- Email: [email protected]
Corrigendum to “Arsenic mineralogy and mobility in the arsenic-rich historical mine waste dump” [Sci. Total Environ. 536 (2015) 713–728]
Science of the Total Environment 541 (2016) 1639
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Science of the Total Environment journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv
Erratum
Corrigendum to “Arsenic mineralogy and mobility in the arsenic-rich historical mine waste dump” [Sci. Total Environ. 536 (2015) 713–728] Michal Filippi a,⁎, Petr Drahotab, Vladimír Machovič c, Vlasta Böhmová a, Martin Mihaljevič c a b c
Institute of Geology, The Czech Academy of Sciences, v.v.i., Rozvojová 269, 165 00 Prague 6, Czech Republic Institute of Geochemistry, Mineralogy and Mineral Resources, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Albertov 6, 128 43 Prague 2, Czech Republic Institute of Chemical Technology Prague, Technická 5, 166 28 Prague 6, Czech Republic
The authors regret that there is a subtle error in Fig 8 of the abovementioned article. This error, however, causes that a part of the text (right in the middle of page 725) does not correspond with Figure 8: “Precipitation of HFO is also supported by the facts that (1) the Fe/As molar ratios of the weathering solutions display low values (b0.5) implying incongruent dissolution of ferric arsenates, (2) As in the pore water and waste leachates is positively correlated with the pH (trends in the analyses in Fig. 8 have a positive “incongruent” slope) and (3) inadvertent in situ neutralization of the waste material (up to pH 7) resulted in a substantial increase in aqueous As (up to 8.7 mg L−1), which is consistent with precipitation of ferrihydrite (Fig. 8).”
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.113. ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail address: fi[email protected] (M. Filippi).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.10.023 0048-9697/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
There is an incorrect designation in the middle and right trend lines in Fig. 8, when lepidocrocite is on place of ferrihydrite and vice versa. We think that this may confuse the readers of the paper and therefore publish the corrected Fig. 8 within this erratum.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Science of the Total Environment journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv
Erratum
Corrigendum to “Arsenic mineralogy and mobility in the arsenic-rich historical mine waste dump” [Sci. Total Environ. 536 (2015) 713–728] Michal Filippi a,⁎, Petr Drahotab, Vladimír Machovič c, Vlasta Böhmová a, Martin Mihaljevič c a b c
Institute of Geology, The Czech Academy of Sciences, v.v.i., Rozvojová 269, 165 00 Prague 6, Czech Republic Institute of Geochemistry, Mineralogy and Mineral Resources, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Albertov 6, 128 43 Prague 2, Czech Republic Institute of Chemical Technology Prague, Technická 5, 166 28 Prague 6, Czech Republic
The authors regret that there is a subtle error in Fig 8 of the abovementioned article. This error, however, causes that a part of the text (right in the middle of page 725) does not correspond with Figure 8: “Precipitation of HFO is also supported by the facts that (1) the Fe/As molar ratios of the weathering solutions display low values (b0.5) implying incongruent dissolution of ferric arsenates, (2) As in the pore water and waste leachates is positively correlated with the pH (trends in the analyses in Fig. 8 have a positive “incongruent” slope) and (3) inadvertent in situ neutralization of the waste material (up to pH 7) resulted in a substantial increase in aqueous As (up to 8.7 mg L−1), which is consistent with precipitation of ferrihydrite (Fig. 8).”
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.113. ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail address: fi[email protected] (M. Filippi).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.10.023 0048-9697/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
There is an incorrect designation in the middle and right trend lines in Fig. 8, when lepidocrocite is on place of ferrihydrite and vice versa. We think that this may confuse the readers of the paper and therefore publish the corrected Fig. 8 within this erratum.