Cited by 40Recycling and Waste Management TechniquesExtraction and Separation ProcessesLignin and Wood Chemistry

Designing a purification process for chromium-, copper- and arsenic-contaminated wood

Kakitani, Tomo, Hata, Toshimitsu, Kajimoto, Takeshi, Imamura, Yuji·2006·Waste Management

Abstract

The disposal of chromated copper arsenate (CCA)-treated wood is becoming a serious problem in many countries due to increasing levels of contamination by the hazardous elements, chromium, copper and arsenic. The present experiment was conducted as a preliminary step toward one-step solvent extraction of CCA-treated wood. Because chromium, copper and arsenic have different chemical characteristics, it is best to consider them separately prior to designing a one-step extraction process. As a basis, various two-step extraction processes were first designed and tested experimentally to determine feasibility. Among these combinations, the treatment combining oxalic acid as the 1st step and a sodium oxalate solution under acidic conditions (pH 3.2) as the 2nd step was found to be an effective way of extracting CCA elements from treated wood. Extraction efficiency reached 100% for arsenic and chromium and 95.8% for copper after a 3-h sodium oxalate treatment, following a 1-h pre-extraction process with oxalic acid. On the other hand, the same combination under alkaline conditions (pH 11.2) during the 2nd step was ineffective for copper removal, indicating that pH plays an important role in complexation with sodium oxalate solution. The present results suggest that the extraction of CCA elements using a combination of oxalic acid and acidic sodium oxalate solution is a promising basis for application to a one-step extraction method.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.wasman.2005.05.006

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Kakitani, T., Hata, T., Kajimoto, T., & Imamura, Y.
Affiliations
  • Kyoto University (JP)
  • Industrial Technology Center of Wakayama Prefecture (JP)
Corresponding author
Hata, Toshimitsu
Venue
Waste Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
26
Issue
5
Pages
453-458
ISSN
0956-053X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2045972124
Cited by
40
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 2
FWCI
5.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Waste Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Extraction and Separation Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lignin and Wood Chemistry
Keywords
chromated copper arsenate, CCA-treated wood, heavy metal contamination, chromium removal, copper removal, arsenic removal, solvent extraction, oxalic acid, sodium oxalate, pH effect on complexation
MeSH terms
Arsenates, Arsenic, Chromium, Copper, Environmental Pollutants, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Oxalates, Refuse Disposal, Solvents, Wood, Oxalic Acid

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