1 / 20

I. The History, How, and Who Cares of Surface Complexation Models, II. Application of SCM’s to the MMR

I. The History, How, and Who Cares of Surface Complexation Models, II. Application of SCM’s to the MMR. GES 166/266 Discussion 5 Feb 2004. Objectives of SCM. To determine the chemical and electrostatic forces involved in ion retention

cosette
Download Presentation

I. The History, How, and Who Cares of Surface Complexation Models, II. Application of SCM’s to the MMR

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. I. The History, How, and Who Cares of Surface Complexation Models, II. Application of SCM’s to the MMR GES 166/266 Discussion 5 Feb 2004

  2. Objectives of SCM • To determine the chemical and electrostatic forces involved in ion retention • To provide a framework that allows such processes to be modeled • To improve problem solving • Sewage and mining discharges • Assessment of radioactive waste repositories

  3. diffuse layer Stern layer surface

  4. Development of SCM’s 1.Used mass law equations to describe reactions at individual surface sites (Kurbatov et al. 1951, Stanton and Maatman 1963, Dugger et al. 1964) 2. Origin and importance of surface charge on oxides (Parks and DeBruyn 1962) 3. Schindler’s group: Constant Capacitance Model and Stumm’s group: Diffuse Layer Model (~1970) 4. Leckie’s group: Triple Layer Model (Davis et al. 1978).

  5. The 2-layer/Stern and 3-layer models • Sorbates considered part of the solid surface (1st layer) -- specific • Electrostatic charge balanced by adjacent diffuse layer of ions in solution (2nd layer) – nonspecific • Satisfies residual charge • Bound water layer added (T-LM) – diffuse layer is farther from solid • Surface reactions include H+ exchange, cation binding, and anion binding • Need to know surface potentials!

  6. C1 C2 To get potential, must relate it to charge: In the Stern layer: σ = C ψ σ = charge C = Capacitance (prop. factor) ψ = potential In the diffuse layer: σB = σD = 2.31 no1/2ψd σB= charge on outer sphere plane σD = charge on diffuse plane no = concentration of counterions d = distance of interfacial region σp distance

  7. The Fundamental Concepts and Assumptions of SCM’s • Protons are the dominant potentially determining ions • All surfaces have a single site type • Each site can undergo two protonation rxns • Charges are always expressed as integers • Strict distinction between inner- and outer-sphere complexes

  8. Reactions responsible for surface charge (1) SOH2+ <==> SOHo + H+ Ka1 = [SOHo]{H+} / [SOH2+] (2) SOHo <==> SO- + H+ Ka2 = [SO-] {H+} / [SOHo] where {} = mol / Kg, and [] = mol / L

  9. For a titration… (CA - [H+]) - (CB - [OH]) = {(+) surface sites} - {(-) surface sites} = W where, W is the charge (mol ) C is [ ] of acid or base Q = charge (mol / Kg) = W / a (amount of sorbent) σ (C / m2) = Q F / A where, F is Faraday A is surface area (m2/kg) The zero point of charge (ZPC) is: {SO-} = {SOH2+}

  10. Ka values must be corrected for electrostatic forces! Following ∆Gads = ∆Gcoul + ∆Gchem, Ka = Kintrinsic + (electrostatic) Ka = Kintrinsic exp (∆ZFψ / RT) The electrostatic contribution – dependence on potential – that allows SCM’s to describe adsorption as a function of pH Electrostatic or coulombic correction factor

  11. The actual adsorption rxn becomes… SOHo + Me2+ = SOMe+ + H+ K1c = [SOMe+] {H+} / [SOHo] {Me2+} K1c = K1int exp (∆ZFψ / RT)

  12. Part II. SCM’s at the MMR

  13. Chemical Characteristics • Groundwater around sewage plume has highest [DO], pH values of 5.3-5.8, low dissolved salts • High NO3- under beds, [DO] decreases with depth • Biodegradation of OM and solute transport away from disposal beds • decreases [DO] through plume, decreases [NO3-], accumulates dissolved Fe(II) ---- impact pH! • Leading edge of Zn contamination = 400 m from source; low Zn until 195 m

  14. unsaturated pond saturated Assumptions • Simple groundwater flow model

  15. Assumptions (cont’d) • Mechanical dispersion >>> molecular dispersion • Zn adsorption onto sediments is the 1° influence on Zn transport • Local equilibrium wrt to adsorption rxns achieved faster than timescale of transport

  16. Mass action equations • The one-site SCM Zn2+ + >SOH = >SOZn+ + H+ sQSOZn = S>SOZnγHCH / CZnS>SOH • The two-site SCM Zn2+ + >SsOH = >SsOZn+ + H+ Zn2+ + >SwOH = >SwOZn+ + H+ sQSOZn = mass action constant Sx = density of adsorption sites γH = activity coef of H+ C = conc

  17. What happens when you cut off the source? • Acidification • Transport: head and tail behavior • [Zn] in the core Source: Kent et al. 2000

  18. 4. Used empirical parameters associated with adsorption isotherms • Linear isotherms: cs = Kd*c Cs = concentration in solid phase Kd = equilibrium distribution coefficient c = concentration in fluid phase • Langmuir or Freundlich isotherms: Θi = Bai/(1+Bai) Θi = fraction of adsorption sites occupied by the adsorbate B = bonding constant ai = activity of the adsorbate cs = Kf*cn Kf = Freundlich adsorption constant n = Freundlich exponent

  19. Brusseau and Srivastava (1999) used different Kd values in different geochemical zones to compensate for variable chemistry affecting Li adsorption during transport • Kirkner et al. (1985) and Viswanathan et al. (1998) account for variable chemistry by calculating changes in aqueous speciation of adsorbing solutes with changing chemical conditions

More Related