No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Comparative performance of iron-modified natural zeolites for chromium(VI) removal from aqueous solutions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 June 2026
Abstract
Natural zeolites modified with iron(II) ions or iron(III) phases represent two promising approaches for treating hexavalent chromium contamination in water due to their reduction and adsorption capacities, respectively. However, comprehensive comparative analysis of their efficiency remains limited. Fe(II)-modified zeolites can reduce Cr(VI) to the less toxic and insoluble Cr(III) form, while Fe(III)-modified zeolites primarily remove Cr(VI) through surface adsorption. This study evaluates the effectiveness of Fe(II)- and Fe(III)-modified zeolites using synthetic Cr solutions and real contaminated surface water. The materials were characterized via X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy and X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy to assess their chemical, structural and morphological changes before and after chromium sorption. Batch and column tests determined Cr(VI) removal capacity, while Cr isotopes were used to track reduction reactions. The Fe(II) enrichment via cation exchange was highly effective. The Fe(II)-modified zeolite demonstrated a greater capacity for Cr(VI) removal from contaminated solutions, primarily through a reduction mechanism that converted Cr(VI) to Cr(III), as was confirmed by isotopic analysis. Its performance improved under higher-salinity conditions. However, it required prolonged contact time with the contaminant to achieve optimal efficiency. The Fe(III)-modified zeolite exhibited a heterogeneous distribution of iron oxide/hydroxide phases on its surface. This material showed some favourable characteristics in batch and column tests, including a notably faster Cr removal rate due to direct Cr(VI) sorption. However, it could only perform well when no other competitive ions were present in the solution, severely impacting its application in complex, real matrices.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Mineralogical Society of the United Kingdom and Ireland.
Footnotes
Paper submitted for the special issue devoted to the ICC-2025
References
Aharchaou, I., Maul, A., Pons, M.N., Pauly, D., Poirot, H., Flayac, J. et al. (2022) Effects and bioaccumulation of Cr(III), Cr(VI) and their mixture in the freshwater mussel Corbicula fluminea. Chemosphere, 297, 134090.Google Scholar
Ajouyed, O., Hurel, C., Ammari, M., Allal, L.B. & Marmier, N. (2010) Sorption of Cr(VI) onto natural iron and aluminum (oxy)hydroxides: effects of pH, ionic strength and initial concentration. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 174, 616–622.Google Scholar
Bish, D.L. & Post, J.E. (1993) Quantitative mineralogical analysis using the Rietveld full-pattern fitting method. American Mineralogist, 78, 932–940.Google Scholar
Bols, M.L., Devos, J., Rhoda, H.M., Plessers, D., Solomon, E.I., Schoonheydt, R.A. et al. (2021) Selective formation of α-Fe(II) sites on Fe–zeolites through one-pot synthesis. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 143, 16243–16255.Google Scholar
Brigatti, M.F., Lugli, C., Cibin, G., Marcelli, A., Giuli, G., Paris, E. et al. (2000) Reduction and sorption of chromium by Fe(II)-bearing phyllosilicates: chemical treatments and X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) studies. Clays and Clay Minerals, 48, 272–281.Google Scholar
Chmielewská, E., Tylus, W., Drábik, M., Majzlan, J., Kravčak, J., Williams, C. et al. (2017) Structure investigation of nano-FeO(OH) modified clinoptilolite tuff for antimony removal. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 248, 222–233.Google Scholar
Coelho, A. (2018) TOPAS and TOPAS-Academic: an optimization program integrating computer algebra and crystallographic objects written in C++. Journal of Applied Crystallography, 51, 210–218.Google Scholar
Døssing, L.N., Dideriksen, K., Stipp, S.L.S. & Frei, R. (2011) Reduction of hexavalent chromium by ferrous iron: a process of chromium isotope fractionation and its relevance to natural environments. Chemical Geology, 285, 157–166.Google Scholar
Du, G., Li, Z., Liao, L., Hanson, R., Leick, S., Hoeppner, N. & Jiang, W.T. (2012) Cr(VI) retention and transport through Fe(III)-coated natural zeolite. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 221, 118–123.Google Scholar
Ellis, A., Johnson, T. & Bullen, T. (2002) Chromium isotopes and the fate of hexavalent chromium in the environment. Science (New York, N.Y.), 295, 2060–2062.Google Scholar
Franus, M., Wdowin, M. & Bandura, L. (2015) Removal of environmental pollutions using zeolites from fly ash: a review. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 24, 854–866.Google Scholar
Gates-Rector, S. & Blanton, T. (2019) The Powder Diffraction File: a quality materials characterization database. Powder Diffraction, 34, 1–9.Google Scholar
Ghezzi, L., Arrighi, S., Mugnaioli, E., Perchiazzi, N., Zamponi, E., Pollastri, S. et al. (2024) Environmental impacts and risk assessment in the re-use of Cr-bearing pyrolyzed tannery wastes: a case study in a residential area. Applied Geochemistry, 168, 106029.Google Scholar
Hao, Y., Ma, H., Wang, Q., Zhu, C. & He, A. (2022) Complexation behaviour and removal of organic–Cr(III) complexes from the environment: a review. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 240, 113676.Google Scholar
Hossini, H., Shafie, B., Niri, A.D., Nazari, M., Esfahlan, A.J., Ahmadpour, M. et al. (2022) A comprehensive review on human health effects of chromium: insights on induced toxicity. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 29, 70686–70705.Google Scholar
Irshad, M.A., Sattar, S., Nawaz, R., Al-Hussain, S.A., Rizwan, M., Bukhari, A. et al. (2023) Enhancing chromium removal and recovery from industrial wastewater using sustainable and efficient nanomaterial: a review. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 263, 115231.Google Scholar
Kiser, J. & Manning, B. (2009) Reduction and immobilization of chromium(VI) by iron(II)-treated faujasite. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 174, 167–174.Google Scholar
Kitchen, J.W., Johnson, T.M., Bullen, T.D., Zhu, J. & Raddatz, A. (2012) Chromium isotope fractionation factors for reduction of Cr(VI) by aqueous Fe(II) and organic molecules. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 89, 190–201.Google Scholar
Kotaś, J. & Stasicka, Z. (2000) Chromium occurrence in the environment and methods of its speciation. Environmental Pollution, 107, 263–283.Google Scholar
Kwak, S., Yoo, J.C., Moon, D.H. & Baek, K. (2018) Role of clay minerals on reduction of Cr(VI). Geoderma, 312, 1–5.Google Scholar
Li, Y., Huang, Y., Li, Z., Tang, X., Liu, X. & Hughes, S.S. (2022) Mechanisms of chromium isotope fractionation and the applications in the environment. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 242, 113948.Google Scholar
Liu, Y., Li, H., Tan, G.Q. & Zhu, X. (2010) Fe2+-modified vermiculite for the removal of chromium(VI) from aqueous solution. Separation Science and Technology, 46, 290–299.Google Scholar
Lofù, A., Mastrorilli, P., Dell’Anna, M.M., Mali, M., Sisto, R. & Vignola, R. (2016) Iron(II) modidied natural zeolite for hexavalent chromium removal from contaminated water. Archives of Environmental Protection, 42, 35–40.Google Scholar
Lv, G., Li, Z., Jiang, W.T., Ackley, C., Fenske, N. & Demarco, N. (2014) Removal of Cr(VI) from water using Fe(II)-modified natural zeolite. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 92, 384–390.Google Scholar
Magar, V., Martello, L., Southworth, B., Fuchsman, P., Sorensen, M. & Wenning, R. (2008) Geochemical stability of chromium in sediments from the lower Hackensack River, New Jersey. Science of the Total Environment, 394, 103–111.Google Scholar
Mandiwana, K.L., Panichev, N., Kataeva, M. & Siebert, S. (2007) The solubility of Cr(III) and Cr(VI) compounds in soil and their availability to plants. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 147, 540–545.Google Scholar
Martello, L., Fuchsman, P., Sorensen, M., Magar, V. & Wenning, R. (2007) Chromium geochemistry and bioaccumulation in sediments from the lower Hackensack River, New Jersey. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 53, 337–350.Google Scholar
Mortada, W.I., El-Naggar, A., Mosa, A., Palansooriya, K.N., Yousaf, B., Tang, R. et al. (2023) Biogeochemical behaviour and toxicology of chromium in the soil–water–human nexus: a review. Chemosphere, 331, 138804.Google Scholar
Munthali, M., Elsheikh, M., Johan, E. & Matsue, N. (2014) Proton adsorption selectivity of zeolites in aqueous media: effect of Si/Al ratio of zeolites. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 19, 20468–20481.Google Scholar
Pontér, S., Pallavicini, N., Engström, E., Baxter, D. & Rodushkin, I. (2016) Chromium isotope ratio measurements in environmental matrices by MC-ICP-MS. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry, 31, 145A.Google Scholar
Rai, D., Eary, L.E. & Zachara, J.M. (1989) Environmental chemistry of chromium. Science of the Total Environment, 86, 15–23.Google Scholar
Richard, F.C. & Bourg, A.C.M. (1991) Aqueous geochemistry of chromium: a review. Water Research, 25, 807–816.Google Scholar
Rosa, M.I.G., Boga, G.A., Cruz, S., Furquim, S. & Shinzato, M.C. (2022) Mechanisms of chromium(VI) removal from solution by zeolite and vermiculite modified with iron(II). Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 33, 49724–49738.Google Scholar
Salem, F.Y., Parkerton, T.F., Lewis, R.V., Huang, J.H. & Dickson, K.L. (1989) Kinetics of chromium transformations in the environment. Science of the Total Environment, 86, 25–41.Google Scholar
Suhartana, Sukmasari E. & Azmiyawati, C. (2018) Modification of natural zeolite with Fe(III) and its application as adsorbent chloride and carbonate ions. Materials Science and Engineering, 349, 012075.Google Scholar
Sultana, Q., Naeem, A., Mahmood, T., Ud Din, I., Saeed, T., Khan, N. & Ahmad, T. (2021) Sorption studies of chromate by iron oxide from drinking water. Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie, 235, 407–425.Google Scholar
Sumari, Fajaroh F., Santoso, A. & Wardani, R.K. (2018) Performance of activated natural zeolite/Cu as a catalyst on degradation of glycerol into ethanol assisted by ultrasonic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1093, 012036.Google Scholar
Tashauoei, H.R., Attar, H., Kamali, M., Amin, M. & Nikaeen, M. (2010) Removal of hexavalent chromium(VI) from aqueous solutions using surface-modified nanozeolite A. International Journal of Environmental Research, 4, 491–500.Google Scholar
Tumolo, M., Ancona, V., De Paola, D., Losacco, D., Campanale, C., Massarelli, C. & Uricchio, V.F. (2020) Chromium pollution in European water, sources, health risk, and remediation strategies: an overview. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17, 5438.Google Scholar
Tzou, Y., Wang, M. & Loeppert, R. (2003) Sorption of phosphate and Cr(VI) by Fe(III) and Cr(III) hydroxides. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 44, 445–453.Google Scholar
Unceta, N., Séby, F., Malherbe, J. & Donard, O. (2010) Chromium speciation in solid matrices and regulation: a review. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 397, 1097–1111.Google Scholar
Vaiopoulou, E. & Gikas, P. (2020) Regulations for chromium emissions to the aquatic environment in Europe and elsewhere. Chemosphere, 254, 126876.Google Scholar
Villalobos, M., Trotz, M. & Leckie, J. (2001) Surface complexation modeling of carbonate effects on the adsorption of Cr(VI), Pb(II) and U(VI) on goethite. Environmental Science and Technology, 35, 3849–3856.Google Scholar
Yu, X.Z. & Zhang, X.H. (2014) Kinetics for adsorptive removal of chromium(VI) from aqueous solutions by ferri hydroxide/oxohydroxides. Ecotoxicology, 23, 734–741.Google Scholar