Premium
No Scientific Debate in the Zero‐Valent Iron Literature
Author(s) -
Noubactep Chicgoua
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
clean – soil, air, water
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.444
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1863-0669
pISSN - 1863-0650
DOI - 10.1002/clen.201400780
Subject(s) - zerovalent iron , pourbaix diagram , dissolution , environmental remediation , cathodic protection , aqueous solution , corrosion , electrochemistry , groundwater , groundwater remediation , chemistry , environmental chemistry , metallurgy , materials science , environmental science , engineering , contamination , geotechnical engineering , ecology , electrode , adsorption , biology
Since the 1930s, the modern science of aqueous iron corrosion has been established by scientists like J. O'M. Bockris, M. Cohen, U. R. Evans, Y. M. Kolotrykin, G. Okamoto, M. Pourbaix, H. H. Uhlig, or K. J. Vetter. Yet, the electrochemical nature of aqueous iron corrosion is seriously questioned by flawed science. Especially, metallic iron (Fe 0 ) was mistakenly introduced in the 1990s as an environmental reducing agent. Fe 0 was then successfully used in subsurface permeable reactive barriers to treat contaminated groundwater. This commentary recalls that observed contaminant degradation/reduction is not the cathodic reaction simultaneous to iron oxidative dissolution. It is concluded that the Fe 0 remediation community is working against creativity and innovation.