An Overview of Treatment Approaches for Octahydro-1, 3, 5, 7-tetranitro-1, 3, 5, 7-tetrazocine (HMX) Explosive in Soil, Groundwater, and Wastewater

Varsha Srivastava (), Grzegorz Boczkaj and Ulla Lassi
Additional contact information
Varsha Srivastava: Research Unit of Sustainable Chemistry, Faculty of Technology, University of Oulu, FI-90014 Oulu, Finland
Grzegorz Boczkaj: Department of Sanitary Engineering, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, G. Narutowicza St. 11/12, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland
Ulla Lassi: Research Unit of Sustainable Chemistry, Faculty of Technology, University of Oulu, FI-90014 Oulu, Finland

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 23, 1-21

Abstract: Octahydro-1, 3, 5, 7-tetranitro-1, 3, 5, 7-tetrazocine (HMX) is extensively exploited in the manufacturing of explosives; therefore, a significant level of HMX contamination can be encountered near explosive production plants. For instance, up to 12 ppm HMX concentrations have been observed in the wastewater effluent of a munitions manufacturing facility, while up to 45,000 mg/kg of HMX has been found in a soil sample taken from a location close to a high-explosive production site. Owing to their immense demand for a variety of applications, the large-scale production of explosives has culminated in severe environmental issues. Soil and water contaminated with HMX can pose a detrimental impact on flora and fauna and hence, remediation of HMX is paramount. There is a rising demand to establish a sustainable technology for HMX abatement. Physiochemical and bioremediation approaches have been employed to treat HMX in the soil, groundwater, and wastewater. It has been revealed that treatment methods such as photo-peroxidation and photo-Fenton oxidation can eliminate approximately 98% of HMX from wastewater. Fenton’s reagents were found to be very effective at mineralizing HMX. In the photocatalytic degradation of HMX, approximately 59% TOC removal was achieved by using a TiO 2 photocatalyst, and a dextrose co-substrate was used in a bioremediation approach to accomplish 98.5% HMX degradation under anaerobic conditions. However, each technology has some pros and cons which need to be taken into consideration when choosing an HMX remediation approach. In this review, various physiochemical and bioremediation approaches are considered and the mechanism of HMX degradation is discussed. Further, the advantages and disadvantages of the technologies are also discussed along with the challenges of HMX treatment technologies, thus giving an overview of the HMX remediation strategies.

Keywords: AOPs; bioremediation; explosives; Fenton process; phytoremediation; wastewater treatment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15948/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15948/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15948-:d:988530

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().