Next Article in Journal
Rational Design, Stabilities and Nonlinear Optical Properties of Non-Conventional Transition Metalides; New Entry into Nonlinear Optical Materials
Next Article in Special Issue
New Experimental Evidence for Drying Shrinkage of Alkali-Activated Slag with Sodium Hydroxide
Previous Article in Journal
Insight into the Mechanism of Cobalt-Nickel Separation Using DFT Calculations on Ethylenediamine-Modified Silica Gel
Previous Article in Special Issue
Potential Evaluation for Preparing Geopolymers from Quartz by Low-Alkali Activation
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Review of the Interactions between Conventional Cementitious Materials and Heavy Metal Ions in Stabilization/Solidification Processing

1
School of Resource and Environmental Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230009, China
2
Anhui Urban Construction Design Institute Corp., Ltd., Hefei 230051, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2023, 16(9), 3444; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16093444
Submission received: 24 March 2023 / Revised: 20 April 2023 / Accepted: 26 April 2023 / Published: 28 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research on Alkali-Activated Materials)

Abstract

:
In the past few decades, solidification/stabilization (S/S) technology has been put forward for the purpose of improving soil strength and inhibiting contaminant migration in the remediation of heavy metal-contaminated sites. Cement, lime, and fly ash are among the most common and effective binders to treat contaminated soils. During S/S processing, the main interactions that are responsible for improving the soil’s behaviors can be summarized as gelification, self-hardening, and aggregation. Currently, precipitation, incorporation, and substitution have been commonly accepted as the predominant immobilization mechanisms for heavy metal ions and have been directly verified by some micro-testing techniques. While replacement of Ca2+/Si4+ in the cementitious products and physical encapsulation remain controversial, which is proposed dependent on the indirect results. Lead and zinc can retard both the initial and final setting times of cement hydration, while chromium can accelerate the initial cement hydration. Though cadmium can shorten the initial setting time, further cement hydration will be inhibited. While for mercury, the interference impact is closely associated with its adapted anion. It should be pointed out that obtaining a better understanding of the remediation mechanism involved in S/S processing will contribute to facilitating technical improvement, further extension, and application.

1. Introduction

In the past few decades, the scale of the contaminated sites has increased in China due to the rapid development of industrialization and urbanization. To stop the further extension of soil pollution, a variety of environmental policies have been implemented since the initial 12th Five Year Plan. Moreover, the financial input was estimated to be increased to CNY trillions in 2020 to encourage technological innovation and improvement in the remediation of contaminated sites [1]. On this basis, quite a few technologies are proposed and subsequently proven to be available to treat heavy metal-contaminated soils, such as physical separation, incineration, solidification/stabilization (S/S), thermal desorption, and so on [2,3,4,5]. Among the various innovative technologies, the S/S method has been extensively adopted and investigated. For instance, the Annual Report on Site Remediation Technologies (ASR, the 12th edition) published that the S/S method was used in 217 of the 977 sites that were financially supported by the U.S. Superfund between 1982 and 2005. In China, S/S has also been increasingly used in the remediation projects of heavy metal contaminated sites. This has been the case due to its advantages of effective contaminant immobilization, significant engineering improvements, high heat and biodegradation resistances, notable economic effects, and construction convenience during in situ or ex situ remediation [6,7,8,9,10].
After being treated with S/S technology, the heavy metal ions can be effectively immobilized, while the engineering properties of the contaminated soil can also be improved [11,12,13,14]. It can be concluded that remediation efficiency predominantly depends on the interactions between binders and contaminant-bearing wastes, which involve the formation of monolithic solids with low permeability to prevent contaminant migration as well as the transformation of contaminants into chemically insoluble and stable phases [15,16,17,18]. Thus, choosing an excellent binder can largely ensure the behavior of treated soils. According to previous studies, cementitious materials, such as cement, lime, and fly ash, play important roles in the S/S treatment of contaminated soils due to their hydraulicity and self-hardening characterizations [19,20,21,22,23]. When considering the presence of heavy metal ions, the S/S process involved in cementitious materials is very likely to be altered, leading to a different performance. This is because heavy metal ions have obvious impacts on the cement hydration process, such as retarding the early hydration process, promoting the long-term hydration process, and changing the crystal morphology of hydrated products [11,11,24,25,26]. On this basis, it is of great importance to obtain a greater understanding of the interactions between heavy metal ions and binders, which involve contaminant immobilization as well as disturbed cement hydration owing to the presence of contaminants.
According to previous studies, remediation of heavy metal-contaminated soil with S/S was always a case study. It is difficult to draw consistent conclusions from the existing studies, especially when taking into account the different heavy metal species, regarding the interactions between heavy metal ions and traditional binders (such as cement, lime, and fly ash). This will make it difficult to use S/S technology in the field. Thus, an overview of the S/S mechanisms based on conventional binders, the immobilization mechanisms of different heavy metal ions, and the interference impacts of these contaminants on the S/S process and the S/S performance is carried out in the present paper. It can be expected that this study will contribute to facilitating technical improvement, further extension, and application of S/S technology.

2. S/S Mechanisms Based on Conventional Binders

2.1. Cement

Cement is predominantly composed of calcium silicate, calcium aluminate, and a small quantity of gypsum, which is generally used to moderate the initial period of the hydration rate [27]. When the cement is in contact with water, the hydrated reaction starts immediately; furthermore, the aluminate phases exhibit the fastest hydration rate in the initial period of hydration [28,29,30]. In addition to the calcium aluminate hydrates (CAHs), ettringite (AFt) can also form in the early period of cement hydration, as long as a sufficient quantity of sulfate is contained in the cement paste [31,32,33]. However, the ettringite will gradually transform into calcium monosulfoaluminate hydrates (AFm) following an increase in the hydration time due to the dilute concentration of sulfate [34,35]. After 5 h of cement hydration, a considerable growth rate of calcium silicate hydrates (CSHs), which are produced by calcium silicate hydration, can be monitored. This composes approximately 50% of the cement hydration products [36,37]. In addition, calcium hydroxide (CH) is another primary product of calcium silicate hydration, the content of which is about 25% wt. [38,39,40]. The formulations of the cement paste hydrations are summarized in Table 1.
In addition to cement, lime and fly ash are both commonly used binders to treat heavy metal-contaminated soils when based on the S/S method. This is due to their self-hardening and pozzolanic characteristics [19,20,22,41].

2.2. Lime

The hydration of lime can significantly increase the soil pH due to the formation of Ca(OH)2. When the produced Ca(OH)2 is sufficient, the oversaturated Ca(OH)2 will precipitate and fill in the soil pores, which enhances the soil’s mechanical performance [42]. Meanwhile, according to the cation exchange reactions between the free Ca2+ and Na+ (K+) located on the surface of soil particles, the aggregation of soil particles occurs due to the decrease in the thickness of the double diffusion layer [43,44,45]. Thus, a denser structure can be achieved. Furthermore, the silica and alumina in the soil can be dissolved in a high alkaline environment (pH ≥ 12.4), which is provided by the hydration of the lime [46]. Then, the pozzolanic reactions will take place according to the interactions between the Ca(OH)2, pozzolans (i.e., the silicate and aluminate phases), and water, as expressed in Equations (1) and (2). The pozzolanic products, such as CSHs and CAHs, tightly bound the soil particles together, resulting in a considerable growth in soil strength [41,47,48].
SiO2 + xCa(OH)2 + (n − 1)H2O = xCaO·SiO2·nH2O
Al2O3 + xCa(OH)2 + (n − 1)H2O = xCaO·Al2O3·nH2O

2.3. Fly Ash

Fly ash is predominantly constituted of SiO2, Al2O3, CaO, and Fe2O3, and its self-cementing characteristic depends on the free CaO (lime) content [49,50,51]. In addition to the self-hardening, which is due to CaO hydration, the released OH can also facilitate the dissolution of the SiO2 and Al2O3 contained in the fly ash [52,53], subsequently leading to the formation of CSHs and CAHs [54,55,56,57], which are identified by the XRD and SEM analysis [20,58,59,60]. Furthermore, as the fly ash is applied to modify soil performance alone, its physical characteristics (such as filling voids between the soil particles, thus resulting in a denser structure) are more pronounced than its chemical characteristics. It should be noted that, in order to accelerate the pozzolanic reactions, the utilization of fly ash is commonly blended with a certain quantity of lime or cement, particularly for Class F fly ash (with a low content of free CaO) [22,61,62,63].
As mentioned above, the main interactions that are responsible for the improvement of soil behavior between the three types of binders and soil can be summarized as follows: (1) gelification, which is attributed to the formation of CSHs and CAHs; (2) the hardening that results from Ca(OH)2; and (3) the aggregation of soil particles, which is owing to cation exchange. However, during the modification process, the most outstanding interaction varies based on the type of binder. As shown in Figure 1, the primary solidification mechanisms of cement and lime are the gelification of CSHs/CAHs and the hardening of Ca(OH)2, respectively, while fly ash can work as a filler to enhance the compaction characteristics of soil due to its fine particle size, which is more pronounced than its cementitious performance. In addition, the interactions between the soil particles and binders can be directly observed based on SEM, as shown in Figure 2.

3. Immobilization Mechanisms of Heavy Metal Ions in the S/S Matrix

During the S/S process, the immobilization of heavy metal ions is dependent on the development of hydrated and pozzolanic reactions. Essentially, the immobilization mechanisms of heavy metal ions based on cementitious binders can be summarized as physical encapsulation, precipitation, incorporation, and substitution, as shown in Figure 3. However, the governed immobilization mechanism seems to be different for each heavy metal ion.

3.1. Lead

Precipitation as insoluble lead silicates (such as PbSiO3, Pb2SiO4, Pb3SiO5, and Pb4SiO6) is the predominant immobilization mechanism of Pb2+ in cementitious materials [64,65,66,67,68]. Additionally, in the alkaline environment that is offered by cement hydration, Pb2+ is ready to precipitate as a lead hydroxide and lead carbonate, or occasionally as a lead sulfate, a lead hydroxyl carbonate (PbSO4, 3PbCO3·2Pb(OH)2·H2O), and a lead carbonate sulfate hydroxide (Pb4SO4(CO3)2(OH)2) [10,69]. According to the logarithm of the stability constants of the formation of lead hydroxide and carbonate (10.9 and 13.1, respectively), lead carbonate appears to be more preferentially formed than that of hydroxide [70,71] solids. However, compared with the lead silicates, the other lead compounds are unstable when exposed to a highly alkaline environment [72]. This is especially the case for lead hydroxide due to the fact that it will decompose as the pH increases up to 12, thus leading to the formation of a lead complex [69]. Li et al. [1] reported that this lead complex can be incorporated into a C-S-H structure. C-S-H phases have layered crystal structures that consist of the alternative tetrahedral Si-O and octahedral Ca-O chains, as well as certain water molecules and cations (in order to balance the negative charges of the structure) in the interlayer spaces [73,74,75]. Thus, during C3S hydration, the hydrolytic lead complex can be directly linked onto the end of the tetrahedral Si-O chain in the form of a tetrahedral Pb-O. Note that the Pb-O tetrahedron and Si-O tetrahedron are connected by one shared oxygen atom [75]. In addition, Guo et al. [76] obtained a similar result, where pozzolanic components, such as SiO2 and Al2O3, would dissolve into [SiO2(OH)2]2− and [Al(OH)4] during pozzolanic reactions that can coordinate with the dissolved [Pb(OH)3] and [Pb(OH)4]2− that are presented in the high alkaline environment, in which Pb2+ is immobilized by forming Pb-O-Si, Pb-O-Al, and Si-O-Pb-O-Al bonds. All the above-mentioned immobilization forms of lead were simultaneously detected by X-ray Absorption Fine Structure spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy, which were performed by Contessi et al. [16]. While incorporation into the C-S-H structure is the most pronounced compared to the other lead immobilization mechanisms.
In addition to the aforementioned immobilization mechanisms, some other mechanisms were proven to be available for the lead immobilization that occurred during the S/S process. Chen et al. [77] found that Pb2+ immobilization was significantly impacted by the Pb2+ concentration: at a lower concentration, Pb2+ was fixed in the C-S-H by physical and chemical adsorption; at a high concentration, Pb2+ was immobilized by precipitation. In addition to the calcium silicate phases, certain studies have reported that the calcium aluminate phases can also make some contribution toward reducing Pb2+ mobility by substituting for Ca2+ in the hydrated aluminate phases [20,78,79]. Furthermore, Pb2+ can also be encapsulated by cementitious hydrates [11].
To sum up, precipitating hydroxide, silicates, and carbonate and incorporating them into a C-S-H structure by forming a Si-O-Pb bond are the most common results with respect to the lead immobilization mechanism.

3.2. Zinc

Numerous other previous studies have suggested that precipitation as hydroxides or carbonates may be the major mechanism of Zn2+ immobilization in the S/S system [64,80,81]. Zinc is a typically amphoteric metal that makes it soluble in a high alkaline environment, which is provided by cement hydration, and exists in the form of a hydroxyl complex, i.e., [Zn(OH)4]2− and [Zn(OH)3] [82]. These hydroxyl complexes are hardly able to adsorb onto the surface of C-S-H due to their negative charge. Poon et al. [83,84] tested this conclusion by performing a leaching test on the Zn-bearing cement pastes, which showed that there was no Zn2+ leaching out during the hydrolysis of CSH. Du et al. [21] validated the absence of Ca(OH)2 in the hydrated Zn-bearing cement pastes based on XRD and SEM analysis, which proved that Zn2+ immobilization was associated with Ca(OH)2. A calcium zincate hydrate (CaZn2(OH)6·2H2O), other than C-S-H and Ca(OH)2, precipitated at the interface between the tri-calcium silicate paste (C3S) and the zinc wire, as observed by Tashiro and Tatibano [85] and Lo et al. [86]. Additionally, Liu et al. [7] also observed the presence of both zinc hydroxide and calcium zincate hydrate, which were responsible for the zinc immobilization at a high level of zinc concentration. Mollah et al. [87] made a further verification of the formation of this precipitate by Fourier transformed infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. Yousuf et al. [88] revealed the precipitation mechanism of the calcium zincate hydrates based on the charge diffusion model. The model illustrated that the negative charges carried by the C-S-H surface constituted the first diffusion layer. In order to balance the charge, the free Ca2+ contained in the pore solution migrated toward the C-S-H surface and formed the second diffusion layer. Under a strongly alkaline condition, the Zn(OH)2 decomposed into [Zn(OH)3] or [Zn(OH)4]2−, which constituted the third diffusion layer. During the diffusion process, the hydroxyl complex had little interaction with the C-S-H surface; however, it reacted with Ca2+, which resulted in the precipitation of a calcium zincate hydrate [14,89].
Having said this, certain researchers have advised that calcium zincate hydrate is a transitional product that will decompose with the development of cement hydration, which can then eventually be incorporated into the C-S-H structure. Ziegler et al. [90] proposed that Zn2+ can be incorporated into the C-S-H structure by forming a Si-O-Zn bond. Liu et al. [91] reported that CSH containing Zn2+ was detected in S/S-treated soil by SEM testing equipped with EDS. It is speculated that Zn2+ is immobilized by incorporation into the interlayer of CSH under a lower Zn2+ concentration condition. Rose et al. [92] illustrated this binding process based on EXAFS and 29NMR analysis, which revealed that a Zn-O tetrahedron can coordinate directly with the tetrahedral Si-O chain by a shared oxygen atom. Meanwhile, several studies have suggested that the mechanisms controlled by Zn2+ immobilization are closely associated with the initial Zn2+ concentration and the pH levels of the binding system [90,93]: at a lower Zn2+ concentration (<1 mmol/L), chemical incorporation into C-S-H served as the major mechanism, which accounts for the Zn2+ immobilization when the pH varies from 11.7 to 12.8; at a higher Zn2+ concentration, Zn2+ is predominantly immobilized by precipitation as β-Zn(OH)2 at pH < 12, or when forming CaZn2(OH)6·2H2O at 12.5 > pH > 12.
Komarneni et al. [94] indicated that a small amount of Zn2+ can substitute for Ca2+ or for the Na+ that is located on the surface of C-S-H, as well as for the Na+ that exists in the interlayer of the C-S-H structure. However, Rose et al. [92] speculated that it was difficult, in terms of geometry, for Zn2+ to replace Ca2+ in the C-S-H structure. This is because Zn2+ and Ca2+ are located in the center of the Zn-O tetrahedron and Ca-O octahedron, respectively, which makes it difficult to complete the substitution. Zn2+, however, can take the place of Ca2+ in either the poorly crystalline or amorphous C-S-H.
In addition, Poon et al. [83] also found that the hydrolysis of AFt was accompanied by the apparent release of Zn2+, which indirectly confirmed that AFt may also be responsible for Zn2+ immobilization. Meanwhile, Kumarathasan et al. [95] verified that Zn2+ can replace Ca2+ in the ettringite structure.

3.3. Chromium

Chromium has two oxidation states, Cr3+ and Cr6+, in the natural environment. Cr6+ appears to be more toxic and mobile than Cr3+, which makes it more difficult to fix [96,97]. Based on the review of the literature, both Cr3+ and Cr6+ immobilization are closely associated with the hydration of the aluminate phases contained in the cement.
A series of analogous calcium aluminate hydrates (CAHs) (Ca2Cr(OH)7·3H2O were generated at 55 °C, and Ca2Cr2O5·6H2O was generated at 25 °C) bearing Cr3+ were detected by Kindness et al. [98] when Cr3+ reacted with Ca(OH)2 in the presence of water. For the sake of affirming this fixation mechanism of Cr3+, Kindness et al. [98] proposed another test program in which the generation of Ca2Cr2O5·6H2O based on the interactions between Cr3+ and pure tri-calcium aluminate was recorded. Thus, it was concluded that Cr3+ was immobilized by substituting for Al3+ in the crystal structure of CAHs. Similar results were obtained by Leisinger et al. [99], Zhang et al. [100], and Sophia et al. [101], who observed that Cr3+ was fixed in two forms of Ca-Cr compounds: one was ettringite analogues and the other was monosulfoaluminate analogues, which formed in the early and later periods of cement hydration, respectively.
Jing et al. [102] suggested that the Cr3+ in the hydrated aluminates was only available at a pH level of no less than 10.5. However, under a relatively low alkaline condition, the precipitation of chromium hydroxides may be the major immobilization mechanism [59,103]. Moreover, Cocke [104] and Ecke et al. [105] emphasized that Cr(OH)3 only existed in an insoluble form in a weakly alkaline environment and was intended to decompose into Cr(OH)4 as the pH increased to a certain high value.
In addition, based on the Richardson and Groves model [106], Wang et al. [107] and Heimann et al. [108] proposed that the replacement of Si4+ in the C-S-H structure by Cr3+ occurred during cement hydration, in which the monovalent cations (Na+ or K+) compensated for the charge deficiency. However, Omotoso et al. [109] suggested that such a substitution can hardly take place for Cr3+ but rather that incorporation into the C-S-H structure by a coordination with a Ca-O octahedron and Si-O tetrahedron simultaneously in the form of a Cr-O octahedron [110].
For Cr6+, it is difficult to immobilize by precipitation or substitution for Al3+ in the aluminate phases. Several researchers have suggested reducing Cr6+ to Cr3+ first with certain reductants [111,112], such as Fe2+, and then performing the next stabilization/solidification process. However, Dermatas and Meng [58] found that Cr6+ can hardly be reduced to Cr3+ by Fe2+ under alkaline conditions, which is in favor of being encapsulated by the products of pozzolanic reactions. In the alkali-activated fly ash system, Na2CrO4·4H2O was responsible for the Cr6+ immobilization, although it has a relatively high solubility [54,65]. Muhammad et al. [113] advised that CrO42− can react with Ca2+ and water under a high alkaline environment (pH > 12) provided by cement hydration to form CaCr(OH)4·H2O and CaCrO4·2H2O. Nevertheless, the most commonly accepted mechanism for Cr6+ immobilization is that Cr6+ appears as CrO42− and can also be incorporated into the AFt structure by the isomorphous substitution of SO42− contained in AFt [97,114,115].
It is interesting that the immobilization of both chromium oxidation states is predominantly attributed to the formation of analogous aluminate hydrates containing chromium.

3.4. Arsenic

In nature, arsenic also exists in two oxidation states, As3+ and As5+. In the S/S process, the immobilization mechanisms of the two species are quite different: As3+ is immobilized by forming insoluble calcium arsenate precipitates (Ca-As-O, CaAs2O6, Ca2As2O7, CaO-As2O5, and Ca3As2O8), calcium hydrogen arsenate (CaHAsO3, CaHAsO4, and Ca(H2AsO4)2), or calcium arsenate hydrates (Ca5H2(AsO4)4·9H2O, CaHAsO4∙2H2O, Ca5H2(AsO4)4∙5H2O, and CaAsO3(OH)∙2H2O) [116,117]; while As5+ is incorporated into NaCaAsO4∙7.5H2O whose generation is strongly dependent on the contents of Na+ and Ca2+ contained in the binder systems [118,119]. In addition, some research revealed that As immobilization was not only up to the As species but also highly associated with the molar mass ratio of Ca to As, as shown in Table 2 [119,120,121].
In addition to the aforementioned conclusions, several different results were reported by other researchers. Mollah et al. [122] claimed that replacement of the aluminate in etteringite by [AsO4]3− can only account for the short-term As5+ immobilization in a cement matrix. While the formation of NaCaAsO4·7.5H2O and Ca5(AsO4)3OH were responsible for the long-term stabilization of As5+, which were identified by XRD in 10 year-old cement pastes [123]. Beiyuan et al. [117] identified that As can be strongly immobilized by the iron oxides/hydroxides and CSHs by adsorption and/or co-precipitation. Li et al. [116] stated that the potential mobility and exposure pathway of As were reduced by means of physical encapsulation in the S/S matrix, where an interlocking framework of hydration products would increase with cement content.

3.5. Cadmium

In cement hydration systems, the major immobilized mechanism of Cd2+ is precipitation of hydroxides [20,107]. Subsequently, these insoluble phases were adsorbed onto the C-S-H surface or through filling in the pore structure of the cement pastes [124,125]. Hale et al. [126] and Pandey et al. [127] advised that the precipitation of Cd(OH)2 was the predominant form of immobilization, which was then encapsulated by CSHs at a microscopic scale. In contrast, Conner and Reinhold [128] and Park [129] proposed that Cd2+ can also be immobilized by forming a double cadmium calcium hydroxide compound (CdCa(OH)4). Additionally, Mollah et al. [130] explained the formation of CdCa(OH)4 via the interfacial interactions between [Cd(OH)4]2− and Ca2+, which was very similar to the formation mechanism of CaZn2(OH)6·2H2O [87].
Except for the precipitation of cadmium hydroxides, the other mechanisms accounting for cadmium immobilization are rarely mentioned.

3.6. Nickel and Cobalt

In cementitious binder systems, Ni2+ is commonly immobilized by the precipitation of hydroxides [131,132]. Vespa et al. [133] detected the layered Ni-Al hydroxide compounds (Ni2Al(OH)6(CO3)1/2) in addition to α-Ni(OH)2 and β-Ni(OH)2 by the EXAFS (Extended X-ray Adsorption Fine Structure) technology. Additionally, Scheidegger et al. [134,135] illustrated the precipitation mechanisms of this Ni-Al hydroxide compound with Equation (3):
[ M 1 x 2 + M x 3 + ( O H ) 2 ] x + ( x / n ) A n · m H 2 O ,
where M2+ and M3+ presented the divalent and trivalent cations, such as Mg2+, Ni2+, Co2+, Zn2+, Mn2+, Fe2+, Al3+, Fe3+, and Cr3+, An− presented the monovalent or divalent anions, such as Cl, N O 3 , C O 3 2 , and S O 4 2 . Moreover, Vespa et al. [133] observed that α-Ni(OH)2 would gradually transform into Ni2Al(OH)6(CO3)1/2 with the process of cement hydration, while the β-Ni(OH)2 content remained approximately constant.
Vespa et al. [136] observed that Co2+ predominantly precipitated as Co(OH)2 during the initial hydration period. In a highly alkaline environment (pH > 12.5) or in the presence of O2, Co2+ was readily oxidized to Co3+ and eventually precipitated as an insoluble CoOOH. However, Hale et al. [126] stated that Co2+ can hardly be oxidized and that Co3+ can also be reduced to Co2+ in the presence of Fe2+ or Al3+. Catalano et al. [137] indicated that Co2+ can react with aluminate phases under strongly alkaline conditions that result in the formation of Co(OH)2, CoCO3, and Co0.75-Al0.25(OH)2CO3−xH2O.
In addition, Komarneni et al. [94] found that Ni2+ and Co2+ can replace Ca2+ in C3S or C-S-H by cation exchange reactions. Depending on the leaching test performed on the Ni2+/Co2+ bearing C3S/C-S-H, a considerable amount of Ca2+ leaches out, and simultaneously, the Ni2+/Co2+ concentration in the pore solution decreases significantly.

3.7. Mercury

The immobilization mechanism with respect to mercury is particularly different from the other waste ions. In that there are no chemical interactions between the Hg2+ and cement pastes, and there is only a physical encapsulation of the cement hydrates [138,139]. Cocke [104] stated that mercury can exist in the form of insoluble mercury oxide under alkaline conditions. Donatello et al. [140] studied Hg immobilization in alkali-activated fly ash cement. Results showed that precipitates that appeared to be yellow/orange could be occasionally encountered in the Hg-doped specimens. The SEM-EDX results proved that these precipitates were composed of HgS, Hg2S, and HgO. Furthermore, the leaching test ensured that the precipitation of amorphous HgS or Hg2S was partially accountable for Hg immobilization in Hg-doped pastes. Ortego et al. [141] stated that during cement hydration, HgO, when in a yellow form, was predominantly responsible for Hg immobilization at room temperature. However, the HgO was still exposed to an emission risk when the temperature was elevated.
Table 3 summarizes the immobilization mechanisms for the different heavy metal ions in the S/S system, and the technologies that can be used to distinguish each immobilization mechanism are listed in Table 4. As shown in Table 3, these immobilization mechanisms can be divided into four categories: (1) the precipitation of insoluble compounds; (2) the incorporation into CSH/CAH structures; (3) substitution; and (4) physical encapsulation by cementitious products. Currently, precipitation, incorporation, and substitution have been commonly accepted as the predominant immobilization mechanisms for heavy metal ions. Furthermore, they have been directly verified by some microtesting techniques. The view is that immobilization via replacement of Ca2+/Si4+ in cementitious products and in physical encapsulation remains controversial. Furthermore, it is proposed to be dependent on indirect results. Finally, it should be noted that the ultimate mechanism that is responsible for the immobilization of heavy metal ions is closely associated with the species, valence, and initial concentration of the heavy metal ions, as well as the pH level of the S/S system and hydration times.

4. Interference Impacts of Heavy Metal Ions

Following the hydrated and pozzolanic reactions, the heavy metal ions were immobilized by the corresponding products. Simultaneously, the presence of heavy metal ions can also impose certain interferences on the above reactions. Consequently, the quantity and morphology of the cementitious products may be altered, and they may subsequently influence the interactions between soil particles and cementitious products as per the performance of the treated soil. Considering the fact that different heavy metal ions are immobilized in different ways in the S/S system, it can be speculated that different interferences can be aroused during the hydrated and pozzolanic reactions.

4.1. Hydrated and Pozzolanic Reactions

Based on the study of Tay [142], the standard initial setting time of OPC should not be less than 45 min, while the final setting time should be more than 10 h. However, when the heavy metal species are poured into the cement pastes, the setting time is very likely to be altered. According to previous studies [16,73,143], the interference impacts of heavy metals on cement hydration are closely associated with the heavy metal species and their corresponding concentrations in the cement hydration system.

4.1.1. Lead

It is generally concluded that the presence of Pb2+ induces the strongest retardation of cement hydration (including both initial and final setting times) when compared with other heavy metals [144,145,146]. The retardation of cement hydration that is caused by Pb can be primarily attributed to the formation of Pb precipitates covering the area around the cement grains [104,110,147,148].
Ortego et al. [141] suggested that Pb2+ primarily adheres to the surface of hydrated cement as a sulfate or hydroxo-sulfate species, as determined via XPS and FTIR analysis. Thus, the cement grains are prevented from coming into contact with water, resulting in the retardation of the hydration process. The aforementioned reaction consumes part of the sulfate in the hydration system, which leads to a reduction in sulfate concentration. It is well known that during the early hydration period, the formation of ettringite requires a relatively high sulfate concentration. Therefore, the presence of Pb2+ would inhibit ettringite and monosulfate formation if the remaining sulfate concentration in the hydration system was not enough. Mohammed et al. [149] suggested that ettringite cannot form in the presence of Pb2+. This is because the sulfate in the hydration system will react first with Pb2+. On this basis, the influence of Pb2+ on the formation of ettringite is most likely determined by the Pb2+ concentration.
Cocke [104] and Chen et al. [77] proposed that Pb2+ influenced the cement hydration by decreasing the silicate polymerization, which is closely associated with the Pb2+ concentration. Otherwise, the retardation impact of Pb2+ on the cement hydration was not obvious for the specimens that were cured for 28 days but was significant for the samples that were cured for 48 h and 7 days [150].
Hills et al. [151] proved that Pb2+ accelerated C3S hydration besides aggravating the carbonation during cement hydration. As a result, the hydrated product, Ca(OH)2, will transform into calcite. Based on the TGA results, the portlandite content of the control cement paste is 16.7%, and the calcite content is 16.8%. While for the Pb-doped cement pastes, the calculated portlandite content is 7.1% and that of the calcite is 27.7%. This indicates that the presence of Pb2+ retards the precipitation of portlandite; meanwhile, it also accelerates the carbonation of portlandite due to the lower pH that is attributed to the hydrolysis of Pb2+.

4.1.2. Zinc

With the exception of lead, zinc is another heavy metal that has severe impacts on cement hydration. The retardation of both calcium aluminate and calcium silicate phases in the cement occurs in the presence of Zn2+ [152,153,154]. The addition of Zn2+ decreases the ratio of Ca/Al in the pore solution of cement paste because of the interactions between Zn2+ and CaO [155]. Thus, the formation of C3AH6 is hindered. Moreover, the impact of Zn on the hydration of the C3A phase is closely associated with the sulfate content in the cement. The C3A hydration will not be retarded until the sulfate content is higher than 2.5% [156]. Based on previous studies, the retardation of calcium silicate phases can be attributed to the precipitation of insoluble zinc compounds that encapsulate the cement grains [77,152,154]. However, Malviya and Chaudhary [81], as well as Hamilton and Sammes [157], indicated that the retardation of C3S hydration was closely associated with Zn2+ concentration. As such, they concluded that no retardation could be observed at a low Zn2+ concentration. While the calcium zinc hydrate cannot be detected at 28 days of curing until the zinc concentration in the cement paste increases to 10%, Yousuf et al. [88] identified this compound as CaZn2(OH)6·2H2O via FTIR analysis, which seemed to form a protective layer that impedes the normal hydration of cement grains.
The XRD results obtained by Hills et al. [151] showed that the peak intensity of the C3S of Zn-doped cement pastes was much higher than that of the control paste. It was suggested that the presence of Zn2+ retards the hydration of C3S. However, this retardation effect was weakened when increasing the curing time.

4.1.3. Chromium

Chromium imposes very different impacts on the cement hydration when compared with lead and zinc, which tend to accelerate the initial cement hydration or produce little interference [92,156,158].
When the Cr2O3 content is low (≤2.5%), it has no influence on the setting time [156]. Tashiro and Oba [153] also found that cement pastes that were doped with 1% and 5% Cr2O3 had similar C3AH6 formation to that of control cement paste. While at a higher Cr2O3 content, the hydrates were clearly distinguished after 28 days of curing. It can be speculated that the effect of Cr on cement hydration is predominantly dependent on its concentration.
Chen et al. [77] suggested that the degree of C3S hydration was accelerated by the presence of Cr3+ because the attack of H+ resulted from chromium hydrolysis. Another explanation emphasizes that chromium compounds are not formed on the surface of hardened cement but that they disperse below the surface of the OPC matrix [130]. As a result, the cement’s hydration cannot be hindered by insulating the cement grains from the water. However, Li et al. [159] reported that Cr3+ accelerated the hydration of C3A at 3 days but restricted it at 7 days. An analogous result was obtained by Rha et al. [160], who pointed out that the presence of Cr3+ could accelerate the initial hydration of slag-cement but lead to a reduction in hydration degree. On the one hand, the presence of Cr3+ can restrain ettringite formation, which is considered the setting delay of calcium silicates in the initial period of hydration. On the other hand, Cr3+ can interact with H2O based on the complexation detailed as follows [161,162]:
Cr H 2 O 6 3 +     Cr ( OH ) H 2 O 5 2 +     Cr ( OH ) 3 ( H 2 O ) 3     Cr ( OH ) 4 ( H 2 O ) 2 2 .
As a result, the OH concentration in the pore solution decreases, which will weaken the hydration degree.

4.1.4. Cadmium

Bobrowski et al. [163] stated that Cd2+ could shorten the initial setting time of cement hydration. Additionally, according to the results published by Díez et al. [164], it was found that the precipitation of Cd(OH)2 gave rise to the hardening of cement pastes, which accelerated the initial setting of the cement hydration. However, the formation of Cd(OH)2 may inhibit further hydration of the cement. According to the hydration exothermic curves obtained by Wang et al. [165], increasing the CdO dosage could result in the gradual extension of the introduction period of cement paste, followed by an increase in time spans for both the acceleration and deceleration periods. Meanwhile, the highest exothermic peaks were reduced. Previous studies have suggested that three-dimensional structures with a thickness of 0.1–0.3 μm containing heavy metal can form coatings around cement grains [166]. If these coatings were in the least insoluble phase, the hydration of encapsulated cement grains could be retarded [144,167]. Given that the solubility of Cd(OH)2 at 20 °C is only 2.697 × 10−4 g/100 g, which is considerably lower than Ca(OH)2 (0.173 g/100 g), Cd2+ could inhibit further hydration of cement by precipitating Cd(OH)2 around the clinker particles surface. Moreover, the XRD and SEM results obtained by Tumidajski and Thomson [168] can also confirm this conclusion, who presented findings showing that the presence of Cd2+ inhibited the formation of C3AH6.

4.1.5. Mercury

When compared with the other heavy metals, mercury (whether as an ionic species or as a covalent molecule) appears to demonstrate quite different impacts on the hydration of cementitious materials. HgCl2 has little influence on the cement’s hydration, while Hg(NO3)2 retards the hydration in terms of strength development. The formation of a waterproof coating or consuming some OH by Hg2+ may be responsible for such retardation [167].

4.2. Development of Compressive Strength

Considering the impacts of heavy metals on cement hydration, the mechanical properties of the cement doped with contaminants should be distinguished from those of the pure cement paste. According to the previous studies, as shown in Table 5, it can be found that the effects of heavy metals on the strength development of cement-based materials are complex and are primarily associated with the heavy metal species, heavy metal concentrations, and curing time.
Tashiro et al. [173] reported that the presence of heavy metal oxides (ZnO, Fe2O3, Cr2O3, Cu(OH)2, and Pb2O(OH)2) induced an apparently reduced compressive strength of cement mortars. It is because these heavy metal oxides promote the growth of ettringite, which causes an expansion of the cement mortars. Thus, the strength is reduced due to the increase in the total pore volume. The results obtained by Guo and Shi [54] showed that the addition of 0.025% Cr6+ and Pb2+ to the class C fly ash geopolymer resulted in strength reductions of 19.4% and 15.1%, respectively. This can be predominantly attributed to the formations of Na2CrO4·4H2O and Pb3SiO5, which most likely have lower strengths than those found in typical cement-hydrated products. Akhter et al. [150] and Rha et al. [160] also found a strength reduction in cement mortars in the presence of Pb2+ due to serious retardation of the initial cement hydration. For the specimens doped with Cr3+, strength development was still hindered, although the presence of Cr3+ had little influence on the reaction rate of cement hydration [160]. Gervais and Ouki [158] investigated the effects of heavy metal ions on the strength of cement mortars. Cement mortar was blended with silica fume and zeolite, as shown in Figure 4. The results indicated that different heavy metal ions have different impacts on the strength development of the tested mortars. Pandey et al. [127] reported that the presence of heavy metals decreased the compressive strength of cement mortars by 10–31%. The order of the impacts involved in different heavy metal ions on the strength of the sample was: Cd ≤ Cr(III) ≤ Zn ≤ Pb ~ Cr(VI) ≤ Cu. While Navarro-Blasco et al. [174] obtained a different result in the study of the strength properties of aluminate cement doped with heavy metals, the results showed that cement doped with Cu obtained the maximum strength, and that of Zn was the lowest.
The variations in heavy metal concentration in the cement-based materials have an obvious influence on their strength development. Li et al. [25] and Li and Yi [175] studied the effect of Zn2+, Cd2+, and Ni2+ on the strength of cement soil and indicated that the strength decreased with an increase in heavy metal concentration, as presented in Figure 5. Du et al. [21] found that increasing the Zn2+ concentration in the cement stabilized kaolin and caused a significant reduction in strength. This is because the precipitation of CaZn2(OH)6·2H2O would encapsulate cement grains, which retards cement hydration [86]. While some other researchers proposed that the addition of Zn2+ and Pb2+ at a low level can enhance the mechanical performance of the cement-based materials, as the heavy metal concentration exceeded a critical concentration, the presence of heavy metals would impose a detrimental influence on the strength development of the cement-based materials [25,175,176,177]. Under a low concentration condition, lead and zinc salts intend to precipitate immediately under an alkaline environment provided by the cement hydration. These precipitates can work as the skeleton and fill in the pores of the cement paste, which has little influence on strength development or even the promotion of strength. While at a high level of concentration, total porosity increased and flexural strength decreased [173,178]. Cho et al. [179] suggested that changes in the volume of micropores with a radius less than 5 nm had little influence on the strength development of cement, but pores with a radius larger than 5 nm could significantly influence the strength. Chen et al. [24] thought that the reduction in strength was due to the addition of heavy metal at high concentration, which could be attributed to the changes in the structure (crystallinity and particle size) and solubility of the hydrated products. This is because the heavy metal ions can be adsorbed on the surface of cement grains during their hydration and then enter the lattice to form a solid solution. Moreover, Alford et al. [180] indicated that Pb-bearing precipitates formed rapidly as soon as excess Pb(NO3)2 was added to cement pastes. Subsequently, these precipitates filled in the pores along with the volume expansion, which led to microcrack formation and a resulting reduction in strength.
In addition, several studies revealed that the presence of Cr could improve the strength properties of cement pastes even though the Cr concentration was at a very high level [156,173,181]. This was probably due to the fact that Cr is incorporated into the lattice of cement hydrates during cement hydration, forming a stable structure that can induce an increase in strength [65].
Despite the presence of heavy metals having interference effects on the strength development of cement pastes, this effect will diminish with an increase in the curing time [141,153,157]. Olmo et al. [156] showed that the addition of 5% ZnO decreased the UCS at 3 and 7 days, but it obtained a similar strength to pure cement pastes as the curing time increased up to 28 days. Based on thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and X-ray diffraction analysis, Chen et al. [77] illustrated that the presence of heavy metal ions would inhibit the formation of portlandite at a short curing period. However, increasing the curing time will weaken this inhibition’s impact.

5. Advantages and Disadvantages of S/S Technology

Currently, the most commonly used technologies to treat heavy metal-contaminated sites include solidification/stabilization, electrokinetic technology, soil washing, ceramic solidification, phytoremediation, etc. Compared to other technologies, S/S is a mature construction technology characterized by its excellent effectiveness in remediation, low cost, and short duration. The cost and duration of each technology are listed in Table 6.
In addition to the above-mentioned advantages, some disadvantages remain outstanding for S/S technology. The commonly used binders are almost silicate materials, the hardening paste of which has poor durability when exposed to sulfate attack. Acid rain is extensively distributed in China, which puts stabilized contaminants at risk of refiltration.

6. Conclusions and Prospects

During the rapid development of industrialization and urbanization, S/S technology has been increasingly used in remediation projects for heavy metal-contaminated sites. During S/S processing, the main interactions that are responsible for improving the soil’s behaviors can be summarized as precipitation, chemical incorporation, isomorphous substitution, physical adsorption, and encapsulation. Currently, precipitation, incorporation, and substitution have been commonly accepted as the predominant immobilization mechanisms for heavy metal ions and have been directly verified by some microtesting techniques. While replacement of Ca2+/Si4+ in the cementitious products and physical encapsulation remain controversial, which is proposed dependent on the indirect results. Lead and zinc can retard both the initial and final setting times of cement hydration, while chromium can accelerate the initial cement hydration. Though cadmium can shorten the initial setting time, further cement hydration will be inhibited. While for mercury, the interference impact is closely associated with its adapted anion. The complex environment of the S/S system (such as the contaminant concentration, pH level, and molar ratio of Ca/Si and Ca/Al) is noted, which makes it difficult to identify the controlling immobilization mechanism for a specific contaminant. In general, S/S-treated heavy metal-contaminated soil with conventional binders appears to have poor durability when exposed to a complicated and changeable environment, such as drying-wetting cycles, freezing-thawing cycles, acid rain leaching conditions, chloride, and sulfate attacks. In addition, the manufacture of conventional binders is always accompanied by the emission of greenhouse gases, which is actually opposite to the environmental protection policy in China. Thus, there is a pressing need to research and develop novel binders that can replace the conventional ones and have better performance. In addition, obtaining a better understanding of the remediation mechanisms involved in S/S processing is of great importance to facilitate technical improvements and further extend and apply this technology.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.L. and L.X.; writing—original draft preparation, J.L.; writing—review and editing, J.L., D.W. and X.T.; supervision, P.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Li, J.S. Evolution Mechanism on Structural Characteristics of Lead-Contaminated Soil in Solidification/Stabilization Process. Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  2. Tunsu, C.; Wickman, B. Effective removal of mercury from aqueous streams via electrochemical alloy formation on platinum. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 4876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Huang, T.; Song, D.P.; Zhou, L.L.; Pan, L.W.; Zhang, S.W. Self-alkali-activated self-cementation achievement and mechanism exploration for the synergistic treatment of the municipal solid waste incineration fly ashes and the arsenic-contaminated soils. Chemosphere 2023, 325, 138397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Xu, B.; Yi, Y.L. Stabilisation/solidification of lead-contaminated soil by using ladle furnace slag and carbon dioxide. Soils Found. 2022, 62, 101205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ren, Z.S.; Wang, L.; Wang, H.; Liu, S.H.; Liu, M. Solidification/stabilization of lead-contaminated soils by phosphogypsum slag-based cementitious materials. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 857, 159552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Guo, X.; Zhang, L.; Huang, J.; Shi, H. Detoxification and solidification of heavy metal of chromium using fly ash-based geopolymer with chemical agents. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 151, 394–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zha, F.S.; Liu, J.J.; Deng, Y.F.; Xu, L.; Wang, X.Y.; Yang, X.H. Solidification/stabilization (S/S) of high concentration zinc-contaminated soils using soda residue. In Proceedings of the 8th International Congress on Environmental Geotechnics, Environmental Science and Engineering, Hangzhou, China, 28 October–1 November 2019; Volume 1, pp. 683–690. [Google Scholar]
  8. Tajudin, S.A.A.; Azmi, M.A.M.; Nabila, A.T.A. Stabilization/solidification remediation method for contaminated soil: A review. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2016, 136, 012043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wu, H.L.; Jin, F.; Bo, Y.L.; Du, Y.J.; Zheng, J.X. Leaching and microstructural properties of lead contaminated kaolin stabilized by GGBS-MgO in semi-dynamic leaching tests. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 172, 626–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ouhadi, V.R.; Yong, R.N.; Deiranlou, M. Enhancement of cement-based solidification/stabilization of a lead-contaminated smectite clay. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 403, 123969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wang, Y.S.; Dai, J.G.; Wang, L.; Tsang, D.C.W.; Poon, C.S. Influence of lead on stabilization/solidification by ordinary Portland cement and magnesium phosphate cement. Chemosphere 2018, 190, 90–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Nikolić, V.; Komljenović, M.; Marjanović, N.; Baščarević, Z.; Petrović, R. Lead immobilization by geopolymers based on mechanically activated fly ash. Ceram. Int. 2014, 40, 8479–8488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Saeed, K.A.; Kassim, K.A.; Nur, H.; Yunus, N.Z.M. Strength of lime-cement stabilized tropical lateritic clay contaminated by heavy metals. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 2015, 19, 887–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Goodarzi, A.R.; Movahedrad, M. Stabilization/solidification of zinc-contaminated kaolin clay using ground granulated blast-furnace slag and different types of activators. Appl. Geochem. 2017, 81, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Xia, W.Y.; Du, Y.J.; Li, F.S.; Guo, G.L.; Yan, X.L.; Li, C.P.; Arulrajah, A.; Wang, F.; Wang, S. Field evaluation of a new hydroxyapatite based binder for ex-situ solidification/stabilization of a heavy metal contaminated site soil around a Pb-Zn smelter. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 210, 278–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Contessi, S.; Dalconi, M.C.; Pollastri, S.; Calgaro, L.; Meneghini, C.; Ferrari, G.; Marcomini, A.; Artioli, G. Cement-stabilized contaminated soil: Understanding Pb retention with XANES and Raman spectroscopy. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 752, 141826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Lasheen, M.R.; Ashmawy, A.M.; Ibrahim, H.S.; Moniem, S.M.A. Pozzolanic-based materials for stabilization/solidification of contaminated sludge with hazardous heavy metal: Case study. Desalination Water Treat. 2013, 51, 2644–2655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. He, X.; Lai, Z.Y.; Yan, T.; Wu, J.; Lu, Z.Y.; Lv, S.Z.; Li, F.; Fan, X.L. Hydration characteristics and microstructure of magnesium phosphate cement in presence of Cu2+. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 225, 234–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wang, L.; Chen, L.; Cho, D.W.; Tsang, D.C.W.; Yang, J.; Hou, D.Y.; Baek, K.; Kua, H.W.; Poon, C.S. Novel synergy of Si-rich minerals and reactive MgO for stabilisation/solidification of contaminated sediment. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 365, 695–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wang, H.R.; Zhu, Z.D.; Pu, S.Y.; Song, W.L. Solidification/Stabilization of Pb2+ and Cd2+ contaminated soil using fly ash and GGBS based geopolymer. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2022, 47, 4385–4400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Du, Y.-J.; Horpibulsuk, S.; Wei, M.-L.; Suksiripattanapong, C.; Liu, M.D. Modeling compression behavior of cement-treated zinc-contaminated clayey soil. Soils Found. 2014, 54, 1018–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wang, F.; Wang, H.; Jin, F.; Al-Tabbaa, A. The performance of blended conventional and novel binders in the in-situ stabilisation/solidification of a contaminated site soil. J. Hazard. Mater. 2015, 285, 46–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Liu, J.; Zha, F.; Deng, Y.; Cui, K.; Zhang, X. Effect of an alkaline environment on the engineering behavior of cement-stabilized/solidified Zn-contaminated soils. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 28248–28257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Chen, Q.Y.; Tyrer, M.; Hills, C.D.; Yang, X.M.; Carey, P. Immobilisation of heavy metal in cement-based solidification/stabilisation: A review. Waste Manag. 2009, 29, 390–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Li, W.T.; Ni, P.P.; Yi, Y.L. Comparison of reactive magnesia, quick lime, and ordinary Portland cement for stabilization/solidification of heavy metal-contaminated soils. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 671, 741–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Liu, M.H.; Zhao, Y.D.; Yu, Z.Y.; Cao, Z.G. Impact of Ni(Ⅱ) and Cd(Ⅱ) on the hydration and microstructure of cement pastes for immobilization: C-A-S-H composition and binding characteristic. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 310, 125284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Emmanuel, A.C.; Krishnan, S.; Bishnoi, S. Influence of curing temperature on hydration and microstructural development of ordinary Portland cement. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 329, 127070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Cai, Y.; Xuan, D.; Hou, P.; Shi, J.; Poon, C.S. Effect of seawater as mixing water on the hydration behaviour of tricalcium aluminate. Cem. Concr. Res. 2021, 149, 106565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Li, P.R.; Li, W.G.; Wang, K.J.; Zhou, J.L.; Castel, A.; Zhang, S.S.; Shah, S.P. Hydration of Portland cement with seawater toward concrete sustainability: Phase evolution and thermodynamic modelling. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2023, 138, 105007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ouhadi, V.; Yong, R.N. Ettringite formation and behavior in clayey soils. Appl. Clay Sci. 2008, 42, 258–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Qu, F.; Li, W.; Wang, K.; Tam, V.W.Y.; Zhang, S. Effects of seawater and undesalted sea sand on the hydration products, mechanical properties and microstructures of cement mortar. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 310, 125229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Xu, L.; Wang, P.M.; Zhang, G.F. Formation of ettringite in Portland cement/calcium aluminate cement/calcium sulfate ternary system hydrates at lower temperatures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 31, 347–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Schmidt, W.; Alexander, M.; John, V. Education for sustainable use of cement based materials. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 114, 103–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Nedyalkova, L.; Lothenbach, B.; Renaudin, G.; Mäder, U.; Tits, J. Effect of redox conditions on the structure and solubility of sulfur- and selenium-AFm phases. Cem. Concr. Res. 2019, 123, 105803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Deng, X.; Guo, H.; Tan, H.; Zhang, J.; Zheng, Z.; Li, M.; Chen, P.; He, X.; Yang, J.; Wang, J. Comparison on early hydration of Portland cement and sulphoaluminate cement in the presence of nano ettringite. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 360, 129516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Bullard, J.W.; Jennings, H.M.; Livingston, R.A.; Nonat, A.; Scherer, G.W.; Schweitzer, J.S.; Thomas, J.J. Mechanisms of cement hydration. Cem. Concr. Res. 2011, 41, 1208–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sanfelix, S.G.; Zea-Garcia, J.D.; Londono-Zuluaga, D.; Santacruz, I.; De la Torre, A.G.; Kjøniksen, A.-L. Hydration development and thermal performance of calcium sulphoaluminate cements containing microencapsulated phase change materials. Cem. Concr. Res. 2020, 132, 106039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Xu, Z.H.; Guo, Z.H.; Zhao, Y.S.; Li, S.J.; Luo, X.; Chen, G.F.; Liu, C.; Gao, J.M. Hydration of blended cement with high-volume slag and nano-silica. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 64, 105657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Liu, B.; Zhou, H.; Pan, G.H.; Li, D.X. Novel in-situ controllably grown CSH: Synthesis, characterization and the effect on cement hydration. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2023, 139, 105044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ávila, F.; Puertas, E.; Gallego, R. Mechanical characterization of lime-stabilized rammed earth: Lime content and strength development. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 350, 128871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Al-Mukhtar, M.; Lasledj, A.; Alcover, J.F. Behaviour and mineralogy changes in lime-treated expansive soil at 20 °C. Appl. Clay Sci. 2010, 50, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kogbara, R.B.; Al-Tabbaa, A. Mechanical and leaching behaviour of slag-cement and lime-activated slag stabilised/solidified contaminated soil. Sci. Total Environ. 2011, 409, 2325–2335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Deep, G. Influence of lime and chicken mesh on compaction behaviour and strength properties of soil. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 37, 2872–2875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Islam, S.; Hoque, N.M.; Hoque, M.A.; Mishra, P.N.; Mamun, M.M.; Dey, S. Strength development in fine-grained paddy field soil by lime addition. J. Build. Eng. 2019, 26, 100857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Bandipally, S.; Cherian, C.; Arnepalli, D.N. Characterization of lime-treated bentonite using thermogravimetric analysis for assessing its short-term strength behavior. Indian Geotech. J. 2018, 48, 393–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Das, G.; Razakamanantsoa, A.; Herrier, G.; Saussaye, L.; Lesueur, D.; Deneele, D. Evaluation of the long-term effect of lime treatment on a silty soil embankment after seven years of atmospheric exposure: Mechanical, physicochemical, and microstructural studies. Eng. Geol. 2020, 281, 105986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Rao, S.M.; Shivananda, P. Role of curing temperature in progress of lime-soil reactions. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 2005, 23, 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Xu, L.; Zha, F.S.; Liu, C.M.; Kang, B.; Liu, J.J.; Yu, C. Experimental investigation on carbonation behavior in lime-stabilized expansive soil. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2020, 2020, 7865469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Antiohos, S.; Tsimas, S. Investigating the role of reactive silica in the hydration mechanisms of high-calcium fly ash/cement systems. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2005, 27, 171–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Galiano, Y.L.; Pereira, C.F.; Vale, J. Stabilization/solidification of a municipal solid waste incineration residue using fly ash-based geopolymers. J. Hazard. Mater. 2011, 185, 373–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Xi, Y.H.; Wang, H.Q.; Guo, L.N.; Zhang, M. Utilization of cement and other additives for solidification/stabilization of soil contaminated simultaneously with Cd2+ and Pb2+ ions. Environ. Prot. Eng. 2018, 44, 61–73. [Google Scholar]
  52. Fernandez-Jimenez, A.; Palomo, A. Composition and microstructure of alkali activated fly ash binder: Effect of the activator. Cem. Concr. Res. 2005, 35, 1984–1992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Guo, X.; Shi, H.; Dick, W.A. Compressive strength and microstructural characteristics of class c fly ash geopolymer. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2010, 32, 142–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Guo, X.L.; Shi, H.S. Self-solidification/stabilization of heavy metal wastes of class C fly ash-based geopolymers. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2013, 25, 491–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zha, F.S.; Liu, J.J.; Xu, L.; Cui, K.R. Effect of cyclic drying and wetting on engineering properties of heavy metal contaminated soils solidified/stabilized with fly ash. J. Cent. South Univ. 2013, 20, 1947–1952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Liu, J.J.; Zha, F.S.; Xu, L.; Kang, B.; Tan, X.H.; Deng, Y.F.; Yang, C.B. Mechanism of stabilized/solidified heavy metal contaminated soils with cement-fly ash based on electrical resistivity measurements. Measurement 2019, 141, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kolias, S.; Kasselouri-Rigopoulou, V.; Karahalios, A. Stabilisation of clayey soils with high calcium fly ash and cement. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2005, 27, 301–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Dermatas, D.; Meng, X. Utilization of fly ash for stabilization/solidification of heavy metal contaminated soils. Eng. Geol. 2003, 70, 377–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Liu, J.J. The Stability of Solidified/Stabilized Heavy Metal Contaminated Soils under Erosive Environment. Ph.D. Thesis, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  60. Yoobanpot, N.; Jamsawang, P.; Horpibulsuk, S. Strength behavior and microstructural characteristics of soft clay stabilized with cement kiln dust and fly ash residue. Appl. Clay Sci. 2017, 141, 146–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Palomo, A.; Alonso, A.; Fernandez-Jimenez, A.; Sobrados, I.; Sanz, J. Alkaline activation of fly ash: NMR study of the reaction products. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2004, 87, 1141–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Fernandez-Jimenez, A.; Garcia-Lodeiro, I.; Palomo, A. Durability of alkali-activated fly ash cementitious materials. J. Mater. Sci. 2007, 42, 3055–3065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Moon, D.H.; Lee, J.R.; Grubb, D.G.; Park, J.H. An assessment of Portland cement, cement kiln dust and Class C fly ash for the immobilization of Zn in contaminated soils. Environ. Earth Sci. 2010, 61, 1745–1750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Halim, C.E.; Amal, R.; Beydoun, D.; Scott, J.A.; Low, G. Implications of the structure of cementitious wastes containing Pb (II), Cd (II), As (V), and Cr (VI) on the leaching of metals. Cem. Concr. Res. 2004, 34, 1093–1102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Palomo, A.; Palacios, M. Alkali-activated cementitious materials: Alternative matrices for the immobilisation of hazardous wastes: Part II. Stabilisation of chromium and lead. Cem. Concr. Res. 2003, 33, 289–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Moon, D.H.; Dermatas, D. An evaluation of lead leachability from stabilized/solidified soils under modified semi-dynamic leaching conditions. Eng. Geol. 2006, 85, 67–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Struis, R.P.; Pasquali, M.; Borgese, L.; Gianoncelli, A.; Gelfi, M.; Colombi, P.; Bontempi, E. Inertisation of heavy metals in municipal solid waste incineration fly ash by means of colloidal silica—A synchrotron X-ray diffraction and absorption study. RSC Adv. 2013, 3, 14339–14351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Grubb, D.G.; Moon, D.H.; Reilly, T.; Chrysochoou, M.; Dermatas, D. Stabilization/solidification (S/S) of Pb and W contaminated soils using type I/II Portland cement, silica fume cement and cement kiln dust. Glob. Nest. J. 2009, 11, 267–282. [Google Scholar]
  69. Jing, C.; Meng, X.; Korfiatis, G.P. Lead leachability in stabilized/solidified soil samples evaluated with different leaching tests. J. Hazard. Mater. 2004, 114, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Król, A.; Mizerna, K.; Bozym, M. An assessment of pH-dependent release and mobility of heavy metals from metallurgical slag. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 384, 121502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Muthu, M.; Santhanam, M.; Kumar, M. Pb removal in pervious concrete filter: Effects of accelerated carbonation and hydraulic retention time. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 174, 224–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Lee, D. Formation of leadhillite and calcium lead silicate hydrate (C-Pb-S-H) in the solidification/stabilization of lead contaminants. Chemosphere 2007, 66, 1727–1733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Contessi, S.; Calgaro, L.; Dalconi, M.C.; Bonetto, A.; Bellotto, M.P.; Ferrari, G.; Marcomini, A.; Artioli, G. Stabilization of lead contaminated soil with traditional and alternative binders. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 382, 120990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Jennings, H.M. A model for the microstructure of calcium silicate hydrate in cement paste. Cem. Concr. Res. 2000, 30, 101–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Vespa, M.; Dähn, R.; Wieland, E. Competition behaviour of metal uptake in cementitious systems: An XRD and EXAFS investigation of Nd-and Zn-loaded 11 Å tobermorite. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts A/B/C 2014, 70, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Guo, B.; Pan, D.A.; Liu, B.; Volinsky, A.A.; Fincan, M.; Du, J.; Zhang, S. Immobilization mechanism of Pb in fly ash-based geopolymer. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 134, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Chen, Q.Y.; Hills, C.D.; Tyrer, M.; Slipper, I.; Shen, H.G.; Brough, A. Characterisation of products of tricalcium silicate hydration in the presence of heavy metals. J. Hazard. Mater. 2007, 147, 817–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Xia, M.; Muhammad, F.; Zeng, L.; Li, S.; Huang, X.; Jiao, B.; Shiau, Y.; Li, D. Solidification/stabilization of lead-zinc smelting slag in composite based geopolymer. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 209, 1206–1215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Boca Santa, R.A.A.; Soares, C.; Riella, H.G. Geopolymers with a high percentage of bottom ash for solidification/immobilization of different toxic metals. J. Hazard. Mater. 2016, 318, 145–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Liu, J.J.; Zha, F.S.; Xu, L.; Kang, B.; Yang, C.B.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, J.W.; Liu, Z.H. Zinc leachability in contaminated soil stabilized/solidified by cement-soda residue under freeze-thaw cycles. Appl. Clay Sci. 2020, 186, 105474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Malviya, R.; Chaudhary, R. Leaching behavior and immobilization of heavy metals in solidified/stabilized products. J. Hazard. Mater. 2006, 137, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Li, X.D.; Poon, C.S.; Sun, H.; Lo, I.M.C.; Kirk, D.W. Heavy metal speciation and leaching behaviors in cement based solidified/stabilized waste materials. J. Hazard. Mater. 2001, 82, 215–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Poon, C.S.; Clark, A.I.; Peters, C.J.; Perry, R. Mechanisms of metal fixation and leaching by cement based fixation processes. Waste Manag. Res. 1985, 3, 127–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Poon, C.S.; Peters, C.J.; Perry, R.; Barnes, P.; Barker, A.P. Mechanisms of metal stabilization by cement based fixation processes. Sci. Total Environ. 1985, 41, 55–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Tashiro, C.; Tatibana, S. Bond strength between C3S paste and iron, copper or zinc wire and microstructure of interface. Cem. Concr. Res. 1983, 13, 377–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Lo, I.M.-C.; Tang, C.-I.; Li, X.-D.; Poon, C.-S. Leaching and microstructural analysis of cement-based solidified wastes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2000, 34, 5038–5042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Mollah, M.Y.A.; Pargat, J.R.; Cocke, D.L. An infrared spectroscopic examination of cement-based solidification/stabilization systems-Portland types V and IP with zinc. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 1992, 27, 1503–1519. [Google Scholar]
  88. Yousuf, M.; Mollah, A.; Vempati, R.K.; Lin, T.C.; Cocke, D.L. The interfacial chemistry of solidification/stabilization of metals in cement and pozzolanic material systems. Waste Manag. 1995, 15, 137–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Lasheras-Zubiate, M.; Navarro-Blasco, I.; Fernández, J.M.; Alvarez, J.I. Encapsulation, solid-phases identification and leaching of toxic metals in cement systems modified by natural biodegradable polymers. J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 233, 7–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Ziegler, F.; Gieré, R.; Johnson, C.A. Sorption mechanisms of zinc to calcium silicate hydrate: Sorption and microscopic investigations. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2001, 35, 4556–4561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Liu, J.J.; Zha, F.S.; Xu, L.; Kang, B.; Yang, C.B.; Feng, Q.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, J.W. Strength and microstructure characteristics of cement-soda residue solidified/stabilized zinc contaminated soil subjected to freezing–thawing cycles. Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 2020, 172, 102992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Rose, J.; Moulin, I.; Masion, A.; Bertsch, P.M.; Wiesner, M.R.; Bottero, J.Y.; Haehnel, C. X-ray absorption spectroscopy study of immobilization processes for heavy metals in calcium silicate hydrates. 2. Zinc. Langmuir 2001, 17, 3658–3665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Ziegler, F.; Scheidegger, A.M.; Johnson, C.A.; Dähn, R.; Wieland, E. Sorption mechanisms of zinc to calcium silicate hydrate: X-ray absorption fine structure (XAFS) investigation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2001, 35, 1550–1555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Komarneni, S.; Breval, E.; Roy, D.M.; Roy, R. Reactions of some calcium silicates with metal cations. Cem. Concr. Res. 1988, 18, 204–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Kumarathasan, P.; McCarthy, G.J.; Hassett, D.J.; Pflughoeft-Hassett, D.F. Oxyanion substituted ettringites: Synthesis and characterization; and their potential role in immobilization of As, B, Cr, Se and V. MRS Online Proc. Libr. 1989, 178, 83–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Nikolić, V.; Komljenović, M.; Džunuzović, N.; Ivanović, T.; Miladinović, Z. Immobilization of hexavalent chromium by fly ash-based geopolymers. Compos. Part B Eng. 2017, 112, 213–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Muhammad, F.; Xia, M.; Li, S.; Yu, X.; Mao, Y.; Muhammad, F.; Huang, X.; Jiao, B.; Yu, L.; Li, D. The reduction of chromite ore processing residues by green tea synthesized nano zerovalent iron and its solidification/stabilization in composite geopolymer. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 234, 381–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Kindness, A.; Macias, A.; Glasser, F.P. Immobilization of chromium in cement matrices. Waste Manag. 1994, 14, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Leisinger, S.M.; Lothenbach, B.; Le Saout, G.; Johnson, C.A. Thermodynamic modeling of solid solutions between monosulfate and monochromate 3CaO • Al2O3 • Ca[(CrO4)x(SO4)1-x] • nH2O. Cem. Concr. Res. 2012, 42, 158–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Zhang, S.Y.; Zhao, Y.L.; Guo, Z.B.; Ding, H.X. Stabilization/solidification of hexavalent chromium containing tailings using low-carbon binders for cemented paste backfill. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 104738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Sophia, C.A.; Sandhya, S.; Swaminathan, K. Solidification and stabilization of chromium laden wastes in cementitious binders. Curr. Sci. 2010, 99, 365–369. [Google Scholar]
  102. Jing, C.; Liu, S.; Korfiatis, G.P.; Meng, X. Leaching behavior of Cr (III) in stabilized/solidified soil. Chemosphere 2006, 64, 379–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Komonweeraket, K.; Cetin, B.; Aydilek, A.H.; Benson, C.H.; Edil, T.B. Effects of pH on the leaching mechanisms of elements from fly ash mixed soils. Fuel 2015, 140, 788–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Cocke, D.L. The binding chemistry and leaching mechanisms of hazardous substances in cementitious solidification/stabilization systems. J. Hazard. Mater. 1990, 24, 231–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Ecke, H.; Menad, N.; Lagerkvist, A. Treatment-oriented characterization of dry scrubber residue from municipal solid waste incineration. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2002, 4, 117–126. [Google Scholar]
  106. Richardson, I.G.; Groves, G.W. The incorporation of minor and trace elements into calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H) gel in hardened cement pastes. Cem. Concr. Res. 1993, 23, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Wang, Y.; Han, F.; Mu, J. Solidification/stabilization mechanism of Pb(II), Cd(II), Mn(II) and Cr(III) in fly ash based geopolymers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 160, 818–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Heimann, R.B.; Conrad, D.; Florence, L.Z.; Neuwirth, M.; Ivey, D.G.; Mikula, R.J.; Lam, W.W. Leaching of simulated heavy metal waste stabilized/solidified in different cement matrices. J. Hazard. Mater. 1992, 31, 39–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Omotoso, O.E.; Ivey, D.G.; Mikula, R. Containment mechanism of trivalent chromium in tricalcium silicate. J. Hazard. Mater. 1998, 60, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Cocke, D.L.; McWhinney, H.G.; Dufner, D.C.; Horrell, B.; Ortego, J.D. An XPS and EDS investigation of Portland cement doped with Pb2+ and Cr3+ cations. Hazard. Waste Hazard. Mater. 1989, 6, 251–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Huang, X.; Zhuang, R.; Muhammad, F.; Yu, L.; Shiau, Y.; Li, D. Solidification/ stabilization of chromite ore processing residue using alkali-activated composite cementitious materials. Chemosphere 2017, 168, 300–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Huang, X.; Huang, T.; Li, S.; Muhammad, F.; Xu, G.; Zhao, Z.; Yu, L.; Yan, Y.; Li, D.; Jiao, B. Immobilization of chromite ore processing residue with alkaliactivated blast furnace slag-based geopolymer. Ceram. Int. 2016, 42, 9538–9549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Muhammad, F.; Huang, X.; Li, S.; Xia, M.; Zhang, M.; Liu, Q.; Shehzad Hassan, M.A.; Jiao, B.; Yu, L.; Li, D. Strength evaluation by using polycarboxylate superplasticizer and solidification efficiency of Cr6+, Pb2+ and Cd2+ in composite based geopolymer. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 188, 807–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Zhang, M.; Yang, C.; Zhao, M.; Yang, K.; Shen, R.; Zheng, Y. Immobilization potential of Cr (VI) in sodium hydroxide activated slag pastes. J. Hazard. Mater. 2017, 321, 281–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Zhang, Z.; Song, Z.W.; Jia, H.B.; Yang, L.K.; Qin, Q.Q. Remediation of chromium(VI) in contaminated soil by schwertmannite: Leachability, long-term stability, and stabilization mechanism. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 109435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Li, J.S.; Beiyuan, J.; Tsang, D.C.W.; Wang, L.; Poon, C.S.; Li, X.D.; Fendorf, S. Arsenic-containing soil from geogenic source in Hong Kong: Leaching characteristics and stabilization/solidification. Chemosphere 2017, 182, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Beiyuan, J.; Tsang, D.C.W.; Valix, M.; Zhang, W.; Yang, X.; Ok, Y.S.; Li, X.D. Selective dissolution followed by EDDS washing of an E-waste contaminated soil: Extraction efficiency, fate of residual metals, and impact on soil environment. Chemosphere 2017, 166, 489–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Kundu, S.; Gupta, A.K. Immobilization and leaching characteristics of arsenic from cement and/or lime solidified/stabilized spent adsorbent containing arsenic. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008, 153, 434–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Moon, D.H.; Wazne, M.; Yoon, I.H.; Grubb, D.G. Assessment of cement kiln dust (CKD) for stabilization/solidification (S/S) of arsenic contaminated soils. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008, 159, 512–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Yoon, I.H.; Moon, D.H.; Kim, K.W.; Lee, K.Y.; Lee, J.H.; Kim, M.G. Mechanism for the stabilization/solidification of arsenic-contaminated soils with Portland cement and cement kiln dust. J. Environ. Manag. 2010, 91, 2322–2328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Moon, D.H.; Dermatas, D.; Menounou, N. Arsenic immobilization by calcium–arsenic precipitates in lime treated soils. Sci. Total Environ. 2004, 330, 171–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Mollah, M.Y.A.; Lu, F.; Cocke, D.L. An X-ray diffraction (XRD) and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopic (FT-IR) characterization of the speciation of arsenic (V) in Portland cement type-V. Sci. Total Environ. 1998, 224, 57–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Mollah, M.Y.A.; Kesmez, M.; Cocke, D.L. An X-ray diffraction (XRD) and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopic (FT-IR) investigation of the long-term effect on the solidification/stabilization (S/S) of arsenic (V) in Portland cement type-V. Sci. Total Environ. 2004, 325, 255–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Sun, Y.; Zhao, Y.L.; Wan, X.J.; Qiu, J.P.; Wu, P.Q.; Sun, X.J. Stabilization/solidification of lead- and cadmium-containing tailings for cemented paste backfill by using clinker-free binders. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 359, 129469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Halim, C.E.; Short, S.A.; Scott, J.A.; Amal, R.; Low, G. Modelling the leaching of Pb, Cd, As, and Cr from cementitious waste using PHREEQC. J. Hazard. Mater. 2005, 125, 45–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Hale, B.; Evans, L.; Lambert, R. Effects of cement or lime on Cd, Co, Cu, Ni, Pb, Sb and Zn mobility in field-contaminated and aged soils. J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 199, 119–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Pandey, B.; Kinrade, S.D.; Catalan, L.J.J. Effects of carbonation on the leachability and compressive strength of cement-solidified and geopolymer-solidified synthetic metal wastes. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 101, 59–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Conner, J.R.; Reinhold, V.N. Chemical fixation and solidification of hazardous wastes. J. Hazard. Mater. 1992, 30, 809–818. [Google Scholar]
  129. Park, C.K. Hydration and solidification of hazardous wastes containing heavy metals using modified cementitious materials. Cem. Concr. Res. 2000, 30, 429–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Mollah, M.Y.A.; Tsai, Y.N.; Cocke, D.L. An FTIR investigation of cement based solidification/stabilization systems doped with cadmium. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 1992, 27, 1213–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Klich, I.; Wilding, L.; Drees, L. Trace metal and mineral speciation of remediated wastes using electron microscopy. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2002, 372, 436–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Karamalidis, A.K.; Voudrias, E.A. Release of Zn, Ni, Cu, SO42− and CrO42− as a function of pH from cement-based stabilized/solidified refinery oily sludge and ash from incineration of oily sludge. J. Hazard. Mater. 2007, 141, 591–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Vespa, M.; Dähn, R.; Grolimund, D.; Wieland, E.; Scheidegger, A.M. Spectroscopic investigation of Ni speciation in hardened cement paste. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 2275–2282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Scheidegger, A.; Wieland, E.; Scheinost, A.C.; Dähn, R.; Tits, J.; Spieler, P. Ni phases formed in cement and cement systems under highly alkaline conditions: An XAFS study. J. Synchrotron Radiat. 2001, 8, 916–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Scheidegger, A.M.; Wieland, E.; Scheinost, A.C.; Dähn, R.; Spieler, P. Spectroscopic evidence for the formation of layered Ni-Al double hydroxides in cement. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2000, 34, 4545–4548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Vespa, M.; Dähn, R.; Grolimund, D.; Wieland, E.; Scheidegger, A.M. Co speciation in hardened cement paste: A macro-and micro-spectroscopic investigation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 1902–1908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Catalano, J.G.; Warner, J.A.; Brown, G.E., Jr. Sorption and precipitation of Co (II) in Hanford sediments and alkaline aluminate solutions. Appl. Geochem. 2005, 20, 193–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Gu, Z.H.; Dong, H.L.; Yuan, T.; Wang, Y.M.; Li, W.J.; Cao, Z.X.; Huang, T. Solidification/stabilization of mercury contaminated soil by geopolymer/ MoS2 composites. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 109546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Zhang, X.Y.; Wang, Q.C.; Zhang, S.Q.; Sun, X.J.; Zhang, Z.X. Stabilization/solidification (S/S) of mercury-contaminated hazardous wastes using thiol-functionalized zeolite and Portland cement. J. Hazard. Mater. 2009, 168, 1575–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Donatello, S.; Fernández-Jiménez, A.; Palomo, A. An assessment of mercury immobilization in alkali activated fly ash (AAFA) cements. J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 213–214, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Ortego, J.; Jackson, S.; Yu, G.-S.; McWhinney, H.; Cocke, D. Solidification of hazardous substances—A TGA and FTIR study of Portland cement containing metal nitrates. J. Hazard. Mater. 1989, 22, 251–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Tay, J.H. Sludge ash as filler for Portland cement concrete. J. Environ. Eng. 1987, 113, 345–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Li, J.; Poon, C.S. Innovative solidification/stabilization of lead contaminated soil using incineration sewage sludge ash. Chemosphere 2017, 173, 143–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Niu, M.; Li, G.; Wang, Y.; Li, Q.; Han, L.; Song, Z. Comparative study of immobilization and mechanical properties of sulfoaluminate cement and ordinary portland cement with different heavy metals. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 193, 332–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Šiler, P.; Kolářová, I.; Novotný, R.; Másilko, J.; Pořízka, J.; Bednárek, J.; Švec, J.; Opravil, T. Application of isothermal and isoperibolic calorimetry to assess the effect of zinc on cement hydration. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2018, 133, 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Weeks, C.; Hand, R.J.; Sharp, J.H. Retardation of cement hydration caused by heavy metals present in ISF slag used as aggregate. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2008, 30, 970–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Trussell, S.; Spence, R.D. A review of solidification/stabilization interferences. Waste Manag. 1994, 14, 507–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Cioffi, R.; Lavorgna, M.; Santoro, L. Environmental and technological effectiveness of a process for the stabilization of a galvanic sludge. J. Hazard. Mater. 2002, 89, 165–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Mohammed, M.R.; Ahmed, D.A. Influence of some heavy metal nitrates on the hydration of C3A. Adv. Cem. Res. 2011, 23, 215–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Akhter, H.; Butler, L.G.; Branz, S.; Cartledge, F.K.; Tittlebaum, M.E. Immobilization of As, Cd, Cr and Pb-containing soils by using cement or pozzolanic fixing agents. J. Hazard. Mater. 1990, 24, 145–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Hills, C.D.; Lange, L.C.; Mole, C.F.; Schrapel, K.; Poole, A.B. The effect of alite content on Portland cement solidified waste forms. Environ. Technol. 1996, 17, 575–585. [Google Scholar]
  152. Arliguie, G.; Grandet, J. Influence de la composition d’un ciment portland sur son hydration en presence de zinc. Cem. Concr. Res. 1990, 20, 517–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Tashiro, C.; Oba, J. The effects of Cr2O3, Cu(OH)2, ZnO and PbO on the compressive strength and the hydrates of the hardened C3A paste. Cem. Concr. Res. 1979, 9, 253–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Arliguie, G.; Ollivier, J.P.; Grandet, J. Etude de l’effet retardateur du zinc sur l’hydratation de la pate de ciment Portland. Cem. Concr. Res. 1982, 12, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Taylor, H.F.W. Proposed structure for calcium silicate hydrate gel. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 1986, 69, 464–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Olmo, I.F.; Chacon, E.; Irabien, A. Influence of lead, zinc, iron (III) and chromium (III) oxides on the setting time and strength development of Portland cement. Cem. Concr. Res. 2001, 31, 1213–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Hamilton, I.W.; Sammes, N.M. Encapsulation of steel foundry bag house dusts in cement mortar. Cem. Concr. Res. 1999, 29, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Gervais, C.; Ouki, S.K. Performance study of cementitious systems containing zeolite and silica fume: Effects of four metal nitrates on the setting time, strength and leaching characteristics. J. Hazard. Mater. 2002, 93, 187–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Li, J.S.; Xue, Q.; Wang, P.; Li, Z.Z.; Liu, L. Effect of drying-wetting cycles on leaching behavior of cement solidified lead-contaminated soil. Chemosphere 2014, 117, 10–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Rha, C.Y.; Kang, S.K.; Kim, C.E. Investigation of the stability of hardened slag paste for the stabilization/solidification of wastes containing heavy metal ions. J. Hazard. Mater. 2000, 73, 255–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Ivey, D.G.; Heimann, R.B.; Neuwirth, M.; Shumborski, S.; Conrad, D.; Mikula, R.J.; Lam, W.W. Electron microscopy of heavy metal waste in cement matrices. J. Mater. Sci. 1990, 25, 5055–5062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Rossetti, V.A.; Medici, F. Inertization of toxic metals in cement matrices: Effects on hydration, setting and hardening. Cem. Concr. Res. 1995, 25, 1147–1152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Bobrowski, A.; Gawlicki, M.; Malolepszy, J. Analytical evaluation of immobilization of heavy metals in cement matrices. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1997, 31, 745–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Díez, J.M.; Madrid, J.; Macías, A. Characterization of cement-stabilized Cd wastes. Cem. Concr. Res. 1997, 27, 479–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Wang, F.Z.; Shang, D.C.; Wang, M.G.; Hu, S.G.; Li, Y.Q. Incorporation and substitution mechanism of cadmium in cement clinker. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 2292–2299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Crannell, B.S.; Eighmy, T.T.; Krzanowski, J.E.; Eusden, J.D., Jr.; Shaw, E.L.; Francis, C.A. Heavy metal stabilization in municipal solid waste combustion bottom ash using soluble phosphate. Waste Manag. 2000, 20, 135–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Poon, C.S.; Clark, A.I.; Perry, R.; Barker, A.P.; Barnes, P. Permeability study on the cement based solidification process for the disposal of hazardous wastes. Cem. Concr. Res. 1986, 16, 161–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Tumidajski, P.J.; Thomson, M.L. Influence of cadmium on the hydration of C3A. Cem. Concr. Res. 1994, 24, 1359–1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Reddy, C.N.V.S.; Prasad, A.C.S.V. New ternary blend limestone calcined clay cement for solidification/stabilization of zinc contaminated soil. Chemosphere 2019, 235, 308–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Ababneh, F.A.; Alakhras, A.I.; Heikal, M.; Ibrahim, S.M. Stabilization of lead bearing sludge by utilization in fly ash-slag based geopolymer. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 227, 116694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Kogbara, R.B.; Al-Tabbaa, A.; Yi, Y.L.; Stegemann, J.A. Cement-fly ash stabilisation/solidification of contaminated soil: Performance properties and initiation of operating envelopes. Appl. Geochem. 2013, 33, 64–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Voglar, G.E.; Leštan, D. Solidification/stabilisation of metals contaminated industrial soil from former Zn smelter in Celje, Slovenia, using cement as a hydraulic binder. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 178, 926–933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Tashiro, C.; Oba, J.; Akama, K. The effects of several heavy metal oxides on the formation of ettringite and the microstructure of hardened ettringite. Cem. Concr. Res. 1979, 9, 303–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Navarro-Blasco, I.; Duran, A.; Sirera, R.; Fernández, J.M.; Alvarez, J.I. Solidification/stabilization of toxic metals in calcium aluminate cement matrices. J. Hazard. Mater. 2013, 260, 89–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Li, W.T.; Yi, Y.L. Stabilization/Solidification of lead- and zinc-contaminated soils using reactive magnesia and carbon dioxide. J. CO2 Util. 2019, 33, 215–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Chen, L. Research of Mechanism and Properties of Cement Stabilized/Solidified Heavy Metal Contaminated Soils. Ph.D. Thesis, Southeast University, Nanjing, China, 2010. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  177. Wei, M.L.; Du, Y.J.; Zhang, F. Fundamental properties of strength and deformation of cement solidified/stabilized zinc contaminated soils. Rock Soil Mech. 2011, 32, 306–312. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  178. Du, Y.J.; Wei, M.L.; Jin, F.; Liu, Z.B. Stress–strain relation and strength characteristics of cement treated zinc-contaminated clay. Eng. Geol. 2013, 167, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Cho, J.W.; Ioku, K.; Goto, S. Effect of Pb(II) and Cr(VI) ions on the hydration of slag alkaline cement and the immobilization of these heavy metal ions. Adv. Cem. Res. 1999, 11, 111–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Alford, N.M.; Rahman, A.A.; Salih, N. The effect of lead nitrate on the physical properties of cement pastes. Cem. Concr. Res. 1981, 11, 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Ortego, J.D. Spectroscopic and leaching studies of solidified toxic metals. J. Hazard. Mater. 1990, 24, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Primary solidified mechanisms of different binders during the S/S process.
Figure 1. Primary solidified mechanisms of different binders during the S/S process.
Materials 16 03444 g001
Figure 2. SEM images of the microstructure of the S/S-treated soils based on the conventional binders [23,57].
Figure 2. SEM images of the microstructure of the S/S-treated soils based on the conventional binders [23,57].
Materials 16 03444 g002
Figure 3. Predominant immobilization mechanisms of heavy metal ions in the S/S matrix.
Figure 3. Predominant immobilization mechanisms of heavy metal ions in the S/S matrix.
Materials 16 03444 g003
Figure 4. Impacts of heavy metals on the strength of cement pastes.
Figure 4. Impacts of heavy metals on the strength of cement pastes.
Materials 16 03444 g004
Figure 5. Effects of heavy metal ions on the strength development of cement soils [25,175].
Figure 5. Effects of heavy metal ions on the strength development of cement soils [25,175].
Materials 16 03444 g005
Table 1. Hydration formulations of cement pastes.
Table 1. Hydration formulations of cement pastes.
CompositionsHydrated Reactions
C3SC3S + H2O = C-S-H + Ca(OH)2
C2SC2S + H2O = C-S-H + Ca(OH)2
C3AC3A + H2O = C-A-H
C3A + Ca(OH)2 + H2O = C-A-H
C3A + 3CaSO4 + 32H2O = 3CaO·Al2O3·3CaSO4·32H2O
C3A + CaSO4 + 12H2O = 3CaO·Al2O3·CaSO4·12H2O
C4AFC4AF + H2O = C-A-F-H
Table 2. Immobilization mechanisms of different As species with consideration of the molar mass ratio of Ca to As.
Table 2. Immobilization mechanisms of different As species with consideration of the molar mass ratio of Ca to As.
SpeciesMolar Mass Ratio of Ca:AsMechanisms
As2O3/Ca-As-O
NaAsO2/Ca-As-O
Na2HAsO4·7H2OCa:As > 1.5:1NaCaAsO4·7.5H2O
Ca:As = 1:1; Ca:As = 1.7:1–1.9:1Ca5(AsO4)3OH
Ca:As > 1:1; Ca:As = 2:1–2.5:1Ca4(OH)2(AsO4)2·4H2O
Table 3. Immobilization mechanisms for different heavy metal ions in the S/S system.
Table 3. Immobilization mechanisms for different heavy metal ions in the S/S system.
Heavy Metal IonsImmobilization Mechanisms
PrimarySecondaryControversial
Pb(II)Precipitation of lead silicatesIncorporation into a CSH/CAH structureCa2+ in CAHs is replaced by Pb2+
Zn(II)Precipitation of zinc hydroxidesIncorporation into a CSH structureCa2+ and Na+ on the surface of CSHs, as well as Ca2+ in AFt, are replaced by Zn2+
Cr(III)Cr3+ substitutes for Al3+ in CAHsPrecipitation of Cr(OH)3Si4+ in CSHs is replaced by Cr3+, with monovalent cations compensating for the charge deficiency
Cr(VI)SO42− in AFt is substituted by Cr6+ in the form of CrO42−Physical encapsulationCrO42− reacts with Ca2+ and OH to form CaCr(OH)4·H2O and CaCrO4·2H2O
Cd(II)Precipitation of Cd(OH)2Precipitation of CaCd(OH)4/
As(III)Precipitation of Ca-As-OPrecipitation of Ca-H-As-O and Ca-As-H/
As(V)Incorporation into NaCaAsO4·7.5H2O and Ca5(AsO4)3OHSubstitution for aluminates in AFt with AsO43−/
Ni(II)Precipitation of β-Ni(OH)2Forms layered Ni-Al hydroxide compounds (Ni2Al(OH)6(CO3)1/2)Ca2+ in CSHs is replaced by Ni2+/Co2+
Co(II)Precipitation of Co(OH)2Forms insoluble CoOOH
Hg(II)Hg2+ is oxidized to form insoluble HgO in alkaline conditions and is encapsulated by hydrated productsForms amorphous HgS or Hg2S precipitatesPrecipitation of Hg(OH)2
Table 4. Technologies used to determine the immobilization mechanisms of different heavy metal ions.
Table 4. Technologies used to determine the immobilization mechanisms of different heavy metal ions.
Immobilization MechanismTechnology
PrecipitationX-ray diffraction, Thermogravimetric Analysis, Scanning Electron Microscope
IncorporationRaman spectroscopy, X-ray Absorption Fine Structure (XAFS) spectroscopy, X-ray Photoelectron spectrometer
SubstitutionX-ray Photoelectron spectrometer, Energy Disperse Spectroscopy
EncapsulationBy means of a comprehensive test
Table 5. Applications of the cementitious binders to treat heavy metal ions based on S/S technology.
Table 5. Applications of the cementitious binders to treat heavy metal ions based on S/S technology.
ReferencesSoil CharacteristicsSpecies and Concentration of HMs * (mg/kg)Binder ProportionsUCS of 28 Day (MPa)
[25]90% fine slag
10% kaolin
Pb 10005% CaO0.160
5% MgO0.126
Pb 16,0005% CaO0.160
5% MgO0.802
[169]High liquid clayZn 50006% novel cement1.087
Zn 10,0006% novel cement1.032
[114]Red clayPb 2000; Zn 200010% cement9.33
10% cement + 5% fly ash9.75
10% cement + 5% fly ash + 2% lime14.84
[19]Contaminated sedimentAs 2047; Pb 16778.45% MK + 2.13% lime + 0.51% PG27.36
6.11% MK + 4.62% lime + 0.37% PG31.69
4.31% MK + 6.53% lime + 0.26% PG32.96
6.30% MK + 1.59% lime + 2.84% calcite + 0.38% PG23.77
4.90% MK + 3.70% lime + 2.21% calcite + 0.29% PG29.89
3.67%MK + 5.56% lime + 1.65% calcite + 0.22% PG38.45
[170]SludgePbO 36,38060% GGBFS + 20% fly ash + 20% sludge bearing Pb7.54
[58]5% kaolin
95% slag
PbO 700010% lime0.154
Cr(III) 400025% fly ash3.830
Cr(VI) 400010% lime + 25% fly ash6.663
[21]KaolinZn 10008% cement0.117
12% cement0.333
15% cement0.387
18% cement0.491
[42,171]65% gravel
29% slag
2.8% silt
3.2% clay
Cd 3000; Cu 3000;
Pb 3000; Ni 3000;
Zn 3000; TPH 10,000
1% cement + 4% fly ash0.09
1% Ca(OH)2 + 4% GGBFS0.049
0.5% cement + 4.5% GGBFS0.106
2% cement + 8% fly ash0.099
2% Ca(OH)2 + 8% GGBFS0.412
1% cement + 9% GGBFS0.468
4% cement + 16% fly ash0.45
4% Ca(OH)2 + 16% GGBFS0.581
2% cement + 18% GGBFS0.803
[172]ClayCd 132; Pb 121; Cu 287; Ni 178; As 661; Zn 44,07415% cement0.63
Cd 37; Pb 37; Cu 157;
Ni 253; As 82; Zn 2074
4.18
* HMs—heavy metal ions; MK—metakaolin; PG—phosphogypsum; GGBFS—Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag.
Table 6. The cost and duration of each technology.
Table 6. The cost and duration of each technology.
TechnologyCost (EUR)Duration (Month/2 × 104 Tons)
Solidification/stabilization75–2006–12 or more
Electrokinetic technology65–1956–12
Soil washing140–4006–12
Ceramic solidification300–400<6
Phytoremediation50–150>12
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Liu, J.; Wu, D.; Tan, X.; Yu, P.; Xu, L. Review of the Interactions between Conventional Cementitious Materials and Heavy Metal Ions in Stabilization/Solidification Processing. Materials 2023, 16, 3444. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16093444

AMA Style

Liu J, Wu D, Tan X, Yu P, Xu L. Review of the Interactions between Conventional Cementitious Materials and Heavy Metal Ions in Stabilization/Solidification Processing. Materials. 2023; 16(9):3444. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16093444

Chicago/Turabian Style

Liu, Jingjing, Dongbiao Wu, Xiaohui Tan, Peng Yu, and Long Xu. 2023. "Review of the Interactions between Conventional Cementitious Materials and Heavy Metal Ions in Stabilization/Solidification Processing" Materials 16, no. 9: 3444. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16093444

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop