2014•HolzforschungRequires access

Chemical remediation of wood treated with micronised, nano or soluble copper preservatives

Saip Nami Kartal, Evren Terzi, Bessie M. Woodward, Carol A. Clausen, Stan Lebow

Open publisher page 14 citations

Abstract

Abstract The potential for extraction of copper from wood treated with micronised, nano or soluble forms of copper has been evaluated in view of chemical remediation. In focus were EDTA, oxalic acid, bioxalate, and d-gluconic acid for extraction of Cu from treated wood. Bioxalate extractions for 24 h resulted in Cu removal over 95% for all tested materials, and the effectiveness of oxalic acid extraction was very similar to that of nano-CuO-treated wood. Bioxalate was more effective than oxalic acid in removing Cu from ACQ-D, MCQ, MCA, CA-C and Cu-ethanolamine treated wood. d-gluconic acid extractions resulted in the lowest Cu removal for nano-CuO even though d-gluconic acid was effective for all other materials. As the pH of d-gluconic acid decreased, Cu removal was improved except for nano-CuO. There is no distinctive difference in Cu removal from wood treated with ACQ-D, MCQ, CA-C, MCA and Cu-ethanolamine.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract The potential for extraction of copper from wood treated with micronised, nano or soluble forms of copper has been evaluated in view of chemical remediation. In focus were EDTA, oxalic acid, bioxalate, and d-gluconic acid for extraction of Cu from treated wood. Bioxalate extractions for 24 h resulted in Cu removal over 95% for all tested materials, and the effectiveness of oxalic acid extraction was very similar to that of nano-CuO-treated wood. Bioxalate was more effective than oxalic acid in removing Cu from ACQ-D, MCQ, MCA, CA-C and Cu-ethanolamine treated wood. d-gluconic acid extractions resulted in the lowest Cu removal for nano-CuO even though d-gluconic acid was effective for all other materials. As the pH of d-gluconic acid decreased, Cu removal was improved except for nano-CuO. There is no distinctive difference in Cu removal from wood treated with ACQ-D, MCQ, CA-C, MCA and Cu-ethanolamine.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract The potential for extraction of copper from wood treated with micronised, nano or soluble forms of copper has been evaluated in view of chemical remediation. In focus were EDTA, oxalic acid, bioxalate, and d-gluconic acid for extraction of Cu from treated wood. Bioxalate extractions for 24 h resulted in Cu removal over 95% for all tested materials, and the effectiveness of oxalic acid extraction was very similar to that of nano-CuO-treated wood. Bioxalate was more effective than oxalic acid in removing Cu from ACQ-D, MCQ, MCA, CA-C and Cu-ethanolamine treated wood. d-gluconic acid extractions resulted in the lowest Cu removal for nano-CuO even though d-gluconic acid was effective for all other materials. As the pH of d-gluconic acid decreased, Cu removal was improved except for nano-CuO. There is no distinctive difference in Cu removal from wood treated with ACQ-D, MCQ, CA-C, MCA and Cu-ethanolamine.

Key concepts: Oxalic acid, Gluconic acid, Copper, Extraction (chemistry), Chemistry, Nuclear chemistry, Ethanolamine, Environmental remediation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Chemical remediation of wood treated with micronised, nano or soluble copper preservatives — Research Paper | ScholarLens