Cited by 35Heavy metals in environmentEnvironmental and Analytical Chemistry StudiesArsenic contamination and mitigation

Evaluating the potential for environmental pollution from chromated copper arsenate (CCA)-treated wood waste: A new mass balance approach

Open access
Mercer, T.G., Frostick, L.E.·2014·Journal of Hazardous Materials

Abstract

The potential for pollution from arsenic, chromium and copper in chromated copper arsenate (CCA) treated wood waste was assessed using two lysimeter studies. The first utilised lysimeters containing soil and CCA wood waste mulch exposed to natural conditions over a five month period. The second study used the same lysimeter setup in a regulated greenhouse setting with a manual watering regime. Woodchip, soil and leachate samples were evaluated for arsenic, chromium and copper concentrations. Resultant concentration data were used to produce mass balances, an approach thus far unused in such studies. This novel analysis revealed new patterns of mobility and distribution of the elements in the system. The results suggest that CCA wood waste tends to leach on initial exposure to a leachant and during weathering of the wood. When in contact with soil, metal(loid) transport is reduced due to complexation reactions. With higher water application or where the adsorption capacity of the soil is exceeded, the metal(loid)s are transported through the soil column as leachate. Overall, there was an unexplained loss of metal(loid)s from the system that might be attributed to volatilisation of arsenic and plant uptake. This suggests a hitherto unidentified risk to both the environment and human health.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.05.006

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mercer, T. G., & Frostick, L. E.
Affiliations
  • Cranfield University (GB)
  • University of Hull (GB)
Corresponding author
Mercer, T.G.
Venue
Journal of Hazardous Materials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-07
Volume
276
Pages
10-18
ISSN
0304-3894 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1995343979
Cited by
35
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Hazardous Materials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lincoln Repository (University of Lincoln) (acceptedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • University of Hull
  • University of Leeds
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Heavy metals in environment
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Environmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Arsenic contamination and mitigation
Keywords
chromated copper arsenate, arsenic, chromium, copper, mass balance, lysimeter study, metal complexation, soil sorption, leachate, volatilization, plant uptake, environmental risk assessment, wood weathering
MeSH terms
Arsenates, Environmental Pollutants, Wood

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review