ElectroHemp Cost Comparison Table

Financial Cost Comparisons

Table 2 demonstrates how ElectroHemp compares in financial costs with existing technologies.  ElectroHemp is a cheaper option than existing capping technologies or scoop and haul.

ElectroHemp Cost Comparison Table 2 Table 2 demonstrates how ElectroHemp is a cheaper option than existing capping technologies, scoop and haul, does not factor in Hazmat Soil Expenses for ease of comparison Description Cost / Sq Ft 4,800 sqft $ Costs ElectroHemp $4.17 / Sq Ft $20,000 Scoop Haul Only (SH) $125.67- $156.27 $24,952 (177 cu yd) Cap with Concrete 4 in $5.87 $28,176 Cap with concrete 6 in $6.99 $33,552 Notes: $5.87 per square foot (4 inch reinforced slab)(Range: $4.69 - $7.04) $6.99 per square foot (6 inch reinforced slab)(Range: $5.63 - $8.34) Dirt Removal Cost Calculator (Non Toxic Normal Dirt) 4,800sq ft x 12 in deep = 177.77 cu yards of dirt ElectroHemp offers the Cheapest $$ Solution to eliminate the toxic waste- not just digging it up for relocation to another area.

Contain and Control BioRad 5 Stage Treatment Train

Contain and Control

Are major concerns when dealing with Nuclear Radiation.  

The following table demonstrates the safety avenues used in the BioRad 5 stage treatment train.

ElectroHemp Pilot Study Safety Solutions Table 1 The ElectroHemp Table 1 below demonstrates how ElectroHemp BioRad  5 Stage Treatment Train works as a system and process while addressing the safety and concerns. Concerns Solutions Plant-based biological limitation ElectroHemp System addresses these concerns Low plant tolerance Lack of contaminant translocation from root to Shoot Small size of remediating plants Use plants that tolerate toxins Containment central location is housed in greenhouse or hoophouse, Proper plant species selection and increased soil vitality increases translocation into the plant. If containment was concentrated in the root zone of the plant.  Removing the root systems in a field would require a “potato” type harvesting machine.  In a Greenhouse because of scale Elbow Grease and a Shovel will suffice. Disposal is same as fiber Many plant species are proven Regulatory limitations Phytoremediation & Electro-Horticulture is recognized solution by: EPA, FUSRAP, Governing Bodies, etc Lack of cost and performance data Regulators unfamiliarity with the technology Disposal of contaminated plant waste Risk of food chain contamination Agree Performance Data is lacking.  Disagree Cost has been determined $20,000.  Compared to other treatment systems.  Phytoremediation is the least expensive option. Agree as well as a great percentage of the Public Disposal of Contaminated waste is handled in-situ (on site) in sealed containers. Food chain contamination eliminated with project housed inside hoophouse or greenhouses Other Limitations Limitation Addressed Contaminant beneath root zone Lengthy process Contaminant in biologically unavailable form Lack of remediating plant species ElectroHemp directs the heavy metal toxins to a central point located in a Greenhouse, Hoophouse, Fenced in or protected area- where plants phyto-extract the toxins. Electro-Horticulture increases soil vitality and heavy metal movement- which allows plants to grow bigger, healthier, and cycle more toxins from the soil. By utilizing Indoor Grow operations increases growing opportunities: length of growing seasons and increases the use of plant species not suited to existing climates.   3 plant cycle rotations per year minimum, with the possibilities of 3-6 forage harvest opportunities (dual cutting) bioavailability of heavy metals in soil can also be increased by adding chelating agents such as EDTA, ammonium sulfate, critic acid and elemental sulfur, mulch, and erosion control in addition to Electrokinetics. Hemp, Kenaf, Rape, Sunflowers, and  many other species and strains of plants will perform the needed phytoremediation techniques desired.  Note: Greenhouse/Hoophouse give additional options for greater adoption of plant species. Ref: The Use of Plants for the Removal of Toxic Metals from Contaminated Soil

ElectroHemp BioRad Disposal will work for Lead too!

In this science paper shares information about Water Lettuce grown in contaminated water in Labratory Conditions in which the Scientist determined:

The overall metal uptake in plant system was higher under EAPR system than one compared with phytoremediation process.

Electrokinetics water lettuce phytoremediation science lab project.

Abstract: The combination used electro-assisted system and hydroponic phytoremediation which is hereinafter referred as hydroponic EAPR system for rapid removal of Pb2+ and Cu2+ from contaminated water which has been demonstrated in a laboratory-scale experiment. A hydroponic setting was used to evaluate the potential rapid removal and uptake of lead and copper concentration by water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes Linn.). The effectiveness of two-dimensional (2D) of cathode-pot electrode was introduced in this study. The results obtained from hydroponic EAPR system were compared with the plants exposed in the contaminated lead and copper water by using phytoremediation for 7 d process. The results showed that the accumulation of lead and copper were high in the plant roots. Analysis of chlorophyll content in treated plant with high lead concentration for EAPR system has showed that water lettuce could cope with lead and copper stress. The overall metal uptake in plant system was higher under EAPR system than one compared with phytoremediation process.

Removal of Lead and Copper from Contaminated Water Using EAPR System and Uptake by Water Lettuce (Pistia Stratiotes L.)

Electrokinetic Remediation and Phytoremediation of Metal Contaminated Soils

Coupled Electro-kinetic Remediation and Phytoremediation of Metal(loid)Contaminated Soils 

Xinyu Mao 1,2,
Fengxiang X. Han 2 *,
Xiaohou Shao 1 and
Yi Su 3
1-College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, China
2-Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Jackson State University, USA
3-Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Texas A&M University-Texarkana, USA

 Coupled Electro-kinetic Remediation and Phytoremediation of Metal(loid) Contaminated Soils. J Bioremed Biodeg 6: e163. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000e163 Volume 6 • Issue 2 • 1000e163 J Bioremed Biodeg ISSN: 2155-6199 JBRBD, an open access journal

Soil contamination with heavy metals and metalloids has become a serious environmental problem with rapid industrialization and urbanization [1-3]. Generally, the contamination is resulted from anthropogenic activities such as mining, domestic waste discharge, agricultural production and industrial activities. Heavy metals and metalloids such as Cd, Pb, Cr, Cu, Hg, Cs, Se, Zn and As enter the food chain and have adverse effects on human health [1-3]. As the increasing concern on the environmental risk, numerous remediation technologies have been developed while very few methods had been proved to be efficient for cleaning up of heavy metal(loid)s due to their characteristics of persistence and non-degradation in contaminated sites [1,4-10].

Phytoremediation is a cost-effective and environmental-friendly remediation technology for the remediation of heavy metal(loid)d in soils [4-6]. It promotes water and soil conservation as well as microbial activity improvement. Thus it has proved to be efficient for large area treatment with low pollutant concentration. However, several limitations such as the remediation period, the climatic condition, the root depth, the biomass production and the variety of the contaminants are existed in actual applications [11]. Therefore, selection of plants with high accumulation capacity of contaminants and new technologies for increasing soil heavy metal(loid) bioavailability should be developed.

Electro-kinetic remediation (EKR) which involves a low intensity electric field has been proposed to enhance phytoremediation. It produces conditions to solubilize metal(loid)s in soils based on the combined mechanisms of electro-osmosis, electromigration and electrophoresis [12]. As a consequence of driving force generated by the passage of current, metal(loid) ions and metal complex migrated from anodes to cathodes could be easily absorbed by plants. Since soil pH polarizations caused by electrolytic decomposition at electrodes, control of soil pH and some key electronic parameters are important for the remediation efficiency [13].

This paper reviews the current development on coupled electrokinetic phytoremediation (EK-phytoremediation) technology, including the selection principles of plants for the technology and interactions between heavy metal(loid) input and their bioavailability in soils. Furthermore, assisted amendments and key electronic parameters for the improvement of soil physical-chemical properties and plants remediation effects are also discussed in the paper.

Coupled EK-phytoremediation Technology 

Generally, coupled EK-phytoremediation techniques contain the application of a low intensity electric field adjoined to growing plants in contaminated soil. Significant variables which can affect the technology include the electric field intensity, use of AC or DC current, mode of voltage application, electrodes configurations and facilitating amendments. Lemstrom first applied electric fields on growing plants and found treated plants were greener and experienced an increase in yield [14] The removal of contaminants by plants in coupled EK-phytoremediation technology are enhanced by increasing the bioavailability of the contaminants through the effect of electric field. Increased soluble heavy metals are drive to the plant roots which might bring stress condition for the plants. Therefore, hyperaccumulators are the best choice for the coupled remediation [15]. It has been proposed sequential use of phytoremediation after EKR is beneficial for the cleanup of residue contaminants and recovery of soil properties damage caused by EKR [16]. However, coupled EK-phytoremediation technology has been proved to be more efficient and effective than the sequential use of these technologies.

Plant Selection

Phytostabilization and phytoextraction are often used for the cleaning up of contaminants. Compared to phytoextraction, phytostablization is not a permanent strategy since the contaminants remain in environment. Therefore, phytoextraction becomes the most promising and commercial application for heavy metal(loid) cleaning up in soils. Plants that suitable for phytoextraction possibly should have the features with high growth rate, high resistance to pathogens and pests, highly developed root system, large biomass production of aerial parts, high tolerance to trace metal(loid), great accumulation and translocation ability and good environment adaptability [17].

Metals accumulation and biomass are two critical factors for determination of plant species for phytoextraction purpose. Hyperaccumulators often with comparatively low over-ground biomass, accumulate greater amount of target metals. Other plants such as Indian mustard accumulates less metal but produces more over-ground biomass so that the overall accumulation is comparable to that of hyperaccumulators. Hyperaccumulation and hypertolerance are more important than high biomass in phytoremediation. In addition, compared with nonaccumulators, hyperaccumulators with high accumulation of metals in small volume of biomass are easier and more economic to operate for either metals recovery or safe disposal [18]. Plants with multiple harvests in a single growth period have great potentials for phytoextraction. In addition, due to the high growth rate, great adaptability and high biomass, grasses are more favorable than shrubs and trees in phytoremediation [19].

Bioavailability of Heavy Metals in Soils

Bioavailability of trace metal(loid)s in soil is a determining factor which influencing the efficiency of phytoextraction. Only a part of metal in soil is bioavailable for plants uptake. Processes like precipitation or strong binding to soil particles make a large part of soil metals insoluble and unavailable for plants extraction. Metal(loid)s in soil are divided into three categories according to their bioavailability: readily bioavailable (Cd, Ni, Zn, As, Se, Cu); moderately bioavailable (Co, Mn, Fe) and least bioavailable (Pb, Cr, U) [20] Low bioavailability constrains the phytoextraction effects of heavy metals while the changes of soil physical-chemical properties may enhance the bioavailability and mobility of metals. Secretion of H+ ions by roots will be able to demobilize more metals around rhizosphere. Moreover, activities of rhizospheric microbes significantly increase labile metals in soil. Except enhanced in natural phytoextraction, bioavailability of heavy metals in soil can also be increased by adding chelating agents such as EDTA, ammonium sulfate, critic acid and elemental sulfur et al. in induced phytoextraction [9].

Key Electronic Parameters for EK-phytoremediation Technology 

Significant electronic parameters are electric field intensity, use of AC/DC current, mode of voltage application and electrodes configurations. Electric field intensity has a determining influence on the effectiveness of EK-phytoremediation. Low voltage was beneficial for Indian mustard growth while the biomass production was decreased as the increase of voltage [21]. However, the increasing bioavailability of heavy metals at elevated voltage and the negative effects of the voltage on the plant development were comprised at an intermediate voltage of 2V with the best metal removal and accumulation on plant tissues [21].

Soil pH was reported to decrease from initial pH 6.5 to 3 near the anode and increased to 8 near the cathode with application of DC electric field with potato [22]. Heavy metals had a migration from anode to cathode and an accumulation in the middle of the pot where the pH was 5. On the contrary, no transportation and soil pH change was observed with application of AC electric current. Moreover, potato had 72% increase whereas 27% decline in biomass production under AC and DC electric field, respectively. Overall, test using AC electric field showed higher metals accumulation in both plant roots and shoots than the control test and the DC test [22]. Soil pH changes which resulted from the electrolysis of water were induced by the use of continuous DC electric field. In order to avoid the negative effects, switching the polarity of the DC electric field every 3 h eliminated pH changes and comparable phytoremediation efficiency between the DC and AC tests were achieved [23].

 The effectiveness of coupled EK-phytoremediation was influenced by electrode configurations. An vertical DC electric field or several electrode arrangements were extended with phytoremediation depth, preventing leaching of Pb [24,25]. The configuration with the cathode in the center surrounded with anodes showed greater potential to metals accumulation [25] Recently a 2D electrode configuration with cathode were placed on the surface of the soil and anodes was vertically installed in four corners of a rectangular chamber. The results showed enhancement in both metal accumulation in roots and shoots and metal translocation towards the shoots [26].

Amendments for EK-phytoremediation 

In order to improve metals bioavailability, control soil pH with the favorable range and facilitate plants growth, amendments are added, including chelating or complexing agents, organic amendments and fertilizers etc. Chelants enhance EK-phytoremediation by forming strong water-soluble complex which desorbs metal(loid)s from soil particle surface. EDTA is most frequently used chelant and has been proved to be effective on mobilization of metals like Cr, Fe, Cu, Pb and Zn [9]. The factors included metals species, metal/chelate ratio, presence of competing cations and soil pH et al. In addition, EDTA showed some phytotoxicicty to plants [9]. Complexing agents such as I−, Cl−, NH4 + may form soluble complexes with metal ions. Ammonium thiosulphate could result in the solubilization of Hg enhancing accumulation in plant roots and shoots [27]. Furthermore, acetic acid and lactic acid is used to neutralize the electrolysis product at the cathode and keep the electrolyte pH within a certain range. Ammonium acetate was beneficial for increasing Cu solubility and removal rate [28] Organic amendments such as sewage sludge and green waste composts improve plant growth by enhancing the physicochemical and biological conditions of soils. They also directly or indirectly alter the distribution and availability of soil metals. Several reports revealed that amended compost increased As mobility due to the competing effect of DOC and soluble P component with As for sorption sites. Moreno-Jimenez et al. discovered the mobilization of As, Cu and Se in flooded soils after the application of olive mill waste compost. In contrast, reports also indicated that the bioavailability of Pb was decreased when added compost [27]. Clemente et al. [29] found an increase in mobility of As and Sb after the two years application of compost mulch in soil which enhanced the uptake by lettuce and sunflower [29].

 Conclusion 

The coupled EK-phytoremediation technology is promising for the clean-up of heavy metal(loid)s in contaminated soils. More research is necessary for its practical design and application before applying at field scale. The research directions are suggested in following aspects such as: determine the distribution, translocation and environmental risks of heavy metal(loid)s and their influence on plants metal(loid) s accumulation; test and select the hyper accumulators which possess remarkable metal(loid)s accumulation ability for this coupled technology; test the remediation efficiency of the coupled technology in sites with both organic and inorganic contaminants; try to apply assisted amendments of natural or biodegradable products; elucidate the mechanisms and influence of electronic parameters on metabolism and growth of plant as well as uptake and translocation of metal(loid)s.

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC– HQ-12-G-38-0038), NOAA-ECSC grant (NA11SEC4810001), NIH-RCMI grant (G12MD007581), the Jiangsu Scientific Research Innovation Program of Ordinary Higher Education Graduate (China) (KYZZ0156), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (China) (2014B00114).

References 1. Han FX, Arieh Singer (2007) Biogeochemistry of Trace Elements in Arid Environments. Springer.
 2. Han FX, Banin A, Su Y, Monts DL, Plodinec MJ, et al. (2002) Industrial age anthropogenic inputs of heavy metals into the pedosphere. Naturwissenschaften 89: 497-504.
3. Han FX, Su Y, Monts DL, Plodinec MJ, Banin A, et al. (2003) Assessment of global industrial-age anthropogenic arsenic contamination. Naturwissenschaften 90: 395-401.
4. Shiyab S, Chen J, Han FX, Monts DL, Matta FB, et al. (2009) Phytotoxicity of mercury in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 72: 619-625.
5. Chen J, Shiyab S, Han FX, Monts DL, Waggoner CA, et al. (2009) Bioaccumulation and physiological effects of mercury in Pteris vittata and Nephrolepis exaltata. Ecotoxicol 18 (1): 110-121.
6. Su Y, Han FX, Chen J, Sridhar BBM, Monts DL (2008) Phytoextraction and accumulation of mercury in three plant species: Indian mustard (Brassica juncea), Beard grass (Polypogon monospeliensis), and Chinese brake fern (Pteris vittata). Int J Phytorem 10: 547-560.
 7. Su Y, Sridhar BB, Han FX, Diehl SV, Monts DL (2007) Effects of bioaccumulation of Cs and Sr natural isotopes on foliar structure and plant spectral reflectance of Indian mustard (Brassica Juncea). Water Air Soil Pollut 180: 65-74.
8. Su Y, Han FX, Sridhar BBM, Monts DL (2005) Phytotoxicity and phytoaccumulation of trivalent and hexavalent chromium in brake fern. Environ Toxicol Chem 24: 2019-2026.
9. Han FX, Su Y, Monts DL, Sridhar BBM (2004) Distribution, transformation and bioavailability of trivalent and hexavalent chromium in contaminated soil. Plant Soil 265: 243-252.
10. Han FX, Sridhar BBM, Monts DL, Su Y (2004) Phytoavailability and toxicity of trivalent and hexavalent chromium to Brassica juncea L. Czern. New Phytol 162: 489-499.
11. Rungwa S, Arpa G, Sakulas H, Harakuwe A, Timie D (2013) Phytoremediationan eco-friendly and sustainable method of heavy metal removal from closed mine environments in Papua New Guinea. Procedia Earth Planet Sci 6: 269- 277.
12. Cameselle C, Reddy KR (2012) Development and enhancement of electroosmotic flow for the removal of contaminants from soils. Electrochim Acta 86: 10-22.
13. Reddy KR, Cameselle C (2009) Electrochemical remediation technologies for polluted soils, sediments and groundwater, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, USA.
14. Lemstrom S (1904) Electricity in agriculture and horticulture. The Electrician Printing & Publishing, London, UK.
15. Vamerali T, Bandiera M, Mosca G (2010) Field crops for phytoremediation of metal-contaminated land. A review. Environ Chem Lett 8: 1-17.
16. Wan QF, Deng DC, Bai Y, Xia CQ (2012) Phytoremediation and electrokinetic remediation of uranium contaminated soils: a review. He-Huaxue yu Fangshe Huaxue/ J Nucl Radiochem 34: 148-156.
17. Pulford ID, Watson C (2003) Phytoremediation of heavy metal-contaminated land by trees-a review. Environ Int 29: 529-540.
18. Chaney RL, Malik KM, Li YM, Brown SL, Brewer EP, et al. (1997) Phytoremediation of soil metals. Curr Opin Biotechnol 8: 279-284.
19. Ebbs SD, Kochian LV (1997) Toxicity of zinc and copper to Brassica species: implications for phytoremediation. J Environ Qual 26: 776-781.
20. Zhang C, Yu ZG, Zeng GM, Jiang M, Yang ZZ, et al. (2014) Effects of sediment geochemical properties on heavy metal bioavailability. Environ Int 73: 270-281.
21. Cang L, Wang QY, Zhou DM, Xu H (2011) Effects of electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation of a multiple-metal contaminated soil on soil metal bioavailability and uptake by Indian mustard. Sep Purif Technol. 79: 246-253.
22. Aboughalma H, Bi R, Schlaak M (2008) Electrokinetic enhancement on phytoremediation in Zn, Pb, Cu and Cd contaminated soil using potato plants. J Environ Sci Health Part A 43: 926-933.
23. Bi R, Schlaak M, Siefert E, Lord R, Connolly H (2011) Influence of electrical fields (AC and DC) on phytoremediation of metal polluted soils with rapeseed (Brassica napus) and tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum). Chemosphere 83: 318- 326.
24. Zhou DM, Chen HF, Cang L, Wang YJ (2007) Ryegrass uptake of soil Cu/Zn induced by EDTA/EDDS together with a vertical direct-current electrical field. Chemosphere 67: 1671-1676.
 25. Hodko D, Hyfte JV, Denvir A, Magnuson JW (2000) Methods for enhancing phytoextraction of contaminants from porous media using electrokinetic phenomena.
26. Putra RS, Ohkawa Y, Tanaka S (2013) Application of EAPR system on the removal of lead from sandy soil and uptake by Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.). Sep Purif Technol. 102: 34-42.
27. Moreno FN, Anderson CWN, Stewart RB, Robinson BH, Ghomshei M, et al. (2005) Induced plant uptake and transport of mercury in the presence of sulphur-containing ligands and humic acids. New Phytol 166: 445-454.
28. Chen JL, Yang SF, Wu CC, Ton S (2011) Effect of ammonia as a complexing agent on electrokinetic remediation of copper-contaminated soil, Sep Purif Technol 79: 157-163.
29. Clemente R, Hartley W, Riby P, Dickinson NM, Lepp NW (2010) Trace element mobility in a contaminated soil two years after field-amendment with a green waste compost mulch. Environ Pollut. 158: 1644-1651.

ElectroHorticulture and Phytotechnologies Reduce Heavy Metals in Soil

3 Electrokinetic coupled Phytotechnology articles that support the ElectroHemp phytoremediation techniques the team has developed.

Taking it one step further by growing the plants in a greenhouse ensures that cross contamination and public exposure is eliminated. see the ElectroHemp BioRad Disposal Infol

Coupled electrokinetic remediation–Bioremediation

Electrokinetic enhancement on phytoremediation in Zn, Pb, Cu and Cd contaminated soil using potato plants

Abstract

The use of a combination of electrokinetic remediation and phytoremediation to decontaminate soil polluted with heavy metals has been demonstrated in a laboratory-scale experiment. Potato tubers were planted in plastic vessels filled with Zn, Pb, Cu and Cd contaminated soil and grown in a greenhouse. Three of these vessels were treated with direct current electric field (DC), three with alternative current (AC) and three remained untreated as control vessels. The soil pH varied from anode to cathode with a minimum of pH 3 near the anode and a maximum of pH 8 near the cathode in the DC treated soil profile. There was an accumulation of Zn, Cu and Cd at about 12 cm distance from anode when soil pH was 5 in the DC treated soil profile. There was no significant metal redistribution and pH variation between anode and cathode in the AC soil profile. The biomass production of the plants was 72% higher under AC treatment and 27% lower under DC treatment compared to the control. Metal accumulation was generally higher in the plant roots treated with electrical fields than the control. The overall metal uptake in plant shoots was lower under DC treatment compared to AC treatment and control, although there was a higher accumulation of Zn and Cu in the plant roots treated with electrical fields. The Zn uptake in plant shoots under AC treatment was higher compared to the control and DC treatment. Zn and Cu accumulation in the plant roots under AC and DC treatment was similar, and both were higher comparing to control. Cd content in plant roots under all three treatments was found to be higher than that in the soil. The Pb accumulation in the roots and the uptake into the shoots was lower compared to its content in the soil.

• Electrokinetic, 
• phytoremediation, 
• contaminated soil, 
• heavy metals,
• potato plant, 
• zinc, 
• lead, 
• cadmium

Abstract

Electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation is an innovative technology to decontaminate heavy metal contaminated soil. In this study, the effect of electric current on plant growth and speciation of soil heavy metals has been investigated by pot experiments, and the remediation processes of electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation has been discussed. After Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) grew for 35 d, four voltage gradients (0, 1, 2, 4 V cm⁻¹) of direct-current (DC) were applied timely (8 h d⁻¹) across the soils for 16 d. The extractable soil metals by different extraction methods had a significant redistribution from the anode to the cathode after the treatments. Simple correlation analysis indicated that the correlation coefficients of the extractable soil metals with root metals were better than that with shoot metals. Plant uptake of metals increased by the electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation, and a medium voltage gradient of 2 V cm⁻¹ was the best due to the highest metal accumulation in the plant. Voltage gradient was the most important factor in affecting the plant growth, soil properties and metal concentrations in the soil and plant.

Graphical abstract

Highlights

► We study the change of soil properties in different soil sections after experiments. ► Impact mechanism of the combined technique on metal uptake by plant is investigated. ► The extractable soil metals has a significant redistribution form anode to cathode. ► The highest metal accumulation of plant is in the treatment of 2 V cm⁻¹. ► Voltage is the foremost factor in affecting the metal contents in soil and plant.

Key words

• Electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation; 
• Heavy metals; 
• Indian mustard; 
• Chemical speciation

Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 25 86881180; fax: +86 25 86881000.

Effects of electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation of a multiple-metal contaminated soil on soil metal bioavailability and uptake by Indian mustard  (Citations: 1) 

Long Cang, Hui Xu

Electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation is an innovative technology to decontaminate heavy metal contaminated soil. In this study, the effect of electric current on plant growth and speciation of soil heavy metals has been investigated by pot experiments, and the remediation processes of electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation has been discussed. After Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) grew for 35d, four voltage gradients (0, 1, 2, 4Vcm−1) of direct-current (DC) were applied timely (8hd−1) across the soils for 16d. The extractable soil metals by different extraction methods had a significant redistribution from the anode to the cathode after the treatments. Simplecorrelation analysis indicated that the correlation coefficients of the extractable soil metals with root metals were better than that with shoot metals. Plant uptake of metals increased by the electrokinetic-assisted phytoremediation, and a medium voltage gradient of 2Vcm−1 was the best due to the highest metal accumulation in the plant. Voltage gradient was the most important factor in affecting the plant growth, soil properties and metal concentrations in the soil and plant.

DualPost: Nuclear Cleanup Taxes-Lisa Gibbs on EPA

Lisa Gibbs give telling arguments on how big business experiments on the Public when the Government Agencies such as the EPA turn a blind eye.



The video where she talks about the St Louis Westlake Landfill and the health and safety concerns of the local residents. starts around 13.10 and goes on to talk about thinking out of the box by the Westlake Landfill Group who asked for the United Nations assistance in suing the EPA.



FYI the Manhattan Project nuclear waste was created for the Atomic Nuclear Bomb in St Louis during the Manhattan Project and dropped on Japan long ago, which President Obama just brought to the forefront of the news media on his last visit to Japan.







Spice Solar shares this tidbit of info:


New nuclear technology and safety procedures will hopefully prevent another disaster (although that’s what we thought after TMI). But what happens at a plant that isn’t crippled by a disaster? Surprisingly, even cleaning up existing nuclear plants is outrageously expensive. Ever wonder why every electric bill has a line item called “Nuclear Decommissioning?” It costs about $750 million to shut down existing plants in a process that can take 20 years or more. Around the world, nuclear plant operators have budgeted over $1 trillion dollars to clean up existing nuclear reactors (think about how many solar panels and batteries we can buy for $1 trillion dollars).

Once they are up and running, the economics of a nuclear plant are pretty good. But they are expensive to build, expensive to decommission, and outrageously expensive to clean up after a disaster. Compare that to a “solar spill” – which is basically a very sunny day. For these economic reasons, from a utility’s perspective the pendulum has swung completely way from nuclear power towards solar. Please join me on this week’s Energy Show as we delve into the long term costs of nuclear energy.

http://cinnamonsolar.com/resources/energy-show-on-kliv/

Cinnamon Solar – “Energy Show” Podcasts

The Energy Show on KLIV radio and the Renewable Energy World Network is a weekly 30 minute talk show every Sunday morning at 11 AM that provides money-saving advice and tips on ways to reduce your energy consumption. As....