Search

The review presents advances in the removal of Cr(III) from the industrial effluents published in the last ten years. Although Cr(III) has low solubility and is less dangerous for the aquatic environment than Cr(VI), it cannot be released into the aquatic environment without limitations and its content in water should be restricted. The development of efficient techniques for the removal of Cr(III) is also a response to the problem of chromium wastewater containing Cr(VI) ions. Very often the first step in dealing with such wastewater is the reduction in chromium content. In some cases, removal of Cr(III) from wastewaters is an important step for pretreatment of solutions to prepare them for subsequent recovery of other metals. In the review, hydrometallurgical operations for Cr(III) removal are presented, including examples of Cr(III) recovery from real industrial effluents with precipitation, adsorption, ion exchange, extraction, membrane techniques, microbial-enhanced techniques, electrochemical methods. The advantages and disadvantages of the operations mentioned are also presented. Finally, perspectives for the future in line with circular economy and low-environmental impact are briefly discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents Cr(III) removal from nickel sulfate waste solutions as a pretreatment step for the modification of hydrogen storage alloys. Adsorption with two cation exchange resins, Dowex G26 (strongly acidic) and MAC-3 (weakly acidic), and precipitation with various solutions were chosen as simple operations for Cr(III) removal from waste solutions. The adsorption of Cr(III) was investigated for both model and real waste nickel solutions. Dowex G26 appeared to be more efficient in Cr(III) removal (RCr(III) from 43 to 80%) than MAC-3 (RCr(III) from 40 to 53%). However, the adsorption from multi-component solutions (presence of Co(II), Ni(II) and Cr(III)) showed no selectivity in Cr(III) adsorption in comparison to those of Co(II) and Ni(II). Cr(III), Ni(II) and Co(II) were removed at a comparable level (30–36%) from a three-component solution of 10 g/dm3 of each metal ion, and a 56–72% removal of these ions was achieved from the real solution. Therefore, the precipitation of Cr(III) was carried out from a real waste nickel solution to compare its performance with adsorption. The best precipitation solution appeared to be 3 and 30% NaOH due to the quantitative precipitation of Cr(OH)3 at pH 5 and relatively small co-precipitation of Ni(II) and Co(II) hydroxides (PCo(II) = 20–52%, PNi(II) = 0–54%). Based on the results of the research, it can be concluded that precipitation with a NaOH solution is an efficient pretreatment operation of an electrolyte for further steps of the hydrometallurgical process of nickel electrodeposition and appears to be more selective in the elimination of Cr(III) than adsorption with Dowex G26 resin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]