Natural biofilters for toxic metals

The following Science Paper highlights how ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Rafts can be used as Biofilters to clean pollution from water sources.

Phytoremediation Raft Infographic- Plants cycle water toxins when grown on Rafts

a wide variety of agricultural and forestry by products have been used as biosorbents of toxic metals in a bid to develop biofilters for specific applications Electronic Journal of Biotechnology: 

The added benefit of how ElectroHemp equips these rafts with Electrokinetics will actually increase the toxic contamination removal because of the forced migration of the toxins is directed towards the rafts and plants roots which growing on the Phytoremediation Rafts.

ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Raft designs can be designed to remove any number or combination of toxic pollutants found in water sources.

 Real Life Example phytoremediation raft design for the removal of Lead (Pb) from Water

A floating phytoremediation raft constructed of: waste tea leaves, Pinus pinaster bark, Olea europea, Acacia nilotica bark. Which has these plant examples growing on it: Kenaf, Water Lettuce, Alligator Weed create a combination of Natural Solutions in the detoxification of Lead (Pb) from water. Scotty, ElectroHemp 

Phytoremediation Science Paper link

• i) Cotton - Hg; Groundnut skins - Cu; 
• Tree Bark (Pinus, Acacia etc.) - variety of metals; 
• Agrowaste - variery of metals; 
• waste tea leaves - Pb, Cd, and Zn; 
• Pinus radiata -U; 
• Apple waste -Variety of metals; 
• Cellulose - Variety of metals; Rice hulls - Variety of metals; 
• Exhausted coffee grounds - Hg; 
• Pinus pinaster bark - Zn, Cu, Pb. Saw mill dust (wood waste)- Cr; 
• Freshwater green algae - variety of metals; 
• Marine algae- Pb, Ni; 
• ii) Sphagnum (moss peat) - Cr(VI); 
• iii) Immobilized Aspergillus niger, A. oryzae - Cd, Cu, Pb, and Ni ; 
• Olive mill waste Olea europea Cr, Ni, Pb, Cd, and Zn, Cu and Ni; 
• Streptomyces rimosus (bacteria); 
• Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast); 
• Penicillium chrysogenum (fungi), Fuscus vesiculosus and Ascophyllum nodosum (marine algae) Zn, Cu andNi; Phanerochaete chrysosporium, P. versicolar - Pb, Ni, Cr, Cd, Cu; Pinus radiata - U;
• Immobilized Pseudomonas putida 5-X and Aspergillus niger, Mucor rouxxi - Cu; 
• Actionomycetes, Aspergillus niger, A.oryzae, Rhizopus arrhizus, R. nigricans- Cd; Rhizopus arrhizus - Cr(VI), Pb; Rhizopus nigricans, Phanarochaete chrysogenum -Pb; Aspergillus niger and Rhizopus arrhizus - Ni 

Acacia nilotica bark serves as an adsorbent of toxic metals. Bark (1 g) when added to 100 ml of aqueous solution containing 10 mg ml-1 metal solution exhibited different metal adsorption values for different metals. The order of metal adsorption being Cr > Ni > Cu > Cd> As > Pb. A similar trend of metal adsorption was observed when the bark is reused (1strecycle) Cr > Ni > Cu > Cd > Pb and also in the column-sorption. In order to verify the metal removal property of A. nilotica bark, toxicity bioassay with Salix viminalis stem cuttings in hydroponic system augmented with Cd, Cr and Pb together with A. nilotica bark powder was carried out. The results of toxicity bioassay confirmed the metal adsorption property of the bark powder. The functions of toxicity studies include leaf area, root length and number of new root primordia produced per stump. The leaf area, root length and number of new root primordia increased considerably in the presence of A. nilotica bark. The order of metal toxicity for leaf area and new root primordial is Cd > Cr > Pb. However, for root length the order of metal toxicity is Cr > Cd > Pb. The metal budgets of the leaf and root confirmed that the bark powder had adsorbed substantial amount of toxic metals and thus, alleviates the toxicity imposed by the various tested elements (Prasad et al. 2001).

Quercus ilex L. phytomass from stem, leaf and root as adsorbent of chromium, nickel, copper, cadmium and lead at ambient temperature was investigated. The metal uptake capacity of the root for different metals was found to be in the order of: Ni > Cd > Pb > Cu > Cr; stem Ni > Pb> Cu > Cd > Cr and leaf Ni > Cd > Cu > Pb > Cr. The highest amount adsorbed was Ni (root > leaf > stem). Data from this laboratory demonstrated that Ni is mostly sequestered in the roots where concentrations can be as high as 7.30 nmol/g dry weight, when one year old seedlings were treated with Ni (2000 mg/l) in pot culture experiments, compared to 0.13 nmol/g dry weight, in the control. This proves that the root biomass of Q. ilex has the capacity for complexing Ni. Chromium exhibited the least adsorption values for all the three types of phytomass compared to other metals. The trend of adsorption of the phytomass was similar for nickel and cadmium i.e. root > leaf > stem. Desorption with 10 mM Na2 EDTA was effective (55-90%). Hence, there exists the possibility of recycling the phytomass. The biosorption results of recycled phytomass suggests, that the selected adsorbents are reusable (Prasad and Freitas, 2000).

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

5 Blog Articles Plants as Water Protectors Series

ElectroHemp BioRad Hazmat Remediation weblinks to the 5 blog articles covering the subject of Plants as Water Protectors.  Using Plants to remove heavy metals and toxic contaminants from Water and Soil.

ElectroHemp Natural and Organic BioRad 5 Stage Treatment Train speeds up the Toxic Removal Process

The ElectroHemp BioRad Remediation System and Process works faster than Phytoremediation alone by incorporating Electrokinetics into the system. 

Electrokinetics directs the heavy metal toxins to a central point where plants phytoextract the toxins. 

Article 5- Phytromediation Rafts with Electrokinetics

Article 4- Plants as Water Protectors

Article 3- Citizen Science Phytoremediation Research StLouis

Article 2- St Louis IKEA Phyto Buffer Zone pt2

Article 1- IKEAs lesser known environmental project

ElectroHemp BioRad Remediation Pilot Study Discussion

-------
Discussions have begun about a Pilot Study Location for the ElectroHemp BioRad hazardous waste removal system. Stay Tuned for more details and see the announcement at the Hemp Environmental Forums Facebook page

#phytoremediation with #electrokinetics speeds up the toxic removal process. < this is nothing new. > But what is new is the organic disposal system for the toxic plants that eliminate Long Term Nuclear Waste Storage! Rememeber its our Tax Dollars that pay for this. Eliminating this part of the nuclear waste storage will save the USA Taxpayers multi-million dollars.

ElectroHemp BioRad Remediation Pilot Study Location Discussion https://t.co/mAySxxTJtW #WestlakeLandfill #NuclearWaste #Remediation

— Scotty (@StLHandyMan) September 19, 2017

Also shared to LinkedIn

ElectroHemp BioRad LinkedIn Post Notice

2018 ElectroHemp Most Read Blog Post

10 most read ElectroHemp Blogger stats analytics report Dec 2017 to Dec 2018

Post - Post Date - Pageviews

1. Using Trees to Clean Up Pollution Cristina Negriu - Jul, 2016 - 637
2. Citizen Science Phytoremediation Research StLouis Jul 20, 2017 -603
3. Phytoremediation Rafts with Electrokinetics - Aug 6, 2017 -527
4. Yes its faster and better than phytoremediation alone -Mar 27, 2016 - 476
5. ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Greenhouse Discussion - Mar 22, 2016 -409
6. Healthy Environments Require Citizen Scientists - Aug 19, 2016 - 370
7. IKEAs lesser known environmental project -Aug 31, 2016 -342
8. St Louis IKEA Phyto Buffer Zone pt2 - Sep 1, 2016 - 304
9. MOhempEnergy: Phytoremediation Research Articles - May 31, 2016 -298
10. 79 Research Articles on Phytoremediation for Bioenergy Jun 26, 2018, 270

10 most read ElectroHemp Blogger stats analytics report Dec 2017 to Dec 2018

Uranium Water Biofilter Remediation

ElectroHemp blog post on Uranium Reducing Phytoremediation Raft Design

ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Raft designs can be designed to remove any number or combination of toxic pollutants found in water sources

Previously ElectroHemp highlighted how Natural biofilters for toxic metals can be used for Pb (Lead) Removal. This same technique can be used for Uranium (U) removal. 
All that needs to be done is substitute the Raft and Plants that will extract Uranium and it's by products.
Example: A phytoremediation raft can be constructed with these biosorbing products: Tree Bark (Pinus, Acacia), Agro Wastes (Tea Leaves, Rice Hulls) Apple Wastes . With these type of hyperaccumulating plant species: Hemp, Kenaf, Sun Flowers, Mustard Grass, Rape, even some Grasses 
To ensure all the Toxic Contamination comes in contact with the Raft and Plant Roots growing on the Phytoremediation Rafts that phytoextract the toxins. ElectroHemps uses Electrokinetics into the Remediation removal process. Electrokinetics draws toxins where directed.

ElectroHemps combines Electrokinetics, Phytoremediation, and Biofilters into the Remediation removal process. Key point: Electrokinetics draws toxins where directed.

Phytoremediation Raft Remove Toxic Pollutants Water

The following photos are examples of where ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Raft designs can be designed to remove any number or combination of toxic pollutants found in water sources from Bridgetown and Westlake Landfill this would stop the pollution from entering the Public Water Supply, as pointed out by Alex Cohen.

The above 3 photos courtesy Environmental Activist and Humanitarian Alex Cohen- https://m.faceboAlex Cohen.
ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Rafts Remediation Example for decontamination of water.

ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Rafts

ElectroHemp Remediation Cost Comparison

ElectroHemp cost comparison with traditional remediation technique. 1 city block.

Reference: Findings and Recommendations for the Remediation...

The costs of remediating a site will vary depending on the concentration and distribution of the contamination, the size and layout of the site, and the remedial actions implemented. Table 6 presents cost estimates associated with each remedial option presented above for 1 acre of contamination that is assumed to be 1 foot deep (1 acre foot). These costs are based on the remediation of undeveloped farmland.      Remediation costs could rise dramatically for existing development due to difficulties associated with the movement of soil around existing structures, trees, pools and decks. In addition, the remediation of properties with existing development would not have the benefits of economy of scale associated with undeveloped land.

https://www.nj.gov/dep/special/hpctf/final/costs.html

Proven and innovative soil treatment technologies
$50,000- $100,000 Remedial Option Cost per acre-foot

1 acre=1 acre is approximately 208.71 feet × 208.71 feet (a square) = 1 acre = 43,560 square feet X 1 foot soil = 43,560 cu yds soil

• Low:  $50,000 ÷   43,560 = $1.15 /cuyd
• High: $100,000 ÷ 43,560 = $2.30 /cuyd

_____

1 city block Ave size = typical city block as 100,000 sq.ft. 100,000 X 1 foot deep = 100,000 cu yd soil

_____

Traditional $115,000 To $230,000

ElectroHemp $100,333 $15,000 to $130,000 Cheaper

2019 R&D ElectroHemp

ElectroHemp is preparing for R&D Projects that will highlight how their system speeds up contamination removal and organically disposes hazardous waste.

• Phytoremediation Assisted Contamination Cleanup
• Organic Hazardous Waste Disposal
• Turning Hazardous Waste into income
• Soil and Water Buffer Zones
• Phytoremediation Rafts for water cleanup and remediation 

If you or your organization would like to join in, partner, sponsor, advertise, or just learn more about the R&D projects use the contact form, subscribe to the blog feed or stay tuned by monitoring the blog.

 ElectroHemp Feed

Using Trees to Clean Up Pollution Cristina Negri

Eye Opening Discussion on Phytoremediation- the stuff that was most appealing to me started at 31:00 and talks about phytoremediation of Heavy Metals and Nuclides: like the ones that are causing the cancer, respiratory issues, extra rare forms of cancer, lymphoma, etc for the Residents of St Louis Region.

DuckDuckGo Web Search

Cancer Cluster in North St Louis, MO

#ColdwaterCreek and #WestlakeLandfill

1. Presenter Instructs for Safety Keep It Out of the Food Chain [which is exactly the opposite that was done when Republic Services grew Soybeans on the landfill a few years ago and then took the soybeans to the local grain elevator]
2. At 31:00 part of discussion about Phytoremediation and Radionuclides.
1. 31:10 Radionuclides Stay where they are at, they don't degrade, you have to move them from one place to another.
2. 31:30 yes it will get into the food chain, uses Chernobyl for an example.
3. [talking about phytotechnologies and cleanup] She says: can’t get enough of it in one area to justify the expense. Bioaccumulation. Granted this is an older video from 2012 and many cleanup scenarios hopefully have changed and have acknowledged a few ways that Scientist have discovered to get the toxic radiation to bioaccumulate such as #Electrokinetics as used in the ElectroHemp BioRad Hazardous Waste Disposal Environmental Startup
4. She talks about Grass will phytoremediate the radionuclides because it was in the Milk from the grass the cows ate [Chernobyl] [Many plant species have the ability to phytoremediate the heavy metals and toxins- Industrial Hemp is a favorite and mentioned frequently at the Hemp Environmental Forum as well as the Kyoto Hemp Forum].
3. 32:15 Condensing Rads to one area is preferred [chalk one up for Electro Hemp who accomplish this by Electrokinetics]
4. 36:36 Q: What was working at Chernobyl? Listen to what she says about the people and the desperation “ No hope- because they were not in control of their lives” “Unsettling feeling”.
5. 38:33 Q: Future of phytoremediation.
6. 39:00 "Invest money" "Keep Working" "No Recovery Is Made Without Funding"
7. 39:36 Ground Source Pollution removal works for plants
8. 39:54 Q: is it too much for large scale Fukushima radiation poisoning?
9. 40:12 A: All Depends...may well be the only choice for certain areas- phytoremediation once again solution for widespread cleanup...work with the [eco] system, you can't be digging everything up...
10. 40:54 Audience Questions start
11. 41:36 Wolves, Birds supposedly healthy? 1, 2, 3: I have read counter to that. The healthy animals that are seen in the Inclusion Zone are new animals that migrated in. Existing Animals have genetic defects per videos I've seen that didn't come from government sources, like the one with the Moose's neck growing out sideways of its body as well as the mutilated birds. [Radiation causes mutations and alters genes in plants and animals]
12. 42:39 Q: what to do with trees once they are cut down after phytoremediation? "Hyperaccumulation of toxins in the plants varies by the growing season. They don't expect the radiation to be in the tree and will mulch it onsite. With Heavy Metals contamination has to be measured before figuring out what to do with it. KEY: when utilizing plants there is less volume at the end. vs scoop, haul, and store. Its preferred that if storage is needed the smaller the mess the better.
13. 44:10 Q: Rapid Reuse of Sites with Heavy Metal Contamination- some sites cleaned up by various techniques: water, vapor...get the easy stuff. A: Metals tuff issue they need a solution for metals ...discussion just to leave them alone but need to measure the risk: leave alone or remove...discussion then goes on and states minimization of the toxins (depending on end use of land). With lead keep it away from kids... double stated Heavy Metals are very hard to remove... [ the guy who questioned her said someone then built a children's playground next to the site. Isn't that the airport site in #StLouis... the lady just shrugs? image map]
14. 45:59 Presentation Leader adds stuff on the first question: What are end goals in re to Mountain. Q: Primary objective- clean land, Secondary objective- beautification or Reuse. A: Eventual Reuse of land, with main objective to reduce Health Hazard to the people who might be exposed nearby- is the number 1 issue- Mentions: numerous studies to determine what is acceptable dose.
15. Phytoremediation for Fracking- been studied and discussed
16. Goes on to discuss removing coal ash by phytoremediation, hydrocarbons definately, problem with ash is the ph combinations that might not be compatible with plants.
17. In re to chicago river phytoremediation: how to use the specific plants in combination and how to design the system- have to get others involved...Wastewater Treatment uses a natural process using microbes.
18. 49:24 Q: Who are the teams/groups of people working on land remediation at Chernobyl. A: She then goes on to mention the needed team members for a multidisciplinary group: Agronomist, Environmentalist, Hydrogeologist- all work together to determine where to plant the trees. Risk Assessment Personal (Safety for personal), Air Modelers to determine what goes into the air and if it is an issue, and Money Managers.
19. 52:17 Mentions work done by a Naval person who developed plants that act as a canary in the coal mine. These plants turn white when exposed to nasty compound (type unknown). When planted around a site they would potentially warn everyone that the toxins are present.
20. 53:03 Q: where to get educated. Google Phytoremediation and go to EPA "Citizen's Guide to Phytoremediation" EPA is a strong proponent of this technique
21. 54:48 Q: Contaminants when translocated into the plant what happens? A: Some gets released, some is broken down in the plant-degraded, some, when transpired, is killed by UV light. Q2: Are some contaminants released into the atmosphere and we do not want that? A: majority of chemicals that make it to the air get broken down by sunlight...when it is exposed to air is very minute concentrations in parts per billion if not parts per trillion range- very very tiny amounts that will get destroyed, they don't accumulate up,
22. 56:24 Q1: Of the phytoremediation techniques that work has there be done a survey where it can be used at? A1: look at EPA gis data on brownfields, tools like decision trees will help figure out what is the best remedy for the land, Q2: Roundup because it kills weeds...A2: using roundup for no till farming has drawbacks and advantages

Update Sep 2, 2017 

Is this what happened to all the Milk they didn't use at Chernobyl? 

Diabetes & African-Americans https://t.co/imx6gVhA6s Update Sep 2, 2017
Is this what happened to all the Milk they didn't use at Chernobyl?

— Scotty (@StLHandyMan) September 3, 2017