Home
Latest News
News
by Country
Regional Contacts
Fluoridation:
-
Astounding Facts
Chemicals Used
History
Important Statements
Links
Overviews
The Proponents
Reports
Fluoride
in Industry:
Air Pollution
Nuclear Production
Pesticides
Pharmaceuticals
Plastics
Videos on Fluoride
Citizen Tool Kit
Abstracts
Search
|
|
--------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL LETTERS, 60), 167-174 (1974)
SEDIMENTARY FLUORITE IN TAMPA BAY, FLORIDA
William H. Taft and Dean F. Martin
Department of Geology, Department of Chemistry
University of South Florida
Tampa, Florida 33620
--------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION
Florida is a major source of phosphate, and the processing of this
resource has undergone a number of changes as environmental degradation
was discovered and new technology became available to-resolve those
problems. One such problem was the amount of fluorine gas emitted
as a waste product through stacks. Complaints by local residents,
cattlemen, orange growers, and commercial florists encouraged one
such company, Gardinier, Inc. (then owned by US Phosphoric), in approximately
1963, to install scrubbers. The collected fluorine was then discharged
into Tampa Bay. Although the amount of fluoride entering the Bay has
varied depending on the amount of phosphate produced, in July of 1973
the daily discharge amounted to approximately 24,000 pounds., In addition
to fluoride, the effluent contained approximately 27,000 pounds of
phosphate and 3,000 pounds of nitrate per day. Gardinier has been
warned about such excessive discharge, and through expenditures of
approximately $12,000,000 in anti-pollution equipment, hopes to reduce
the amount of these pollutants by 97 percent in December, 1973.
EXPERIMENTAL
Physical Observations
Two canals are used for discharging Gardinier's phosphate processing
wastes into the Bay. At the mouth of the southernmost canal there
is a deltaic deposit of fluorite that, to the best of our knowledge,
is the only known deposit of sedimentary fluorite in the world. In
cross-section, the deposit is approximately three inches thick at
the point of initial discharge and thins rapidly to translucent flakes
at the outer edges of the deposit - approximately 1,000 feet into
the Bay. The fluorite deposit is composed of alternating layers of
fluorite and loose grains except where sticks, limbs and roots of
trees have provided a site, free of detrital grains, for fluorite
to precipitate.
When standing in relatively shallow water (approximately 0.6 meters),
overlying the fluorite deposit, there is usually a noticeable increase
in temperature within ten to fifteen centimeters above the sediment-water
interface (Table 1). To test the significance of this increased temperature
near the base of the water column, bamboo poles sufficiently long
to stick out above sea level were pushed into the sediment. After
thirty days, there was a coating of fluorite on the poles, but the
fluorite was restricted to the lowest ten to fifteen centimeters of
the water column - the zone of highest water temperatures which owes
its origin to the thermal discharge from the phosphate processing
plant. In this relatively shallow water, a great deal of mixing occurs,
yet a portion of the thermal discharge is capable of maintaining some
of its composition as shown by the physical and chemical differences
between the tops and bottoms of measured water columns (Table 1).
Given the quantities of fluoride that are discharged daily, and have
been since 1963, we can only account for a small percentage as being
incorporated in the fluorite deposit. Clearly, a large quantity of
fluoride escapes local precipitation as shown by the fluorine concentrations
in Bay water at the most remote station such as 8.
As might have been anticipated by the extremely low pHmeter readings,
there were no visible signs of plant or animal life within the area
of fluorite deposition. During the time of field study, Tampa Bay
had an abundance of living jellyfish. In the study area, however,
there were sitings of four to six such organisms, but they were all
dead. Presumably, the jellyfish had been killed by the chemical discharge.
| TABLE 1 - PHYSICAL AND
CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF TAMPA BAY WATER SAMPLES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Station**
|
Salinity o/oo
|
t, C
|
pH*
|
PO4-P ppm
|
SiO-P PPM
|
F-, PPM
|
Distance from
Discharge Canal, m.
|
|
1B
|
27.8 +
0.3
|
36
|
3.3
|
36.7
|
44.1
|
43.0
|
15
|
|
2S
|
21.1 +
0.1
|
28
|
3.95
|
32
|
18.7
|
23.3
|
155
|
|
2B
|
27.1 +
0.3
|
34
|
3.3
|
33
|
46.1
|
34.8
|
155
|
|
3S
|
21.1 +
0.1
|
28
|
5.70
|
20.1
|
10.3
|
18.5
|
305
|
|
3B
|
22.6 +
|
28.5
|
4.60
|
22.5
|
17.1
|
14.0
|
305
|
|
4S
|
31.1 +
0.1
|
30
|
3.8
|
31.3
|
19.0
|
21.5
|
115
|
|
4B
|
29.6 +
0.3
|
34
|
3.2
|
35.5
|
46.9
|
30.8
|
115
|
|
5S
|
23.8 +
0.2
|
33
|
3.5
|
35.4
|
25.5
|
36.5
|
155
|
|
5B
|
31.7 +
|
35
|
3.2
|
33.6
|
49.2
|
25
|
155
|
|
6S
|
22.4 +
0.5
|
33
|
3.6
|
35.5
|
25.6
|
34.2
|
305
|
|
6B
|
31.9 +
3.5
|
33
|
3.2
|
40.3
|
34.8
|
35.0
|
305
|
|
7S
|
21.2 +
0.1
|
28.5
|
5.5
|
23
|
10.7
|
16.3
|
265
|
|
7B
|
34.8 +
0.6
|
31
|
3.4
|
33.7
|
40.0
|
36.3
|
265
|
|
8S
|
23.4 +
0.2
|
29
|
6.0
|
22.7
|
10.9
|
16.5
|
365
|
|
8B
|
21.3 +
0.1
|
29
|
6.7
|
1.4
|
2.0
|
22.3
|
365
|
*pH-meter reading, B.
**S, surface; B, bottom (ca. 0.6 m at time of collection, August
23, 1973) |
Sampling and Analytical Procedures
Water and sediment samples were collected at eight sites in Tampa
Bay adjacent to the southernmost discharge canal of Gardinier. Water
samples were frozen within four hours of collection and sediment samples
were dried and prepared for X-ray diffraction.
Temperature and pH data were obtained in the field at the time of
sampling. Temperatures were obtained using a mercury thermometer.
Because the temperature increased rapidly during equilibration while
water temperature was being read at the surface during a 30-sec period,
the temperatures of bottom samples in Table 1 should be thought of
as minimum values. The pH values were obtained with a.Beckman Model
G pH meter; pH values obtained in the field were checked in the laboratory
before analysis and were general to-within 0.1 unit of the field value.
Salinity was determined by the Harvey method. 1 Silicate and phosphate
analyses were obtained by means of a Technicon Autoanalyzer using
standard procedures described in the EPA Methods Manual. 2
Fluoride was determined by using an Orion fluoride electrode (model
94-09A) and a single junction reference electrode (model 90-01) with
a Corning Model 10 Expanded pH meter. A procedure described earlier
1 was modified. A 10-ml sample of water was added to 40 ml of stock
sea water (salinity 30'/oo) in a plastic beaker, then mixed with 10
ml of total ionic strength buffer (TSIB, pH = 5.5, ionic strength
= 1.9). The reading was recorded after 5 minutes of stirring (=E i
). Readings (EX) were also recorded after addition of 0.1, 0.2, 0.3,
0.4, and 0.5 ml of stock fluoride solution (100 PPM F in distilled
water). The response, log E x as a function of added.fluoride (in
PPM), was linear and the value of apparent initial fluoride (F-)i
was obtained by extrapolation knowing E i. The original apparent fluoride
concentration (F-)0 was obtained from the relationship
|
(F-, PPM)o =
|
(F-)i - (F-)s
|
|
0.2
|
where (F-)s is the apparent fluoride concentration
in the stock sea water (a value obtained using 10 ml of distilled
water instead of sample), and where 0.2 is the dilution factor. The
value of (F-)s was 1.05 PPM, which would correspond to a value of
1.3 PPM for the sample of salinity of 36*/oo (the typical value is
1.28 for salinity 35*/oo). 3 Precision was estimated for samples 6S
and 6B.and the mean and standard deviations were 34.210.8 and 35.0
+ 0.3, respectively. No significant variation in fluoride values were
observed over a 24-hour period after refrigeration.
DISCUSSION
A number of unique features were observed during this study. The most
obvious is the existence of the sedimentary fluorite. The second is
the remarkably low pH meter readings which indicate the buffering
capacity (6,000 milliequivalents per kilogram of sea water) 4 of twelve
(12) acre-meters of estuarine water was virtually exhausted. Third,
the fluoride concentration is as much as forty times its concentration
in normal sea water, undoubtedly because of the complexing by hydrogen
ions and silicon. Fourth, the temperature differentials in such relatively
shallow water (0.6 meters) are not only significant, but are the inverse
of what would normally be expected, i.e., the water temperature is
warmer at the base of the water column than at the air water interface.
Although in some instances the solution to pollution may be dilution,
in this case, the fluorine problem in stack gasses was translated
to water and thermal pollution and precipitation problems in Tampa
Bay. When the anti-pollution controls come on line in December,
1973, this particular pollution problem should be sharply curtailed.
Meanwhile, the values of pH, fluoride and phosphate concentrations
that were obtained in August, 1973 should provide a benchmark to establish
the extent of progress in the future.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We are grateful for the technical information and assistance provided
by Mr. Donald Graff, Manager of Gardinier, Inc.; officer Robert Knight
of the Florida Marine Patrol; Ms. Val Maynard, USF Department of Marine
Science, who performed the analysis of silicate and phosphate; and
Mr. James Goetz, who performed the X-ray analyses. One of us (DFM)
is grateful for the support provided by a Public Health Service Research
Career Development Award (K04-GM 42569-05, National Institute of General
Medical Sciences).
REFERENCES
1. D. F. Martin, Marine Chemistry: Analytical Methods, 2nd ed., Dekker,
New York, 1973, p. 85, p. 305.
2. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Methods for Chemical Analysis
of Water and Wastes, U. S. Department of the Interior, Washington,
1971.
3. J. P. Riley and R. Chester, Introduction to Marine Chemistry Academic
Press, New York, 1971, p. 81.
4. L. G. Sillen, Science, 156, 1189 (1967).
To learn more about fluoride pollution from
the phosphate industry, see www.fluoridealert.org/phosphate/overview.htm
|