Immobilisation of heavy metal in cement-based solidification/stabilisation: a review

Heavy metal-bearing waste usually needs solidification/stabilization (s/s) prior to landfill to lower the leaching rate. Cement is the most adaptable binder currently available for the immobilisation of heavy metals. The selection of cements and operating parameters depends upon an understanding of chemistry of the system. This paper discusses interactions of heavy metals and cement phases in the solidification/stabilisation process. It provides a clarification of heavy metal effects on cement hydration. According to the decomposition rate of minerals, heavy metals accelerate the hydration of tricalcium silicate (C3S) and Portland cement, although they retard the precipitation of portlandite due to the reduction of pH resulted from hydrolyses of heavy metal ions. The chemical mechanism relevant to the accelerating effect of heavy metals is considered to be H+ attacks on cement phases and the precipitation of calcium heavy metal double hydroxides, which consumes calcium ions and then promotes the decomposition Of C3S. In this work, molecular models of calcium silicate hydrate gel are presented based on the examination of Si-29 solid-state magic angle spinning/nuclear magnetic resonance (MAS/NMR). This paper also reviews immobilisation mechanisms of heavy metals in hydrated cement matrices, focusing on the sorption, precipitation and chemical incorporation of cement hydration products. It is concluded that further research oil the phase development during cement hydration in the presence of heavy metals and thermodynamic modelling is needed to improve effectiveness of cement-based s/s and extend this waste management technique. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

No more nonsense

Discusses the approach of the courts to the quantification of beneficial interests in the family home in the event of a relationship breakdown. Assesses the clarification provided by the Court of Appeal ruling in Fowler v Barron on whether the respondent was the sole beneficial owner of a property purchased with his former partner, by means of a significant cash contribution from him and a mortgage in both their names, focusing on whether he could rebut the presumption that they held the property as joint tenants in equity where it was registered in joint names. [From Legal Journals Index]