatment, were placed in contact with distilled water in capped glass bottles. The solid-to-liquid ratio was 1/10 (90 g of dry BA and 900 mL of distilled water), and the suspension was agitated for 24 h at room temperature (20 ± 5 °C). The solid residue was separated by filtration. We immediately detected the pH and conductivity of the eluate. We analyzed the concentrations of three metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) by atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) according to LST EN ISO 15586:2004 [38].

2.2. Natural Weathering Experiments

We stabilized the heavy metals in five different fractions (<5.6; 5.6–11.2; 11.2–24.4; 24.4–40.0; <40.0 mm) of MSWI BA during natural weathering in ambient air conditions (the temperature and amount of precipitation were not constant). We filled five laboratory stands with 200 ± 5 kg of different fractions of fresh (untreated) BA. For comparison, we placed another stand (<40.0 mm) in the laboratory (the temperature and the amount of precipitation (60 mm per month) were constant).
We developed the laboratory stands for the study (Figure 1) for the natural weathering of bottom ash without restricted air circulation or precipitation, which consisted of two main parts: The bottom ash and slag storage tank and the leachate storage tank. We installed accumulated filtrate outlets at the base of the bottom ash storage stand, which we covered with a dense mesh to prevent the bottom ash and slag particles from entering the filtrate. A total of 10 laboratory stands were filled with bottom ash: Two stands for each of the five fractions.
The bottom ash was exposed to natural (outdoor) conditions for 6 months and was thus affected by atmospheric precipitation. The leachate that formed and permeated through the bottom ash was collected in storage tanks. We observed precipitation throughout the stabilization process. The bottom ash was re-mixed once every 2 weeks to improve air circulation. Samples of bottom ash (4 ± 0.05 kg) were obtained once every two weeks.
Each bottom ash sample was dried, and its physical properties were determined: Density according to LST EN ISO 17892-2:2015; moisture according to LST EN 14524-2:2003; porosity and particle size distribution according to LST EN 933-1:2012. We determined the chemical composition of the bottom ash to evaluate any compositional changes during the stabilization process. The bottom ash eluate was also prepared according to LST EN 12457-2:2003. The metal content of the waste bottom ash eluate was determined by atomic absorption spectral analysis using a Buck Scientific 2010 VGP spectrometer.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Fractional Composition and Moisture Content of BA

The fractional composition of the MSWI BA is presented in Figure 1.
More than half (52.94 ± 0.1%) of the BA consisted of particles smaller than 5.6 mm. Particles of 5.6 to 11.2 and 11.2 to 24.4 mm represented 23.26 ± 0.1% and 16.58 ± 0.1% of the content, respectively. The largest (>40.0 mm) bottom ash particles comprised the smallest portion of the sample (1.19 ± 0.1%). Thus, BA is similar to the optimum distribution with a sand-like fraction and can be classified as a 0–25 mm material with good graduation [24].
The results of the determination of the moisture content of the different fractions are shown in Figure 3.
Moisture analysis showed that the water content in the untreated BA ranged from 8.50% to 17.16%. The mean value was 12.60 ± 0.39%. The amount of water in BA is not a stable value as the BA is cooled by water in an incinerator. Some of the water immediately evaporates from the hot bottom ash, while some is absorbed.

3.2. Chemical Composition of BA

The chemical compositions (major elements) of the five different fractions of BA, obtained by XRF, are provided in Table 1. The compositions are described as the weight percentages of each element.
The chemical analysis of the five different fractions of BA showed that the main elements (>10%) were silicon (Si) and calcium (Ca). The bottom ash also contained aluminum, magnesium, sodium, iron, and sulfur (1–8%). The above-mentioned elements of bottom ash were found in the oxide form (oxides, silicates, and sulfates).
A comparison between the chemical compositions of the different fractions of BA and the Earth’s crust is depicted in Figure 4.
Figure 4 shows that the amounts of the major elements found within all five different fractions of BA were close to the composition of the Earth’s crust (with basaltic and other geological materials) [27,28]. We also found a wide range of metals that are hazardous to human health and the environment, such as titanium, chromium, manganese, nickel, copper, zinc, lead, and others. A comparison of the amounts of five heavy metals (Mn, Cu, Zn, Sr, and Pb) in the different untreated BA fractions is presented in Figure 5. In the <40 mm fraction, we performed tests in natural weathering (N) and laboratory aging (L) conditions.
The chemical composition analysis showed that zinc (Zn) was present in untreated BA in high concentrations (2596–5504 mg kg−1). The maximum concentrations of three metals (Cu, Pb, and Sr) were found in the 5.6–11.2 mm fraction, with values of 3223 ± 129, 805 ± 40, and 1000 ± 25 mg kg−1, respectively. The highest concentration of Zn (5504 ± 152 mg kg−1) was found in the smallest BA fraction (<5.6 mm).
Figure 5 shows that bottom ash particle size and heavy metal distribution did not have a direct relationship. These results showed that the bottom ash fractions did not have a substantial effect on the amounts of heavy metals.

3.3. Leaching of Untreated MSWI Bottom Ash

The pH levels of the different fractions of untreated BA eluate were determined via the single-stage leaching method (LST EN 12457-2:2003). The pH values of the samples varied from 10.55 to 12.48. The lowest pH value (10.55) was found in the 11.2–22.4 mm fraction and the highest (12.48) in the <5.6 mm fraction. The pH of the BA mixture (<40.0 mm) was closest to the pH of the eluate of the smallest fraction (<5.6 mm). With these pH values, the solution was quite close to the equilibrium solubility of portlandite (Ca(OH)2) and calcite (CaCO3). The presence of Ca(OH)2 in BA is caused by calcination reactions in the furnaces. Natural or synthetic calcite (CaCO3), gypsum (CaSO4·2H2O), or anhydrite (CaSO4) generates CaO and CO2 or SO2. Later, most of the generated CaO is hydrolyzed as a result of quenching and forms the corresponding hydroxide [28].
Using the atomic adsorption spectral analysis method (AAS), we determined the concentration of three metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) in the five BA fractions (Figure 6). We found the highest Cu concentration (217.800 ± 10.890 µg L−1), and a high concentration of Pb (124.522 ± 9.614 µg L−1) was also found in the <40.0 mm fraction. We found the highest Pb concentration in the <5.6 mm fraction (145.625 ± 7.281 µg L−1). After analyzing the Zn concentration in the untreated BA eluates, we observed the highest zinc content occurred in the <40.0 mm fraction (239.700 ± 11.950 µg L−1).
Chemical composition and leaching tests (Figure 5 and Figure 6) showed that the highest metal concentrations occurred in the fraction eluates, which had the highest amounts of these metals in the solid phase of BA.

3.4. Effect of the BA Natural Weathering

We determined the effect of natural weathering on the different BA fractions using analyses of the chemical and mineralogical compositions, and leachate and eluate parameters.
The chemical compositions of the different untreated BA fractions and those after 3 and 6 months of natural weathering are shown in Table 2 and Figure 6 in terms of major and minor elements (provided in the oxide form) by the percentage of weight and trace elements in milligrams per kilogram. Additionally, we weathered the <40.0 mm fraction under laboratory conditions (constant precipitation amount and temperature) for comparison. The main part of BA (more than 65% by weight) consisted of the following element oxides: SiO2, CaO, Al2O3, and Fe2O3. We noted that all element (except Fe2O3 and TiO2) concentrations decreased during natural weathering.
The concentrations of metals, including the main elements, in all the fractions of BA, decreased during natural weathering (Figure 7). We found the largest decreases in Mn, Cu, and Sr in the <40.0 mm fraction for both weathering types (natural and laboratory conditions). The Mn concentration was lower by 678 ± 159 and 725 ± 162 mg kg−1, Cu by 1096 ± 125 and 1088 ± 122 mg kg−1, and Sr by 346 ± 125 mg kg−1 for natural and laboratory conditions, respectively. The decreases in Zn concentration in both <40.0 mm fractions were similar: 1121 ± 112 mg kg−1 (natural weathering) and 1119 ± 110 mg kg−1 (laboratory ageing). Decreases in the Pb concentrations of these fractions were relatively low: From 104 ± 12 to 142 ± 15 mg kg−1 after 6 months of weathering. The highest decrease in Zn concentration (2359 ± 140 mg kg−1) was found in the 5.6–11.2 mm fraction after 6 months of natural weathering.
We concluded that heavy metal concentrations in laboratory-aged BA decreased more rapidly than in naturally weathered BA during the first 3 months. Our analysis showed that heavy metal loss from BA in both conditions (natural weathering and laboratory aging) was similar after 6 months of the weathering (aging) process.
As mentioned above, various complex reactions occur during the MSWI BA weathering (aging) process, such as pH neutralization, secondary element formation, sorption, etc. These reactions can affect the leaching of macro- and micro-elements from BA [37]. These reactions can be represented by changes in the mineralogical composition (Table 3).
The mineralogical composition analysis (Table 2) showed a very high (>20%) content of two minerals, calcite (or otherwise calcium carbonate) (CaCO3) and quartz (SiO2), in BA. The quartz content remained almost unchanged (0% decrease) during weathering, while the calcite content increased by 3.2%. As the calcium content increased, other calcium-containing compounds such as anhydride (Ca(SO4)) decreased. Comparing these results to those obtained by other scientists [1,5,16,36], we concluded that the mineralogical composition of BA from other countries is similar.
The mineralogical changes in bottom ash during the stabilization process can be explained by the following formula:
Ca(OH)2 + CO2 → CaCO3 + H2O
One of the major processes for the stabilization of BA is carbonization (Formula (1)), which occurs in two steps: First, carbon dioxide is absorbed into the water in the pores of BA. Then, calcium carbonate is formed by calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2) reacting with dissolved CO2 (water is necessary for the reaction) [39,40]. Later, the formation of calcium silicate hydrates is possible (Formula (2)):
Ca(OH)2 + SiO2 → CaH2SiO4
The analogous formation of calcium aluminate hydrates occurs. Other scientists [26,27] have shown that calcium silicates and calcium aluminate hydrates have a high sorption capacity for heavy metals.
Along with the carbonization reaction, a sulfate formation reaction plays an important role in the stabilization of BA. During the sulfate reaction, calcium sulfate dissolves in pore water and is transported. Subsequently, an aqueous sulfate phase such as gypsum is formed. Due to the increased reaction of sulfates with aluminum compounds, during the formation of the calcium aluminate phase, ettringite forms in the pore water (Formula (3)):
Ca3Al2O6 + 3CaSO4 · 2H2O + 26H2O → Ca6Al2(SO4)3(OH)12 · 26H2O
The reactions described above are illustrated by a graph depicting the dependence of pH on the calcium oxide concentration in the eluates (Figure 8). Six months after the beginning of the stabilization process, all pH and Ca concentration values decreased. The graph shows that Ca(OH)2 in the <5.6 m and <40.0 mm fractions was hydrolyzed to CaCO3 during the stabilization process.
The concentrations of copper (Cu), lead (Pb), and zinc (Zn) in the BA eluates and filtrate during natural weathering and laboratory aging are shown in Figure 8, Figure 9 and Figure 10. We compared the metal concentrations with the limit values (in an eluate) that would enable BA to be used in civil engineering in Lithuania [41].
As with the other elements, the concentration of copper in the eluates decreased with increasing stabilization time (Figure 9). In the <40.0 mm fraction, the Cu concentration in the eluate exceeded the leaching limit value (150 µg L−1), with values of 257.12 ± 5.14 and 178.60 ± 3.57 µg L−1. For the filtrate formed by stabilizing the <40.0 mm BA fraction in the laboratory for up to 10 weeks, the Cu concentrations (172.32 ± 3.45 to 451.25 ± 9.02 µg L−1) were above the limit values. Our experimental studies showed that the copper concentrations decreased rapidly (19.5–72.0%) during the first four weeks of the process. As the stabilization duration increased, the concentration change slowed and became almost stable after 16 weeks from the beginning of weathering (aging). After 24 weeks, all the BA eluate fractions had a Cu concentration <50 µg L−1.
In three fractions (<5.6 mm with natural weathering; <40.0 mm with natural weathering and with laboratory aging), after 4 weeks, the lead concentrations were higher than the leaching limit value (50 µg L−1) (Figure 10). The highest concentration of Pb occurred after 2 weeks in the laboratory-aged BA filtrate (411.25 ± µg L−1). Even after 24 weeks, the concentration of Pb in the filtrate was higher than the leaching limit value. The concentrations of Pb in all the eluate fractions decreased during stabilization and did not exceed the limit value. The concentrations of lead in the fractions became almost stable and did not exceed 25 µg L−1 after 12 weeks of the weathering process.
The concentration of zinc in the BA filtrate and the eluates of the different fractions did not exceed the limit value of 300 µg L−1 during the stabilization process (Figure 11). Compared to the other metals, the concentration of zinc in the eluates decreased the most rapidly, with a remarkable decrease (from 19.5% to 78.5%) already noticeable after two weeks of the weathering process. Compared to the concentration in the untreated bottom ash eluates, the zinc concentration in the <40.0 mm fraction was 93.9% and 91.5% smaller after 24 weeks under natural weathering and laboratory aging conditions, respectively.
From this experimental research, we concluded that the metal concentrations in untreated MSWI bottom ash eluates exceed the limit values; therefore, they cannot be used in civil engineering. Three months is long enough to conduct heavy metal stabilization in MSWI BA. After the natural weathering process, the heavy metal concentration was lower than the limit values.

4. Conclusions

We presented the results of experimental research on MSWI BA quality parameters and the impact of natural weathering on heavy metal stabilization. On the basis of our results, the following conclusions were drawn.
The quantities of the major elements in all five investigated fractions of BA are close to the composition of the Earth’s crust.
No direct relationship exists between bottom ash particle size and heavy metal distribution. These results showed that the bottom ash fractions do not have a significant effect on the amounts of heavy metals present.
The concentrations of all the elements (major, minor, and trace) in BA decreased during natural weathering. The largest decrease in heavy metals was found in the <40.0 mm fraction of stabilized (natural weathering) BA. Therefore, BA should not be fractionated before natural weathering.
After experimental analysis, we found that heavy metal concentrations decreased more rapidly under laboratory ageing (temperature and precipitation amount were constant) during the first three months than under natural weathering. This may have occurred because of the relatively more intensive precipitation under laboratory conditions. The heavy metal decreases in BA under both conditions were similar after 6 months of the weathering process.
The accelerated carbonation during natural weathering resulted in a remarkable decrease in heavy metal leaching.
The changes in the MSWI BA quality parameters seen during natural weathering (the temperature and precipitation amount are not constant) and laboratory aging (the temperature and precipitation amount are constant) were similar. From this, we concluded that natural aging is a more cost-effective method to treat bottom ash, as it does not require constant temperature retention or additional water resources.

Author Contributions

S.V. and V.V. designed the experiments; J.S. performed the experiments and analyzed the data; S.V. and J.S. writing—original draft preparation; V.V. writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study did not require ethical approval.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The study did not report any data.

Acknowledgments

This article is based upon work from COST CA15115 Action Mining the European Anthroposphere (MINEA), supported by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST). Parts of the experimental study were performed at the Institute of Chemical Process Fundamentals, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Nørgaard, K.P.; Hyks, J.; Mulvad, J.K.; Frederiksen, J.O.; Hjelmar, O. Optimizing large-scale ageing of municipal solid waste incinerator bottom ash prior to the advanced metal recovery: Phase I: Monitoring of temperature, moisture content, and CO2 level. Waste Manag. 2019, 85, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Schafer, M.L.; Clavier, K.A.; Townsend, T.G.; Kari, R.; Worobel, R.F. Assessment of the total content and leaching behavior of blends of incinerator bottom ash and natural aggregates in view of their utilization as road base construction material. Waste Manag. 2019, 98, 92–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zhou, H.; Long, Y.Q.; Meng, A.H.; Li, Q.H.; Zhang, Y.G. Classification of municipal solid waste components for thermal conversion in waste to energy research. Fuel 2015, 145, 151–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Inkaew, K.; Saffarzadeh, A.; Shimaoka, T. Modeling the formation of the quench product in municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) bottom ash. Waste Manag. 2016, 52, 159–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Tang, P.; Florea, M.V.A.; Spiesz, P.; Brouwers, H.J.H. Characteristics and application potential of municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) bottom ashes from two waste-to-energy plants. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 83, 77–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Di Gianfilippo, M.; Costa, G.; Pantini, S.; Allegrini, E.; Lombardi, F.; Astrup, T.F. LCA of management strategies for RDF incineration and gasification bottom ash based on experimental leaching data. Waste Manag. 2016, 47, 285–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Holm, O.; Simon, F.G. Innovative treatment trains of bottom ash (BA) from municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) in Germany. Waste Manag. 2017, 59, 229–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Wei, Y.; Shimaoka, T.; Saffarzadeh, A.; Takahashi, F. Mineralogical characterization of municipal solid waste incineration bottom ash with an emphasis on heavy metal-bearing phases. J. Hazard. Mater. 2011, 187, 534–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Di Gianfilippo, M.; Hyks, J.; Verginelli, I.; Costa, G.; Hjelmar, O.; Lombardi, F. Leaching behaviour of incineration bottom ash in a reuse scenario: 12years-field data vs. lab test results. Waste Manag. 2018, 73, 367–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Schabbach, L.M.; Bolelli, G.; Andreola, F.; Lancellotti, T.; Barbieri, L. Valorization of MSWI bottom ash through ceramic glazing process: A new technology. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 23, 147–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Um, N.; Ahn, J. Effects of two different accelerated carbonation processes on MSWI bottom ash. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2017, 3, 560–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Allegrini, E.; Maresca, A.; Olsson, M.E.; Holtze, M.S.; Boldrin, A.; Astrup, T.F. Quantification of the resource recovery potential of municipal solid waste incinera-tion bottom ashes. Waste Manag. 2014, 34, 1627–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Nakic, D.; Vouk, D.; Siljeg, M.; Bubalo, A. LCA of heavy metals leaching from landfilled sewage sludge ash. J. Environ. Eng. Landsc. Manag. 2021, 29, 359–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sivula, L. Characterisation and Treatment of Waste Incineration Bottom Ash and Leachate; Jyväskylä University Printing House: Jyväskylä, Finland, 2012; pp. 12–13. [Google Scholar]
  15. 2000/532/EC; Commission Decision of 3 May 2000 Replacing Decision 94/3/EC Establishing a List of Wastes Pursuant to Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC on waste and Council Decision 94/904/EC Establishing a List of Hazardous Waste Pursuant to Article 1(4) of Council Directive 91/689/EEC on Hazardous Waste, 15. 005. European Union: Maastricht, The Netherlands, 2000; pp. 151–172.
  16. Santos, R.M.; Mertens, G.; Salman, M.; Cizer, Ö.; Gerven, T. Comparative study of ageing, heat treatment and accelerated carbonation for stabilization of municipal solid waste incineration bottom ash in view of reducing regulated heavy metal/metalloid leaching. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 128, 807–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Lin, W.Y.; Heng, K.S.; Sun, X.; Wang, J.Y. Accelerated carbonation of different size fractions of MSW IBA and the effect on leaching. Waste Manag. 2015, 41, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Tang, J.; Steenari, B.M. Leaching optimization of municipal solid waste incineration ash for resource recovery: A case study of Cu, Zn, Pb and Cd. Waste Manag. 2016, 48, 315–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Kuo, W.T.; Liu, C.C.; Su, D.S. Use of washed municipal solid waste incinerator bottom ash in pervious concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2013, 37, 328–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Olsson, S.; Gustafsson, J.P.; Berggren Kleja, D.; Bendz, D.; Persson, I. Metal leaching from MSWI bottom ash as affected by salt or dissolved organic matter. Waste Manag. 2009, 29, 506–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Toraldo, E.; Saponaro, S.; Careghini, A.; Mariani, E. Use of stabilized bottom ash for bound layers of road pavements. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 121, 117–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Ferraris, M.; Salvo, M.; Ventrella, A.; Buzzi, L.; Veglia, M. Use of vitrified MSWI bottom ashes for concrete production. Waste Manag. 2009, 29, 1041–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Arickx, S.; Van Gerven, T.; Vandecasteele, C. 2006, Accelerated carbonation for treatment of MSWI bottom ash. J. Hazard. Mater. 2006, B137, 235–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Del Valle-Zermeño, R.; Formosa, J.; Chimenos, J.M.; Martínez, M.; Fernández, A.I. Aggregate material formulated with MSWI bottom ash and APC fly ash for use as secondary building material. Waste Manag. 2013, 33, 621–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Del Valle-Zermeño, R.; Romero-Güiza, M.S.; Chimenos, J.M.; Formosa, J.; Mata-Alvarez, J.; Astals, S. Biogas upgrading using MSWI bottom ash: An integrated municipal solid waste management. Renew. Energy 2015, 80, 184–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hyks, J.; Astrup, T. Influence of operational conditions, waste input and ageing on contaminant leaching from waste incinerator bottom ash: A full-scale study. Chemosphere 2009, 76, 1178–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bayuseno, A.P.; Schmahl, W.W. Understanding the chemical and mineralogical properties of the inorganic portion of MSWI bottom ash. Waste Manag. 2010, 30, 1509–1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Chan, W.P.; Ren, F.; Dou, X.; Yin, K.; Chang, V.W.C. A large-scale field trial experiment to derive effective release of heavy metals from incineration bottom ashes during construction in land reclamation. Sci. Total Environ. Vol. 2018, 637-638, 182–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Piantonea, P.; Bodenan, F.; Chatelet-Snidaro, L. Mineralogical study of secondary mineral phases from weathered MSWI bottom ash: Implication for the modeling and trapping of heavy metals. Appl. Geochem. 2004, 19, 1891–1904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Polettini, A.; Pomi, R. 2004, The leaching behavior of incinerator bottom ash as affected by accelerated ageing. J. Hazard. Mater. 2004, B113, 209–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Perez-Martínez, S.; Giro-Paloma, J.; Maldonado-Alameda, A.; Formosa, J.; Queralt, I.; Chimenos, J.M. Characterisation and partition of valuable metals from WEEE in weathered municipal solid waste incineration bottom ash, with a view to recovering. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 218, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Xuan, D.; Tang, P.; Poon, C.S. Limitations and quality upgrading techniques for utilization of MSW incineration bottom ash in engineering applications—A review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 190, 1091–1102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Maldonado-Alameda, A.; Giro-Paloma, J.; Andreola, F.; Barbieri, L.; Chimenos, J.M.; Lancellotti, I. Weathered bottom ash from municipal solid waste incineration: Alkaline activation for sustainable binders. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 327, 126983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. LST EN 933-2:2001; Tests for Geometrical Properties of Aggregates-Part 2: Determination of Particle Size Distribution-Test Sieves, Nominal Size of Apertures. Lithuanian Standards Board: Vilnius, Lithuania, 2001.
  35. LST EN 933-1:2012; Tests for Geometrical Properties of Aggregates-Part 1: Determination of Particle Size Distribution-Sieving Method. Lithuanian Standards Board: Vilnius, Lithuania, 2012.
  36. Willits, C.O. Methods for Determination of Moisture-Oven Drying. Anal. Chem. 1951, 23, 1058–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. LST EN 12457-2:2003; Characterization of Waste-Leaching-Compliance Test for Leaching of Granular Waste Materials and Sludges-Part 2: One Stage Batch Test at a Liquid to Solid Ratio of 10 L/kg for Materials with Particle Size below 4 mm (without or with Size Reduction). Lithuanian Standards Board: Vilnius, Lithuania, 2003.
  38. LST EN ISO 15586:2004; Water Quality-Determination of Trace Elements Using Atomic Absorption Spectrometry with Graphite; Furnace. Lithuanian Standards Board: Vilnius, Lithuania, 2004.
  39. Meima, J.A.; van der Weijden, R.D.; Eighmy, T.T.; Comans, R.N.J. Carbonation processes in municipal solid waste incinerator bottom ash and their effect on the leaching of copper and molybdenum. Appl. Geochem. 2002, 17, 1503–1513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Rendek, E.; Ducom, G.; Germain, P. Carbon dioxide sequestration in municipal solid waste incinerator (MSWI) bottom ash. J. Hazard. Mater. 2006, 128, 73–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Lapkričio 25 d, Įsakymas Nr, D1-805; Dėl Atliekų Deginimo Įrenginiuose ir Bendro Atliekų Deginimo Įrenginiuose Susidariusių Pelenų ir Šlako Tvarkymo Reikalavimų Patvirtinimo. Lietuvos Respublikos Aplinkos Ministro: Vilnius, Lithuania, 2016. (In Lithuanian)
Figure 1. Laboratory stand used for MSWI bottom ash natural weathering experiments: (a) Storage tank for MSWI bottom ash; (b) holes, covered with plastic mesh, for leachate draining; (c) leachate collection tank.
Figure 1. Laboratory stand used for MSWI bottom ash natural weathering experiments: (a) Storage tank for MSWI bottom ash; (b) holes, covered with plastic mesh, for leachate draining; (c) leachate collection tank.
Applsci 12 03419 g001
Figure 2. Fractional composition of BA (%).
Figure 2. Fractional composition of BA (%).
Applsci 12 03419 g002
Figure 3. Water content in untreated MSWI bottom ash.
Figure 3. Water content in untreated MSWI bottom ash.
Applsci 12 03419 g003
Figure 4. Major chemical elements of MSWI BA in comparison to the element abundances in the Earth’s crust, based on [27].
Figure 4. Major chemical elements of MSWI BA in comparison to the element abundances in the Earth’s crust, based on [27].
Applsci 12 03419 g004
Figure 5. Amounts of heavy metals in different bottom ash fractions (mg kg−1): Mn; Cu; Zn; Pb; Sr.
Figure 5. Amounts of heavy metals in different bottom ash fractions (mg kg−1): Mn; Cu; Zn; Pb; Sr.
Applsci 12 03419 g005
Figure 6. Concentrations of heavy metals in the different fractions of untreated bottom ash eluate.
Figure 6. Concentrations of heavy metals in the different fractions of untreated bottom ash eluate.
Applsci 12 03419 g006
Figure 7. Amounts of heavy metals in different bottom ash fractions during natural weathering (mg/kg): Mn; Cu; Zn; Pb; Sr.
Figure 7. Amounts of heavy metals in different bottom ash fractions during natural weathering (mg/kg): Mn; Cu; Zn; Pb; Sr.
Applsci 12 03419 g007
Figure 8. Changes in calcium solubility and pH during 6 months of natural weathering of BA eluates as a function of particle size.
Figure 8. Changes in calcium solubility and pH during 6 months of natural weathering of BA eluates as a function of particle size.
Applsci 12 03419 g008
Figure 9. Concentration of copper (Cu) in different fractions of BA eluate and leachate during natural weathering and laboratory aging.
Figure 9. Concentration of copper (Cu) in different fractions of BA eluate and leachate during natural weathering and laboratory aging.
Applsci 12 03419 g009
Figure 10. Concentration of lead (Pb) in different fractions of bottom ash eluate and leachate during natural weathering and laboratory aging.
Figure 10. Concentration of lead (Pb) in different fractions of bottom ash eluate and leachate during natural weathering and laboratory aging.
Applsci 12 03419 g010
Figure 11. Concentration of zinc (Zn) in different fractions of bottom ash eluate and leachate during natural weathering and laboratory aging.
Figure 11. Concentration of zinc (Zn) in different fractions of bottom ash eluate and leachate during natural weathering and laboratory aging.
Applsci 12 03419 g011
Table 1. Major elements of five different fractions of untreated MSWI bottom ash (wt %).
Table 1. Major elements of five different fractions of untreated MSWI bottom ash (wt %).
ElementFraction of MSWI BA (mm)
<5.65.6–11.211.2–24.222.4–40.0<40.0
Na2.890 ± 0.6272.179 ± 0.1132.194 ± 0.5442.027 ± 0.3392.603 ± 0.154
Mg1.844 ± 0.4001.390 ± 0.0721.400 ± 0.3481.293 ± 0.2161.661 ± 0.098
Al2.708 ± 0.0752.597 ± 0.0722.963 ± 0.0704.028 ± 0.1853.047 ± 0.225
Si12.982 ± 0.08819.947 ± 0.12022.098 ± 0.12721.925 ± 0.27517.520 ± 0.295
P0.876 ± 0.0160.537 ± 0.0140.391 ± 0.0130.454 ± 0.0320.632 ± 0.043
S2.727 ± 0.0191.422 ± 0.0120.843 ± 0.0090.779 ± 0.0201.946 ± 0.041
K0.792 + 0.0070.735 ± 0.0070.899 ± 0.0081.260 ± 0.0220.809 ± 0.021
Ca19.050 ± 0.11514.453 ± 0.08512.880 ± 0.07312.965 ± 0.15516.268 ± 0.245
Ti0.826 ± 0.0220.595 ± 0.0190.478 ± 0.0180.442 ± 0.0440.610 ± 0.065
Fe4.690 ± 0.0324.272 ± 0.0293.917 ± 0.0264.510 ± 0.0684.398 ± 0.085
Table 2. Bulk chemical composition of untreated BA and BA after 3 and 6 months of weathering.
Table 2. Bulk chemical composition of untreated BA and BA after 3 and 6 months of weathering.
Fraction (mm)Element
SiO2CaOFe2O3Al2O3K2OTiO2P2O5SO2
5.6 mm
Untreated27.700 ± 0.18926.655 ± 0.1616.506 ± 0.0465.117 ± 0.1421.093 ± 0.0101.375 ± 0.0372.007 ± 0.0366.818 ± 0.048
3 months27.424 ± 0.51726.834 ± 0.4246.222 ± 0.1415.454 ± 0.4091.029 ± 0.0281.348 ± 0.1251.740 ± 0.1005.967 ± 0.120
6 months26.376 ± 0.51726.104 ± 0.4336.293 ± 0.1295.407 ± 0.4130.910 ± 0.0261.315 ± 0.1171.844 ± 0.1014.368 ± 0.098
5.6–11.2 mm
Untreated42.670 ± 0.25720.223 ± 0.1196.108 ± 0.0415.587 ± 0.1351.014 ± 0.0090.992 ± 0.0321.231 ± 0.0333.555 ± 0.031
3 months34.441 ± 0.60323.054 ± 0.3756.388 ± 0.1245.483 ± 0.4130.906 ± 0.0261.128 ± 0.1111.534 ± 0.0983.528 ± 0.085
6 months32.526 ± 0.59222.634 ± 0.3576.372 ± 0.1265.121 ± 0.3970.836 ± 0.0251.184 ± 0.1141.731 ± 0.1023.321 ± 0.079
11.2–24.4 mm
Untreated47.272 ± 0.27118.022 ± 0.1035.601 ± 0.0375.599 ± 0.1321.241 ± 0.0110.797 ± 0.0290.896 ± 0.0312.108 ± 0.022
3 months44.377 ± 0.75218.057 ± 0.2855.428 ± 0.1105.476 ± 0.4031.134 ± 0.0310.786 ± 0.0970.790 ± 0.0872.101 ± 0.069
6 months42.474 ± 0.69916.891 ± 0.2755.288 ± 0.1145.372 ± 0.4060.988 ± 0.0280.773 ± 0.1000.708 ± 0.0842.049 ± 0.064
24.4–40.0 mm
Untreated46.902 ± 0.58818.141 ± 0.26826.748 ± 0.0977.612 ± 0.3501.739 ± 0.0300.737 ± 0.0741.041 ± 0.0731.949 ± 0.050
3 months43.536 ± 0.75216.359 ± 0.2686.519 ± 0.1007.404 ± 0.4571.657 ± 0.0400.731 ± 0.0721.042 ± 0.0911.652 ± 0.056
6 months36.081 ± 0.62016.753 ± 0.2526.067 ± 0.1227.958 ± 0.4411.247 ± 0.0310.715 ± 0.0710.657 ± 0.0891.470 ± 0.056
<40.0 mm natural weathering
Untreated37.479 ± 0.63122.763 ± 0.3436.288 ± 0.1225.757 ± 0.4251.116 ± 0.0291.018 ± 0.1081.449 ± 0.1004.865 ± 0.103
3 months33.703 ± 0.61722.947 ± 0.3666.384 ± 0.1365.508 ± 0.4190.928 ± 0.0271.123 ± 0.1111.558 ± 0.1014.418 ± 0.099
6 months31.850 ± 0.50322.947 ± 0.3666.193 ± 0.1245.404 ± 0.3940.832 ± 0.0241.594 ± 0.1021.558 ± 0.1014.677 ± 0.099
<40.0 mm laboratory ageing
Untreated37.479 ± 0.63122.763 ± 0.3436.288 ± 0.1225.757 ± 0.4251.116 ± 0.0291.018 ± 0.1081.449 ± 0.1004.865 ± 0.103
3 months34.279 ± 0.62324.263 ± 0.1606.252 ± 0.1285.487 ± 0.4061.083 ± 0.0280.101 ± 0.1061.496 ± 0.1014.800 ± 0.103
6 months33.569 ± 0.61624.641 ± 0.1636.176 ± 0.1235.418 ± 0.3951.059 ± 0.0270.980 ± 0.1011.615 ± 0.1044.847 ± 0.103
Table 3. Mineral compositions of untreated BA and BA after 3- and 6-month laboratory aging.
Table 3. Mineral compositions of untreated BA and BA after 3- and 6-month laboratory aging.
MineralChemical
Formula
Untreated
Sample
Laboratory Ageing
3 Months6 Months
Carbonates
CalciteCaCO3XXXXXXXXXXXX
Oxide
QuartzSiO2XXXXXXXXXXXX
HematiteFe2O3XXX
MagnetiteFe + 2Fe + 3O4XXXXXX
Silicates
DiopsideCaMgSi2O6XXXXX
GehleniteCa2Al2SiO7XXXXXX
AkermaniteCa2Mg(Si2O7)XXX
MicroclineK(AlSi3)O8XXX
Phosphates
HydroxylapatiteCa5(PO4)3(OH)XXXX
Sulfates
AnhydriteCa(SO4)XXX
Note: XXXX—very high amount (>20%); XXX—high amount (10–20%); XX—medium amount (5–10%); X—small amount (trace) (<5%).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Vasarevičius, S.; Seniūnaitė, J.; Vaišis, V. Impact of Natural Weathering on Stabilization of Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) in MSWI Bottom Ash. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3419. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12073419

AMA Style

Vasarevičius S, Seniūnaitė J, Vaišis V. Impact of Natural Weathering on Stabilization of Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) in MSWI Bottom Ash. Applied Sciences. 2022; 12(7):3419. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12073419

Chicago/Turabian Style

Vasarevičius, Saulius, Jurgita Seniūnaitė, and Vaidotas Vaišis. 2022. "Impact of Natural Weathering on Stabilization of Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) in MSWI Bottom Ash" Applied Sciences 12, no. 7: 3419. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12073419

APA Style

Vasarevičius, S., Seniūnaitė, J., & Vaišis, V. (2022). Impact of Natural Weathering on Stabilization of Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) in MSWI Bottom Ash. Applied Sciences, 12(7), 3419. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12073419

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop