Chemical and toxicological properties of coal fly ash - University of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 25. The range of concentrations and recommended water quality levels for chemical constituents measuredin test solutions of 12.Range ofRecommended waterChemical concentrations qua1 i ty 1 eve1 s r2constituent (mdL) a (m3/Ub Ch angec rcaAl 1 values in mg/L except pH.b~alues are MATES cited from Cleland and Kingsbury (1977) unless another source isindicated.cValues of r2 and r represent the results from multiple and simple 1 inearregression analyses of the relationship between mortality observed in the testsolutions of the extract and the concentrations of each chemical constituent measuredin those test solutions.d~rom Quality Criteria for Water 1976 (U.S. EPA, 1976).which the EC exceeded 4.0 mmhos/cm (Suloway et al., 1981). Thus, the totalionic strength of the test solutions of I7 also probably contributed to theacute toxicity of this fly ash extract.The extract generated from I2 was nearly neutral in pH when the LC-50determinations were made (Table 24). This extract was much less toxic thanwere the W2 and I3 extracts (Table 21); therefore, test solutions used todetermine the LC-50 value were comprised of 50 to 100% extract. Because ofthe high percentage of extract used in the test solutions, concentrationsof various chemical constituents were higher in the test solutions of I2than in I3 and W2. The concentrations of B, Mn, Mo, Ni, SO4, and Zn intest solutions of I2 exceeded recommended water quality levels andcorrelated well with mortality data based on the simple linear regressions.
Boron concentrations were high, but extremely high concentrations of B arerequired to produce toxic effects in aquatic life (Becker and Thatcher,1973). For example, the minimum lethal dose for minnows exposed to boricacid at 20' C for 6 hours was reported to be 18,000 to 19,000 mg/L indistilled water and 19,000 to 19,500 mg/L in hard water (Le Clerc andDevlaminck, 1955; Le Clerc, 1960).According to toxicity data available inthe 1 iterature (Cardwell, 1976; Cleland and Kingsbury, 1977; Mount, 1966;Pickering, 1974; Pickering and Gast, 1972; Pickering and Henderson, 1966).The individual concentrations of Mn, 0, Ni, SO4, and Zn were probablynot. high enough to cause the mortality observed in the test solutions of 12.The total ionic strength of the I2 extract as measured by EC was less thanthat of the I7 extract (Tables 14 and 16). The EC of the undiluted I2extract ranged from 2.74 to 3.80. Insignificant mortality was observed inreconstituted water in which the EC was less than 3.0 (Suloway et al.,1981). Because of the complex chemical composition of the I2 fly ashextract and the unknown synergistic and antagonistic effects of thechemical constituents composing the extract, it is not possible from theseexperiments to determine specifically which chemical constituents weredirectly responsible for the observed mortality.Analyses of variance of fish lengths and weights (Tables 26 and 27)showed that only the fathead minnows were different in weight for sample13, and so all duplicates were combined for each organism for each sample.The mean initial length and weight of fathead minnows used in thebioaccumulation experiments were approximately 50 mm and 1 g, respectively(Table 28). The mean initial length and weight of the green sunfish usedTable 26. The mean initial lengths and weights of adult fathead minnows used in the bioaccumulation experiments.Mean lengthMean weightSample N (md F valued (9) F valuedaResults of the analysis of variance indicate that if F(1,8)than 3.46, the replicates are significantly different.-- -- -- -- - -is greater
Page 1 and 2:
lllinoiSTATSTAT
Page 3 and 4:
V SURVEYatural Resources Building60
Page 5 and 6: TABLESSummary of the origin and gen
Page 7 and 8: The overall purpose of this investi
Page 9 and 10: steady state conditions in the disp
Page 11 and 12: total carbon determinations were ca
Page 13 and 14: y passing the extract through a col
Page 15 and 16: The GC-MS analyses were performed b
Page 17 and 18: with ultrapure water. The final HCl
Page 19 and 20: Be 3. Wlir~eraiogical composi'tion
Page 21 and 22: Table 6. Trace constituent concentr
Page 23 and 24: Table 7. Fly ash sample classificat
Page 25 and 26: Table 8. Carbon, sulfur, and benzen
Page 27 and 28: Wave number (cm-'Figure 8. Infrared
Page 29 and 30: Figure 12. HPLC chromatogram of the
Page 31 and 32: Figure 16. HPLC chromatogram of the
Page 34 and 35: Table 11. Organic components in the
Page 36 and 37: Figure 21. Gas chromatogram of the
Page 38 and 39: 4.Jrcrm c o mQU"* 'tn U.a-U U O NrO
Page 40 and 41: constituents. The amount of soluble
Page 42 and 43: Table 14. Change in chemical compos
Page 44 and 45: Table 16. Change in chemical compos
Page 46 and 47: Change in chemical composition as a
Page 48 and 49: Figure 26. Changes in the concentra
Page 50 and 51: Table 19. Corytituents in the long-
Page 52 and 53: Table 21. The LC-50 values, amount
Page 54 and 55: Table 23. The range of concentratio
Page 58 and 59: Table 27. The mean initial lengths
Page 60 and 61: Table 32. The mean final lengths an
Page 62 and 63: Several of the extrbivalves ( ~ are
Page 64 and 65: The mean concentrations of various
Page 66 and 67: 1972). Cadmium is a dangerous cumul
Page 68 and 69: Bl umer, M., 1957, Removal of eleme
Page 70 and 71: Furr, A. K-, T. F, Parkinson, R. A.
Page 72 and 73: Murtha, M. J., and G. Burnet, 1979,
Page 74 and 75: Standard methods for examination of
show all

Chemical and toxicological properties of coal fly ash - University of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?