<%BANNER%>

Utilization of University of Florida flux meter for estimating arsenic contamination in groundwater

University of Florida Institutional Repository
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110113_AAAADJ INGEST_TIME 2011-01-13T19:56:07Z PACKAGE UFE0005441_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 11019 DFID F20110113_AACGVK ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH gupta_p_Page_36.pro GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
202d3a6c49914cd54b1899f0524006d6
SHA-1
f164dd07f43d6a847e535836c8f75565ecafdcf4
21650 F20110113_AACHHF gupta_p_Page_42thm.jpg
0ad4dd9654781b55277beedda6cc7322
49459cb8dcae60343994b10210a3fcf6eeeb7ea9
33961 F20110113_AACHCH gupta_p_Page_17.pro
717ad90f807c2b9c6e38d6f3f1b5f6e7
4006bb8d08a2ffeb7ec5b01c51e0e4b268e354da
2896 F20110113_AACGVL gupta_p_Page_04.txt
954e66afc7effa49498b6b38cc1b5d24
f5802344f570b7cc8abe50283d034c59ca75cff5
97447 F20110113_AACHHG gupta_p_Page_43.QC.jpg
1eedf9f762513e0bc30c4281a3b4b729
04a535868b6227fa75db6f377a684a40063f9280
41355 F20110113_AACHCI gupta_p_Page_18.pro
4ce74eab5444c1eece64d1a6db756c24
1d8ff59736103ecb2396297d19ad3eb5a26440dc
15293 F20110113_AACGVM gupta_p_Page_47thm.jpg
81d8d24888e173b48355391664ba37e7
6648b418761f3237af0108a66e52b96dd19e226c
45754 F20110113_AACHHH gupta_p_Page_44thm.jpg
a72979ddf5bc3900154bb906f68cae1f
88d5a2a66f4deb6ce04d9b4ea59f223d305c85bb
30031 F20110113_AACHCJ gupta_p_Page_19.pro
c2433137079a37863acf895529994cf8
8774b17a3c05461573c90d50c2fea34511fc1046
68245 F20110113_AACGVN gupta_p_Page_42.QC.jpg
fd65eedba351771659d6f246bb650b6c
cf8ae391f623258baa76bb6cf1210fdaaa8171ea
85604 F20110113_AACHHI gupta_p_Page_44.QC.jpg
5f08345babfa6bd46b7256ec58b943d0
d468c680e9633f33a5267a20b9bc8b2de3113d2b
40077 F20110113_AACHCK gupta_p_Page_21.pro
5ad62b892f8dfca8eb374ff384f89de3
d9b40e51cea63f3be78745759cd8affbb1834b4c
39850 F20110113_AACGVO gupta_p_Page_20.jp2
17dc0ce44c1fabac14d8f5f6977fca51
534b4671d99489ed4f9182ea50d4970207d969ad
44416 F20110113_AACHHJ gupta_p_Page_45.QC.jpg
33d2cf80e59f7fd47109ef7e7a345e50
571553fbc07b8eb37f429be32faea5f3e2d79a85
53627 F20110113_AACHCL gupta_p_Page_22.pro
bc8315bb052c27a2e900ba8b40bdfc9c
c16ca5aa057da41bbc289f184ef06f2966f56c17
22665 F20110113_AACGVP gupta_p_Page_12thm.jpg
6304ce2996675e161961abad00dccd47
cff9579cbd36d2a69b424307245cb90a7a0da007
33304 F20110113_AACHCM gupta_p_Page_24.pro
cc6a9ffbf42a143fea963df4cb3ffe0b
a531167e3f8ce6f4822c6cc85b7ce08754fb50ec
1748 F20110113_AACGVQ gupta_p_Page_18.txt
4317af572e7d2e90fccf8a0bc7ecfa6b
b6a718982899b366f86e6ee01349255f94a830ab
22127 F20110113_AACHHK gupta_p_Page_46thm.jpg
e6a8b73ffc94fc59659dfd90fccf1615
74df9334bb38d334075bd9163a9d2b7e6a2e7d68
44117 F20110113_AACHCN gupta_p_Page_27.pro
d6c5cbb0378729c254440ef84e1eb498
97c66473d1bf44ccb2bff243d83934f62b5a4489
71816 F20110113_AACGVR gupta_p_Page_27.QC.jpg
86e04bd124efb8919c1d41441c4d0165
d47c5d6aabfe366814c9939f318c22a715da1f24
64981 F20110113_AACHHL gupta_p_Page_46.QC.jpg
97aed4e15dc162a5929efd63eba09a80
19b0f69417ec37408022aa121ee03bb532df2aee
51701 F20110113_AACHCO gupta_p_Page_28.pro
426494b5fe4d970914f0bd0f240d73e5
18ec3065084aabfab72303a9823b3b772d192594
51189 F20110113_AACGVS gupta_p_Page_26.pro
1994b34abd852377939d835abae76e88
b4cb4b44afa71b48d7a8db1457522ed71564ad00
46961 F20110113_AACHHM gupta_p_Page_48thm.jpg
5fe7187186c64b6aed48a8c5a0658d56
99b324e78a50a87e77371117d1db4317e13fe151
50352 F20110113_AACHCP gupta_p_Page_29.pro
5bf7a1ee1622ba5c1768a0c4f0907a6f
bc88a2ca36ea5dac2fd0ad2e2cc6f40422360b1d
97550 F20110113_AACGVT gupta_p_Page_48.QC.jpg
08597bcc238f268cac5f3bc37d9ef36a
636d85b380096421fff0857ba54e658aaf2dd9af
49985 F20110113_AACHHN gupta_p_Page_49thm.jpg
5e5d90565ee072f0d1bcbf6e6f3f010b
8d19f5c2377e10bf9bdd4604ebdf8e51e66a8f7e
13512 F20110113_AACHCQ gupta_p_Page_30.pro
db08045368b0ad87a7863268df22b07c
a4a7726959fd9b312db604cbf20cca385f685939
7457 F20110113_AACGVU gupta_p_Page_52thm.jpg
938b1cd18e032ca73d5275cd67fd50d2
3aebeeb339bec56457b1903b6042f3de17cc35a6
107932 F20110113_AACHHO gupta_p_Page_49.QC.jpg
b4683b1bd823b9bf6280b5c250c1c368
1583473b0ce999dd59340639a10add6cb1634471
43334 F20110113_AACHCR gupta_p_Page_31.pro
537d65ab3d27ae38b82ac737251ae95f
ba7293535ae90affdf6640b7bef14e74f0b615ca
80729 F20110113_AACGVV gupta_p_Page_25.QC.jpg
0303b269c66d020624fd062f031d89c4
5d7071cacf865363dfe2a21606c2b361cf4ff37f
21993 F20110113_AACHHP gupta_p_Page_51thm.jpg
381b9e9ed3ec4a50479a0e0a950908b7
99687ec3d910f284b7fa9902738aa509eba9a779
50798 F20110113_AACHCS gupta_p_Page_32.pro
8df6d3f328ca0a450d0ca1c6c881dc53
f632c80a9cae63c76209c158542104bb44a5fff1
172071 F20110113_AACGVW gupta_p_Page_39.jpg
5923702fd364c23126d039d661f60eaf
d3fdbe4489a37298ca1a01df799fb377035319b4
76861 F20110113_AACHHQ gupta_p_Page_51.QC.jpg
eb0b6de1a7986a621e178bc45c0c7570
92c7622236b720b5aeaec505d6f7f143fd39bc66
43198 F20110113_AACHCT gupta_p_Page_33.pro
a525232eba667b202692f6cc7871f6e2
1d3f1fb881535261679c0af3d166d07b59942169
100432 F20110113_AACGVX gupta_p_Page_03.jpg
cdd1a5d6130b92640b9129fc15fff1b7
f07fa19a6cb5d07d963ad221c4d4030a1525407e
20675 F20110113_AACHHR gupta_p_Page_52.QC.jpg
3993487a437e00384b0bd2238977aa2e
363be82d247e6e508a1ac4e1d314eb52c7e3cde8
49227 F20110113_AACHCU gupta_p_Page_34.pro
98f122006b501e0aca60e5b611eca956
97571e7db9ae3fbd39ed75cc9499b36a2771989f
62495 F20110113_AACHHS UFE0005441_00001.mets FULL
518f0d26a5b95bf742ad5e41132be9ef
201332eafea3c73c3d913620c32f96eb7309186b
47305 F20110113_AACHCV gupta_p_Page_35.pro
5cf7136c3b08578c86c56efb121c5f52
b60986d053cca1be285d2a55996cfbcd88e2d342
1053954 F20110113_AACGVY gupta_p_Page_21.tif
3377e07c3eff0b04e3865902f2f9b732
1908c0e5d4859e4b13586431e5bc953c6b60bf69
7005 F20110113_AACHCW gupta_p_Page_37.pro
be097cc2617981e03553f51370a85bd6
0bac40f248a98b6aec7cc1d4a15877c864121064
32861 F20110113_AACHCX gupta_p_Page_39.pro
0bcad994fa926a7175bfe1f313c1dff5
6e4f8dda99d98c437e44cf25e44859e2460e4acd
849431 F20110113_AACGVZ gupta_p_Page_07.jp2
a2662d78ee4300463535ad5478c7d456
2a28a7c96aa5996c8100696ded4fdc5a3cc3658c
110070 F20110113_AACHAA gupta_p_Page_32.jp2
f6a3e681424dc696543b719fa2940606
f99f8953115704bb48dbdf798f41acd020719eda
45652 F20110113_AACHCY gupta_p_Page_40.pro
cf8da7c310d3a9f6e58e9ee2271089fa
8a35b885b7fb3d46f603af6d3d81e4ca618d1619
221598 F20110113_AACGYA gupta_p_Page_04.jpg
8f8cfd6add0bc598d7574aee4a487f24
81f98540ea550836f8c743ca1a50f9b1c41a77d7
96151 F20110113_AACHAB gupta_p_Page_33.jp2
4faefda998b9849b40f883f6617960bd
2c8a7b347a782cad0253a9dfd135420d9f075a78
28547 F20110113_AACHCZ gupta_p_Page_41.pro
3ad7fb4180cffd727bd6d3c0c6e9563e
57dd61b78cc4b756f465cb3b80def0bb242d3884
94469 F20110113_AACGYB gupta_p_Page_06.jpg
557a51c4a59270b9d9f89b186524ed9b
2b6cbfe6e05f0840fb57287a8ccc100687ea49fc
18556 F20110113_AACHAC gupta_p_Page_37.jp2
f6b5a8aac2fffbc661c210fa98801041
74b99e5e3d388b72c92d656e076ca872b179be9b
60239 F20110113_AACGYC gupta_p_Page_09.jpg
24eca0cbf63dd984cff49c5ccc988558
874ff9ac8bb5695e8bebaac2c853ee5e62204222
5645 F20110113_AACHFA gupta_p_Page_02.QC.jpg
7a1e6c22bd2fed047ef3549d3641f036
7b2f6bd06f728d8796c731ff47be5c0bedcb5668
186275 F20110113_AACGYD gupta_p_Page_10.jpg
179f7a1cb6a5b02c2f20cf0875134480
3992697dbc1adb5450b5ff22e2757af9dd480cf8
723987 F20110113_AACHAD gupta_p_Page_39.jp2
aef40ec092cf62b33cf25d2f1f9e55ba
3e31c3fed36b33598833c5bbab2642f139089db6
12911 F20110113_AACHFB gupta_p_Page_03thm.jpg
979e825af8fbad6d8945d1af36f6cedd
a1de2a37cb4a8a5d92a182d399d8ec3f47514f69
210053 F20110113_AACGYE gupta_p_Page_11.jpg
5e042e8b25c4c09d54dbc8f994167d49
d4e9741251375f51a807c2e3c3fbf13c1e8e78f3
1031092 F20110113_AACHAE gupta_p_Page_43.jp2
aec1670bfb6d6f01fdd6906ef4af4756
51a8588431a0ef6fdae1785774c6f20a2fea98e3
39947 F20110113_AACHFC gupta_p_Page_03.QC.jpg
0743ab5b105b9b80041413c1c483c946
773d88df48d0eb8f9972a6917b7e703ffff00afc
157080 F20110113_AACGYF gupta_p_Page_13.jpg
ce219e65410324514dc5b80143ead1bf
eb2ed25bc8040a818d977b0af764029b8aab4628
89490 F20110113_AACHAF gupta_p_Page_46.jp2
aabdb487782e384ec393a042ff0dcd47
73c91a2a4d7023aa3aefc35fe7ed4a454e26a34c
44044 F20110113_AACHFD gupta_p_Page_04thm.jpg
641ee5c24559e3afd5ffc1d9dd7d0add
0ec9398dca50587379404f62a2aad3b411ca8c8f
133210 F20110113_AACGYG gupta_p_Page_14.jpg
7c27148221289e778b277c4a8a2c641b
785926423cfad8dc50e4118daff493fa1fc6b9b2
63947 F20110113_AACHAG gupta_p_Page_47.jp2
8c95cd2bd6694b67a5fbc213d9388657
37f8c82ddd72a0ec1f0eefc2e6c527fac0ad74aa
89106 F20110113_AACHFE gupta_p_Page_04.QC.jpg
79f23db6ab775fee069726340810ae68
9b98edc3fbc06ebaf0cd023a7b45398b2c68a368
156018 F20110113_AACGYH gupta_p_Page_17.jpg
257cc2445414b5108cd3899dc533b6c6
2963bc747162185aeaacfe36d69aba071bfb0480
1051953 F20110113_AACHAH gupta_p_Page_48.jp2
bea849d7a5f4c9bd1862311874bf836d
cc4a30526060a38dc292b2961628323bd37976ea
37210 F20110113_AACHFF gupta_p_Page_05thm.jpg
b80525a0ef900eaca323b526154dc425
dd0ca056b78bd7164fefbf0e50676a8f7ca483db
165434 F20110113_AACGYI gupta_p_Page_19.jpg
aacfbbaee5bcf59ce08e4d43ae6ba14e
e7e2a4481969eb24e9f8081b570aab3052e8bbf6
1051985 F20110113_AACHAI gupta_p_Page_49.jp2
d584245e009eaaeba43626fd2fa2b95a
fffd788bd64c2496819ed33a456acdd0e5eb4129
51881 F20110113_AACHFG gupta_p_Page_06.QC.jpg
0ce30599ead4e9ea147606ae8ee7ec1d
5b43ce5cdd50e798130b4abeda29b5c65c43bb52
76474 F20110113_AACGYJ gupta_p_Page_20.jpg
ba717f3f73a9ae1894403cdb70ba9726
da21237a59e5d871492774d39d47b093b04fb0d9
137271 F20110113_AACHAJ gupta_p_Page_50.jp2
82a9ca8c68bce9c027434f3bec8314fd
ac99dee0b64dab15e6aa1884e940ad4564a786d2
38593 F20110113_AACHFH gupta_p_Page_07thm.jpg
85e0988f73bd31358762c819c41cde16
1c134695d013632d5ff399e60d42cd0fea8c14c5
173134 F20110113_AACGYK gupta_p_Page_21.jpg
b537c46d9566bc9be146701fa2859ad7
b07cfa078f4416a0c89ad177a5b8fc9688c17200
26358 F20110113_AACHAK gupta_p_Page_52.jp2
b016d44671d401b9e739cf64bdf05004
d343a187a2836a33c63c04bf867d96cbc0f9acfc
224441 F20110113_AACGYL gupta_p_Page_22.jpg
e8870026d059852a6bd53dcd699fa92e
54967427915f7afa3f194bd00f020a9edeba6de8
F20110113_AACHAL gupta_p_Page_01.tif
df079955eb7fed98706178ebecd4051d
330b263f178b35a5fe8e332b9e48a04823428763
84453 F20110113_AACGTO gupta_p_Page_22.QC.jpg
80a4f5b404a43ac4ff54d3b4a1756ad0
70548084a2e2117f8e1fc6c7f3b3dc7f042079bf
62316 F20110113_AACHFI gupta_p_Page_07.QC.jpg
68dcc9fb5e222ca996f6ff697703004e
1610b53845ee522d1da5b74acc44f90e7d5a9722
209376 F20110113_AACGYM gupta_p_Page_23.jpg
e4cc7646f77937c3ff77c4d3d7e2c79f
b008161ad0c4eda100e61c3b9ca5cea20a42f7f5
F20110113_AACHAM gupta_p_Page_02.tif
f73a8a9d2a86c52b7e1736fdc5a355df
1b40d5c866d446b0e0f7ceee95815021e9177924
79256 F20110113_AACGTP gupta_p_Page_39.QC.jpg
a6905f1afec3cbd5fec252c2ba7be8a3
7918e5f232f5ab7722fa1f2515a0b733acc14f8e
67042 F20110113_AACHFJ gupta_p_Page_08.QC.jpg
2ec76582508cba68f3717b437ac4c5a1
d8af750fd9bf32fd19b4a8ae3cc147b2582ae358
177272 F20110113_AACGYN gupta_p_Page_24.jpg
405cd2eb7952bf9a68a34d0050914fbd
3bc8e8c1714acd8a5dccb1f03f64901c3046874c
F20110113_AACHAN gupta_p_Page_03.tif
507ac8ff95c8028037756bc987e8e7f4
99a44378f10d53eb7ae0e9f46849522ff53f2345
557705 F20110113_AACGTQ gupta_p_Page_36.jp2
2382b6e17a283e16b38f55ff2e012d49
3915d3262a1177deb8da4ff39eff94d205dfa5df
8060 F20110113_AACHFK gupta_p_Page_09thm.jpg
7feed93a462e04712ab2e71cf718c3ae
8f50b8a80a06a62644868abc84e910f2653cf02c
216187 F20110113_AACGYO gupta_p_Page_25.jpg
c5eacd9cb406ba9c4d22ae6e78f49eb8
b228b3e09137947386b434826b05ffd798f0baa9
25271604 F20110113_AACHAO gupta_p_Page_04.tif
5a77e5a1e6a0c45b9e0a8a91b6520b07
0cb477556de724958e6cb5bfeba3464868516a07
185332 F20110113_AACGTR gupta_p_Page_12.jpg
9f8a208e399852d0971fcceefab80d73
39cf7aee72636e3bf34337186315fc5271f7fb05
24099 F20110113_AACHFL gupta_p_Page_09.QC.jpg
81248a06817c690257aa87e1f9a435d3
8ab8c286e4050aeb884c492e928e51c147a7e04b
189118 F20110113_AACGYP gupta_p_Page_27.jpg
f6a9b9ade6d2124244783aa06bda6b6a
4c2d73b324129e856fb423d5187f345e49fca276
F20110113_AACHAP gupta_p_Page_06.tif
427351783c0cf3a9a410f929e03332da
00a6a7aa03ca922726bc0801a4b892004a7ffa01
43322 F20110113_AACGTS gupta_p_Page_42.pro
06797d8d85a998ca37ce0a9bd347ef25
76f9cc5d512849551b58149afbbafd6197ac6b9e
21380 F20110113_AACHFM gupta_p_Page_10thm.jpg
114c0dd0a2fb40407917d53df51e42ae
330490a8c05c33cb4097f8cfc07305a4baba2ade
217802 F20110113_AACGYQ gupta_p_Page_28.jpg
955cbcb0ec5c62aec9fa41cde4b6fd81
faba851d0e40698bb45bfdcc012f142030348064
F20110113_AACHAQ gupta_p_Page_07.tif
8195d6eb10f3f9bc79a0e1cd266c0504
5366c28613b2e64243c1f8ca6d1526cf9c3f0998
44155 F20110113_AACGTT gupta_p_Page_38.pro
2265a9325bdf583acc25b185b80f1f27
716c1a9c688701ba1a550ce7a60a99b94da32393
24965 F20110113_AACHFN gupta_p_Page_11thm.jpg
8810ac87abed77e869ea081db66c5117
6ec1e79a6f085e90f5d5593656713e86201084e3
210188 F20110113_AACGYR gupta_p_Page_29.jpg
4bf89695b69aa858dc3f79491215ecfd
efbf29bbebd3ca8157e42ba67c93b8b2202f6bb4
F20110113_AACHAR gupta_p_Page_08.tif
45e2c32953450a83b180cac214d1bd52
92aeb5565c9bcc90c3073ab5ce8cd9d4ecf7b617
113034 F20110113_AACGTU gupta_p_Page_51.jp2
f66238a5026c1a9ac093b9553f517b33
70e2e70c212e8f80fceb7670ab59eadcb82e6afa
66358 F20110113_AACHFO gupta_p_Page_12.QC.jpg
476eb98d2c58a4abfaaff2d5f8557a55
d5363fdce614f9cf151de3445332205036bd6aff
63885 F20110113_AACGYS gupta_p_Page_30.jpg
006d7c8d99ac41f9d89f3449f83f9b0a
07a54c1dcf2b433fafcd28b78d737d33442029bf
F20110113_AACHAS gupta_p_Page_09.tif
e14281a3e4bc2d36cf60c54254b78c2e
ef87f0192ef132f5581e4ba4af0bc659e798c476
F20110113_AACGTV gupta_p_Page_33.tif
dc8ce8a399200a5fdc2c814e2faece4b
c8a1046384e65a4bbecaa09a1ad31b226c918067
18624 F20110113_AACHFP gupta_p_Page_13thm.jpg
50033642fce860d865236f3af4d33fc9
2b882b2ed5f42cc8928acc31a7199ae78657437a
186508 F20110113_AACGYT gupta_p_Page_31.jpg
2040e019345ecf17c84108d30d506174
fbfe325f6166b23a17395020bc2a814228ffd2e2
F20110113_AACHAT gupta_p_Page_10.tif
0265af4418774378833642c7c7751fe4
00e7b42f989d0036567e5f031abc71d0e294d4e9
F20110113_AACGTW gupta_p_Page_48.tif
d58ec2391306885dd6b470973c7afa93
5bd1dda25ffddb2bd9af1ab83dacbd31597ddae6
17775 F20110113_AACHFQ gupta_p_Page_14thm.jpg
b901530816ea8d403db2ca187bd7f9e0
f76d88180006df625effdb5cd6881fe19a43507f
F20110113_AACHAU gupta_p_Page_13.tif
80f14ab63823baeb77e889baab5cb5d4
75884b5b88dcc39b4857bc1601f7d144d97d5ad4
20662 F20110113_AACHFR gupta_p_Page_15thm.jpg
fe1090e8684020c87e614654ae391687
32c398765b329de85352a69afd70fe13ec4c7d00
212840 F20110113_AACGYU gupta_p_Page_32.jpg
64584bcd8a4128eb7dbc8001ababc2ed
1d10188759ff236b6595352770a41a0eb52b9164
F20110113_AACHAV gupta_p_Page_14.tif
6556c5dacd112f373cb64bef3b3feafc
bcd9184f17cfda0f18fea1cf0821d396a0e18aa2
96266 F20110113_AACGTX gupta_p_Page_31.jp2
7782e45f012355b28b515bd550072d7f
7e3c23214f6d283e9bc1ccbc857f9f65822934ae
22705 F20110113_AACHFS gupta_p_Page_16thm.jpg
06c605d6efae2d1479628da737d9c754
123512da5d0ed389faa573dbbdcc486ce423a3fb
36062 F20110113_AACGYV gupta_p_Page_37.jpg
135160867770e313fb9844d86cb9e912
1a140a75e92b1a651995fad844cffd9b3600826f
F20110113_AACHAW gupta_p_Page_17.tif
f7b3146072e3e158b3dd5771172abf37
5a6da8ba1916ea9a964289c1c29932bf54768a68
79044 F20110113_AACGTY gupta_p_Page_11.QC.jpg
61cc5f8e3bda605682909989d6a6fa75
4b9f51df20d50ee6c7b1860837b28b5ee406be0c
67575 F20110113_AACHFT gupta_p_Page_16.QC.jpg
fd1378abdd722ed9591d03e4fec3e318
60ad42ba6050a2001e27fbc36ea486ebbe5fb561
220214 F20110113_AACGYW gupta_p_Page_43.jpg
284f713f7830320b5874bdfc2dece690
2c1e9cc2f45c3669af0c112ced7955f72f41187c
F20110113_AACHAX gupta_p_Page_18.tif
0dd59446987a85c58bee81b3bc240415
f680edec94f812879575201937e06f074f31f33b
274300 F20110113_AACGTZ gupta_p_Page_50.jpg
6c43c2ae264d75f2ce82dd5fe8bcf961
2e22928d2a232f512c62e0db312ccde31e277b26
41648 F20110113_AACHFU gupta_p_Page_17thm.jpg
1934c9faaab099c7e319bc8d34b61a96
a90b9a2151cf769423abb78a0db7d9d05005fc54
120856 F20110113_AACGYX gupta_p_Page_45.jpg
3aecfde7b7d398df1ff43accfe6b0ea1
772d652f02beaee04140f771c2231fb330f15a8a
F20110113_AACHAY gupta_p_Page_19.tif
d1be62de36760a1e69bacc45a0b801ec
b9de76ce92d804c5600c40b6dab947033d2b0082
73209 F20110113_AACHFV gupta_p_Page_17.QC.jpg
461a97b5e592f9be1a3b08e7eae3e3f4
9ec7df785e19fa4e0b3476fed078d0cb0b5f6539
170238 F20110113_AACGYY gupta_p_Page_46.jpg
24bf95896c7eaff7161cdcca6a4de93b
8be0bb1566627da9587b00b7e3fb407a58b5aee2
F20110113_AACHAZ gupta_p_Page_20.tif
8935203713bcfc3bbb06042048f7395e
462d7cdb3c1e75b41f1e214cf0779e0c0d4f51c4
20319 F20110113_AACHFW gupta_p_Page_18thm.jpg
38483589bda61957bca2e23cfbed4066
d8735c25ac2155a045c8263e3a41c354bff024bd
65325 F20110113_AACGWA gupta_p_Page_05.QC.jpg
d887af84d3a3c4d21db28aecfcff5403
8366e71c817cfbe2ac4684b5e588cef8ffa21cb7
123250 F20110113_AACGYZ gupta_p_Page_47.jpg
cb05303671b13a7cb9491c0289cf1007
1c7b70e837d70315908c39f963acaf4791bec381
63303 F20110113_AACHFX gupta_p_Page_18.QC.jpg
f0691b672786f994da6626a9258ec2f5
1763ebdd74bf23a40d9f0dacb4e73d454584fcff
187614 F20110113_AACGWB gupta_p_Page_38.jpg
739d211fc737c09c4b0b9e72c627d7bf
e797b32f4192fc265afe88e9c6183eccb789e766
49483 F20110113_AACHDA gupta_p_Page_43.pro
793783b4018d1e6c653fd8499d762caa
bab8aa9c23f31a3bbbc7263dbe82b793e79ec9c1
42027 F20110113_AACHFY gupta_p_Page_19thm.jpg
6f73c5ff079aa856629e2369b95c1cef
799bc59bca3f44ee036c5e17f51ce5fa568a2927
49367 F20110113_AACGWC gupta_p_Page_11.pro
228f89be253c91f6485dc8d271fc02f7
20a8d7ae7cb61b863212a018de53d5f3b9071b84
39039 F20110113_AACHDB gupta_p_Page_44.pro
78c4b3b00a79e192d8ccef5058423190
f20089e71978ffe9bae1af54e921af4d584ec1cd
73918 F20110113_AACHFZ gupta_p_Page_19.QC.jpg
b03e2e60f666f1c182db02d133b10324
207f5f9dfab8ba7e5ab81d3dad445f7851f90144
326 F20110113_AACGWD gupta_p_Page_37.txt
954a511192c30ffa10a5e30d539363aa
19be418b5dd3018e022318be2edf492c76f219c1
40756 F20110113_AACHDC gupta_p_Page_46.pro
dbda7959f4dd3a654dff544ca6f11e5d
09de3b7c7a46d45f4bd59c6d4536333862d36921
F20110113_AACGWE gupta_p_Page_16.tif
9923a64eb5733bc7ceeebe31e0ea8b0b
e246ce2d3a2af841e7c175b82b73b1ac1b23df72
28494 F20110113_AACHDD gupta_p_Page_47.pro
2d243835462c3f1b628a6766d70aea02
cbeadfb6106bb7cd2f601a909142eb568b99bef5
F20110113_AACGWF gupta_p_Page_27.tif
1fd2c9dc6516fb240d5046f6a15c2a1b
c8224f5eff0a9f4dfc5659ec35b68cd6902c571d
50866 F20110113_AACHDE gupta_p_Page_48.pro
e4cc2d355d55b66b35293f846b51e8a1
9a537cb0ecf405c066ba56c8cafc49bbb8fc68e9
61438 F20110113_AACGWG gupta_p_Page_45.jp2
538947dcf8aba6d28852cf259a814c9f
ba9b9fae52477430e2802b6c76f95f8d236fd765
65507 F20110113_AACHDF gupta_p_Page_50.pro
d83679f010d914b81c6bf1b1faf5020e
a7c779641e494f82792ba23d9a63df609238ee1e
194454 F20110113_AACGWH gupta_p_Page_35.jpg
c142226fb330360ee4ae6f193dfa6197
96469d319a1240bb391ed0df7dc78d5d9e95f4f6
92098 F20110113_AACGWI gupta_p_Page_42.jp2
886c59095341948db9f4254c883d6b7e
7b77dc48f8fe300c34bfdccdf6e247e714b46f1e
52627 F20110113_AACHDG gupta_p_Page_51.pro
4f48e173440fdfcb270fd354313b6be2
9026f3cceddef705ea1795f81d530f39ffc4c9c1
92905 F20110113_AACGWJ gupta_p_Page_40.jp2
dcbafd8d1857ac1e15b9bb8d9f105080
440b66fbec70dc37b8d515a916082bd0d57ca371
10448 F20110113_AACHDH gupta_p_Page_52.pro
5b586e14b7d0d2b8fd64dba4ec87d67a
bb4d4550f244acb9c6b7ccb7d1f3c2696e7878b5
56957 F20110113_AACGWK gupta_p_Page_15.QC.jpg
0a4ab2206c991f5df524e9aa66caab6c
ba78f0e17fe13e24d0c3c5d2c539dcc8353e8307
473 F20110113_AACHDI gupta_p_Page_01.txt
e1f138182ae200c0f8288bbf94efd0aa
7764138cd4c9247ff4cc2e2314e1f7e9f7030223
20697 F20110113_AACGWL gupta_p_Page_08thm.jpg
6dd408dafd2cacc570ec52786fe3ddef
ab94bcce3e09cfe32a2c23eec5068c5afdd647f7
108 F20110113_AACHDJ gupta_p_Page_02.txt
3385397da52c3541d323dac47d9bb996
cc4e97d7f37db7c6caad07098ac7f18521fd7004
24719 F20110113_AACGWM gupta_p_Page_28thm.jpg
9e21346e1424db06cb4f391e4bd207e5
6abf2d4df68b9488b1541e841fd5d47fc2cffa57
934 F20110113_AACHDK gupta_p_Page_03.txt
a4a2253979e599ba89d798c2a300980e
f93e6a97841c23b14063b29a75ada20b72cac451
8997 F20110113_AACGWN gupta_p_Page_30thm.jpg
84c6c4fa824f09715d89a44b8e4cbeb6
b4115bb64f4430ebe20d9d3071cca16056df5bdf
1859 F20110113_AACHDL gupta_p_Page_05.txt
46933377bde14ab3021d1666b0d747ac
fb20d9a438527bce4941358ebaea78a3067e2212
114432 F20110113_AACGWO gupta_p_Page_22.jp2
49a64fcd7c28bde07c7e7c0024775fb0
8f40b297d5a93ef026cda0a0b940d2eca58b4aa2
1091 F20110113_AACHDM gupta_p_Page_07.txt
cd8f5d658866e2cdc263985f5730ea9f
e073a94f54f2f15b617a5eccca73c85ff05dee03
153288 F20110113_AACGWP gupta_p_Page_05.jpg
16234c1c391d978b940f5ae20c21fc40
96ae5a0b278d0b7a0e93fcf5108440018252c0f0
1818 F20110113_AACHDN gupta_p_Page_08.txt
95bcd4b081460817bbacafcdef28a59d
0674910c4a2286caf947c6b0cfd6f809d7c1bfd0
57670 F20110113_AACGWQ gupta_p_Page_13.QC.jpg
097096e4d756ca9b8afcc44bfcf5189f
c788c791f10abcabdcfd654c78015a295e622ea7
523 F20110113_AACHDO gupta_p_Page_09.txt
59cd1d8d5fdb1a0b099778205fce471b
a8969ed1dd5424961ba023696167bfef6e2d9eb0
183597 F20110113_AACGWR gupta_p_Page_08.jpg
1cfdc4c2f441aac605d30db498adb7c4
dcb35af4863dc4c6d80759efa28e13bf1ec6cf72
1808 F20110113_AACHDP gupta_p_Page_10.txt
d16ca768cbf627dff08173d5cc91c5ef
8e89506f0540e5452b092be52a1aa674fcf18fd2
1988 F20110113_AACGWS gupta_p_Page_40.txt
ba661250c13959332d889be95fccb9cd
a4092c2e39df85b149991f886359497a6f36a6d7
1941 F20110113_AACHDQ gupta_p_Page_11.txt
7d19f5458766160537762cc9adb9e75c
8deb53f4c58d906c325b64846b8691f5641984b5
75201 F20110113_AACGWT gupta_p_Page_26.QC.jpg
66b9dc34540856c219e8bde0e9e9efcd
903c38eb4c10ff17cfe51508782fbe5065bd411e
1759 F20110113_AACHDR gupta_p_Page_12.txt
2fd8f0e6c356fa93a0eb3b1e2e935ec5
848959821b8fd1c1ba2ea26edec027b8ac2a60f5
176138 F20110113_AACGWU gupta_p_Page_42.jpg
f3e63eca730368850c163722bc06a74d
61353b5df835a75c09604c0a1f08e6fe8186ee2c
1721 F20110113_AACHDS gupta_p_Page_13.txt
a18921f66bde4625f6885bc6a473457f
467b309191b2882d6fed6a0d7e02e0c0cb8ec87a
F20110113_AACGWV gupta_p_Page_49.tif
cfca6fc8a67ab01cc7a6b71d14851206
19aeaec2505afbaaf58c5bbe43bccbae141f55a3
1746 F20110113_AACHDT gupta_p_Page_14.txt
f70378629284d0223f6542665b8338b6
02309031f245bcea93c731d4eebcc90c52b0efe4
17238 F20110113_AACGWW gupta_p_Page_20.pro
6604c5d3fa52300702725569e948e7f4
9f09daa6103f1c7b0f8c74a6923a06ad0d9e3e41
1747 F20110113_AACHDU gupta_p_Page_15.txt
5b5f9c36175c343ed615ec91c683e1a1
4c0dea8a2f0a46c90f3b31155eb064d1af966466
801 F20110113_AACGWX gupta_p_Page_06.txt
deb1cfe889476a347def95917c0f8f0e
e94fa2e0dab0be45dd0ce4867afd7eb85379631e
1664 F20110113_AACHDV gupta_p_Page_17.txt
627f8c0e9a86e760b398228ed779eb41
60f807d5639fffeb11a94f678ddade24d0ee2f21
592 F20110113_AACGWY gupta_p_Page_30.txt
0dc90821bb4314e82c841faa02e6bf8c
a3bf8824a0eaaa79ac1381cff5be0507dec8d976
1403 F20110113_AACHDW gupta_p_Page_19.txt
f03a421a97481dfe0dd4fbaa5150abc0
179b8f9418575a171a1a36e525a5732fbe120090
23086 F20110113_AACGUA gupta_p_Page_41thm.jpg
2fb334d465bdc9f4f5bd0942cf1da254
cef9e17f89585d2a9fa7b49f770e7ac540a610f2
30016 F20110113_AACGWZ gupta_p_Page_20.QC.jpg
76a08a4deee96496fb05830ec5e6ce9f
d2559f6c1a1de8f4a7a15a30f1748673c2904664
100531 F20110113_AACGUB gupta_p_Page_35.jp2
246933631af596aa6f8f1264d2870b3c
89a571d5596bed1938e9cfedc0d7580ea0a2cbc4
692 F20110113_AACHDX gupta_p_Page_20.txt
b9ec6217edb6e6cd7eba011deadb5a00
e6afd7c272da4e6e1d247ed9dfa1edfd471433f8
96945 F20110113_AACGUC gupta_p_Page_38.jp2
369ab44efb3958f778ffa073efd989b3
5d7eeb3661272541dd0f78045e22aadec100bd40
F20110113_AACHBA gupta_p_Page_22.tif
28b5a37cb2f8bd7176e34aca50fedde2
85478e83bc68ddc22842d3c35ea0baee0ecb30da
1694 F20110113_AACHDY gupta_p_Page_21.txt
3a4e8e5c10436d57dab114f52656cb0a
f2cb3f8a87089b5b095bff3d0aefe5de4514391f
289522 F20110113_AACGZA gupta_p_Page_49.jpg
8ed3874286291042da559de509c93c4d
949cb82f2135e89199efff2aabe674a0e84f0381
F20110113_AACHBB gupta_p_Page_23.tif
c46725308846d9866c04419e34f37cc4
d51e440faf4e98bf4470ea2614cf4f6778b4a578
2428 F20110113_AACHDZ gupta_p_Page_23.txt
6d027c87810ed2467e68e589f3187bd4
bf1392e1a1c12589b83dacfd057455d5d499d90e
33446 F20110113_AACGUD gupta_p_Page_06thm.jpg
c339434886a5c9171f276a7f83f1cf27
36d1d721ea918456fe875c7bea87d3bd136821bd
246757 F20110113_AACGZB gupta_p_Page_51.jpg
39549c6fc988b22032b9954eda8060cf
6ea09d01256ef21e0134f3b15510b7c1f70de9f0
F20110113_AACHBC gupta_p_Page_24.tif
53943a3d450d8889a851ec0444fd8f75
ded6a36d18946162f4b97465c78ab0bcca59774c
178377 F20110113_AACGUE gupta_p_Page_40.jpg
225faa8391b673323c1642ef9a8a8b11
02ce037a61c42c84208339ab0897b2178fa1fa37
10163 F20110113_AACHGA gupta_p_Page_20thm.jpg
3acb3ea31b33690cc30ec87e06d6e336
e233f9b222d296472ef99b9865333ae640876ae2
54047 F20110113_AACGZC gupta_p_Page_52.jpg
f568e4edf81827d8c720c2cd4e2932cc
9a097fa14b74444a7f3ec4b6a84ea24b90a83c11
F20110113_AACHBD gupta_p_Page_25.tif
c7860699e6bc378c0c78baaf04b7eec9
b0f241fccb3ff6ce96cf5f97ab78f4eb238d0f2f
50946 F20110113_AACGUF gupta_p_Page_41.QC.jpg
51034333200c5d668e29b49591db5b0c
0e56ab74dc5fec15616435e69672eed5d0000ed7
20996 F20110113_AACHGB gupta_p_Page_21thm.jpg
4184da1760759116267ee543a0e34de0
0b7f0c3779cdb10681c28c6422c22f25740c7898
24960 F20110113_AACGZD gupta_p_Page_01.jp2
22b66d29ff63729052ad171bea418da3
13beb871cb0c1527ac8f67b1a1a77169a07fbf90
47347 F20110113_AACGUG gupta_p_Page_47.QC.jpg
76a419b81ab1ced0cf712106ba5b1d9a
b5df544104950f169a712fed6fce9eceb0a4ab05
66138 F20110113_AACHGC gupta_p_Page_21.QC.jpg
c1ef5f723ae1547da2b961e1fc9dc7b0
b13730cdbb7e23a65a09d7a463cc608fe42676c4
5514 F20110113_AACGZE gupta_p_Page_02.jp2
764e43b43e0fc11346f78984a55d6fa6
cf35e18f44c1bac4eee14d5782bac760e869e729
F20110113_AACHBE gupta_p_Page_26.tif
b477c8e0a23a9268d6134c65b7585d3f
cbd6fdfa533eb0af99f18e41e74e31a3e243f17a
823217 F20110113_AACGUH gupta_p_Page_44.jp2
084a744723fdea364d302ee3239bc255
d5191e74039d78fd900c23a6365fe1e894d6836a
25475 F20110113_AACHGD gupta_p_Page_22thm.jpg
34b6a926270ad0569d72e59a578c9e3d
8c0b6ad3ab2adecfc83234f9d2f5d41e71255707
50967 F20110113_AACGZF gupta_p_Page_03.jp2
eea503f95d8fe323de297a96ad23d25b
0624acfb1ba8c34775cad72a0ed37c11f275958b
F20110113_AACHBF gupta_p_Page_30.tif
ff9c7faf0839ff441354745d3a82243c
20ebf2892ea5e23badea943be4c412576cfbb8b9
64555 F20110113_AACGUI gupta_p_Page_40.QC.jpg
5a51092162322c9215b8a5774b6f83d3
538e19471f60e45e11703be12d2c5b345d2156a2
46529 F20110113_AACHGE gupta_p_Page_23thm.jpg
7394d0730c7ce4d118a95d9e1e83a3f9
298c277c36485eb4bf4cff0071a7a62061433a2c
1051960 F20110113_AACGZG gupta_p_Page_04.jp2
0a0ba339e43f4cfeec635f12555eb98a
eb7296d0e15ac8707ec2b933487b0fdb940fa2ea
F20110113_AACHBG gupta_p_Page_31.tif
4cb9e9852740f77155920f4f9c1e4b28
ca8cd8925fab4c1ce81e89a6a715e0002c6980d4
168297 F20110113_AACGUJ gupta_p_Page_18.jpg
b806546caf6220458ce99a18ba4fdf5d
43190a91f44f1bec8eaea72c046e3e483ec44541
94207 F20110113_AACHGF gupta_p_Page_23.QC.jpg
a5ee7a643531173ae78e68e7c5e75776
ce94272c2e84bd5456a57c33c8f26abb9c457b3d
962652 F20110113_AACGZH gupta_p_Page_05.jp2
c6eccdbe9e0914fb94875151a52b7c6d
add0610eee04c608a2f773dc653465bbfe319d6b
F20110113_AACHBH gupta_p_Page_34.tif
16e567fdafc96e3de53cb2571b0cd00e
1ae25888438fde5df8c3c8551b6c71befc96852b
1795 F20110113_AACGUK gupta_p_Page_16.txt
5dc23d3416b0455eb7a2715779d3b21f
5f3d8d284717b82c9f6fdf54246467052b8602f8
44676 F20110113_AACHGG gupta_p_Page_24thm.jpg
107e926a6ee668096d8f74203fa31e0b
79dfe7ce458dbd13462fcc9d55619a3f48df86e1
523399 F20110113_AACGZI gupta_p_Page_06.jp2
ee4810781193e066176c7091c30e9edc
d9135d1b4e02e1bc75cdd83675974ea69002553d
F20110113_AACHBI gupta_p_Page_35.tif
11c7d66752d0ca557cc72f3a68eee2b5
b542f463a74c2c9222b2634075068ffba7d34b00
135081 F20110113_AACGUL gupta_p_Page_36.jpg
0481ed061ad8af2c179496e4e2c9edff
df1967f0d275bdd26aceb33f4765ed2696ca47b1
25023 F20110113_AACHGH gupta_p_Page_25thm.jpg
6b071f9976ebf944e21b35217188d3c9
828247ca60d28ed8ba43d0542b7960dcb9e6c296
31450 F20110113_AACGZJ gupta_p_Page_09.jp2
3a6de21c3da41ef95b8e83cd9b658b11
1dc455809d75a651721221ce63df8a61a725c52a
F20110113_AACHBJ gupta_p_Page_36.tif
e4281514cb132dabad8f2f1f0027e380
bcb94f157be6ddceccaa7e756ef4d0c1a975bf48
F20110113_AACGUM gupta_p_Page_32.tif
f9714b2adba2119b1de2cc8163abee89
617f02cbd35761395c8958c8d0869eedab54c155
22729 F20110113_AACHGI gupta_p_Page_26thm.jpg
ac8571528300d1b8d41bac44ef232df3
cc1e16bba81532998181114c7496f809406fb30f
94454 F20110113_AACGZK gupta_p_Page_10.jp2
86a9cc02bbd467ccbae008b023699661
52ccac29552168953dbdbe600032d6254af8ed30
F20110113_AACHBK gupta_p_Page_39.tif
b4faba2738f7836e5a1043080c8fa1af
09cd8ac4c1521e9ceab5970a1d2134d716952b94
70498 F20110113_AACGUN gupta_p_Page_33.QC.jpg
ab179e6d4f9d7ca3be705fae67c3bc5e
934e9dcec0f5c13855ef819354a0499db67e686b
108605 F20110113_AACGZL gupta_p_Page_11.jp2
0a0b7a8cd84a285b62135b3eaf8af8e6
c2b25430714d3f9a89d389ec08fad12d5036391d
F20110113_AACHBL gupta_p_Page_40.tif
4366f70d4f2ad30a719c97ee9e3ad710
1c25f0ca8c9e70eb51cc9d35b252dc115bae99b1
F20110113_AACGUO gupta_p_Page_37.tif
4630e3896fcec8285187291bc1486c3c
71dd148bc37e2ecda688bca2eca27d02bdb1e178
22330 F20110113_AACHGJ gupta_p_Page_27thm.jpg
b2d78fc5a782ae5b31cddf4a0a59b7af
379dfe3209a20702bbbda4202cd376692fd5e75d
94426 F20110113_AACGZM gupta_p_Page_12.jp2
31fba14d95467103725d759523991be5
818b76276d2f9c469eb86282f559163b3656a7f2
8423998 F20110113_AACHBM gupta_p_Page_41.tif
a23c586164c64c1dcc5b6184d6f34fab
fbae5197ba683ce7f43aa30825e3a76d6761580a
1089 F20110113_AACGUP gupta_p_Page_45.txt
6ff6e125607e4d8b6324f0366b87579e
154b4ea498fd75e5e84f2c108b0c2239c85c52f7
80161 F20110113_AACHGK gupta_p_Page_28.QC.jpg
5f6a32771e4e8186404484191745c9cb
65d496ffb9983e52cab01a0fe478e0a4211eca5c
79164 F20110113_AACGZN gupta_p_Page_13.jp2
fa66a740f5192d8efddd31dfe74ca00d
6a4fd515d20b27e42af8cfb8f53f45e0c5766133
F20110113_AACHBN gupta_p_Page_42.tif
fe9920b4824fedb64a5cac46dda7d1db
ea904d2110bb265b7f9a77cd4ea749d4a89db14d
136187 F20110113_AACGUQ gupta_p_Page_07.jpg
f4d95f0486ca000499c3feb0d91ead88
9c1cca93dedc7dc0680ec8f7ec6f7cab9a9155c4
24759 F20110113_AACHGL gupta_p_Page_29thm.jpg
d4bc7381e1bc9f8aec5e0b329eca5765
e69f7b5b74ff9345a7dc50f5fb558741e910264b
66173 F20110113_AACGZO gupta_p_Page_14.jp2
39eac728c8a9b4273aefd68062a97062
5102c81018c4751a2bdf0dac19b820037bb855bd
F20110113_AACHBO gupta_p_Page_43.tif
48dac47d83f1aff3bcc4d21f48563a40
ea8eb4ddcff68017debc99a42f55ca62f2458c4c
104758 F20110113_AACGUR gupta_p_Page_34.jp2
51de7b5a016da0636d65243e481e8b51
a501fc5fedb04e28b458c0cb80ae790e4a08c0a9
81115 F20110113_AACHGM gupta_p_Page_29.QC.jpg
e65f5b776923fa24671a0a030c07afd4
07a3b4fefcc53a3c4b814fcdf99ebbc6726eb3ad
78879 F20110113_AACGZP gupta_p_Page_15.jp2
7c9d0857d07a21828925cfad5ed016cd
3c527b425ec1fd7ad9ae41c5a2dd2a4578415d79
F20110113_AACHBP gupta_p_Page_44.tif
29a74c29cac3c16d2e09e3ee60735f62
4ad39b7f66be19e0494b01dfa10a7509720cb282
25613 F20110113_AACGUS gupta_p_Page_50thm.jpg
5c343ddc0d2093bafb9f0b00e9dd43c7
1b343c61089a248d28e7e55c1e29829bc33d8d19
25410 F20110113_AACHGN gupta_p_Page_30.QC.jpg
8a9b293a7a6a1cc88c2b7ad3d9e096a3
74d5cc24de0cc0eb01abdf8fd570197faf901dbb
90904 F20110113_AACGZQ gupta_p_Page_16.jp2
e7651b1a0b1c6ebc3b9cf2307a1dcd7a
15adc726d5c49b09fe67fcd53063186f741fd53b
F20110113_AACHBQ gupta_p_Page_45.tif
8a46d2c40b8344fc2d890282d1967366
3922a9227a54cfa0eee1e7b244823f574f735c1a
F20110113_AACGUT gupta_p_Page_05.tif
a8b24a714ec69b6e5f22bd9b8fc35297
916de95506db671d3a3c88e240e188c9ccfdeb06
21612 F20110113_AACHGO gupta_p_Page_31thm.jpg
3b14bd7d9cc145b70ffc4a959f7d81bc
59568b0a2ebc42ff9c09a874d643f6705c2f0d34
662599 F20110113_AACGZR gupta_p_Page_17.jp2
3c485375764ae65f36391fed92c5a661
7c7dc0f7b90fcd883f2cf8706fd67ab927f3e357
F20110113_AACHBR gupta_p_Page_47.tif
1b8bb87c4adde828bdf380c6569d98e3
d98b5d8402edcaf95fbe088c32ea60077e3c3f50
43415 F20110113_AACGUU gupta_p_Page_12.pro
5d4b7aea1f5a93f563f2233058882eac
b3f905f86c74cd586ab31f06f251202f2617b5c3
69085 F20110113_AACHGP gupta_p_Page_31.QC.jpg
304ed043e41c6ba2acafcf6d695a71d0
206abf20270d57a55a99e3729f8191341075e3bf
86748 F20110113_AACGZS gupta_p_Page_18.jp2
5b8f9971169c63e65ac1fb7619c45958
50e2446bab17afb392a363501d649638bd2d9844
F20110113_AACHBS gupta_p_Page_50.tif
6a8ab6482b85ccf21ebc88e10c38b68f
efe391ce2f373bd6cb3be37a00fda19f7ab84bc7
2130 F20110113_AACGUV gupta_p_Page_22.txt
d0d17cb81cdc58cf22945d7fb2138ea9
cff9293e0554848a56c77d8f1dfa03b0fe714c52
24673 F20110113_AACHGQ gupta_p_Page_32thm.jpg
346435505ef8b165194ee179e7dd1bdc
d7b4161011d91238266bbf9ed42157603f89f00d
710475 F20110113_AACGZT gupta_p_Page_19.jp2
06d4d957cb0355391e6e3ab764754e2f
686276df5dff56f17232c78145f049942469c959
F20110113_AACHBT gupta_p_Page_51.tif
a85aec10fdac5b34449552721bf0b4a6
214af7984f8ae1ab4b092249bc535e3600be935b
185598 F20110113_AACGUW gupta_p_Page_33.jpg
51712e737afd1ca6ce6a52a0ce2b0c2b
3efa7bf0e7f7f6a97fa773051904a5f4720cf506
79794 F20110113_AACHGR gupta_p_Page_32.QC.jpg
79dd8e58ac18ebfa45bfbeba26970c98
fe1b950f8c3d3aa43371f7f33332d3419c3873e3
89525 F20110113_AACGZU gupta_p_Page_21.jp2
967b08258dcbeec1974f622b79a9b82f
e6ae4b1b301610368ffd0239035ccae511d89249
F20110113_AACHBU gupta_p_Page_52.tif
b62da35a01b3cb5dbffab10cd41d84da
4bdb07da8fee25c9dcb6c6d3cf6dc9230f269c9d
240718 F20110113_AACGUX gupta_p_Page_48.jpg
8fe454296f2d59999c7a839243f4eb0c
2a9bbd3c2e230881c6d86a5e31707e9e40315a9d
21996 F20110113_AACHGS gupta_p_Page_33thm.jpg
ffb6955251fe493c88de2a1064d9bfc1
a2353f5955769e1ea62466cab7effaf9e91c0307
979442 F20110113_AACGZV gupta_p_Page_23.jp2
74f123028f82d8429590fb87c62512ea
914d786545e9e8e99726db7dae77fd1a713ef809
8530 F20110113_AACHBV gupta_p_Page_01.pro
3dbcfe93ac2f6b8e911ce8d68825dee8
5e90abb13ca29cd5dc8b2315d6c79b1bb2a56a39
109720 F20110113_AACGZW gupta_p_Page_25.jp2
4f57b760bb9e4238a1839ed458409a9a
52b5f9add767345293f388a9daec90b44295846c
1121 F20110113_AACHBW gupta_p_Page_02.pro
2e895c7737c812fd858f3f6e2399f89a
c4a1f9a7587016d8969117054b844b13e5894c39
158962 F20110113_AACGUY gupta_p_Page_15.jpg
d152a22bf3c05d25030a375a77c47f2d
ac5060fff194dbb7677fb1c0498e6aa7e79e190f
23966 F20110113_AACHGT gupta_p_Page_34thm.jpg
614dc82ca10e0c4525eff6f435168a10
cb3b1a8d3edd427ee7022a410ed3641348dc2f15
108817 F20110113_AACGZX gupta_p_Page_26.jp2
aaf178eeb3249a1f8253ab1327be4e0c
3e99de591a8149af9ef579ae354c2d09f889d84c
69170 F20110113_AACHBX gupta_p_Page_04.pro
336d06fc86cc6aa3023dec2b19793801
8d57e18ad398c7f42f8a2520340ad94a8bf808ca
48727 F20110113_AACGUZ gupta_p_Page_14.QC.jpg
5a6c615eb90ef2fe30a5031f07f27948
637618ee3d547699c28f97ed46b9396eb537e3fc
77821 F20110113_AACHGU gupta_p_Page_34.QC.jpg
193e141134ddad9c7f859fa51d53dfe3
d7fef55f67d5cd3968589b577367e00d1b37f289
98071 F20110113_AACGZY gupta_p_Page_27.jp2
fc7b2e2554e92691719d856ca6462598
c6064311ee7a5b91771ad56abc8a8227a9b3bf38
43140 F20110113_AACHBY gupta_p_Page_05.pro
12e714c38638dbff8933c417365a4100
11e3299b84fde9d2085517e43cc47a461583b094
23479 F20110113_AACHGV gupta_p_Page_35thm.jpg
d23b0dadc0c5d254be2a274e938986c0
663494688b4cec276e9e8ca1d661798963e8a281
111994 F20110113_AACGZZ gupta_p_Page_28.jp2
786b6d9256bfaf5271cec76ef490f16f
001303a2ce9fac27fdcec4e5acc6a41a4f996de5
17988 F20110113_AACHBZ gupta_p_Page_06.pro
d1d2f3123065b9d97a8100686d3ddc83
59e5eb49616989b158c08759a8d54b1320780ddc
73416 F20110113_AACHGW gupta_p_Page_35.QC.jpg
015dcf86ef3caf8ebc39b6e09002b300
249f21eabdfb3e5909296ab00a3b16ab60764562
27245 F20110113_AACGXA gupta_p_Page_45.pro
8f6395f9522e9509c6722a9183810de7
dfb8da847b3e30885cff2f12dfb5a97ba17901c6
40019 F20110113_AACHGX gupta_p_Page_36thm.jpg
9ec55cad80583e6ddfd3e919cd81525c
c7ef65c816cb71901a3d64975fab73c4de926f40
F20110113_AACGXB gupta_p_Page_15.tif
1e8d98a09b93060d1db9bf98c6c440a9
290f4ee86c36694fd6ffba24931cfd04d2a3455f
1646 F20110113_AACHEA gupta_p_Page_24.txt
8f920e19fb85a1b1e2987e01015aa770
2904a5713e309224f332a2799f639e1973a04ab0
63607 F20110113_AACHGY gupta_p_Page_36.QC.jpg
80b1c48604bd6ac06f0830944317edaa
72dbbe995a72e5899114106bcc741b81a2195d8b
222840 F20110113_AACGXC gupta_p_Page_26.jpg
5de2d47a63e86d4adcac8b95bdf2c7da
7be4dee2bb7be0b94195fadf951de6c53fad3034
1997 F20110113_AACHEB gupta_p_Page_25.txt
0e9b5ed5e1f6b99c50dc36aecebeaa78
aa8658d80748a1961b66a65548cd5534616a17a6
5844 F20110113_AACHGZ gupta_p_Page_37thm.jpg
652ed2f7b38d328f56c1ebb12d6a4e5b
f9e3f795459cd744f1aeaf8c50690eddeb2b34e6
776311 F20110113_AACGXD gupta_p_Page_24.jp2
47f693ac7f2f390855c5ca88fa649771
ad225a29c347701a27690189cf950401187a4152
2384 F20110113_AACHEC gupta_p_Page_26.txt
65fd4732cd743b02dc912d8dce4380b0
b7e17fbd3ba5d487defd4064c5ce6ad86608c15c
59181 F20110113_AACGXE gupta_p_Page_49.pro
7fe2a9a748de1d757bb10fb695f43f76
1565dfc017923254cec3ecf6c508b0002feaab26
1792 F20110113_AACHED gupta_p_Page_27.txt
52cda732a60ad7d2687629062631b7be
1efa5f4aa408802b68a2babca9ad07c623f33a7b
F20110113_AACGXF gupta_p_Page_28.tif
bad6c6ef9395a7e8d5a6fb2be1ae4ee9
5dde37b7219166fc0677161b9e207520dfeca824
2032 F20110113_AACHEE gupta_p_Page_28.txt
4d9fe8cbfd5af26d9378b65292e6cb1d
37de337ef0b329c64ef6f20d4927220f30a17e54
91873 F20110113_AACGXG gupta_p_Page_08.jp2
e3a13ec815c34c843d9a01f3ca064436
c2237039dc0a1ba9cbb2d9e3c8d3fc4125a2543a
2004 F20110113_AACHEF gupta_p_Page_29.txt
3f7e9950bc499fe3e1d5a3b9b6e8963d
71c49a662032ae1ac1a37500b312dc0111f01d64
204882 F20110113_AACGXH gupta_p_Page_34.jpg
26857fd93ae3bb71c82b1ac8538ca9cb
a482f477a0d0eaac9fd79e414e5899ad9389445e
1807 F20110113_AACHEG gupta_p_Page_31.txt
ab6af24d0097ab04346aa18886b962f9
7132831a3fe316f7dd52945e22d4c4a294d3b3ec
F20110113_AACGXI gupta_p_Page_12.tif
de7bc0782c4f0a9f7fe0d0b546b1bee4
3c31ef1cdfe311a2f2cab6695c6943572b5c8efe
187274 F20110113_AACGXJ gupta_p_Page_44.jpg
9677b59140425edb4c0097ec65caf17f
72160ab4224546cbe2d3b6d1b25849989e02526c
2035 F20110113_AACHEH gupta_p_Page_32.txt
c3ae6804bc9911e149d1524d44954219
d2bc5a4e0e44780d85e1f364f92ce706cad2f1ee
1701 F20110113_AACGXK gupta_p_Page_46.txt
cc33da4b342846cba607d5e2d30a8e02
b72714fdb691f3ea3c6811de9172eae4e0cbbcef
1810 F20110113_AACHEI gupta_p_Page_33.txt
42a30bc15951791bc3c73e896f129531
b2cd0ce6f46822ad401950e3915eb9eb1c1b52ae
585760 F20110113_AACGXL gupta_p_Page_41.jp2
870fab1a7a5e0239559fab880f87b7c6
ba5af3d8ae15dce54247a74f8e84cab047866316
1945 F20110113_AACHEJ gupta_p_Page_34.txt
d5c267350d0c8e4c390afb2f0e29db85
d06d42131da1c9b1993b3933d81615339f07f4f4
132323 F20110113_AACGXM gupta_p_Page_41.jpg
37a18b91509739f434ee00e091c9e529
63d3ee02bf2ab45663bc6ef767a32c0186991edf
1872 F20110113_AACHEK gupta_p_Page_35.txt
c3fb1cfc5fe9be54c30683ed1830db97
8c0e488f6f4e1c28e832098fbdca0825976123db
F20110113_AACGXN gupta_p_Page_46.tif
679f23a41ccd9b87acf0a71dce3570c6
045c9537005a408aba3302c4af9edd1c733ce6f8
594 F20110113_AACHEL gupta_p_Page_36.txt
433b49906309d1ea6d8b06ca0a4ab7df
c3daf0481bec2adce98812367c0d50cb459b6186
65798 F20110113_AACGXO gupta_p_Page_10.QC.jpg
e17372c262af872ed3defbadbb90d5ee
9da8aa06ba8bbb931aafdaaba3f0c44b4d0588b7
1838 F20110113_AACHEM gupta_p_Page_38.txt
97984314f869ea822009683770d09c1e
df0df1a3057958efb3d2dac9ae99d2c17ab13424
109958 F20110113_AACGXP gupta_p_Page_29.jp2
03974c84e9bb424bd27ca339e7684ae9
c837c55a0b3e0b226630fa74958021cff98d60e3
1605 F20110113_AACHEN gupta_p_Page_39.txt
b08e1f6d5a868ef4541ac2e092821ae9
3f7305277a6e35fbddb12cffe407aa080cf56123
15074 F20110113_AACGXQ gupta_p_Page_45thm.jpg
2eac892c80595965f6c2539d6c24d2e2
00e93766dc8b7b31a118006728e8f79c2736d2b2
1548 F20110113_AACHEO gupta_p_Page_41.txt
5dbcf1c9b7c7b5bf2721decee26d1934
cd20120193dc233bafb94891882808a215b99027
32883 F20110113_AACGXR gupta_p_Page_30.jp2
e30a82558b5fcd1ee73295417b4a1a07
9f15f37f8658b39808d1f6025c66c29347956cf7
F20110113_AACHEP gupta_p_Page_42.txt
3cf138489a438cd1d835ea8d0d068db2
055b6dcfaf59762b1ada66f9bf9d264c840ca58d
1143 F20110113_AACGXS gupta_p_Page_47.txt
aad29b7d424781446d11d8f5dfaf9fc9
2be8e58b49cd73cfc5f87e3a104ee082e44b538f
2355 F20110113_AACHEQ gupta_p_Page_43.txt
a5addf9596c5e570603302cdda171d0c
ead6ba02fb8eb7dd5f4907ec551fd8b188165bfe
37583 F20110113_AACGXT gupta_p_Page_15.pro
80f50576a1e37254748e27a770af6f5b
231ac49d4d3d2bd720ac3bfda97bf2b36f972eea
2041 F20110113_AACHER gupta_p_Page_44.txt
19cbc640768839371ff0c9e410d61f53
ee373e39d08b9d70303b8eeba8f5ee1f4500f8a0
43963 F20110113_AACGXU gupta_p_Page_23.pro
a36f83ec1dedadbef86222aee41f646c
4257a54923c975fd7c30ecb7cfee693d356d9f92
2073 F20110113_AACHES gupta_p_Page_48.txt
0bfc92202095aed67278760fc4e66b8b
23a0e2e93fb9df5325d0b2e87b39535b4d124c0a
80391 F20110113_AACGXV UFE0005441_00001.xml
adff402e474de89d525ec689d6b1c089
eb284910f7e0b6d5af2c70750d3f0dba841151a8
2409 F20110113_AACHET gupta_p_Page_49.txt
24ac7e082578e58d2b6a8b42c9c7fd82
b2f662ab63a2f5ddaff4c4f8f13b26b451aa0402
2150 F20110113_AACHEU gupta_p_Page_51.txt
e4fcbea3ab03f18c5db19e9a16c6a3f8
ea02c55285476b370c9378a44288906efa8693bf
464 F20110113_AACHEV gupta_p_Page_52.txt
34606ac5a6510275217ce1408b24ddc1
cec3f6ee14b38f5bba29bad64252acfbdaa46b0f
56331 F20110113_AACGXY gupta_p_Page_01.jpg
9c58a94dd86a781f333005b218323b37
bf45f00cbef3b55dfd0de93feb130d8e734e7e80
1658145 F20110113_AACHEW gupta_p.pdf
590df7cb947663b145ab2d2a896b1abf
b3700a498aa688420124d558c010ffa64c6136fa
89080 F20110113_AACGVA gupta_p_Page_50.QC.jpg
05252f3787f7d3543e0f3a30a0230c7a
be81d9e98b172b1626e477e56af238b711535af3
14456 F20110113_AACGXZ gupta_p_Page_02.jpg
12b109bf5a8c5b2a6300522fe7c106f8
63c46064eda769d023bc286675b95773ccd603b0
7413 F20110113_AACHEX gupta_p_Page_01thm.jpg
3db99b60bdc355da5f3a744ea88c96ba
a0cbe2f2ab602694bb918c7309dbf86495d03ab3
82078 F20110113_AACGVB gupta_p_Page_24.QC.jpg
33cf948bf9ba152ec8cf1e9aa2e03e0d
b5385598f7c6432bd52c3d77154a7840c22762e6
25835 F20110113_AACHCA gupta_p_Page_07.pro
221a9ce301dde5c10a8464c700c7cdbe
6c001ea3956d6ed90ca5c3e511009f9cc05a1316
19472 F20110113_AACHEY gupta_p_Page_01.QC.jpg
0918f7d94323eb054a393d159a59af87
198b495785e4560adb0906af0d9f8bac1edbed27
F20110113_AACGVC gupta_p_Page_29.tif
5e359faf8c689cfdd84a61425e6064d5
68bb5386f7915221ac8393355c7e2b2307b38582
41669 F20110113_AACHCB gupta_p_Page_08.pro
b63f0cac63b9ede81479e803e348b1b5
d21668f30058fbc60f18b6d11d7086805ee0029e
3089 F20110113_AACHEZ gupta_p_Page_02thm.jpg
3b1849df339cbbd6e8f5ed2adbf2e7e8
26e844bc5a15e35a68978984bbe95f71a5f94fcd
48332 F20110113_AACGVD gupta_p_Page_43thm.jpg
93a9d7ecf2e1ea6db6a4ad97d92f9d42
ccc47738277335109882289d8bac6ab0a1314f0d
13126 F20110113_AACHCC gupta_p_Page_09.pro
6159275ed773841d4168cc464a142d63
e5cbb8c9a1fa18346f2d0c87eb55d6f179611f42
50959 F20110113_AACGVE gupta_p_Page_25.pro
a086de41fbce0b9dd7e83b4809d6c482
7938de0468399bb89de8c0bbe34041c409285fdb
2638 F20110113_AACGVF gupta_p_Page_50.txt
a209954a7698a55527bc09cab29819d8
de661dab5b8ec25ef5a1c8afe39620bc6d440690
15407 F20110113_AACHHA gupta_p_Page_37.QC.jpg
298ef1588f7497024779f2fbe987356d
4dcbaf8d7b1f91c0fc64f16f2fb5fec225b60d51
43022 F20110113_AACHCD gupta_p_Page_10.pro
1bed3e67df87fcc7477e64c412548935
79a1560a3bebc35bed87c740b6802da9a448523d
176048 F20110113_AACGVG gupta_p_Page_16.jpg
f0ec6d89d2fd6b8e9ffa73d013e84f5c
a5b3e2d584f0a773d28df6fe07f24ecda94fc09a
22335 F20110113_AACHHB gupta_p_Page_38thm.jpg
2755ebbc5e9c7928c34653a73a5c5266
263d8f8deea21b2c6a874b4d44a946096ed8c55a
37746 F20110113_AACHCE gupta_p_Page_13.pro
bfed993f3a9facb16ee640b5f1348fe6
f85176e0c52ee6fd87be3d83c60e12ccee70ae8b
F20110113_AACGVH gupta_p_Page_11.tif
5f2809e9f43c679d6b2f5128fffbd78b
5ffed59dbccf06938794af5bfcfdcdd679bc377d
70126 F20110113_AACHHC gupta_p_Page_38.QC.jpg
f77fd8632a475d0f63cf4b42a829a375
73e753e7c63693285ab83d2d3a9bc116211c288c
21953 F20110113_AACGVI gupta_p_Page_03.pro
b598b31186aed3b4e097cf67951b4a8c
e7233b4352e6a44d2da600d870e7cc64e53b62c6
43135 F20110113_AACHHD gupta_p_Page_39thm.jpg
1251b11bca2f807df4a710ed8f5f3356
329dda9eb3d11f87439882f3729fa8f45fb1b59f
34142 F20110113_AACHCF gupta_p_Page_14.pro
5b81c69e1a6a9745626afb32afb593fe
b06107af888c53fc75e67bce5c69e295847a0033
F20110113_AACGVJ gupta_p_Page_38.tif
1f88e7f0257d578dcd31b7a6a3415d4a
f617471d183944dfe5a7c0593bc54b681dd3eae1
21292 F20110113_AACHHE gupta_p_Page_40thm.jpg
ec61dffdc98961f048775724908c5fa6
9b93d4ba4e4ea49c3fd9fc127059360e6b8492e0
43600 F20110113_AACHCG gupta_p_Page_16.pro
1fdd3a4d4103a79ef68591b1dc7ac9e5
9de8ed210ddcf558fb54e8a77502381fc0dcae0a



PAGE 1

UTILIZATION OF UNIVERSITY OF FL ORIDA FLUX METER FOR ESTIMATING ARSENIC CONTAMINATI ON IN GROUNDWATER By PRACHEE GUPTA A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2004

PAGE 2

Copyright 2004 by Prachee Gupta

PAGE 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Clayton J. Clark II, chairperson of my supervisory committee, for all his guidance and support throughout the project. I am very grateful to my committee, members, Dr. Kirk Hatfield and Dr. Michael Annable, for all their valuable guidance, suggestions and encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. Jaehyun Cho, Dr. Mark Newman and Mr. Harald Klammler for constant guidance in performing laboratory experiments and Dr. Tait Cherenji for providing basic data for computer model simulation. I greatly appreciate the help of Mr. Thomas Luongo for sample analysis. Thanks go to the students of Water Resource Research Center for the support I received throughout. Finally, I want to thank my parents and friends who encouraged me throughout my academic career. iii

PAGE 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iii LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................vi LIST OF FIGURES..........................................................................................................vii ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................1 General........................................................................................................................1 Purpose and Objectives...............................................................................................3 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND...........................................................................4 Advective-Dispersive Transport of Reactive Solutes.................................................4 Linear Isotherm..................................................................................................4 Non-linear (Freundlich Isotherm) ......................................................................5 Non-linear (Langmuir Isotherm)........................................................................6 University of Florida Flux Meter................................................................................6 Estimating Fluid Flux........................................................................................7 Estimating Solute Mass Flux.............................................................................9 3 LITERATURE REVIEW.........................................................................................12 Occurrence of Arsenic..............................................................................................12 Fate and Transport of Arsenic...................................................................................13 Adsorption Characteristics of Arsenic......................................................................15 Laboratory Analysis..................................................................................................18 Adsorption Isotherms......................................................................................18 Extraction and Analysis:..................................................................................19 Flux Meter Analysis..........................................................................................19 Computer Model Simulation.....................................................................................20 iv

PAGE 5

4 MATERIALS AND METHODS.............................................................................22 Adsorption Isotherms................................................................................................22 Extraction Method....................................................................................................23 Analysis Method.......................................................................................................24 Flux Meter.................................................................................................................24 Flux Meter Set-up...........................................................................................25 Running Experiment.......................................................................................26 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..............................................................................29 Adsorption Experiments...........................................................................................29 Extraction Experiments.............................................................................................31 Flux Meter Bench Scale Experiments.......................................................................33 Computer Simulation Results...................................................................................35 6 CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................................................37 LIST OF REFERENCES...................................................................................................39 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.............................................................................................43 v

PAGE 6

LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Behavior of arsenic with different minerals.............................................................17 5-1 Adsorption of arsenic on activated alumina.............................................................30 5-2 Arsenic extracted using nitric acid...........................................................................31 5-3 Arsenic extracted using sodium hydroxide..............................................................32 5-4 Concentrations measured from flux meter tests.......................................................34 5-5 Soil properties..........................................................................................................35 vi

PAGE 7

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2-1 Contaminant sorbed by the sorbing matrix..............................................................10 3-1 Cumulative probability curve for As in Florida surface soils...............................14 3-2 Eh-pH diagram for inorganic arsenic compounds....................................................15 4-1 Bench Scale set-up of flux meter..............................................................................27 4-2 Cross sectional dimensions of flux meter................................................................27 5-1 Adsorption isotherm of arsenic on activated alumina..............................................30 5-2 Amount extracted using acid vs. initial concentration.............................................32 5-3 Amount extracted using base vs. initial concentration.............................................32 5-4 Concentration of arsenic vs time for varying soil type. ...........................................35 vii

PAGE 8

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science UTILIZATION OF UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA FLUX METER FOR ESTIMATING ARSENIC CONTAMINATION IN GROUNDWATER By Prachee Gutpa August 2004 Chair: Clayton J. Clark II Major Department: Civil and Coastal Engineering Groundwater contamination is a major problem in todays environment. In Florida, the ground water standards are equivalent to the drinking water standards according to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Among the various contaminants, organic, inorganic, microbial pathogens and radioactive contaminant, inorganic contaminants are of high interest because most of these contaminants are readily soluble in water, and have a high potential to contaminate groundwater. The present research focused on the groundwater contamination due to arsenic. The maximum permissible concentration of arsenic in drinking water in United States is 10g l-1 or 10 ppb as recommended by United States Environmental Protection Agency. The purpose of the research was to evaluate the use of the University of Florida flux meter for estimating arsenic contamination in the groundwater. The flux meters were placed in three wells located perpendicular to the flow lines in the center of model aquifer. The internal adsorbent chosen was activated alumina due to its high efficiency in removal of arsenic. Adsorption of arsenic on activated alumina showed a linear trend with a Kd value of viii

PAGE 9

1.844 L kg-1. The procedure for extracting arsenic adsorbed by activated alumina was evaluated and it was found that extraction efficiency of acid (88%) is comparatively more than that of base (84%). Flux meter tests were conducted for arsenic concentration of 12 ppm at a flow rate of 0.84 cm/hr. The flux meter in the central well estimated 99% of the actual arsenic concentration in aquifer Therefore this provides an efficient and cost effective way to estimate arsenic flux in the field. ix

PAGE 10

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION General Groundwater contamination is a major problem in todays environment since groundwater constitutes major portion of potable water in Florida. In Florida, the ground water standards are equivalent to the drinking water standards, as stated by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Groundwater can be contaminated by disease-producing pathogens, leachate from landfills and septic systems, careless disposal of hazardous household products, agricultural chemicals, and leaking underground storage tanks (Ginn et al., 2002; Day et al., 2001; Leeuwen, 2000). There are four basic types of contaminants that include organic, inorganic, radioactive elements, and microbial pathogens (Salas and Ayora 2004; Jones and Huang, 2003; Barry et al., 2002; Ginn et al., 2002). Among the various contaminants, inorganic contaminants are of high interest because most of these contaminants are readily soluble in water, and have a high potential to contaminate groundwater. Relative to other oxyanion forming minerals, arsenic is problematic because of its mobility in most of its oxidations states and at almost all pH values. During 2001, roughly 96% of the arsenic imported into the United States was in the form of arsenic tri-oxide (Solo-Gabriele et al., 2002). Most of this arsenic trioxide was used for the production of arsenic acid used for wood preservation. Arsenic is brought into the State of Florida for the production of chromated copper arsenate (CCA) treated wood (Chirenje et al., 2003 and Solo-Gabriele and Townsend, 1999). CCA is composed of three major 1

PAGE 11

2 elemental constituents, copper (Cu), chromium (Cr), and arsenic (As), among which arsenic is the most hazardous. The present research focused on the soil and groundwater contamination due to arsenic. Arsenic is a semi-metal element, found in environment combined with other elements such as oxygen, chlorine, and sulfur to form inorganic arsenic compounds. It also combines with carbon and hydrogen to form organic compounds. It most often exists in organic form as monomethyl arsonic acid (MMA) and dimethyl arsonic acid (DMA). Arsenic exists in the environment most often in two oxidation states: arsenite, As (III), and arsenate, As (V), respectively (Singh and Pant 2003; Meng et al., 2002). Under oxidation conditions (and aerobic environments) arsenates are stable species (as oxyanions H3AsO4, H2AsO4-, HAsO4-2 or AsO4-3) and are strongly sorbed onto clays, iron, and manganese oxides and hydroxides, and organic matters. However, under most reducing conditions (and anaerobic environment) arsenites (H3AsO3, H2AsO3-1, HAsO3-2) are the predominant arsenic compounds (Chakravarty et al., 2002). According to Kayajanian (2003), studies on Utah cancer mortality as a function of lifetime arsenic exposure indicated that for concentration range of 1-25 ppb, there are 2.682 cancers per 100 people and in the 5 years following initial arsenic medication, around 6.45 deaths are expected. The maximum permissible concentration of arsenic in drinking water in United States is 10g L-1 or 10 ppb as recommended by United States Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA (2001). In addition to the arsenic contamination in water sources, dietary intake of arsenic through the food chain via uptake from contaminated soils may adversely affect human health (Alam et al., 2003). The current soils clean up goals set by the Florida department of environmental

PAGE 12

3 protection for arsenic in residential and industrial soils are 0.8 mg/kg and 3.6 mg/kg respectively (Solo-Gabriele et al., 2002). Various scientists and organizations have made an attempt to identify the source of contaminant and degree of contamination in groundwater using different field monitoring techniques (Montas et al., 2000; Brusseau and Srivastava, 1997). This research discusses a new devise named Flux meter that allows to simultaneously measuring cumulative dissolved solute fluxes when placed within a flow field. The Flux meters have been tested for most of the organic contaminant analysis both in lab as well as field for contaminant flux, groundwater flow and flow direction (Hatfield et al., 2003; Klammler 2001). Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this research was to evaluate the use of flux meter for estimating arsenic contamination in the groundwater. Before bench scale flux meter tests are performed, information regarding the type of adsorbents and its interaction with arsenic should be understood very well. Hence, the objectives of this research were 1) review of adsorption and extraction characteristics of arsenic to different materials and 2) to evaluate the applicability of these materials as flux meter sorbent media for arsenic flux measurement, 3) to simulate the arsenic contamination for various Florida soil types. This thesis seeks to give the basic understanding of the solute transport and theoretical contemplation of flux meter for estimating fluid and contaminant flux, arsenic contamination and need of flux meter for estimating fluid flow and contaminant flux in the groundwater.

PAGE 13

CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Advective-Dispersive Transport of Reactive Solutes In non-ideal condition found in the environment, a reactive solute interacts with the solid matrix during flow. The solute is, therefore distributed between the fluid and the sorbed phases. If a primary anisotropic system is assumed, for the steady water flow, under saturated or uniformly unsaturated conditions, the solute transport equation for a homogeneous media can be represented by (Domenico and Schwartz, 1990) 22wwwbwwwCCSDqttx wCt (2.1) where w= volumetric water content Cw= solute concentration in water (g L-1) b= bulk density of sorbing media (g/cm3) S= sorbed solute concentration (mg/kg) Dw = dispersion coeffecient (cm2/hr) qw = advective mass flux (cm/hr) Three most commonly known isotherms that define the adsorption characteristics of any adsorbent are linear isotherm, Freundlich isotherm and Langmuir isotherm (Zheng and Bennett 2002, Charbeneau 2000). Freundlich and Langmuir isotherms can be used to represent both linear and non-linear isotherms. Linear Isotherm When the sorbed phase solute concentration is linearly proportional to the solute concentration in the solution phase, the sorption isotherm is linear isotherm, and is represented by S = Kd.Cw. Therefore, the equation 2.1 is transformed to 4

PAGE 14

5 22[1]wbdwwwCKCDtx wCt (2.2) The transport velocity (cm/hr) is represented by v. The adsorption coefficient (Kd) is a measure of how tightly the solute binds or sticks to soil particles. The greater the Kd value, the less likely a chemical will leach or contribute to runoff. The retardation factor, R = (1+ Kd/w), expresses how much slower a contaminant moves than does the water itself. Equation 2.2 is therefore transformed to 22.wwCCDtx wCt (2.3) where = D D R and = R When Kd = 0, it implies that R = 1 and hence D* = D and v* = v, which reverts the equation (equation 2.3) back to the non-reactive ideal solutes. Hence the equations below show the effect of retardation factor on the solute transport. As Kd and R increases, the distance to solute peak decreases. The distance to solute peak (x*) is given by x* = [v*t] = t R (2.4) The time of arrival of solute peak (t*) is delayed and is given by t* = [L/v*] = LR (2.5) Non-linear (Freundlich isotherm) In this type of isotherm the solute mass is proportional to the concentration raise to N. S = K C, N 1 (2.6) Nw

PAGE 15

6 Hence, retardation factor 1[1]NwwKNCR It is evident from the above equation that R is not a constant but is a function of Cw. N<1, R (Cw) decreases as Cw increases for Cw >1 N>1, R (Cw) increases as Cw increases for Cw >1 N = 1, R is independent of Cw and hence leads to the linear isotherm. Non-linear (Langmuir Isotherm) Langmuir isotherm is the most common type non-linear isotherm and in this isotherm max1wwSkCSkC (2.7) Hence, retardation factor for Langmuir isotherm is max2()[1(1)wwwSkRCkC ] In non-ideal environmental conditions, it is very difficult to obtain the accurate values of various parameters and hence accurate flux measurement is difficult. There is a need for accurate and easy to use equipment for the calculation of groundwater flux and contaminant flux. A new method utilizing flux meter has been developed at the University of Florida and laboratory tested for measuring both contaminant and groundwater fluxes at hazardous waste site. University of Florida Flux Meter The University of Florida flux meter measures cumulative dissolved solute fluxes with directions simultaneously when placed within a flow field (Hatfield et al., 2003). The device consists of a self-contained permeable unit that intercepts the groundwater flow without retaining it. A matrix of hydrophobic and hydrophilic sorbents in the device

PAGE 16

7 sorbs dissolved organic and inorganic solutes present in the water intercepting the unit, thus indicating the amount of contaminant carried by the groundwater. The sorbent matrix is also impregnated with known amount of one or more fluid soluble resident tracers that leaches from the sorbent at the rate proportional to the fluid flux (Hatfield et al. 2003) and provides an estimate for the fluid flow. The flux meter has been validated and used for estimating fluid flow and contaminant flux for various organic contaminants. This research seeks to explore the use of flux meter for measuring arsenic contamination. Estimating Fluid Flux Fluid flow can be estimated by placing flux meter device in a monitoring well perpendicularly intercepting the groundwater flow. The amount of tracer leaching out of the device gives the measure of fluid flux. It is assumed that a) the various tracers used do not mutually affect their partitioning properties; b) tracers partition isotherm is linear and, c) tracer transport due to dispersion is negligible (Hatfield et al., 2003). Therefore the distance that the tracer is pushed away by the water can be calculated as x = trt = t R (2.8) where vtr = tracer transport velocity. If the water flows through the meter at the rate vtr = v/R, the remaining amount of the tracer with respect to the initial tracer amount (represented by mR) gives the measure of how much water has passed the unit. The rate of vtr is measured by vtr = v/R. Given the cross sectional area of the unit, one can relate this concentration to the area still occupied by the tracer as

PAGE 17

8 212sin()aArar x (2.9) 2RAmr (2.10) 2qt x rR [v = q ] (2.11) where 2[()2 2 x ar (2.12) r = radius of the device If is the dimensionless cumulative volume of fluid conveyed through the device, then equation 2.10 can also be stated as 122[sin(1)1]Rm 2 (2.13) 2qt R r (2.14) However, due to the circular cross section only at the very beginning is the tracer present over the whole width of the device (2r). As the tracer is desorbed, some water will pass the device without leaching out any of the tracer. The distance a from the center, this is equal to the radius of the section at the beginning. This also decreases with growing x and the water passing the device at distances greater than a from the center does not leach out tracer any more. Therefore, equation 2.13 must be used to describe the relation between the relative remaining tracer mass mR and the dimensionless cumulative volume To simplify equation 2.13, Klammler (2001) performed regression analysis for the variation of with mR and observed that regression equation is almost linear for less

PAGE 18

9 than equal to 0.6, which corresponds to the mR equal to 0.3. The regression equation obtained was mR = -1.2 +1.0 (2.15) After keeping the flux meter in the groundwater for a determined amount of time, the amount of tracer left in the sorbent media (mR) is extracted. The dimensionless cumulative volume of water, intercepted by the flux meter at a specified depth can be obtained using equation 2.15. The specific discharge, q, can then be calculated using the equation 2.14. The specific discharge calculated using equation 2.14 is the discharge through the flux meter. Because the material used in the aquifer can be different from that used in flux meter, the permeability (or hydraulic conductivity) of flux meter can be different from permeability of the surrounding aquifer. The specific discharge in the well and surrounding aquifer can be related as (Hatfield et al., 2003) 2ooqkqkk (2.16) Where, q and qo are the specific discharge through the flux meter and surrounding aquifer respectively. k is the hydraulic conductivity of flux meter and ko is the hydraulic conductivity of aquifer. Estimating Solute Mass Flux The dotted area shown in Figure 2-1 is where the contaminant is sorbed in to the device. The respective retardation factor of the contaminant (Rcont) quantifies the fraction of the cross sectional area of the device that is actually occupied by the sorbed contaminant (Klammler 2001). Hence the actual concentration of contaminant in aqueous phase is given by

PAGE 19

10 2,(1)contRcontcontMCrLmR (2.17) where Mcont = mass of contaminant sorbed (mg) r = radius of the flux meter cylinder (cm) L = length of sorbent matrix (cm) mR,cont = relative mass of hypothetical resident tracer retained after time period t. Rcont = retardation of sorbent (contaminant) on matrix (L g-1) = water content in the device. To calculate the amount of tracer retained in the flux meter (mR,cont) that is required for contaminant flux calculations (equation 2.17), an imaginary tracer is assumed in the flux meter that has the same leaching properties as that of contaminant (i.e. the tracer and contaminant have the same retardation factor). Equation 2.13 and 2.14 can then be used for calculating mR,cont using the parameters of sorbent matrix. Figure 2-1 Contaminant sorbed by the sorbing matrix Device Area of sorbed contaminant v0 v0 Since the calculated concentration is same in the aqueous phase of the aquifer and aqueous phase of the device, it can be directly used to calculate the contaminant flux using J = qo. C (2.20)

PAGE 20

11 Like any other process, flux meter also has a disadvantage in it. This method only works for plume constituents that are actually retained by the sorbing matrix of the device. For plume constituents that are not retained by the sorbing matrix, the contaminant flux is not measured. Hence the prior knowledge of type of contaminant in the area of interest is very important. Evaluating flux meter for monitoring arsenic concentration and the various parameters needed to be considered while simulating field conditions in lab are discussed in next chapter. Also, this method has not been validated for wide scale use for measuring inorganic solutes.

PAGE 21

CHAPTER 3 LITERATURE REVIEW Arsenic predominantly exists in two oxidation states, As (III) and As (V). USEPA 2001 and FDEP 2004 have revised their maximum contamination level limits from 50g l-1 to 10g l-1 starting from 2006 and 2005, respectively. In this study, arsenic contamination due to chromated copper arsenate (CCA) leaching from construction and demolition landfills is considered. Various factors that can affect the sorbed concentration of arsenic are discussed and affect of varying soil types is also initiated. Occurrence of Arsenic Occurrence of arsenic can be both anthropogenic including mining and industrial waste, and geogenic such as volcanic eruption and weathering, in nature. High concentration of arsenic in ground water can occur in some areas as a result of inputs from geothermal sources. Nimick et al. (1998) found up to 370g l-1 arsenic in Madison River water as a result of geothermal inputs from the yellow-stone geothermal system. Smedley and Kinniburgh (1996) noted high arsenic concentrations (around 200-300g l-1) in surface waters affected by Sn and Au mining activities. Azcue and Nriagu (1995) conducted experiments for arsenic concentrations in Moira lake of Canada throughout the year and showed the significant seasonal difference with an average concentration of 62 g l-1 during summers and 22 g l-1 during winters, they attributed this difference to the depleted oxygen levels in the bottom lake waters as a result of biological productivity during summers. 12

PAGE 22

13 Arsenic is widely used in making wood preservatives like CCA, insecticides and pesticides and for various other agricultural and industrial purposes. Due to its widespread use in agriculture, industry, and medicine, it has gained attention of lot of scientists and researchers for its health effects and required remediation procedures. Arsenic is brought into the State of Florida primarily for the production of CCA-treated wood (Chirenje et al., 2003 and Solo-Gabriele and Townsend, 1999). Upon disposal, the majority of CCA-treated wood is may be disposed in unlined construction and demolition (C&D) landfills, or recycled as mulch or wood fuel. As a result, a considerable amount of arsenic can be potentially released into the Florida environment. Townsend et al. (2000) estimated that, in Florida, CCA-treated decks impact ~ 10 000 ha or 108 m2 of soil, and the amount of CCA-treated utility poles in use is 7x105 m3. Arsenic is predominant in +5 oxidation state in CCA, though as the pH changes the stable oxidation state for arsenic varies (Solo Gabriele et al., 2002 Bull, 2000). Fate and Transport of Arsenic Relative to other oxyanion forming minerals, arsenic is problematic because it is mobile in most of the oxidations states and at almost all pH values, whereas other oxyanion like selenium are mobile as selenate (SeO4-2) under oxidizing conditions but are immobile under reducing conditions either due to the stronger adsorption of its reduced form, selenite (SeO3-2), or due to its reduction to metal (Smedley and Kinniburgh, 1996). Chen et al. (2002) collected over 448 samples to determine arsenic distribution in soils of Florida. The soil order described by Chen et al. (1999) is used to classify different types of soils including Alfisols (14%), Entisols (22%), Histosols (10%), Mollisols (4%), Inseptisols (3%), Spodisols (28%) and Ultisols (19%). Clark et al. (2004) grouped these soil types into three classes, class 1, 2, and 3 of arsenic retention indices. Class 1 includes

PAGE 23

14 Marls and Histosols; these soils have the greatest retention and minimal leaching capability of arsenic. Class 2 includes Entisols, Alfisols and Ultisols. These soils found to have moderate retention with moderate potential for leaching. Class 3 have the least retention and greatest risk for leaching and it include Spodosols. Chen et al. (2002) observed the decrease in arsenic concentration with following trend in soil order: Histosols> Inceptisols> Mollisols> Ultisols> Entisols, Alfisols> Spodosols. A cumulative probability curve for Arsenic concentration in Florida surface soils was developed as shown in Figure 3-1 (Chen et al., 2002), where x-axis plots a histogram of the data categories and y-axis plots the frequency of the data in percentage. Numbers in parentheses are sample sizes of individual soil orders. Figure 3-1: Cumulative probability curve for As in Florida surface soils (Chen et al. 2002)

PAGE 24

15 Adsorption Characteristics of Arsenic Redox potential (Eh), and pH are most often the controlling factors in mobility of arsenic in the environment. Under oxidizing conditions, H2AsO4is dominant, at low pH (pH of 2 to 6); while at high pH (6 to 12), HAsO4-2 becomes dominant (Smedley and Kinniburgh, 2002). The Eh-pH diagram for arsenic is given in Figure 3-2. Solubility of arsenic in natural systems is strongly influenced by its capacity to be adsorbed by different minerals present in soils. The interaction of arsenic with different minerals is represented in the Table 3-1. Figure 3-2: Eh-pH diagram for inorganic arsenic compounds (Smedley and Kinniburgh, 2002) Among the treatment processes appropriate for removal of arsenic, activated alumina adsorption is considered to be in-expensive and more versatile (Wang et al., 2000). Activated alumina (AA) has high efficiency to adsorb arsenic in both of its oxidation states. However, ionic strength, pH, competing ions, and temperature can significantly change adsorption characteristics of activated alumina for arsenic (Deliyanni

PAGE 25

16 et al., 2003; Meng et al., 2002; Lin and Wu, 2000; Wang et al., 2000; Halter and Pfiefer 2001). Lin and Wu (2000) found that arsenite uptake on activated alumina is much less than arsenate uptake at almost all pH conditions. The uptake of arsenite was found to increase with the increasing pH until pH ~ 7, and then decrease as pH increases. This was attributed to surface charge of AA, which is positive until pH < pHzpc (point of zero charge). Deliyanni et al. (2003) observed the effect of ionic strength of solution on the sorption process of arsenate ions on alkaganeite by varying the concentrations of (0-0.1M KNO3). Observations indicated that as the concentration of KNO3 is increased, the removal of arsenic is improved until saturation, when varying the amount of sorbent. This improvement was attributed to certain depression of negative solid surfaces charges in the alkaline region, caused by the presence of inorganic electrolyte, which enhanced the interaction between surface sites and arsenic oxyanions. These adsorption characteristics of arsenic highly differ in presence of intersecting minerals like phosphorous. British Geological Survey (BGS 2001) calculated sorption of As (V) and As (III) by Hydrous Ferric Oxide (HFO) as a function of arsenic concentrations and pH in 0.01M NaCl background electrolytes. Observations were made in the absence and presence of an equilibrium dissolved phosphate-P concentration of 1 mg l-1. Results indicated that over the pH range of 6 to 8, As (III) sorbs more strongly than As (V), the reverse was seen in the absence of phosphate. Meng et al. (2002) investigated the combined effect of phosphate, silicate and bicarbonate on the adsorption of arsenic by iron hydroxides. The apparent adsorption constants indicated that the affinity of the anions for iron hydroxide sites decreased in the order as arsenate > phosphate > arsenite > silicate > bicarbonate.

PAGE 26

17 Table 3-1: Behavior of arsenic with different minerals Mineral Comment Reference Akaganeit The maximum load capacity was found to be about Deliyanni et. al. (-FeO(OH)) about 100-120 mg As(V) per g of Akaganeite (2003) when .5g l-1 used. The amount of arsenate adsorption increases by lowering the pH, increasing the amount of sorbent and ionic strength of the system. Clay mineral An increased Arsenic content has been noted with the Galba and increasing clay content of the contaminated soils. Polacek, (1973) Hametite & The effect of solute concentration, detention time, pH Singh et. al. Feldspar temperature, and agitation rate of the adsorbent like (1996) Hematite and Felspar. The maximum removal was found to be 100% and 97% with hematite and felspar respectively at optimum conditions. Orange Juice Found that for iron-loaded phosphorylated OJR, maximum Ghimire et. al. Residue (OJR) adsorption capacity for As(V) and As(III) was (2002) 0.94 and 0.91 mol/kg at their optimum pH values 3.1 And 10.0, respectively Activated Uptake of arsenite is much less than that of arsenate Lin and Wu Alumina for AA in most pH conditions. Pore diffusion coefficients (2000) (AA) And tortuosity factors of arsenate and arsenite were interpreted for AA grains with different grain size and different pH. HFO Discussed kinetics and pH dependence of As(V) and As(III) Raven et al. adsorption on HFO Found very high (1998) As(V) and As(III) loadings (up to 4 mol As kg-1) at the highest concentrations. HFO Sorption of As(V) and As(III) on HFO at As Wilkie and concentration of environmental significance (low Hering (1996) micromolar range) and pH 4. SO4 decreased adsorption Of As(V) and As(III), especially at low pH, while Ca Increased As(V) adsorption at high pH. 1mM bicarbonate did not act on either As(V) or As(III) adsorption greatly

PAGE 27

18 Phosphate, silicate and bicarbonate decrease the removal of As (III) even at relatively low concentrations and low surface site coverage (Meng et al., 2002). Effect of temperature as discussed by Pattanayak et al. (2000) showed that higher temperatures could lead to lower metal uptakes. Another easily available adsorbent considered by researchers for arsenic adsorption is activated carbon. Lorenzen et al., (1995) and Pattanayak et al., (2000) used activated carbon and its derivatives with different ash contents for arsenic adsorption. Lorenzen et al., (1995) used peat-based carbon with 5-6% ash content and coconut shell carbon with 3% ash content for arsenic adsorption. Peat based carbon was found to perform better that coconut shell carbon, implying that carbon with higher ash content can perform better. Activated Carbon was found to be less effective and efficient for removal of Arsenic than other adsorbents like activated alumina and iron hydroxide. Laboratory Analysis The two adsorbents considered in this research for use of flux meter were activated alumina and activated carbon. These two adsorbents were chosen because activated alumina has a very high efficiency for arsenic adsorption and activated carbon is one of the most commonly used adsorbent for most of the adsorption based remediation procedures. Adsorption Isotherms Adsorption isotherms define the effectiveness of adsorbents (activated alumina and activated carbon) for the adsorption of arsenic. In this research batch experiments were performed for adsorption isotherm. Most of these adsorption experiments were performed at constant temperature and controlled pH.

PAGE 28

19 Extraction and Analysis: Arsenic extraction can be achieved by using strong acidic or alkaline solutions. Lorenzen et al., (1995) used copper pretreated peat based carbon with a 100-ppm arsenic solution for 24 hrs at a pH of 6 and checked the elution with distilled water, acids and alkalis of different pH at different temperatures and flow rates. The acidic solutions were found to be more effective than the alkaline solutions based on results seen in this research. Singh et al., 1996 observed the effect of effluent flow rate on elution and found that the faster flow rate resulted in lower peak and lower arsenic concentrations at low number of bed volumes and there was a beneficial effect of a higher flow rate towards the end of an elution run. Once arsenic is extracted, it can be analyzed using Graphite Furnace Atomic Adsorption Spectrometer (GFAAS) techniques for concentration range of 5-100 g l-1using EPA method 7060 A, Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma Spectroscopy (ICP) for concentrations above 100 g l-1 using EPA method 3010A and 6010 B, and Spectrophotometer (Bran+Luebbe GmbH) using industrial method 26-71E for concentration range 0.4-20 ppm. GFAAS can also analyze the solid samples directly, though often digestion is performed on solid samples for analysis (Sahuquillo et al. 2003). The advantages of this technique are its low detection limits, the minimum sample manipulation, its relative simplicity and the short time required to obtain the results. Flux Meter Analysis Various scientists and organizations have made an attempt to identify the source of contaminant and degree of contamination in groundwater using different field monitoring techniques (Brusseau and Srivastava 1997, Montas et al., 2000). Brusseau and Srivastava (1997) collected a dense, 3 dimensional array of sampling points to obtain time-series data and spatial distribution which was used to determine the zeroth, first and second

PAGE 29

20 spatial moments of the plume. Montas et al. (2000) presented a methodology for designing groundwater quality monitoring well network in space and time, and to evaluate the performance of the resulting network. However, the two techniques are often time consuming and include various assumptions in the contaminant flux calculations and large number of wells are drilled for correct measurement of contaminant (Montas et al., 2000). Zhang et al. (2002) performed experimental investigation of contaminant transport in coastal groundwater. The experiments were performed in a flow tank and glass beads were used as the homogeneous porous media. The salt water and fresh water intrusion was taken into consideration by incorporating the vertical/horizontal ratio of the sloping seaward boundary keeping freshwater and saltwater at the high and low elevation respectively. In this thesis, University of Florida flux meter are discussed for their use for measuring contaminant flux in groundwater. Flux meter has been validated for most of the organic contaminant analysis both in lab as well as field for contaminant flux, groundwater flow and flow direction. In this research, use of flux meter for inorganic contaminant like arsenic was analyzed. Computer Model Simulation A numerical model simulation is performed using MODFLOW MT3DMS for arsenic contamination in various soil types. Soil classification described in earlier section is used because various scientists working on arsenic contamination and its concentrations in soils of Florida prefer this classification for research (Chen et al., 1999; Clark et al., 2004). The advantages of using MODFLOW include numerous facilities for data preparation, easy exchange of data in standard form, extended worldwide experience, continuous development, availability of source code, and relatively low price (McDonald and Harbaugh, 1988).

PAGE 30

21 Partition coefficients were calculated for different soil types based on arsenic concentration of 48 ppm. The Kd values were calculated using solution to solid ratio of 1:5. They range from 0.2 to 0.8, highest in marls and histosols (soil and water department, University of Florida). Bulk density values were based on the ranges from USDA county soil classification. Porosity calculations are done on the basis of linear relation between porosity and bulk density developed by NASA staff science 2003.

PAGE 31

CHAPTER 4 MATERIALS AND METHODS Various adsorption, extraction and analysis methods were performed for arsenic adsorption onto activated carbon and activated alumina. The adsorption experiments were performed as batch experiments for different time periods with respect to different adsorbents because equilibrium time for each adsorbent is different. Extraction was performed using strong acidic as well as alkaline solution of nitric acid and sodium hydroxide respectively. Simple digestion process explained by EPA method 3010A for extraction of arsenic from soils was used for extracting arsenic from activated alumina using acid. For extraction using strong bases, standard procedure described by water chemicals codex (Glaze et al., 1982) was used. Analysis was performed using GFAAS (Graphite Furnace Atomic Adsorption Spectrometer) for all concentrations since it can measure concentrations as low as 5 ppb (g l-1). For higher concentrations, samples were diluted to bring them within the detection range of 5 100 ppb. Typical flux meter set up is then discussed and various boundary conditions and assumptions involved with the method are described. Adsorption Isotherms Experimental quantities vary significantly for adsorption on activated carbon and activated alumina because of their different efficiencies to adsorb arsenic. Activated Alumina acts as a strong adsorbent whereas activated carbon is a weak adsorbent. In this research, trace metal grade arsenic (Fisher Scientific) was used for analysis. Granular activated alumina and activated carbon used in this research is commercially available 22

PAGE 32

23 (Fisher Scientific). Adsorption experiments of arsenic on activated alumina were conducted using 40 ml glass vials fitted with a Teflon-lined septa screw-top cap. In each experiment .02-.20 g of activated alumina grains were placed into the vial (Lin and Puls, 2000) and 30 ml solution prepared at a predetermined arsenic concentration using de-ion water. The temperature of the system was kept constant, and the reciprocating speed was kept at 70 rpm for all experiments. System was kept on rotator for 48 hrs, for adsorption to come into equilibrium (Lin and Puls, 2000). In adsorption experiment for activated carbon, 40 ml vials and varying amount of activated carbon (1 5 grams) were used (Pattanayak et al., 2000). The reciprocating speed was kept at 70 rpm and system was kept for 72 hrs for adsorption to come into equilibrium (Pattanayak et al., 2000). After rotating at their respective times, activated carbon/aluminum was allowed to settle for 12 hrs. Solution was then filtered for analysis using GFAAS. Since the initial concentration of arsenic in the solution was known and arsenic left in the solution were analyzed, respective calculations for sorbed concentration was performed. Extraction Method Arsenic extraction from activated alumina was performed using strong acid and alkaline solutions using techniques described by EPA method 3010A and water chemical codex respectively. For extraction using acid, a known volume of well-mixed sample was transferred to a 250 ml Griffin beaker, 2 ml of 30% H2O2 and sufficient concentrated HNO3 was added to get an acid concentration of 1% (v/v). It was allowed to digest at 105oC for 2 hrs. The solution was then filtered and injected into the furnace for analysis. For extraction using base, first the extraction solution was prepared by adding 100 ml of 0.1 M potassium hydrogen phthalate to 47 ml of 0.1 N sodium hydroxide. Solution

PAGE 33

24 was then diluted to 200 ml using de-ionized water. 0.1 g of sample was taken into a 250 ml beaker and 50 ml of extraction solution was added to completely digest activated alumina samples. A drop of non-ionic surfactant (Brij 97) was then added and solution was agitated with a magnetic stirrer for 1 hour. This solution was then filtered and analyzed using GFAAS. Analysis Method As discussed above, arsenic analysis was performed using EPA method 7060 A. the detection limit for this method is 1 g/l (1ppb). Samples were analyzed by GFAAS on a Perkin Elmer SIMAA 6000 THGA. The details of parameters used are: Wavelength= 193.7nm Injection size = 20 l Matrix Modifier = 7 l of 700 ppm Pd(NO3)2 These parameters were used on the basis of the guidelines provided by the manufacturer. Because temperature-sensing mechanisms and temperature controllers can vary between instruments or with time, the validity of the furnace parameters were periodically confirmed by systematically altering the furnace parameters while analyzing a standard. In this manner, losses of analyte due to overly high temperature settings or losses in sensitivity due to less than optimum settings can be minimized. 20 micro liter aliquot of sample was injected into the furnace and atomized. If the concentration was found to be greater than the highest standard (100 ppb), the sample were diluted in the acid matrix (suggested by EPA method 7060A) and reanalyzed. Flux Meter Before conducting bench scale flux meter experiments for estimating contaminant flux, the basic instrument was set up for simulating true field conditions. Hence this

PAGE 34

25 section is divided into two, one containing information on set-up of the flux meter and second on running the experiment. Flux Meter Set-up The test aquifer was set up in a box of approximately 46 cm length and 30 cm width. Well casing and screen are constituted by a 3.2 cm inner diameter PVC tube that is slotted over the entire height of the aquifer and that was glued to the bottom of the box to keep it in position. A metal grid was placed 3.8 centimeters from the box walls where the water enters and leaves to avoid intrusion of the aquifer material into glass beads. Glass beads possesses a very high permeability compared to aquifer, which serves to establish a vertical plane of constant head over the entire cross sections where the water enters and leaves the aquifer. The aquifer consists of 20-30 mesh Ottawa sand (hydraulic conductivity, 4.45 cm/min and porosity 0.3) that reaches up to a height of 11.5 cm in the box. The filling of box was performed by adding water simultaneously with the sand in order to obtain a saturated aquifer from the beginning. The boundary conditions of uniform flow field have to be approximated by the bench-scale aquifer. These conditions are constant head at infinity on two opposite sides of the well and straight streamlines going parallel to the other sides of the infinity. To achieve these conditions, the distance from the well screen to the box walls on one side and to the gravel pack on the other side were considered big enough in relation to the well diameter to assume the boundary conditions for a uniform flow field as valid. The water supply of the aquifer was established using a Kimax brand aspirator bottle with tubulation, which was used as a water reservoir that keeps the head at a constant level. As illustrated in Figure 4-1, this was achieved by placing a tube into the

PAGE 35

26 closed container that maintains atmospheric pressure at its bottom. In order to guaranty constant head conditions in the aquifer, the bottom of this tube was elevated to the level of the top part of the aquifer. A constant flow pump on the other side of the aquifer was used to convey a known constant flow through the aquifer, which was then collected in another container to allow control of the actual flow over a certain time. A typical setup of the flux meter is shown in Figure 4.1 (Klammler 2001). Running Experiment Before the experiment can be started, the device has to be prepared. As stated in the previous section, it has to consist of a self-contained permeable unit that intercepts the groundwater flow without retaining it. In this case, 8-14 mesh activated alumina (hydraulic conductivity, 4.82 cm/min, porosity 0.382, particle density of 2.45 kg/l, and bulk density is1.5 kg/l) was used for the permeable media, which took the role of the sorbent for arsenic contamination. The sorbents (activated alumina) in the device sorbs dissolved inorganic solutes (arsenic) present in the water intercepting the unit, thus indicating the amount of contaminant carried by the groundwater. The device was placed in the well, and pump was set to the required flow rate and started. In this case, flow rate was approximately 4.83 mL/min, which result in specific discharges of 0.84 cm/hr for the uniform flow field (cross sectional area A = 420 cm2). The running times was aimed to be 7 hrs hours, thus conveying a total volume of about 1500 mL to 2000 mL of water through the aquifer per run. A control volume at the end of the process is used to quantify the total volume conveyed through the aquifer in order to compute the actual average flow rate over the running time.

PAGE 36

27 q q0 q0 Q 0 Q 0 p o Q 0 Valve Control volume Valve Sorbent media Well Screen Aquifer surface Glass Beads Ottawa Sand Constant flow pump Constant head p po p = p0 p = p 0 Q 0 Figure4-1 Bench Scale set-up of flux meter (Klammler, 2001) Well R Well C Well L 3 in 3 in 3 in 3 in 3.2c m 12 in 1.5 in 15 in 1.5 in Figure 4-2 Cross sectional dimensions of flux meter

PAGE 37

28 Since the hydraulic head at the beginning of the aquifer was set to a certain value by the constant head reservoir and the flow rate was determined by the setting of the pump, the hydraulic head at the end of the aquifer changes with changing flow rates.

PAGE 38

CHAPTER 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Batch experiments for measuring adsorption coefficient for arsenic adsorption onto activated carbon and activated aluminum were conducted at predetermined arsenic concentrations. Strong acid and base extracts were analyzed for extraction efficiency, and GFAAS was used for analysis. Flux meter tests were performed at a flow rate of 0.69 cm/hr to simulate horizontal flow lines and steady state in the box. Adsorption Experiments Batch experiments measuring adsorption coefficient for arsenic adsorption on activated carbon and activated alumina were conducted for constant concentrations of 36 ppb and 17.4 ppm respectively (Pattanayak et al., 2000; Lin and Wu, 2000). These values were used based on experiments conducted at different concentrations used for adsorption of arsenic (Lin and Wu, 2000; Lorenzen et al., 1995). It was observed that activated carbon is a weak adsorbent for arsenic contamination whereas activated aluminum is a strong adsorbent for arsenic contaminant. Hence higher concentrations were used for activated aluminum over activated carbon. Adsorption experiments for arsenic adsorption on activated carbon indicated that activated carbon is not an adequate sorbent for arsenic, therefore, it was not examined for extraction and flux meter experiments. The results obtained from adsorption experiments for arsenic on activated aluminum are shown in Table 5-1. Activated alumina was allowed to adsorb 30 ml of 17.4-ppm arsenic solution for 48 hrs and final concentration of arsenic left in the solution was measured, which is indicated as solution concentration (C) in Table 5-1. The total 29

PAGE 39

30 mass sorbed by activated alumina (total mass mass lest) was calculated. Mass sorbed was then normalized with respect to mass of activated alumina to give sorbed concentration (S). Table 5-1 Adsorption of arsenic on activated alumina Solution Concentration(C) Total Mass Mass Left Mass Sorbed Sorbed Concentration (S) ppm(mg/l) (mg) (mg) (mg) per unit AA mass (mg/g) 8.09 0.52 0.24 0.28 13.89 2.91 0.52 0.09 0.43 7.18 1.58 0.52 0.05 0.47 4.68 1.76 0.52 0.05 0.47 3.41 1.36 0.52 0.04 0.48 2.68 1.33 0.52 0.04 0.48 2.21 The adsorption isotherm (the curve of sorbed concentration Vs concentration in the solution) was analyzed and for the lower range of activated alumina as in this case (0.02g to .2g), a linear isotherm is obtained (Figure 5-1). S = 1.8444CR2 = 0.921602468101214160246810Solution Concentration, C (mg/l)Sorbed Concentration, S (mg/g) Figure 5-1: Adsorption isotherm of arsenic on activated alumina The adsorption isotherm (Figure 5-1) is linear with Kd value of 1.844 L/g. The adsorption isotherm obtained by (Lin and Wu 2000; Singh and Pant 2003) was found to

PAGE 40

31 follow non-linear trend. The difference can be attributed to lower range of solution concentrations used in the analysis which lie on the lower end of the range used by Lin and Wu 2000, and Singh and Pant 2003. However from the data it is evident that activated alumina has a very high efficiency for arsenic and at lower concentrations of arsenic, it can adsorb almost all of arsenic present in the solution. Extraction Experiments Since activated carbon was not found to be a promising adsorbent for arsenic, only extraction of arsenic from activated alumina was considered for the analysis. Extraction using acid and base was analyzed using EPA method 3010A and water chemical codex (Glaze et al., 1982) prescribed method (from materials and methods section). Extraction efficiency was calculated at the ratio of amount of arsenic extracted per unit amount of arsenic sorbed. Extractions performed using strong base, sodium hydroxide and strong acid, nitric acid were compared and it was observed that acidic extraction is more efficient for extracting arsenic from activated alumina. Nitric acid was used for extraction and the results obtained are shown in Table 5-2. A graph of actual amount of arsenic on activated alumina with amount of arsenic extracted using acid is shown in Figure 5-2. Table 5-2 Arsenic extracted using nitric acid Conc. of As in Mass of AA Volume of As per unit mass of AA extracted solution extraction solution Extracted Actual (mg/l) (g) (l) (mg/g) (mg/g) 6.20 0.1016 0.05 3.0512 3.4148 6.19 0.1378 0.05 2.2460 2.6838 6.60 0.1622 0.05 2.0345 2.2125

PAGE 41

32 y = 0.8817xR2 = 0.95980.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.500.001.002.003.004.00Amount sorbed (mg/g)Amount extracted (mg/g) Figure 5-2 Amount extracted using acid vs. initial concentration Graph of amount extracted with respect to actual amount on activated alumina (Figure 5-2) indicated that extraction efficiency of nitric acid is around 88%. Extractions were also performed using strong base, sodium hydroxide. Table 5-3 Arsenic extracted using sodium hydroxide Conc. Of As in Mass of AA Volume of As per unit mass of AA extracted solution extraction solution Extracted Actual (mg/l) (g) (l) (mg/g) (mg/g) 3.54 0.1055 0.0500 1.6777 1.9301 1.96 0.1072 0.0500 0.9142 1.0924 0.96 0.1059 0.0500 0.4514 0.7043 y = 0.8412xR2 = 0.97020.000.501.001.502.000.000.501.001.502.002.50Amount Adsorbed (mg/g)Extracted Amount (mg/g) Figure 5-3 Amount extracted using base vs. initial concentration

PAGE 42

33 The results obtained from extraction using base are shown in Table 5-3. The graph of actual amount of arsenic on activated alumina with amount of arsenic extracted using base (sodium hydroxide) is shown in Figure 5-3. Figure 5-3 indicates that extraction efficiency of sodium hydroxide to extract arsenic is around 84%. However, the results obtained for both types of extraction were similar i.e. efficiency of 85-90%. Flux Meter Bench Scale Experiments The UF flux meter was tested in the lab for its ability to determine arsenic contaminant flux. Dimensionless cumulative mass () for activated alumina was calculated (equation 2.15) from given parameters (section of materials and methods) to be 0.59. Since this is less than 0.6, the linear relation developed by Klammler (2001) was used to calculate mass of imaginary tracer retained in the flux meter (equation 2.15) as ,1.211.22Rcontcontqtm R r (5.1) Since the hydraulic conductivity of activated alumina (4.82 cm/min) is more than the hydraulic conductivity of Ottawa sand (4.45 cm/min), the specific discharge through flux meter was different from that through the surrounding aquifer. Therefore, to calculate specific discharge in flux meter, qo was multiplied with a factor of 1.04 (equation 2.16). Also, from the extraction experiment the amount of arsenic sorbed per unit mass of activated alumina was obtained. If this sorbed mass is denoted by mcont, then the concentration of arsenic in the solution as indicated by flux meter can be calculated as (using equation 2.14, 2.15 and 2.17) 0.6contmCqt r (5.2)

PAGE 43

34 where 2contcontMmLr (5.3) Arsenic was extracted using acid based on EPA method 6010A. Mean and standard deviation of calculated concentration using actual and corrected mass (88% extraction efficiency) was calculated. Results obtained from the flux meter analysis are shown in Table 5-4. From statistical t-test, 95% confidence intervals ( 0.025*tn s where is the sample mean, t is the t-test parameter, s is the sample standard deviation and n is the number of samples takes) for actual and corrected concentrations are 9.79 1.79 and 10.97 2.24 respectively. Arsenic concentration used in the influent solution in flux meter set up was 12ppm, which lies within the 95% confidence interval obtained from the concentration calculations using corrected mass. However, because the degree of freedom for the analysis was low (df = 2, which results in high value of parameter t0.025) confidence interval provides a wide range for concentrations. 0.025 Table 5-4 Concentrations measured from flux meter tests Extracted mass Concentration Calculated Using contm Actual Corrected Actual mass Corrected mass Well Location (g/g) (g/g) (mg/l) (mg/l) Well L 14.25 15.96 9.36 10.48 Well C 16.17 18.11 10.62 11.89 Well R 14.29 16.01 9.73 10.89 Mean 9.79 10.97 Std Dev 0.72 0.81 Since well L and well R are the peripheral wells (Figure 4-2), and due to possible convergence of flow lines; flow through well L and well R might have been lower when compared to the center well. Similarly, the total mass of arsenic passing through the well on sides might have been less than expected, which in turn would result in lower estimated flux concentration. From Table 5-4, calculated concentrations in well L and

PAGE 44

35 well R (Figure 4-2) are less than the concentration calculated in well C. Well C provides a good estimate (estimated value = 11.89ppm) of the actual concentration (12ppm) of arsenic in the solution. This implies that flux meter is a promising tool to assess arsenic contamination in groundwater. Computer Simulation Results Arsenic concentration is plotted with respects to time for varying soil types. The parameters used for the analysis were taken from research through various journals and documents as well as from data collected by University of Florida, soil and water department. Table 5-5: Soil properties Soil Type Silt+Clay Content Bulk Density Kd Porosity Marls 95 1000 0.8 0.62 Histosols 90 600 0.7 0.76 Spodosols 13.7 1300 0.3 0.51 Entisols 3.85 1300 0.2 0.51 Concentration Vs Time012345678901000200030004000Time (days)Concentration (ppm) Marls Histosols Spodosols Entisols Figure 5-4: Concentration of arsenic vs. time for varying soil type. The data used is described in the literature review section of the thesis. Most of this data is obtained from findings of University of Florida, soil and water science department or from the research conducted by Clark et al. (2004). As can be seen from the data,

PAGE 45

36 marls and histosols have comparatively high silt and clay content. There high clay content values reflect that higher values of bulk density should be expected. Conversely, marls and histosols were found to have low bulk densities, and this is due to their higher particle fraction. These fractions are mostly organics or limestone particles and are not clay. Marls are clayey soils and therefore, have a higher efficiency to retain arsenic, which results in minimal leaching. From Marls to Entisols, the soil characteristics change from higher composition of clay to lower composition of clay (and higher composition of sand). From Figure 5-4, one can see that time taken by arsenic to reach maximum concentration decreases with increasing sand content (or decreasing clay content) and decreasing Kd values, hence decrease in dispersion from clayey soil to sandy soil (Marls to Entisols) can be observed. Therefore, break through for entisols was achieved the first, spodosols the second, histosols the third and marls the fourth.

PAGE 46

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this research was to evaluate the use of flux meter for estimating arsenic contamination in groundwater. The primary objective was to evaluate the capability of activated alumina as a flux meter sorption media for arsenic. Activated alumina was chosen as the potential sorbents because it has a high efficiency for arsenic (Lin and Wu, 2000). From the batch experiments, it was observed that for constant initial arsenic concentration of 17.4 ppm, with varying amount of activated alumina, a linearly increasing isotherm with Kd value of 1.84 L/g is obtained. This showed that with higher concentrations of arsenic in the aqueous phase, higher concentrations were sorbed onto the solid phase. Evaluation for determining a suitable technique for extracting arsenic from activated alumina was explored. Both acid as well as base solutions were used. It was observed that acid has relatively higher efficiency to extract arsenic from activated alumina than a base. It was determined that extraction methods, acid and base, extract around 85-90% of arsenic from activated alumina. The acid and base considered in the research were nitric acid and sodium hydroxide respectively. The acid was used for extracting arsenic from flux meter samples. Bench scale experiments were conducted for evaluating the use of flux meter for estimating arsenic concentration. A continuous flow of 12 ppm aqueous arsenic concentration was maintained through the model aquifer at specific discharge of 0.84 37

PAGE 47

38 cm/hr. The flux meters were placed in three wells located perpendicular to the flow lines in the center of model aquifer, and arsenic adsorbed by activated alumina in each flux meter was measured. Concentrations calculated based on the mass sorbed by activated alumina were compared with the aqueous concentration used in the aquifer (12ppm). The statistically estimated range of aqueous concentration, calculated on the based of arsenic extracted from flux meter, provided the 95% confidence interval of 10.97 2.24 ppm. The flux meter in central well estimated 99% of the actual concentration in aquifer. The results obtained from flux meter proved it to be a promising device for assessing arsenic contamination in groundwater. Potential applications for this method are measuring arsenic fluxes for quantifying risk to human from arsenic leaching through hazardous waste sites, or from source zones before and after remedial efforts. Future research can be conducted to evaluate compatibility of various available tracers with activated alumina for fluid flow determination.

PAGE 48

LIST OF REFERENCES Alam M. G. M., Snow E. T. and Tanaka A. 2003. Arsenic and heavy metal contamination of vegetables grown in Samta village, Bangladesh. The Science of The Total Environment. 308: 83-96. Azcue, J. M. and Nriagu, J. O. 1995. Impact of abandoned mine tailing on the arsenic concentrations in Moira Lake, Ontario. Journal of Geochemical Exploration. 52: 81-89. Barry D. A., Prommer H., Miller C. T., Engesgaard P., Brun A. and Zheng C. 2002. Modeling the fate of oxidisable organic contaminants in groundwater. Advances in Water Resources. 25: 945-983. British Geological Survey (BGS) 2001. Groundwater studies for arsenic contamination. Report WC/00/19. Volumes 1-10. Brusseau, M., Srivastava R. 1997. Nonideal transport of reactive solutes in heterogeneous porous media: 2. Quantitative analysis of the borden natural-gradient field experiment. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. 28(1-2): 115-155. Bull D. C. 2000. The chemistry of chromated copper arsenate, characteristics of timber treatment plant chemical sludge. Wood Science and Technology. 34:367-376. Chakravarty S., Dureja V., Bhattacharyya G., Maity S. and Bhattacharjee S. 2002. Removal of arsenic from groundwater using low cost ferruginous manganese ore. Water Research. 36:625-632. Charbeneau R. J. 2000. Groundwater hydraulics and pollutant transport. Prentice Hall, Inc. Upper Saddle River. NJ. Chen M., Ma L. Q. and Harris W. G. 2002. Arsenic concentrations in Florida surface soils: influence of soil type and properties. Soil Science Society of American Journals. 66:632. Chen, M., Ma, L.Q. and Harris, W.G. 1999. Baseline concentrations of 15 trace elements in Florida surface soils. Journal of Environmental Quality. 28:1173-1181. Chirenje T., Ma L. Q., Clark C. and Reeves M. 2003. Cu, Cr and As distribution in soils adjacent to pressure-treated decks, fences and poles. Environmental Pollution. 124:407-417. 39

PAGE 49

40 Clark J. C., Chirenje T., Annable M. D., Hatfield K. 2004. Developing retention indices and modeling transport of CCA in Florida soils at unlined landfills. Florida center of solid and hazardous waste management. Final Project Report. Day, M. J., Reinke, R. F. and Thomson, J. A. M. 2001. Fate and transport of fuel components below slightly leaking underground storage tanks. Environmental Forensics.2: 21-28 Deliyanni E. A., Bakoyannakis, D. N., Zouboulis A. I. and Matis K. A. 2003. Sorption of As(V) ions by akaganeite-type nanocrystals. Chemosphere. 50:155-163. Domenico P.A. and Schwartz F. W. 1990. Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York City. New York Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) 2004. New arsenic standards applicable to both domestic and industrial wastewater facilities. Chapter 62-550, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) Galba J and Polacek S. 1973. Sorption of arsenates under kinetic conditions in selected soil types. Acta Fytotech. 28: 187 Ghimire K. N., Zhu1 Y., Yano M., Makino K. and Miyajima T. 2002. Effective use of orange juice residue for removing heavy and radioactive metals from environment. Geosystem Engineering. 5(2): 31-37. Ginn T. R., Wood B. D., Nelson K. E., Scheibe T. D., Murphy E. M. and Clement T. P., 2002. Processes in microbial transport in the natural subsurface. Advances in Water Resources. 25:1017-1042 Halter W. E. and Pfeifer H. R. 2001. Arsenic (V) adsorption onto -Al2O3 between 25 and 70C. Applied Geochemistry. 16(7-8): 793-802. Hatfield K., Annable M., Cho J, Rao P. S. C. and Klammler H. 2003. A direct passive method for measuring water and contaminant fluxes in porous media. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. In press. Jones K. D. and Huang W, 2003. Evaluation of toxicity of the pesticides, chlorpyrifos and arsenic, in the presence of compost humic substances in aqueous systems. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 103: 93-105. Kayajanian G. 2003. Arsenic, cancer, and thoughtless policy. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 55: 139-142. Klammler H. 2001. Contaminant hydrology A new method for measurement of groundwater and contaminant flux. PhD Dissertation. Technical University Graz, Austria

PAGE 50

41 Leeuwen, F. X. R. 2000. Safe drinking wate r: the toxicologist's approach. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 38:S51-S58 Lin T. F. and Wu, J. K. 2000. Adsorption of arsenite and arsenate within activated alumina grains: equilibrium and kinetic s. Water Resource (Oxford). 35: 2049-2057. Lin Z and Puls R. W. 2000. Adsorption, deso rption and oxidation of arsenic affected by clay minerals and aging proce ss. Environmental Geology. 39: 753-759. Lorenzen L., Deventer J. S. J. van a nd Landi W. M. 1995. Factors affecting the mechanism of the adsorption of arsenic species on activated carbon. Minerals Engineering. 8:557-569. McDonald, M.G. and Harbaugh A.W. 1988. A modular three-dimensional finitedifference ground-water flow m odel. USGS TWRI. 6-A1: 586 Meng X., Korfiatis G. P., Bang S., Bang K. W. 2002. Combined effects of anions on arsenic removal by iron hydroxide Toxological Letters. 133: 103-111. Montas H. J., Mohtar R. H., Hassan A. E. and Alkhal F. A. 2000. Heuristic spacetime design of monitoring wells for contaminan t plume characterization in stochastic flow fields. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. 43(3-4): 271-301. National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) Staff Science 2003. (http://wwweosdis.ornl.gov /FIFE /Datasets /Soil_Propert ies /Soil_Survey_Ref.html). Last seen on September 2003. Nimick, D. A., Moore J. N. Dalby C. E. and Savka M. W. 1998. The fate of geothermal arsenic in Madison and Missouri rivers Montana and Wyoming. Water Resource Research. 34: 3051-3067. Pattanayak J., Mondal K., Mathew S., Lalvani S. B. 2000. A parametric evaluation of the removal of As (V) and As(III) by car bon based adsorbents. Carbon. 38: 589-596. Raven K. P., Jain A. and Loeppert, R. H. 1998. Arsenite and arsenate adsorption on ferrihydrite: kinetics, equilibrium and adso rption envelopes. Environmental Science and Technology. 32: 344-349. Sahuquillo A., Rauret G., Rehnert A. and Munt au H. 2003. Solid sample graphite furnace atomic adsorption spectroscopy for supporti ng arsenic determinat ion in sediments following a sequential extraction proce dure. Analytica Chemica Acta. 476:15-24. Salas J. and Ayora C. 2004. Groundwater chem istry of the Oklobondo uraninite deposit area (Oklo, Gabon): two-dimensional reac tive transport modeling. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. 69:115-137. Singh D. B., Prasad G. and Rupainwar D. C. 1996. Adsorption technique for the treatment of As(V) rich effluent s. Colloids and Surfaces. 111: 49-56.

PAGE 51

42 Singh T. S. and Pant K. K. 2003. Equilibrium, kinetics and thermodynamic studies for adsorption of As (III) on activated alumin a. Separation Purification Technology. 36:139:147. Smedley P. L. and Kinniburg D. G. 2002. A review of the source, behavior and distribution of arsenic in natural waters. Applied Geochemistry. 17: 517-168. Smedley P. L and Kinniburgh D. G. 1996. Arse nic contamination of groundwater in bangladesh, Sorption and Transport. Br itish Geological Survey Report WC/00/19. Volume 1. Solo-Gabriele H., Townsend T.G. 1999. Disposal practices and management alternatives for CCA-treated wood waste. Wast e Manage. Residential. 17:378-389. Solo-Gabriele H. M., Townsend T. G. and Me ssick B. 2002. Characteristics of chromated copper arsenate-treated wood ash. Journa l of Hazardous Materials. B89: 213 Townsend T., Stook K., Tolaymat T., Song J.K., Solo-Gabriele H., Hosein N., and Khan B. 2000. New lines of CCA-treated wood res earch: in-service and disposal issues. Florida Center for Hazardous Waste. Technical Report. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2001. National primary drinking water regulations; arsenic and clarif ication to contaminants monitoring. DOCID:fr22ja01-29. 66:6975-7066. Wang L., Chen A. and Fields K. 2000. Arsenic removal from drinking water by ion exchange and activated alumina plan ts. EPA Publication EPA/600/R-00/088. Glaze W. H., Buescher C. A. and Mahon J. H. 1982. Water chemical codex. Activated alumina. National Academy press. Washington D. C. pp 57-58. Wilkie, J. A. and Hering J. G. 1996. Adsorp tion of arsenic onto hydrous ferric oxide: effect of adsorbate/adsorbent ratios a nd co-occuring solutes. Colloidal Surfaces. 107:97-110. Zhang, W., Cai Y., Tu C., and Ma. L.Q. 2002. Arsenic speciation and distribution in an arsenic hyper accumulating plant. Scie nce of Total Environment. 300:167-177. Zheng, C. and Bennett, G.D. 2002. Applied cont aminant transport modeling; John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York City. New York.

PAGE 52

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Prachee Gupta was born in 1980 in Rajasthan, India. She received a Bachelor of Technology (B.Tech) from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Mumbai, in 2002. In the fall of 2002, Prachee joined the University of Florida for a Master of Science in the Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering under the tutelage of her major professor, Dr. Clayton J. Clark, II. 43


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0005441/00001

Material Information

Title: Utilization of University of Florida flux meter for estimating arsenic contamination in groundwater
Physical Description: ix, 43 p. ; ill. , tables
Language: English
Creator: Gupta, Prachee ( Dissertant )
Clark, Clayton J. ( Thesis advisor )
Hatfield, Kirk ( Thesis advisor )
Annable, Michael ( Reviewer )
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2004
Copyright Date: 2004

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Civil and Coastal Engineering thesis, M.S.
Dissertations, Academic -- UF -- Civil and Coastal Engineering

Notes

Abstract: Groundwater contamination is a major problem in today's environment. In Florida, the ground water standards are equivalent to the drinking water standards according to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Among the various contaminants, organic, inorganic, microbial pathogens and radioactive contaminant, inorganic contaminants are of high interest because most of these contaminants are readily soluble in water, and have a high potential to contaminate groundwater. The present research focused on the groundwater contamination due to arsenic. The maximum permissible concentration of arsenic in drinking water in United States is 10microg l⁻± or 10 ppb as recommended by United States Environmental Protection Agency. The purpose of the research was to evaluate the use of the University of Florida flux meter for estimating arsenic contamination in the groundwater. The flux meters were placed in three wells located perpendicular to the flow lines in the center of model aquifer. The internal adsorbent chosen was activated alumina due to its high efficiency in removal of arsenic. Adsorption of arsenic on activated alumina showed a linear trend with a K sub d value of 1.844 L kg⁻±. The procedure for extracting arsenic adsorbed by activated alumina was evaluated and it was found that extraction efficiency of acid (88%) is comparatively more than that of base (84%). Flux meter tests were conducted for arsenic concentration of 12 ppm at a flow rate of 0.84 cm/hr. The flux meter in the central well estimated 99% of the actual arsenic concentration in aquifer Therefore this provides an efficient and cost effective way to estimate arsenic flux in the field.
General Note: Title from title page of source document.
General Note: Document formatted into pages; contains 52 pages.
General Note: Includes vita.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2004.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Original Version: Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format.

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0005441:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0005441/00001

Material Information

Title: Utilization of University of Florida flux meter for estimating arsenic contamination in groundwater
Physical Description: ix, 43 p. ; ill. , tables
Language: English
Creator: Gupta, Prachee ( Dissertant )
Clark, Clayton J. ( Thesis advisor )
Hatfield, Kirk ( Thesis advisor )
Annable, Michael ( Reviewer )
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2004
Copyright Date: 2004

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Civil and Coastal Engineering thesis, M.S.
Dissertations, Academic -- UF -- Civil and Coastal Engineering

Notes

Abstract: Groundwater contamination is a major problem in today's environment. In Florida, the ground water standards are equivalent to the drinking water standards according to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Among the various contaminants, organic, inorganic, microbial pathogens and radioactive contaminant, inorganic contaminants are of high interest because most of these contaminants are readily soluble in water, and have a high potential to contaminate groundwater. The present research focused on the groundwater contamination due to arsenic. The maximum permissible concentration of arsenic in drinking water in United States is 10microg l⁻± or 10 ppb as recommended by United States Environmental Protection Agency. The purpose of the research was to evaluate the use of the University of Florida flux meter for estimating arsenic contamination in the groundwater. The flux meters were placed in three wells located perpendicular to the flow lines in the center of model aquifer. The internal adsorbent chosen was activated alumina due to its high efficiency in removal of arsenic. Adsorption of arsenic on activated alumina showed a linear trend with a K sub d value of 1.844 L kg⁻±. The procedure for extracting arsenic adsorbed by activated alumina was evaluated and it was found that extraction efficiency of acid (88%) is comparatively more than that of base (84%). Flux meter tests were conducted for arsenic concentration of 12 ppm at a flow rate of 0.84 cm/hr. The flux meter in the central well estimated 99% of the actual arsenic concentration in aquifer Therefore this provides an efficient and cost effective way to estimate arsenic flux in the field.
General Note: Title from title page of source document.
General Note: Document formatted into pages; contains 52 pages.
General Note: Includes vita.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2004.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Original Version: Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format.

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0005441:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












UTILIZATION OF UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA FLUX METER FOR ESTIMATING
ARSENIC CONTAMINATION IN GROUNDWATER















By

PRACHEE GUPTA


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2004

































Copyright 2004

by

Prachee Gupta
















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Clayton J. Clark II, chairperson

of my supervisory committee, for all his guidance and support throughout the project. I

am very grateful to my committee, members, Dr. Kirk Hatfield and Dr. Michael Annable,

for all their valuable guidance, suggestions and encouragement. I would also like to thank

Dr. Jaehyun Cho, Dr. Mark Newman and Mr. Harald Klammler for constant guidance in

performing laboratory experiments and Dr. Tait Cherenji for providing basic data for

computer model simulation.

I greatly appreciate the help of Mr. Thomas Luongo for sample analysis. Thanks go

to the students of Water Resource Research Center for the support I received throughout.

Finally, I want to thank my parents and friends who encouraged me throughout my

academic career.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ................................................................................................. iii

LIST OF TABLES ....................................................... ............ ....... ....... vi

L IST O F F IG U R E S .... ...... ................................................ .. .. ..... .............. vii

A B STR A C T ..................... ................................... ........... ................. viii

CHAPTER

1 IN TRODU CTION ............................................... ..... ..... .............. ..

G e n e ra l .......................................................................................................1
Purpose and O bjectives............................................................... ....................... 3

2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ............................... ................................. 4

Advective-Dispersive Transport of Reactive Solutes...........................................4.
Linear Isotherm ....................... .................... ... ...... .........4
N on-linear (Freundlich Isotherm ) ........................................... .....................5
N on-linear (Langm uir Isotherm ).................................... ........................ 6
U university of Florida Flux M eter................................................... ... ................... 6
Estimating Fluid Flux ............................. .. .......... ....... ...... ...............7
Estimating Solute Mass Flux........................................ ...............9

3 LITER A TU RE REV IEW ...................... .... ................................. ............... 12

O occurrence of A rsenic ............... .......... .............. .............. .. ..................... ..... 12
Fate and Transport of A rsenic .............. ..................................... ............... 13
Adsorption Characteristics of Arsenic ....... .......... ................... ..............15
L laboratory A naly sis........... ...... ...................................................... .......... .. 18
A d sorption Isoth erm s ........................................ ....................................... 18
Extraction and A analysis: .............. ................................... .... ........ 19
F lux M eter A naly sis ........................................................ .... ...... .... .. ... 19
Com puter M odel Sim ulation.......................................................... ............... 20










4 MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................ ........................ 22

A dsorption Isotherm s........................................................................... ............... 22
E extraction M ethod .......................................... .. .. ......... .... .. ... 23
A analysis M ethod ............... ................. ....................... ............ 24
F lu x M ete r ........................................................................................................... 2 4
F lux M eter Set-up ..................... .. ...................... .. .. ...... ........... 25
R running E xperim ent ............................................... ............................ 26

5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................ ......................... 29

A dsorption E xperim ents ............................................... ......................................29
Extraction Experim ents....................................................................................... 31
Flux M eter Bench Scale Experim ents.................................... ....................... 33
Computer Simulation Results ...........................................................................35

6 CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................37

L IST O F R E F E R E N C E S ....................................................................... ... ................... 39

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E TCH ..................................................................... ..................43

































v
















LIST OF TABLES

Table p

3-1 Behavior of arsenic with different m inerals ........................................ .................17

5-1 Adsorption of arsenic on activated alum ina ........................................ .................30

5-2 Arsenic extracted using nitric acid ...............................................31

5-3 Arsenic extracted using sodium hydroxide ................................... .................32

5-4 Concentrations measured from flux meter tests............... ......... ............... 34

5-5 Soil properties ........................................................................35






















LIST OF FIGURES


Figure p

2-1 Contaminant sorbed by the sorbing matrix ................................... .................10

3-1 Cumulative probability curve for "As" in Florida surface soils............................. 14

3-2 Eh-pH diagram for inorganic arsenic compounds........................................15

4-1 Bench Scale set-up of flux meter............. ...... ..................................... ....... 27

4-2 Cross sectional dimensions of flux meter ...................... ...................... 27

5-1 Adsorption isotherm of arsenic on activated alumina.................... ..................30

5-2 Amount extracted using acid vs. initial concentration ..........................................32

5-3 Amount extracted using base vs. initial concentration........................... ..........32

5-4 Concentration of arsenic vs. time for varying soil type. .........................................35














Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science
UTILIZATION OF UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA FLUX METER FOR ESTIMATING
ARSENIC CONTAMINATION IN GROUNDWATER

By

Prachee Gutpa

August 2004

Chair: Clayton J. Clark II
Major Department: Civil and Coastal Engineering

Groundwater contamination is a major problem in today's environment. In Florida,

the ground water standards are equivalent to the drinking water standards according to

the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Among the various

contaminants, organic, inorganic, microbial pathogens and radioactive contaminant,

inorganic contaminants are of high interest because most of these contaminants are

readily soluble in water, and have a high potential to contaminate groundwater. The

present research focused on the groundwater contamination due to arsenic. The maximum

permissible concentration of arsenic in drinking water in United States is 10g 1-1 or 10

ppb as recommended by United States Environmental Protection Agency. The purpose of

the research was to evaluate the use of the University of Florida flux meter for estimating

arsenic contamination in the groundwater. The flux meters were placed in three wells

located perpendicular to the flow lines in the center of model aquifer. The internal

adsorbent chosen was activated alumina due to its high efficiency in removal of arsenic.

Adsorption of arsenic on activated alumina showed a linear trend with a Kd value of









1.844 L kg1. The procedure for extracting arsenic adsorbed by activated alumina was

evaluated and it was found that extraction efficiency of acid (88%) is comparatively more

than that of base (84%). Flux meter tests were conducted for arsenic concentration of 12

ppm at a flow rate of 0.84 cm/hr. The flux meter in the central well estimated 99% of the

actual arsenic concentration in aquifer Therefore this provides an efficient and cost

effective way to estimate arsenic flux in the field.














CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

General

Groundwater contamination is a major problem in today's environment since

groundwater constitutes major portion of potable water in Florida. In Florida, the ground

water standards are equivalent to the drinking water standards, as stated by Florida

Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Groundwater can be contaminated by

disease-producing pathogens, leachate from landfills and septic systems, careless disposal

of hazardous household products, agricultural chemicals, and leaking underground

storage tanks (Ginn et al., 2002; Day et al., 2001; Leeuwen, 2000). There are four basic

types of contaminants that include organic, inorganic, radioactive elements, and

microbial pathogens (Salas and Ayora 2004; Jones and Huang, 2003; Barry et al., 2002;

Ginn et al., 2002). Among the various contaminants, inorganic contaminants are of high

interest because most of these contaminants are readily soluble in water, and have a high

potential to contaminate groundwater.

Relative to other oxyanion forming minerals, arsenic is problematic because of its

mobility in most of its oxidations states and at almost all pH values. During 2001,

roughly 96% of the arsenic imported into the United States was in the form of arsenic tri-

oxide (Solo-Gabriele et al., 2002). Most of this arsenic trioxide was used for the

production of arsenic acid used for wood preservation. Arsenic is brought into the State

of Florida for the production of chromated copper arsenate (CCA) treated wood (Chirenje

et al., 2003 and Solo-Gabriele and Townsend, 1999). CCA is composed of three major









elemental constituents, copper (Cu), chromium (Cr), and arsenic (As), among which

arsenic is the most hazardous. The present research focused on the soil and groundwater

contamination due to arsenic. Arsenic is a semi-metal element, found in environment

combined with other elements such as oxygen, chlorine, and sulfur to form inorganic

arsenic compounds. It also combines with carbon and hydrogen to form organic

compounds. It most often exists in organic form as monomethyl arsonic acid (MMA) and

dimethyl arsonic acid (DMA). Arsenic exists in the environment most often in two

oxidation states: arsenite, As (III), and arsenate, As (V), respectively (Singh and Pant

2003; Meng et al., 2002). Under oxidation conditions (and aerobic environments)

arsenates are stable species (as oxyanions H3AsO4, H2AsO4-, HAsO4-2 or AsO4-3) and are

strongly sorbed onto clays, iron, and manganese oxides and hydroxides, and organic

matters. However, under most reducing conditions (and anaerobic environment) arsenites

(H3AsO3, H2AsO3-1, HAsO3-2) are the predominant arsenic compounds (Chakravarty et

al., 2002).

According to Kayajanian (2003), studies on Utah cancer mortality as a function of

lifetime arsenic exposure indicated that for concentration range of 1-25 ppb, there are

2.682 cancers per 100 people and in the 5 years following initial arsenic medication,

around 6.45 deaths are expected. The maximum permissible concentration of arsenic in

drinking water in United States is 10g L-1 or 10 ppb as recommended by United States

Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA (2001). In addition to the arsenic

contamination in water sources, dietary intake of arsenic through the food chain via

uptake from contaminated soils may adversely affect human health (Alam et al., 2003).

The current soils clean up goals set by the Florida department of environmental









protection for arsenic in residential and industrial soils are 0.8 mg/kg and 3.6 mg/kg

respectively (Solo-Gabriele et al., 2002).

Various scientists and organizations have made an attempt to identify the source

of contaminant and degree of contamination in groundwater using different field

monitoring techniques (Montas et al., 2000; Brusseau and Srivastava, 1997). This

research discusses a new devise named Flux meter that allows to simultaneously

measuring cumulative dissolved solute fluxes when placed within a flow field. The Flux

meters have been tested for most of the organic contaminant analysis both in lab as well

as field for contaminant flux, groundwater flow and flow direction (Hatfield et al., 2003;

Klammler 2001).

Purpose and Objectives

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the use of flux meter for estimating

arsenic contamination in the groundwater. Before bench scale flux meter tests are

performed, information regarding the type of adsorbents and its interaction with arsenic

should be understood very well. Hence, the objectives of this research were 1) review of

adsorption and extraction characteristics of arsenic to different materials and 2) to

evaluate the applicability of these materials as flux meter sorbent media for arsenic flux

measurement, 3) to simulate the arsenic contamination for various Florida soil types. This

thesis seeks to give the basic understanding of the solute transport and theoretical

contemplation of flux meter for estimating fluid and contaminant flux, arsenic

contamination and need of flux meter for estimating fluid flow and contaminant flux in

the groundwater.














CHAPTER 2
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Advective-Dispersive Transport of Reactive Solutes

In non-ideal condition found in the environment, a reactive solute interacts with the

solid matrix during flow. The solute is, therefore distributed between the fluid and the

sorbed phases. If a primary anisotropic system is assumed, for the steady water flow,

under saturated or uniformly unsaturated conditions, the solute transport equation for a

homogeneous media can be represented by (Domenico and Schwartz, 1990)

Sac aS 82C ac (2.
Ow +Pb a =wD, -q a (2.1)
at at ax Qt

where
Ow= volumetric water content
Cw= solute concentration in water (kg L-1)
pb= bulk density of sorbing media (g/cm3)
S= sorbed solute concentration (mg/kg)
Dw = dispersion coeffecient (cm2/hr)
qw = advective mass flux (cm/hr)


Three most commonly known isotherms that define the adsorption characteristics of

any adsorbent are linear isotherm, Freundlich isotherm and Langmuir isotherm (Zheng

and Bennett 2002, Charbeneau 2000). Freundlich and Langmuir isotherms can be used to

represent both linear and non-linear isotherms.

Linear Isotherm

When the sorbed phase solute concentration is linearly proportional to the solute

concentration in the solution phase, the sorption isotherm is linear isotherm, and is

represented by S = Kd.Cw. Therefore, the equation 2.1 is transformed to









aC + pbK 2C Oc
a [1+ ] = D (2.2)
at a ax2 at

The transport velocity (cm/hr) is represented by v. The adsorption coefficient (Kd)

is a measure of how tightly the solute binds or sticks to soil particles. The greater the Kd

value, the less likely a chemical will leach or contribute to runoff.

The retardation factor, R = (1+ pKd/Ow), expresses how much slower a

contaminant moves than does the water itself. Equation 2.2 is therefore transformed to

ac 0 2C ac
a = D*. d2 v (2.3)
at a2 at

D v
where D* and v =
R R

When Kd = 0, it implies that R = 1 and hence D* = D and v* = v, which reverts

the equation (equation 2.3) back to the non-reactive ideal solutes. Hence the equations

below show the effect of retardation factor on the solute transport. As Kd and R increases,

the distance to solute peak decreases. The distance to solute peak (x*) is given by

vt
x* = [v*t] (2.4)
R

The time of arrival of solute peak (t*) is delayed and is given by

LR
t* = [L/v*] = LR (2.5)
V

Non-linear (Freundlich isotherm)

In this type of isotherm the solute mass is proportional to the concentration raise

to N.


S K C N #


(2.6)









pKNCN
Hence, retardation factor R = [1 + P w ]


It is evident from the above equation that R is not a constant but is a function of Cw.

N<1, R (Cw) decreases as Cw increases for Cw >1

N>1, R (Cw) increases as Cw increases for Cw >1

N = 1, R is independent of Cw and hence leads to the linear isotherm.

Non-linear (Langmuir Isotherm)

Langmuir isotherm is the most common type non-linear isotherm and in this

isotherm


S = maxkw (2.7)
1+ kC

pS k
Hence, retardation factor for Langmuir isotherm is R(C,) = [1+ PSmax
O, (1 + kC)2

In non-ideal environmental conditions, it is very difficult to obtain the accurate

values of various parameters and hence accurate flux measurement is difficult. There is a

need for accurate and easy to use equipment for the calculation of groundwater flux and

contaminant flux. A new method utilizing flux meter has been developed at the

University of Florida and laboratory tested for measuring both contaminant and

groundwater fluxes at hazardous waste site.

University of Florida Flux Meter

The University of Florida flux meter measures cumulative dissolved solute fluxes

with directions simultaneously when placed within a flow field (Hatfield et al., 2003).

The device consists of a self-contained permeable unit that intercepts the groundwater

flow without retaining it. A matrix of hydrophobic and hydrophilic sorbents in the device









sorbs dissolved organic and inorganic solutes present in the water intercepting the unit,

thus indicating the amount of contaminant carried by the groundwater. The sorbent

matrix is also impregnated with known amount of one or more fluid soluble "resident

tracers" that leaches from the sorbent at the rate proportional to the fluid flux (Hatfield et

al. 2003) and provides an estimate for the fluid flow. The flux meter has been validated

and used for estimating fluid flow and contaminant flux for various organic

contaminants. This research seeks to explore the use of flux meter for measuring arsenic

contamination. .

Estimating Fluid Flux

Fluid flow can be estimated by placing flux meter device in a monitoring well

perpendicularly intercepting the groundwater flow. The amount of tracer leaching out of

the device gives the measure of fluid flux. It is assumed that a) the various tracers used do

not mutually affect their partitioning properties; b) tracers partition isotherm is linear and,

c) tracer transport due to dispersion is negligible (Hatfield et al., 2003). Therefore the

distance that the tracer is pushed away by the water can be calculated as

vAt
Ax v,,tAt (2.8)


where vtr = tracer transport velocity.


If the water flows through the meter at the rate vtr = v/R, the remaining amount of

the tracer with respect to the initial tracer amount (represented by mR) gives the measure

of how much water has passed the unit. The rate of vtr is measured by vtr = v/R. Given the

cross sectional area of the unit, one can relate this concentration to the area still occupied

by the tracer as










A = 2r2 sinl(a)-aAx (2.9)
r


R = 2 (2.10)
)Tr


A = q 2r [v q= (2.11)
RO 0

where

a= [r2 -( )2 (2.12)

r = radius of the device

If 4, is the dimensionless cumulative volume of fluid conveyed through the

device, then equation 2.10 can also be stated as


mR [sin 1 2)- 2] (2.13)


qAt
= (2.14)
20Rr

However, due to the circular cross section only at the very beginning is the tracer

present over the whole width of the device (2r). As the tracer is desorbed, some water

will pass the device without leaching out any of the tracer. The distance "a" from the

center, this is equal to the radius of the section at the beginning. This also decreases with

growing Ax and the water passing the device at distances greater than "a" from the center

does not leach out tracer any more. Therefore, equation 2.13 must be used to describe the

relation between the relative remaining tracer mass mR and the dimensionless cumulative

volume 4. To simplify equation 2.13, Klammler (2001) performed regression analysis for

the variation of with mR and observed that regression equation is almost linear for less









than equal to 0.6, which corresponds to the mR equal to 0.3. The regression equation

obtained was

mR = -1.2 +1.0 (2.15)

After keeping the flux meter in the groundwater for a determined amount of time,

the amount of tracer left in the sorbent media (mR) is extracted. The dimensionless

cumulative volume of water, intercepted by the flux meter at a specified depth can be

obtained using equation 2.15. The specific discharge, q, can then be calculated using the

equation 2.14. The specific discharge calculated using equation 2.14 is the discharge

through the flux meter. Because the material used in the aquifer can be different from that

used in flux meter, the permeability (or hydraulic conductivity) of flux meter can be

different from permeability of the surrounding aquifer. The specific discharge in the well

and surrounding aquifer can be related as (Hatfield et al., 2003)

q 2k
q k (2.16)
q, k+k0

Where, q and qo are the specific discharge through the flux meter and surrounding

aquifer respectively. k is the hydraulic conductivity of flux meter and ko is the hydraulic

conductivity of aquifer.

Estimating Solute Mass Flux

The dotted area shown in Figure 2-1 is where the contaminant is sorbed in to the

device. The respective retardation factor of the contaminant (Ront) quantifies the fraction

of the cross sectional area of the device that is actually occupied by the sorbed

contaminant (Klammler 2001). Hence the actual concentration of contaminant in aqueous

phase is given by










C = Mco (2.17)
r 2L(1 mR,cont Rcont

where
Moont = mass of contaminant sorbed (mg)
r = radius of the flux meter cylinder (cm)
L = length of sorbent matrix (cm)
mR,ont = relative mass of hypothetical resident tracer retained after time period t.
Reont = retardation of sorbent (contaminant) on matrix (L g')
0 = water content in the device.
To calculate the amount of tracer retained in the flux meter (mR,cont) that is required

for contaminant flux calculations (equation 2.17), an imaginary tracer is assumed in the

flux meter that has the same leaching properties as that of contaminant (i.e. the tracer and

contaminant have the same retardation factor). Equation 2.13 and 2.14 can then be used

for calculating mR,cont using the parameters of sorbent matrix.




Service
Area of sorbed
contaminant



~~ ---------~-- --t------------ ----------







Figure 2-1 Contaminant sorbed by the sorbing matrix

Since the calculated concentration is same in the aqueous phase of the aquifer and

aqueous phase of the device, it can be directly used to calculate the contaminant flux

using


J = qo. C


(2.20)









Like any other process, flux meter also has a disadvantage in it. This method only

works for plume constituents that are actually retained by the sorbing matrix of the

device. For plume constituents that are not retained by the sorbing matrix, the

contaminant flux is not measured. Hence the prior knowledge of type of contaminant in

the area of interest is very important. Evaluating flux meter for monitoring arsenic

concentration and the various parameters needed to be considered while simulating field

conditions in lab are discussed in next chapter. Also, this method has not been validated

for wide scale use for measuring inorganic solutes.













CHAPTER 3
LITERATURE REVIEW

Arsenic predominantly exists in two oxidation states, As (III) and As (V). USEPA

2001 and FDEP 2004 have revised their maximum contamination level limits from 50ig

1-1 to 10g 1- starting from 2006 and 2005, respectively. In this study, arsenic

contamination due to chromated copper arsenate (CCA) leaching from construction and

demolition landfills is considered. Various factors that can affect the sorbed concentration

of arsenic are discussed and affect of varying soil types is also initiated.

Occurrence of Arsenic

Occurrence of arsenic can be both anthropogenic including mining and industrial

waste, and geogenic such as volcanic eruption and weathering, in nature. High

concentration of arsenic in ground water can occur in some areas as a result of inputs

from geothermal sources. Nimick et al. (1998) found up to 370kg 1- arsenic in Madison

River water as a result of geothermal inputs from the yellow-stone geothermal system.

Smedley and Kinniburgh (1996) noted high arsenic concentrations (around 200-300kg 1-

1) in surface waters affected by Sn and Au mining activities. Azcue and Nriagu (1995)

conducted experiments for arsenic concentrations in Moira lake of Canada throughout the

year and showed the significant seasonal difference with an average concentration of 62

.g 1- during summers and 22 .g 1- during winters, they attributed this difference to the

depleted oxygen levels in the bottom lake waters as a result of biological productivity

during summers.









Arsenic is widely used in making wood preservatives like CCA, insecticides and

pesticides and for various other agricultural and industrial purposes. Due to its

widespread use in agriculture, industry, and medicine, it has gained attention of lot of

scientists and researchers for its health effects and required remediation procedures.

Arsenic is brought into the State of Florida primarily for the production of CCA-treated

wood (Chirenje et al., 2003 and Solo-Gabriele and Townsend, 1999). Upon disposal, the

majority of CCA-treated wood is may be disposed in unlined construction and demolition

(C&D) landfills, or recycled as mulch or wood fuel. As a result, a considerable amount of

arsenic can be potentially released into the Florida environment. Townsend et al. (2000)

estimated that, in Florida, CCA-treated decks impact 10 000 ha or 108 m2 of soil, and

the amount of CCA-treated utility poles in use is 7x105 m3. Arsenic is predominant in +5

oxidation state in CCA, though as the pH changes the stable oxidation state for arsenic

varies (Solo Gabriele et al., 2002 Bull, 2000).

Fate and Transport of Arsenic

Relative to other oxyanion forming minerals, arsenic is problematic because it is

mobile in most of the oxidations states and at almost all pH values, whereas other

oxyanion like selenium are mobile as selenate (Se04-2) under oxidizing conditions but are

immobile under reducing conditions either due to the stronger adsorption of its reduced

form, selenite (SeO3-2), or due to its reduction to metal (Smedley and Kinniburgh, 1996).

Chen et al. (2002) collected over 448 samples to determine arsenic distribution in soils of

Florida. The soil order described by Chen et al. (1999) is used to classify different types

of soils including Alfisols (14%), Entisols (22%), Histosols (10%), Mollisols (4%),

Inseptisols (3%), Spodisols (28%) and Ultisols (19%). Clark et al. (2004) grouped these

soil types into three classes, class 1, 2, and 3 of arsenic retention indices. Class 1 includes










Marls and Histosols; these soils have the greatest retention and minimal leaching

capability of arsenic. Class 2 includes Entisols, Alfisols and Ultisols. These soils found to

have moderate retention with moderate potential for leaching. Class 3 have the least

retention and greatest risk for leaching and it include Spodosols. Chen et al. (2002)

observed the decrease in arsenic concentration with following trend in soil order:

Histosols> Inceptisols> Mollisols> Ultisols> Entisols, Alfisols> Spodosols. A cumulative

probability curve for Arsenic concentration in Florida surface soils was developed as

shown in Figure 3-1 (Chen et al., 2002), where x-axis plots a histogram of the data

categories and y-axis plots the frequency of the data in percentage. Numbers in

parentheses are sample sizes of individual soil orders.

100 .. .. .
-o-- Spodosols (122) .
---Entisols (107) I *
80 -o- Alfsols (60) pp .
Upper biislhn
S -- tisos (88) 4" concentration= 702 nag
kg (hen et al., 199)
OM- Moisols (15)
60 -- nceptisoh (10) Florida DEP soil cleanup
I o 3.70 n9l kg9
m Histosols (39) industrial land use)
~- : Florida DEP soil cleanup
40 poal = (A SO rLim
:. (Residential land usw)

a USEPA soil screening
20 level =0.40 Mg kg0'
& :(USEPA, 1996)



0.0 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Arsenic Concentration (rmgkg)

Figure 3-1: Cumulative probability curve for "As" in Florida surface soils
(Chen et al. 2002)










Adsorption Characteristics of Arsenic

Redox potential (Eh), and pH are most often the controlling factors in mobility of

arsenic in the environment. Under oxidizing conditions, H2AsO4- is dominant, at low pH

(pH of 2 to 6); while at high pH (6 to 12), HAsO4-2 becomes dominant (Smedley and

Kinniburgh, 2002). The Eh-pH diagram for arsenic is given in Figure 3-2. Solubility of

arsenic in natural systems is strongly influenced by its capacity to be adsorbed by

different minerals present in soils. The interaction of arsenic with different minerals is

represented in the Table 3-1.


1200 0





400 i ,
E
uJI O .






I IO I I I I -- -]
-400




2 4 6 B 10 12 14
pH
Figure 3-2: Eh-pH diagram for inorganic arsenic compounds
(Smedley and Kinniburgh, 2002)

Among the treatment processes appropriate for removal of arsenic, activated

alumina adsorption is considered to be in-expensive and more versatile (Wang et al.,

2000). Activated alumina (AA) has high efficiency to adsorb arsenic in both of its

oxidation states. However, ionic strength, pH, competing ions, and temperature can

significantly change adsorption characteristics of activated alumina for arsenic (Deliyanni









et al., 2003; Meng et al., 2002; Lin and Wu, 2000; Wang et al., 2000; Halter and Pfiefer

2001). Lin and Wu (2000) found that arsenite uptake on activated alumina is much less

than arsenate uptake at almost all pH conditions. The uptake of arsenite was found to

increase with the increasing pH until pH 7, and then decrease as pH increases. This was

attributed to surface charge of AA, which is positive until pH < pHzpc (point of zero

charge). Deliyanni et al. (2003) observed the effect of ionic strength of solution on the

sorption process of arsenate ions on alkaganeite by varying the concentrations of (0-0.1M

KNO3). Observations indicated that as the concentration of KNO3 is increased, the

removal of arsenic is improved until saturation, when varying the amount of sorbent. This

improvement was attributed to certain depression of negative solid surfaces charges in the

alkaline region, caused by the presence of inorganic electrolyte, which enhanced the

interaction between surface sites and arsenic oxyanions. These adsorption characteristics

of arsenic highly differ in presence of intersecting minerals like phosphorous. British

Geological Survey (BGS 2001) calculated sorption of As (V) and As (III) by Hydrous

Ferric Oxide (HFO) as a function of arsenic concentrations and pH in 0.01M NaCl

background electrolytes. Observations were made in the absence and presence of an

equilibrium dissolved phosphate-P concentration of 1 mg 1-1. Results indicated that over

the pH range of 6 to 8, As (III) sorbs more strongly than As (V), the reverse was seen in

the absence of phosphate. Meng et al. (2002) investigated the combined effect of

phosphate, silicate and bicarbonate on the adsorption of arsenic by iron hydroxides. The

apparent adsorption constants indicated that the affinity of the anions for iron hydroxide

sites decreased in the order as arsenate > phosphate > arsenite > silicate > bicarbonate.









Table 3-1: Behavior of arsenic with different minerals
Mineral Comment Reference
Akaganeit The maximum load capacity was found to be about Deliyanni et. al.
(P-FeO(OH)) about 100-120 mg As(V) per g of Akaganeite (2003)
when .5g 1-1 used. The amount of arsenate
adsorption increases by lowering the pH, increasing
the amount of sorbent and ionic strength of the system.
Clay mineral An increased Arsenic content has been noted with the Galba and
increasing clay content of the contaminated soils. Polacek, (1973)
Hametite & The effect of solute concentration, detention time, pH Singh et. al.
Feldspar temperature, and agitation rate of the adsorbent like (1996)
Hematite and Felspar. The maximum removal was found
to be 100% and 97% with hematite and felspar
respectively at optimum conditions.
Orange Juice Found that for iron-loaded phosphorylated OJR, maximum Ghimire et. al.
Residue (OJR) adsorption capacity for As(V) and As(III) was (2002)
0.94 and 0.91 mol/kg at their optimum pH values 3.1
And 10.0, respectively
Activated Uptake of arsenite is much less than that of arsenate Lin and Wu
Alumina for AA in most pH conditions. Pore diffusion coefficients (2000)
(AA) And tortuosity factors of arsenate and arsenite were
interpreted for AA grains with different grain size and
different pH.
HFO Discussed kinetics and pH dependence of As(V) and As(III) Raven et al.
adsorption on HFO Found very high (1998)
As(V) and As(III) loadings (up to 4-5 mol As kg-1)
at the highest concentrations.
HFO Sorption of As(V) and As(III) on HFO at As Wilkie and
concentration of environmental significance (low Hering (1996)
micromolar range) and pH 4-9. SO4 decreased adsorption
Of As(V) and As(III), especially at low pH, while Ca
Increased As(V) adsorption at high pH. ImM bicarbonate did
Snot act on either As(V) or As(III) adsorption greatly









Phosphate, silicate and bicarbonate decrease the removal of As (III) even at

relatively low concentrations and low surface site coverage (Meng et al., 2002). Effect of

temperature as discussed by Pattanayak et al. (2000) showed that higher temperatures

could lead to lower metal uptakes.

Another easily available adsorbent considered by researchers for arsenic adsorption

is activated carbon. Lorenzen et al., (1995) and Pattanayak et al., (2000) used activated

carbon and its derivatives with different ash contents for arsenic adsorption. Lorenzen et

al., (1995) used peat-based carbon with 5-6% ash content and coconut shell carbon with

3% ash content for arsenic adsorption. Peat based carbon was found to perform better that

coconut shell carbon, implying that carbon with higher ash content can perform better.

Activated Carbon was found to be less effective and efficient for removal of Arsenic than

other adsorbents like activated alumina and iron hydroxide.

Laboratory Analysis

The two adsorbents considered in this research for use of flux meter were activated

alumina and activated carbon. These two adsorbents were chosen because activated

alumina has a very high efficiency for arsenic adsorption and activated carbon is one of

the most commonly used adsorbent for most of the adsorption based remediation

procedures.

Adsorption Isotherms

Adsorption isotherms define the effectiveness of adsorbents (activated alumina and

activated carbon) for the adsorption of arsenic. In this research batch experiments were

performed for adsorption isotherm. Most of these adsorption experiments were performed

at constant temperature and controlled pH.









Extraction and Analysis:

Arsenic extraction can be achieved by using strong acidic or alkaline solutions.

Lorenzen et al., (1995) used copper pretreated peat based carbon with a 100-ppm arsenic

solution for 24 hrs at a pH of 6 and checked the elution with distilled water, acids and

alkalis of different pH at different temperatures and flow rates. The acidic solutions were

found to be more effective than the alkaline solutions based on results seen in this

research. Singh et al., 1996 observed the effect of effluent flow rate on elution and found

that the faster flow rate resulted in lower peak and lower arsenic concentrations at low

number of bed volumes and there was a beneficial effect of a higher flow rate towards the

end of an elution run. Once arsenic is extracted, it can be analyzed using Graphite

Furnace Atomic Adsorption Spectrometer (GFAAS) techniques for concentration range

of 5-100 tg 1- using EPA method 7060 A, Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma

Spectroscopy (ICP) for concentrations above 100 tg 1- using EPA method 3010A and

6010 B, and Spectrophotometer (Bran+Luebbe GmbH) using industrial method 26-71E

for concentration range 0.4-20 ppm. GFAAS can also analyze the solid samples directly,

though often digestion is performed on solid samples for analysis (Sahuquillo et al.

2003). The advantages of this technique are its low detection limits, the minimum sample

manipulation, its relative simplicity and the short time required to obtain the results.

Flux Meter Analysis

Various scientists and organizations have made an attempt to identify the source of

contaminant and degree of contamination in groundwater using different field monitoring

techniques (Brusseau and Srivastava 1997, Montas et al., 2000). Brusseau and Srivastava

(1997) collected a dense, 3 dimensional array of sampling points to obtain time-series

data and spatial distribution which was used to determine the zeroth, first and second









spatial moments of the plume. Montas et al. (2000) presented a methodology for

designing groundwater quality monitoring well network in space and time, and to

evaluate the performance of the resulting network. However, the two techniques are often

time consuming and include various assumptions in the contaminant flux calculations and

large number of wells are drilled for correct measurement of contaminant (Montas et al.,

2000). Zhang et al. (2002) performed experimental investigation of contaminant transport

in coastal groundwater. The experiments were performed in a flow tank and glass beads

were used as the homogeneous porous media. The salt water and fresh water intrusion

was taken into consideration by incorporating the vertical/horizontal ratio of the sloping

seaward boundary keeping freshwater and saltwater at the high and low elevation

respectively. In this thesis, University of Florida flux meter are discussed for their use for

measuring contaminant flux in groundwater. Flux meter has been validated for most of

the organic contaminant analysis both in lab as well as field for contaminant flux,

groundwater flow and flow direction. In this research, use of flux meter for inorganic

contaminant like arsenic was analyzed.

Computer Model Simulation

A numerical model simulation is performed using MODFLOW MT3DMS for

arsenic contamination in various soil types. Soil classification described in earlier section

is used because various scientists working on arsenic contamination and its

concentrations in soils of Florida prefer this classification for research (Chen et al., 1999;

Clark et al., 2004). The advantages of using MODFLOW include numerous facilities for

data preparation, easy exchange of data in standard form, extended worldwide

experience, continuous development, availability of source code, and relatively low price

(McDonald and Harbaugh, 1988).






21


Partition coefficients were calculated for different soil types based on arsenic

concentration of 48 ppm. The Kd values were calculated using solution to solid ratio of

1:5. They range from 0.2 to 0.8, highest in marls and histosols (soil and water

department, University of Florida). Bulk density values were based on the ranges from

USDA county soil classification.

Porosity calculations are done on the basis of linear relation between porosity and

bulk density developed by NASA staff science 2003.














CHAPTER 4
MATERIALS AND METHODS

Various adsorption, extraction and analysis methods were performed for arsenic

adsorption onto activated carbon and activated alumina. The adsorption experiments were

performed as batch experiments for different time periods with respect to different

adsorbents because equilibrium time for each adsorbent is different. Extraction was

performed using strong acidic as well as alkaline solution of nitric acid and sodium

hydroxide respectively. Simple digestion process explained by EPA method 3010A for

extraction of arsenic from soils was used for extracting arsenic from activated alumina

using acid. For extraction using strong bases, standard procedure described by water

chemicals codex (Glaze et al., 1982) was used. Analysis was performed using GFAAS (Graphite

Furnace Atomic Adsorption Spectrometer) for all concentrations since it can measure

concentrations as low as 5 ppb (t-g 1-1). For higher concentrations, samples were diluted

to bring them within the detection range of 5 100 ppb. Typical flux meter set up is then

discussed and various boundary conditions and assumptions involved with the method

are described.

Adsorption Isotherms

Experimental quantities vary significantly for adsorption on activated carbon and

activated alumina because of their different efficiencies to adsorb arsenic. Activated

Alumina acts as a strong adsorbent whereas activated carbon is a weak adsorbent. In this

research, trace metal grade arsenic (Fisher Scientific) was used for analysis. Granular

activated alumina and activated carbon used in this research is commercially available









(Fisher Scientific). Adsorption experiments of arsenic on activated alumina were

conducted using 40 ml glass vials fitted with a Teflon-lined septa screw-top cap. In each

experiment .02-.20 g of activated alumina grains were placed into the vial (Lin and Puls,

2000) and 30 ml solution prepared at a predetermined arsenic concentration using de-ion

water. The temperature of the system was kept constant, and the reciprocating speed was

kept at 70 rpm for all experiments. System was kept on rotator for 48 hrs, for adsorption

to come into equilibrium (Lin and Puls, 2000). In adsorption experiment for activated

carbon, 40 ml vials and varying amount of activated carbon (1 5 grams) were used

(Pattanayak et al., 2000). The reciprocating speed was kept at 70 rpm and system was

kept for 72 hrs for adsorption to come into equilibrium (Pattanayak et al., 2000). After

rotating at their respective times, activated carbon/aluminum was allowed to settle for 12

hrs. Solution was then filtered for analysis using GFAAS. Since the initial concentration

of arsenic in the solution was known and arsenic left in the solution were analyzed,

respective calculations for sorbed concentration was performed.

Extraction Method

Arsenic extraction from activated alumina was performed using strong acid and

alkaline solutions using techniques described by EPA method 3010A and water chemical

codex respectively.

For extraction using acid, a known volume of well-mixed sample was transferred to

a 250 ml Griffin beaker, 2 ml of 30% H202 and sufficient concentrated HNO3 was added

to get an acid concentration of 1% (v/v). It was allowed to digest at 1050C for 2 hrs. The

solution was then filtered and injected into the furnace for analysis.

For extraction using base, first the extraction solution was prepared by adding 100

ml of 0.1 M potassium hydrogen phthalate to 47 ml of 0.1 N sodium hydroxide. Solution









was then diluted to 200 ml using de-ionized water. 0.1 g of sample was taken into a 250

ml beaker and 50 ml of extraction solution was added to completely digest activated

alumina samples. A drop of non-ionic surfactant (Brij 97) was then added and solution

was agitated with a magnetic stirrer for 1 hour. This solution was then filtered and

analyzed using GFAAS.

Analysis Method

As discussed above, arsenic analysis was performed using EPA method 7060 A.

the detection limit for this method is 1 gg/1 (Ippb). Samples were analyzed by GFAAS on

a Perkin Elmer SIMAA 6000 THGA. The details of parameters used are:

Wavelength= 193.7nm
Injection size = 20 tl
Matrix Modifier = 7 kl of 700 ppm Pd(N03)2

These parameters were used on the basis of the guidelines provided by the

manufacturer. Because temperature-sensing mechanisms and temperature controllers can

vary between instruments or with time, the validity of the furnace parameters were

periodically confirmed by systematically altering the furnace parameters while analyzing

a standard. In this manner, losses of analyte due to overly high temperature settings or

losses in sensitivity due to less than optimum settings can be minimized. 20 micro liter

aliquot of sample was injected into the furnace and atomized. If the concentration was

found to be greater than the highest standard (100 ppb), the sample were diluted in the

acid matrix (suggested by EPA method 7060A) and reanalyzed.

Flux Meter

Before conducting bench scale flux meter experiments for estimating contaminant

flux, the basic instrument was set up for simulating true field conditions. Hence this









section is divided into two, one containing information on set-up of the flux meter and

second on running the experiment.

Flux Meter Set-up

The test aquifer was set up in a box of approximately 46 cm length and 30 cm

width. Well casing and screen are constituted by a 3.2 cm inner diameter PVC tube that is

slotted over the entire height of the aquifer and that was glued to the bottom of the box to

keep it in position. A metal grid was placed 3.8 centimeters from the box walls where the

water enters and leaves to avoid intrusion of the aquifer material into glass beads. Glass

beads possesses a very high permeability compared to aquifer, which serves to establish a

vertical plane of constant head over the entire cross sections where the water enters and

leaves the aquifer. The aquifer consists of 20-30 mesh Ottawa sand (hydraulic

conductivity, 4.45 cm/min and porosity 0.3) that reaches up to a height of 11.5 cm in the

box.

The filling of box was performed by adding water simultaneously with the sand in

order to obtain a saturated aquifer from the beginning. The boundary conditions of

uniform flow field have to be approximated by the bench-scale aquifer. These conditions

are constant head at infinity on two opposite sides of the well and straight streamlines

going parallel to the other sides of the infinity. To achieve these conditions, the distance

from the well screen to the box walls on one side and to the gravel pack on the other side

were considered big enough in relation to the well diameter to assume the boundary

conditions for a uniform flow field as valid.

The water supply of the aquifer was established using a Kimax brand aspirator

bottle with tubulation, which was used as a water reservoir that keeps the head at a

constant level. As illustrated in Figure 4-1, this was achieved by placing a tube into the









closed container that maintains atmospheric pressure at its bottom. In order to guaranty

constant head conditions in the aquifer, the bottom of this tube was elevated to the level

of the top part of the aquifer. A constant flow pump on the other side of the aquifer was

used to convey a known constant flow through the aquifer, which was then collected in

another container to allow control of the actual flow over a certain time. A typical setup

of the flux meter is shown in Figure 4.1 (Klammler 2001).

Running Experiment

Before the experiment can be started, the device has to be prepared. As stated in the

previous section, it has to consist of a self-contained permeable unit that intercepts the

groundwater flow without retaining it. In this case, 8-14 mesh activated alumina

(hydraulic conductivity, 4.82 cm/min, porosity 0.382, particle density of 2.45 kg/l, and

bulk density is1.5 kg/1) was used for the permeable media, which took the role of the

sorbent for arsenic contamination. The sorbents (activated alumina) in the device sorbs

dissolved inorganic solutes (arsenic) present in the water intercepting the unit, thus

indicating the amount of contaminant carried by the groundwater. The device was placed

in the well, and pump was set to the required flow rate and started. In this case, flow rate

was approximately 4.83 mL/min, which result in specific discharges of 0.84 cm/hr for the

uniform flow field (cross sectional area A = 420 cm2).

The running times was aimed to be 7 hrs hours, thus conveying a total volume of

about 1500 mL to 2000 mL of water through the aquifer per run. A control volume at the

end of the process is used to quantify the total volume conveyed through the aquifer in

order to compute the actual average flow rate over the running time.













Sorbent media


Aquifer surface


Constant head


Constant flow
pump


'Glass Beads


= <= Qo


Figure4-1 Bench Scale set-up of flux meter (Klammler, 2001)


3.2cm


I I
I I
-------- Well


---------- Well C

------- Well R


15 in


1.5 in


12 in


1.5 in


Figure 4-2 Cross sectional dimensions of flux meter


p

Control
volume


Qo


i:.n

^:i^in

V^^- -'/'-^lS^-: -' A-






28


Since the hydraulic head at the beginning of the aquifer was set to a certain value

by the constant head reservoir and the flow rate was determined by the setting of the

pump, the hydraulic head at the end of the aquifer changes with changing flow rates.














CHAPTER 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Batch experiments for measuring adsorption coefficient for arsenic adsorption onto

activated carbon and activated aluminum were conducted at predetermined arsenic

concentrations. Strong acid and base extracts were analyzed for extraction efficiency, and

GFAAS was used for analysis. Flux meter tests were performed at a flow rate of 0.69

cm/hr to simulate horizontal flow lines and steady state in the box.

Adsorption Experiments

Batch experiments measuring adsorption coefficient for arsenic adsorption on

activated carbon and activated alumina were conducted for constant concentrations of 36

ppb and 17.4 ppm respectively (Pattanayak et al., 2000; Lin and Wu, 2000). These values

were used based on experiments conducted at different concentrations used for

adsorption of arsenic (Lin and Wu, 2000; Lorenzen et al., 1995). It was observed that

activated carbon is a weak adsorbent for arsenic contamination whereas activated

aluminum is a strong adsorbent for arsenic contaminant. Hence higher concentrations

were used for activated aluminum over activated carbon. Adsorption experiments for

arsenic adsorption on activated carbon indicated that activated carbon is not an adequate

sorbent for arsenic, therefore, it was not examined for extraction and flux meter

experiments. The results obtained from adsorption experiments for arsenic on activated

aluminum are shown in Table 5-1. Activated alumina was allowed to adsorb 30 ml of

17.4-ppm arsenic solution for 48 hrs and final concentration of arsenic left in the solution

was measured, which is indicated as solution concentration (C) in Table 5-1. The total










mass sorbed by activated alumina (total mass mass lest) was calculated. Mass sorbed

was then normalized with respect to mass of activated alumina to give sorbed

concentration (S).

Table 5-1 Adsorption of arsenic on activated alumina
Solution Total Mass Mass Sorbed Concentration
Concentration(C) Mass Left Sorbed (S)
ppm(mg/l) (mg) (mg) (mg) per unit AA mass (mg/g)
8.09 0.52 0.24 0.28 13.89
2.91 0.52 0.09 0.43 7.18
1.58 0.52 0.05 0.47 4.68
1.76 0.52 0.05 0.47 3.41
1.36 0.52 0.04 0.48 2.68
1.33 0.52 0.04 0.48 2.21

The adsorption isotherm (the curve of sorbed concentration Vs concentration in the

solution) was analyzed and for the lower range of activated alumina as in this case (0.02g

to .2g), a linear isotherm is obtained (Figure 5-1).


Figure 5-1: Adsorption isotherm of arsenic on activated alumina

The adsorption isotherm (Figure 5-1) is linear with Kd value of 1.844 L/g. The

adsorption isotherm obtained by (Lin and Wu 2000; Singh and Pant 2003) was found to


l16
14
12
= 1.8444C
- 10
SR2 == 0.9216
8





0 2 4 6 8 10

Solution Concentration, C (mgll)









follow non-linear trend. The difference can be attributed to lower range of solution

concentrations used in the analysis which lie on the lower end of the range used by Lin

and Wu 2000, and Singh and Pant 2003. However from the data it is evident that

activated alumina has a very high efficiency for arsenic and at lower concentrations of

arsenic, it can adsorb almost all of arsenic present in the solution.

Extraction Experiments

Since activated carbon was not found to be a promising adsorbent for arsenic, only

extraction of arsenic from activated alumina was considered for the analysis. Extraction

using acid and base was analyzed using EPA method 3010A and water chemical codex

(Glaze et al., 1982) prescribed method (from materials and methods section). Extraction

efficiency was calculated at the ratio of amount of arsenic extracted per unit amount of

arsenic sorbed. Extractions performed using strong base, sodium hydroxide and strong

acid, nitric acid were compared and it was observed that acidic extraction is more

efficient for extracting arsenic from activated alumina.

Nitric acid was used for extraction and the results obtained are shown in Table 5-2.

A graph of actual amount of arsenic on activated alumina with amount of arsenic

extracted using acid is shown in Figure 5-2.

Table 5-2 Arsenic extracted using nitric acid
Conc. of As in Mass of AA Volume of As per unit mass of AA
extracted solution extraction solution Extracted Actual
(mg/1) (g) (I) (mg/g) (mg/g)
6.20 0.1016 0.05 3.0512 3.4148
6.19 0.1378 0.05 2.2460 2.6838
6.60 0.1622 0.05 2.0345 2.2125












3.50
? 3.00 y = 0.8817x
S. R2 2=0.9598
E 2.50
t 2.00
5 1.50
C 1.00
E 0.50
0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
Amount sorbed (mglg)

Figure 5-2 Amount extracted using acid vs. initial concentration

Graph of amount extracted with respect to actual amount on activated alumina

(Figure 5-2) indicated that extraction efficiency of nitric acid is around 88%. Extractions

were also performed using strong base, sodium hydroxide.

Table 5-3 Arsenic extracted using sodium hydroxide

Conc. Of As in Mass of AA Volume of As per unit mass of AA
extracted solution extraction solution Extracted Actual
(mg/I) (g) (I) (mg/g) (mg/g)
3.54 0.1055 0.0500 1.6777 1.9301
1.96 0.1072 0.0500 0.9142 1.0924
0.96 0.1059 0.0500 0.4514 0.7043


2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
0.0


0


0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
Amount Adsorbed (mglg)


Figure 5-3 Amount extracted using base vs. initial concentration


y 0.8412x
R2 = 0.9702









The results obtained from extraction using base are shown in Table 5-3. The graph

of actual amount of arsenic on activated alumina with amount of arsenic extracted using

base (sodium hydroxide) is shown in Figure 5-3.

Figure 5-3 indicates that extraction efficiency of sodium hydroxide to extract

arsenic is around 84%. However, the results obtained for both types of extraction were

similar i.e. efficiency of 85-90%.

Flux Meter Bench Scale Experiments

The UF flux meter was tested in the lab for its ability to determine arsenic

contaminant flux. Dimensionless cumulative mass () for activated alumina was

calculated (equation 2.15) from given parameters (section of materials and methods) to

be 0.59. Since this is less than 0.6, the linear relation developed by Klammler (2001) was

used to calculate mass of imaginary tracer retained in the flux meter (equation 2.15) as


1-m t = 1.2 qAt (5.1)
20Rkontr

Since the hydraulic conductivity of activated alumina (4.82 cm/min) is more than

the hydraulic conductivity of Ottawa sand (4.45 cm/min), the specific discharge through

flux meter was different from that through the surrounding aquifer. Therefore, to

calculate specific discharge in flux meter, qo was multiplied with a factor of 1.04

(equation 2.16). Also, from the extraction experiment the amount of arsenic sorbed per

unit mass of activated alumina was obtained. If this sorbed mass is denoted by moont, then

the concentration of arsenic in the solution as indicated by flux meter can be calculated as

(using equation 2.14, 2.15 and 2.17)


C = cntpr (5.2)
0.6qAt










where mnt cnt (5.3)
pLzrr
Arsenic was extracted using acid based on EPA method 6010A. Mean and standard

deviation of calculated concentration using actual and corrected mass (88% extraction

efficiency) was calculated. Results obtained from the flux meter analysis are shown in

t s
Table 5-4. From statistical t-test, 95% confidence intervals (/u+ 025 where is the


sample mean, to25 is the t-test parameter, s is the sample standard deviation and n is the

number of samples takes) for actual and corrected concentrations are 9.79 1.79 and

10.97 2.24 respectively. Arsenic concentration used in the influent solution in flux

meter set up was 12ppm, which lies within the 95% confidence interval obtained from the

concentration calculations using corrected mass. However, because the degree of freedom

for the analysis was low (df = 2, which results in high value of parameter to.025)

confidence interval provides a wide range for concentrations.

Table 5-4 Concentrations measured from flux meter tests
Extracted mass Concentration Calculated Using

m
Well cont 0.69 A
Location Actual Corrected Actual mass Corrected mass
(pg/g) (pg/g) (mg/1) (mg/1)
Well L 14.25 15.96 9.36 10.48
Well C 16.17 18.11 10.62 11.89
Well R 14.29 16.01 9.73 10.89
Mean 9.79 10.97
Std Dev 0.72 0.81

Since well L and well R are the peripheral wells (Figure 4-2), and due to possible

convergence of flow lines; flow through well L and well R might have been lower when

compared to the center well. Similarly, the total mass of arsenic passing through the well

on sides might have been less than expected, which in turn would result in lower

estimated flux concentration. From Table 5-4, calculated concentrations in well L and










well R (Figure 4-2) are less than the concentration calculated in well C. Well C provides

a good estimate (estimated value = 11.89ppm) of the actual concentration (12ppm) of

arsenic in the solution. This implies that flux meter is a promising tool to assess arsenic

contamination in groundwater.

Computer Simulation Results

Arsenic concentration is plotted with respects to time for varying soil types. The

parameters used for the analysis were taken from research through various journals and

documents as well as from data collected by University of Florida, soil and water

department.

Table 5-5: Soil properties
Soil Type Silt+Clay Content Bulk Density Kd Porosity
Marls 95 1000 0.8 0.62
Histosols 90 600 0.7 0.76
Spodosols 13.7 1300 0.3 0.51
Entisols 3.85 1300 0.2 0.51


Concentration Vs Time

9
8 -
C. 7
_6 Marls
2 5 --Histosols
S4 Spodosols
3 -x Entisols
c2
0

0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Time (days)

Figure 5-4: Concentration of arsenic vs. time for varying soil type.

The data used is described in the literature review section of the thesis. Most of this

data is obtained from findings of University of Florida, soil and water science department

or from the research conducted by Clark et al. (2004). As can be seen from the data,









marls and histosols have comparatively high silt and clay content. There high clay

content values reflect that higher values of bulk density should be expected. Conversely,

marls and histosols were found to have low bulk densities, and this is due to their higher

particle fraction. These fractions are mostly organic or limestone particles and are not

clay.

Marls are clayey soils and therefore, have a higher efficiency to retain arsenic,

which results in minimal leaching. From Marls to Entisols, the soil characteristics change

from higher composition of clay to lower composition of clay (and higher composition of

sand). From Figure 5-4, one can see that time taken by arsenic to reach maximum

concentration decreases with increasing sand content (or decreasing clay content) and

decreasing Kd values, hence decrease in dispersion from clayey soil to sandy soil (Marls

to Entisols) can be observed. Therefore, break through for entisols was achieved the first,

spodosols the second, histosols the third and marls the fourth.














CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the use of flux meter for estimating

arsenic contamination in groundwater. The primary objective was to evaluate the

capability of activated alumina as a flux meter sorption media for arsenic. Activated

alumina was chosen as the potential sorbents because it has a high efficiency for arsenic

(Lin and Wu, 2000).

From the batch experiments, it was observed that for constant initial arsenic

concentration of 17.4 ppm, with varying amount of activated alumina, a linearly

increasing isotherm with Kd value of 1.84 L/g is obtained. This showed that with higher

concentrations of arsenic in the aqueous phase, higher concentrations were sorbed onto

the solid phase.

Evaluation for determining a suitable technique for extracting arsenic from

activated alumina was explored. Both acid as well as base solutions were used. It was

observed that acid has relatively higher efficiency to extract arsenic from activated

alumina than a base. It was determined that extraction methods, acid and base, extract

around 85-90% of arsenic from activated alumina. The acid and base considered in the

research were nitric acid and sodium hydroxide respectively. The acid was used for

extracting arsenic from flux meter samples.

Bench scale experiments were conducted for evaluating the use of flux meter for

estimating arsenic concentration. A continuous flow of 12 ppm aqueous arsenic

concentration was maintained through the model aquifer at specific discharge of 0.84









cm/hr. The flux meters were placed in three wells located perpendicular to the flow lines

in the center of model aquifer, and arsenic adsorbed by activated alumina in each flux

meter was measured. Concentrations calculated based on the mass sorbed by activated

alumina were compared with the aqueous concentration used in the aquifer (12ppm). The

statistically estimated range of aqueous concentration, calculated on the based of arsenic

extracted from flux meter, provided the 95% confidence interval of 10.97+ 2.24 ppm.

The flux meter in central well estimated 99% of the actual concentration in aquifer.

The results obtained from flux meter proved it to be a promising device for

assessing arsenic contamination in groundwater. Potential applications for this method

are measuring arsenic fluxes for quantifying risk to human from arsenic leaching through

hazardous waste sites, or from source zones before and after remedial efforts.

Future research can be conducted to evaluate compatibility of various available

tracers with activated alumina for fluid flow determination.
















LIST OF REFERENCES


Alam M. G. M., Snow E. T. and Tanaka A. 2003. Arsenic and heavy metal contamination
of vegetables grown in Samta village, Bangladesh. The Science of The Total
Environment. 308: 83-96.

Azcue, J. M. and Nriagu, J. O. 1995. Impact of abandoned mine tailing on the arsenic
concentrations in Moira Lake, Ontario. Journal of Geochemical Exploration. 52:
81-89.

Barry D. A., Prommer H., Miller C. T., Engesgaard P., Brun A. and Zheng C. 2002.
Modeling the fate of oxidisable organic contaminants in groundwater. Advances in
Water Resources. 25: 945-983.

British Geological Survey (BGS) 2001. Groundwater studies for arsenic contamination.
Report WC/00/19. Volumes 1-10.

Brusseau, M., Srivastava R. 1997. Nonideal transport of reactive solutes in heterogeneous
porous media: 2. Quantitative analysis of the borden natural-gradient field
experiment. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. 28(1-2): 115-155.

Bull D. C. 2000. The chemistry of chromated copper arsenate, characteristics of timber
treatment plant chemical sludge. Wood Science and Technology. 34:367-376.

Chakravarty S., Dureja V., Bhattacharyya G., Maity S. and Bhattacharjee S. 2002.
Removal of arsenic from groundwater using low cost ferruginous manganese ore.
Water Research. 36:625-632.

Charbeneau R. J. 2000. Groundwater hydraulics and pollutant transport. Prentice Hall,
Inc. Upper Saddle River. NJ.

Chen M., Ma L. Q. and Harris W. G. 2002. Arsenic concentrations in Florida surface
soils: influence of soil type and properties. Soil Science Society of American
Journals. 66:632-640.

Chen, M., Ma, L.Q. and Harris, W.G. 1999. Baseline concentrations of 15 trace elements
in Florida surface soils. Journal of Environmental Quality. 28:1173-1181.

Chirenje T., Ma L. Q., Clark C. and Reeves M. 2003. Cu, Cr and As distribution in soils
adjacent to pressure-treated decks, fences and poles. Environmental Pollution.
124:407-417.









Clark J. C., Chirenje T., Annable M. D., Hatfield K. 2004. Developing retention indices
and modeling transport of CCA in Florida soils at unlined landfills. Florida center
of solid and hazardous waste management. Final Project Report.

Day, M. J., Reinke, R. F. and Thomson, J. A. M. 2001. Fate and transport of fuel
components below slightly leaking underground storage tanks. Environmental
Forensics.2: 21-28

Deliyanni E. A., Bakoyannakis, D. N., Zouboulis A. I. and Matis K. A. 2003. Sorption of
As(V) ions by akaganeite-type nanocrystals. Chemosphere. 50:155-163.

Domenico P.A. and Schwartz F. W. 1990. Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology. John
Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York City. New York

Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) 2004. New arsenic standards
applicable to both domestic and industrial wastewater facilities. Chapter 62-550,
Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)

Galba J and Polacek S. 1973. Sorption of arsenates under kinetic conditions in selected
soil types. Acta Fytotech. 28: 187 -197.

Ghimire K. N., Zhul Y., Yano M., Makino K. and Miyajima T. 2002. Effective use of
orange juice residue for removing heavy and radioactive metals from environment.
Geosystem Engineering. 5(2): 31-37.

Ginn T. R., Wood B. D., Nelson K. E., Scheibe T. D., Murphy E. M. and Clement T. P.,
2002. Processes in microbial transport in the natural subsurface. Advances in Water
Resources. 25:1017-1042

Halter W. E. and Pfeifer H. R. 2001. Arsenic (V) adsorption onto a-A1203 between 25
and 700C. Applied Geochemistry. 16(7-8): 793-802.

Hatfield K., Annable M., Cho J, Rao P. S. C. and Klammler H. 2003. A direct passive
method for measuring water and contaminant fluxes in porous media. Journal of
Contaminant Hydrology. In press.

Jones K. D. and Huang W, 2003. Evaluation of toxicity of the pesticides, chlorpyrifos
and arsenic, in the presence of compost humic substances in aqueous systems.
Journal of Hazardous Materials. 103: 93-105.

Kayajanian G. 2003. Arsenic, cancer, and thoughtless policy. Ecotoxicology and
Environmental Safety. 55: 139-142.

Klammler H. 2001. Contaminant hydrology A new method for measurement of
groundwater and contaminant flux. PhD Dissertation. Technical University Graz,
Austria









Leeuwen, F. X. R. 2000. Safe drinking water: the toxicologist's approach. Food and
Chemical Toxicology. 38:S51-S58

Lin T. F. and Wu, J. K. 2000. Adsorption of arsenite and arsenate within activated
alumina grains: equilibrium and kinetics. Water Resource (Oxford). 35: 2049-2057.

Lin Z and Puls R. W. 2000. Adsorption, desorption and oxidation of arsenic affected by
clay minerals and aging process. Environmental Geology. 39: 753-759.

Lorenzen L., Deventer J. S. J. van and Landi W. M. 1995. Factors affecting the
mechanism of the adsorption of arsenic species on activated carbon. Minerals
Engineering. 8:557-569.

McDonald, M.G. and Harbaugh A.W. 1988. A modular three-dimensional finite-
difference ground-water flow model. USGS TWRI. 6-Al: 586

Meng X., Korfiatis G. P., Bang S., Bang K. W. 2002. Combined effects of anions on
arsenic removal by iron hydroxide. Toxological Letters. 133: 103-111.

Montas H. J., Mohtar R. H., Hassan A. E. and Alkhal F. A. 2000. Heuristic space-time
design of monitoring wells for contaminant plume characterization in stochastic
flow fields. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology. 43(3-4): 271-301.

National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) Staff Science 2003. (http://www-
eosdis.oml.gov /FIFE /Datasets /Soil Properties /Soil_Survey Ref.html). Last seen
on September 2003.

Nimick, D. A., Moore J. N. Dalby C. E. and Savka M. W. 1998. The fate of geothermal
arsenic in Madison and Missouri rivers, Montana and Wyoming. Water Resource
Research. 34: 3051-3067.

Pattanayak J., Mondal K., Mathew S., Lalvani S. B. 2000. A parametric evaluation of the
removal of As (V) and As(III) by carbon based adsorbents. Carbon. 38: 589-596.

Raven K. P., Jain A. and Loeppert, R. H. 1998. Arsenite and arsenate adsorption on
ferrihydrite: kinetics, equilibrium and adsorption envelopes. Environmental Science
and Technology. 32: 344-349.

Sahuquillo A., Rauret G., Rehnert A. and Muntau H. 2003. Solid sample graphite furnace
atomic adsorption spectroscopy for supporting arsenic determination in sediments
following a sequential extraction procedure. Analytica Chemica Acta. 476:15-24.

Salas J. and Ayora C. 2004. Groundwater chemistry of the Okelobondo uraninite deposit
area (Oklo, Gabon): two-dimensional reactive transport modeling. Journal of
Contaminant Hydrology. 69:115-137.

Singh D. B., Prasad G. and Rupainwar D. C. 1996. Adsorption technique for the
treatment of As(V) rich effluents. Colloids and Surfaces. 111: 49-56.









Singh T. S. and Pant K. K. 2003. Equilibrium, kinetics and thermodynamic studies for
adsorption of As (III) on activated alumina. Separation Purification Technology.
36:139:147.

Smedley P. L. and Kinniburg D. G. 2002. A review of the source, behavior and
distribution of arsenic in natural waters. Applied Geochemistry. 17: 517-168.

Smedley P. L and Kinniburgh D. G. 1996. Arsenic contamination of groundwater in
bangladesh, Sorption and Transport. British Geological Survey Report WC/00/19.
Volume 1.

Solo-Gabriele H., Townsend T.G. 1999. Disposal practices and management alternatives
for CCA-treated wood waste. Waste Manage. Residential. 17:378-389.

Solo-Gabriele H. M., Townsend T. G. and Messick B. 2002. Characteristics of chromated
copper arsenate-treated wood ash. Journal of Hazardous Materials. B89: 213-232

Townsend T., Stook K., Tolaymat T., Song J.K., Solo-Gabriele H., Hosein N., and Khan
B. 2000. New lines of CCA-treated wood research: in-service and disposal issues.
Florida Center for Hazardous Waste. Technical Report.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2001. National primary
drinking water regulations; arsenic and clarification to contaminants monitoring.
DOCID:fr22ja01-29. 66:6975-7066.

Wang L., Chen A. and Fields K. 2000. Arsenic removal from drinking water by ion
exchange and activated alumina plants. EPA Publication EPA/600/R-00/088.

Glaze W. H., Buescher C. A. and Mahon J. H. 1982. Water chemical codex. Activated
alumina. National Academy press. Washington D. C. pp 57-58.

Wilkie, J. A. and Hering J. G. 1996. Adsorption of arsenic onto hydrous ferric oxide:
effect of adsorbate/adsorbent ratios and co-occuring solutes. Colloidal Surfaces.
107:97-110.

Zhang, W., Cai Y., Tu C., and Ma. L.Q. 2002. Arsenic speciation and distribution in an
arsenic hyper accumulating plant. Science of Total Environment. 300:167-177.

Zheng, C. and Bennett, G.D. 2002. Applied contaminant transport modeling; John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., New York City. New York.















BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Prachee Gupta was born in 1980 in Rajasthan, India. She received a Bachelor of

Technology (B.Tech) from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Mumbai, in 2002. In

the fall of 2002, Prachee joined the University of Florida for a Master of Science in the

Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering under the tutelage of her major professor,

Dr. Clayton J. Clark, II.