Antimony in the metallurgical industry: A review of its chemistry and
environmental stabilization options

Ravinder S. Multani, Thomas Feldmann, George P. Demopoulos

PII: S0304-386X(16)30347-4
DOI: doi: 10.1016/j.hydromet.2016.06.014
Reference: HYDROM 4380

To appear in: Hydrometallurgy

Received date: 15 March 2016

Revised date: 27 May 2016
Accepted date: 13 June 2016

Please cite this article as: Multani, Ravinder S., Feldmann, Thomas, De-
mopoulos, George P., Antimony in the metallurgical industry: A review of its
chemistry and environmental stabilization options, Hydrometallurgy (2016), doi:
10.1016/j.hydromet.2016.06.014

This is a PDF le of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.
As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.
The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof
before it is published in its nal form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could aect the content, and all legal disclaimers that
apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Antimony in the metallurgical industry: a review of its chemistry and

environmental stabilization options
Ravinder S. Multani, Thomas Feldmann, and George P. Demopoulos*
Department of Mining and Materials Engineering, McGill University, 3610 University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada,

PT
H3A 0C5
* Corresponding author. Tel: +1 514 398 2046; Fax: +1 514 398 4492

RI
E-mail address: george.demopoulos@mcgill.ca

SC
Abstract

NU
Antimony (Sb) is an impurity element that is increasingly encountered in the mineral

processing/metallurgical industries of gold, copper and lead. Its occurrence in metallurgical

MA
feedstocks is in the form of various antimony minerals with stibnite, Sb2S3, being the most

important one. During processing antimony is mobilized reporting to waste solid tailings or
D

effluent streams. This becomes a matter of concern since antimony is similar to arsenic in many
TE

respects, both sharing similar chemical properties as well as toxicity and thus have negative
P

environmental implications, especially in the context of industrial effluents and their treatment.
CE

This review summarizes the available literature on antimony in the environment and its removal
AC

with emphasis on effluent treatment. Antimony speciation as well as oxidation was presented at

various conditions (pH, Eh, temperature, and concentration) to provide a basis of its aqueous

behaviour, an important foundation for industrial effluent treatment. For immobilizing antimony

in the environment via precipitation from effluents several mineral candidates were identified of

which schafarzikite, FeSb2O4, and tripuhyite, FeSbO4, were proposed as very attractive due to

their very low antimony solubility (< 1 mgL1).

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Contents
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1
2. Antimony in the environment .................................................................................................. 3
2.1 Air................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Soil.................................................................................................................................. 3

PT
2.3 Water .............................................................................................................................. 4
2.4 Environmental treatment ................................................................................................ 5
3. Industrial processing and treatment ......................................................................................... 7

RI
3.1 Antimony metallurgy ..................................................................................................... 7
3.2 Mineral processing ......................................................................................................... 7

SC
3.3 Pyrometallurgy ............................................................................................................... 8
3.4 Hydrometallurgy ............................................................................................................ 9
3.5 Industrial treatment and antimony recovery ................................................................. 11

NU
4. Antimony speciation .............................................................................................................. 12
4.1 The SbH2O system ..................................................................................................... 12
4.2 The SbSH2O system ................................................................................................. 13
MA
5. Antimony oxidation Sb(III) to Sb(V) ................................................................................. 15
5.1 Oxygen (O2) ................................................................................................................. 16
5.2 Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) ........................................................................................... 16
D

5.3 Trace metal effects on oxidation kinetics ..................................................................... 17

6. Ultimate sinks of antimony in the environment..................................................................... 18
TE

6.1 Potential candidates immobilizing antimony ............................................................... 18

6.2 Stability of tripuhyite and schafarzikite ....................................................................... 21
7. Review of tripuhyite synthesis ............................................................................................... 22
P

7.1 Precipitation and calcination ........................................................................................ 22

CE

7.2 Grinding and/or calcination .......................................................................................... 23

8. Summary ................................................................................................................................ 25
References ..................................................................................................................................... 26
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1. Introduction

Antimony (Sb, atomic number 51) is found in Group 15 of the Periodic Table directly

below arsenic and has a standard atomic weight of 121.76 gmol1. Its name is of Greek origin,

PT
anti plus monos, translating to a metal not found alone. This is accurate as native

RI
antimony metal is rarely found, it is usually discovered as a sulfide mineral, the most important

being stibnite, Sb2S3 (Lide et al. 2007). Antimony metal is silvery in colour, has a fairly low

SC
melting point for a metal, 630.6 oC, is very brittle and a poor conductor of heat and electricity.

NU
Similar to arsenic, it is typically found in four oxidation states: 3, 0, +3, and +5.

More than 200 antimony minerals are found in nature, common primary and secondary
MA
minerals are listed in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Primary antimony minerals are typically

sulfides, mainly because antimony has a higher affinity for sulfur than oxygen (chalcophile).
D
TE

Under ambient pH and temperature, most primary antimony minerals are fairly stable and thus

are relatively insoluble, little to no dissolved antimony is found in the surrounding aqueous
P

solutions. However, in oxygenrich environments the sulfide minerals react with oxygen to
CE

produce secondary minerals. These can become unstable and result in antimony release (Roper et
AC

al. 2012). Table 2 includes information on the frequency of occurrence of the secondary minerals

based on the number of localities it has been found in. Using this information, one may infer

their relative stabilities when antimony fixation options are considered.

Antimony and its various compounds have been known and used since ancient times,

dating back at least 6000 years. There is evidence dating to ancient Egypt, where synthetic

antimonate compounds were used as colorants for glass and as eye shadow, among other things

(Shortland 2002; Selim 2012). Various applications continued over the ages where it was also

used as material for ornaments, jewellery, and alloys. Antimony compounds also found use in

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

medicine, primarily as hydrated potassium antimonyl tartrate, K2Sb2(C4H2O6)23H2O, better

known as tartar emetic. Its main use was as an emetic (inducing vomiting), however, also as a

laxative to purge the human body of illnesses and toxins (Lide et al. 2007). Currently, antimony

PT
compounds find a multitude of applications such as semiconductors for gas sensing applications

RI
(liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen gas, carbon monoxide gas, butane gas, etc.), infrared

detectors, diodes, and much more (Tianshu and Hing 1999; Lide et al. 2007). Iron antimonates

SC
have been studied for at least thirty years and found to have specific catalytic properties, such as

NU
the ammoxidation of propylene (Teller et al. 1985). Inorganic ion exchangers such as iron

antimonates have also been found to be selective toward some alkali metals, said to be superior
MA
to ionexchange resins due to their thermal stability and differential selectivity (Rawat et al.

1976; Rawat et al. 1984). Although the aforementioned applications seem as though they would
D
TE

account for the bulk of antimony commodities in the market, a large portion of the manufactured

antimony compounds find their way into flame retardants, paints, glass, pottery, and as a
P

hardening agent in lead bullets and ammunition (Lide et al. 2007; Anderson 2012).
CE

Antimony and arsenic are typically associated together due to their several similarities
AC

in chemical behaviour as they both fall in Group 15 of the Periodic Table, even where toxicity is

concerned. However, there are some noteworthy differences, the main being the degree of

toxicity and the availability of each element in the environment, which play a significant role on

its biological and ecological toxicity. Arsenic is likely more toxic than antimony, however, it is

also more abundant due to both natural and anthropogenic activities, making it even more likely

to be encountered than antimony. Arsenic has been proven to be a definite human carcinogen as

it has been the subject of numerous studies, affecting areas of the skin, lung, bladder, kidney and

liver (Gebel 1997). On the other hand, antimony has been much less studied and thus there is

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

limited data on its toxicity. Most antimony studies normally include antimony trioxide, Sb2O3,

as their subject of toxicological tests since it is the most widely used antimony compound.

Although the results are slightly skewed to the behaviour of Sb2O3 in biological studies,

PT
nonetheless, antimony was found to be a possible human carcinogen (IARC 1980).

RI
2. Antimony in the environment

SC
2.1 Air

Antimony and its compounds, usually antimony trioxide, find their way into the

NU
atmosphere from several sources and exist as solid compounds suspended in air (Belzile et al.
MA
2011). Sources of atmospheric pollution can be separated into natural and anthropogenic, the

latter consists of mining, smelting and refining operations, fossil fuel combustion, and the
D

incineration of waste (Selim 2012). Natural atmospheric concentration of antimony in urban

TE

areas is several ngm3, closer to anthropogenic regions (i.e. urban incinerators, mine sites, and

metal smelters) this value can increase to hundreds of ngm3 (Belzile et al. 2011). In China, the
P
CE

reported concentration in anthropogenic vicinities such as mining areas and waste incinerators

was as high as 575 mgm3 (He et al. 2012). Worldwide regulations on the allowable antimony
AC

industrial air emissions vary from country to country, however, in Canada and China, total

allowable suspended particulate emission is 70 and 87 gm3, respectively, averaged over an

annual basis (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 1999; He et al. 2012).

2.2 Soil

Antimonys concentration in the earths crust is approximately 0.2 to 0.3 mgkg 1 and is

typically found as the sulfide mineral stibnite (Sb2S3), sometimes as valentinite (Sb2O3). Due to

increased antimonybearing mineral mining/processing over the past few decades, there has been

increased deposition of antimony into the environment (Selim 2012). The anthropogenic sources,

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

stated earlier, contribute to a significant portion of the pollution. Soil concentrations close to

these sources can reach values of 15,000 mgkg 1and even 80,200 mgkg 1, as were the cases in

southern Tuscany and a smelter site in New Zealand, respectively (Wilson 2004; Selim 2012).

PT
Table 3 gives examples of increased Sb contamination levels in soils surrounding anthropogenic

RI
sites such as mining, smelting and shooting range sites, the latter due to usage of leadantimony

ammunition. Industrial regulations on environmental solid waste releases are not widely adopted.

SC
Typically the waste is transferred to settling or tailings areas and subjected to wastewater

NU
treatment for release. The maximum allowable concentration into agricultural soils is 10 mgkg
1
for antimony, which happens to be more stringent than arsenic (15 20 mgkg 1) (Kabata
MA
Pendias 2011).
D

2.3 Water
TE

Worldwide antimony concentration in unpolluted natural waters is commonly well

below 1 gL1. Most naturally occurring antimony in fresh waters is from rock weathering and
P
CE

soil runoffs (Filella et al. 2002a). One of few exceptions to low concentrations in natural waters

are hot springs where the concentrations can sometimes exceed 500 mgL1, although the
AC

likelihood of encountering this situation is low. In oceans, the concentration is even less than in

fresh waters, estimated to be 200 ngL1 (Filella et al. 2002a). Anthropogenic sites and their

vicinities typically have concentrations of one to two orders of magnitudes higher than natural

waters, in China, this was found to be as high as 263 gL1 in certain mine natural waters. Many

regulatory bodies worldwide place strict limits on antimony content in drinking water as it has

been labelled a hazardous substance. The World Health Organization, China, USEPA and

European Union drinking water standards are set to 20 gL1, 5 gL1, 6 gL1and 5 gL1,

respectively (Council of the European Union 1998; USEPA 1999; WHO 2006; He et al. 2012).

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Industrial environmental release regulation varies or is not specific for antimony and its

compounds, however, sometimes arsenic limits are associated to antimony due to their

similarities, which is 0.5 mgL1 (monthly average) and 1.0 mgL1 (for a grab sample) from the

PT
Canadian Metal Mining Effluent Regulation (Government of Canada 2014).

RI
The natural and anthropogenic concentration of antimony in the air, soil and water

systems have been shown to differ by at least one order of magnitude, however, the difference is

SC
typically larger (two orders) when approaching the anthropogenic sites and even more

NU
pronounced at the sites themselves. To reduce the concentration in these regions, extensive

treatment efforts have been employed.

MA
2.4 Environmental treatment
D

Particulate and toxic substance releases such as antimony oxides are normally captured
TE

and subjected to subsequent treatment. They are collected in flues, condensing pipes, baghouses,

and electrostatic precipitators (Anderson 2012). Waste incineration is a prime example where
P
CE

municipal waste along with some landfill waste is burned, 20% of which becomes bottom ash

and 2 3% results in air pollution control residue (APC). Elemental antimony, which is fairly
AC

volatile at temperatures > 500 oC, only about half of it reports to the bottom ash while the other

half reports to the APC residue, which contains many other toxic substances and must be further

processed before moving into landfill (Cornelis et al. 2008; Okkenhaug et al. 2013). Since the

APC residue is very alkaline, the choice of treatment is neutralization with other industrial

wastes containing sulfuric acid and iron to yield a final pH between 8 and 9. Iron compounds

such as iron hydroxides and iron oxyhydroxides precipitate out of solution due to neutralization

and many metals either adsorb or coprecipitate with these compounds. The precipitate moves

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

onto landfills, while the neutralized solution, which still contains trace metals, moves onto

wastewater treatment for final processing (Okkenhaug et al. 2013).

There are extensive soil remediation methods to treat highly polluted soils, these include

PT
leaching, soil amendment (immobilization), biodegradation (microbial degradation of

RI
substances), phytoremediation (removal of metals by plant uptake), vitrification (immobilization

via melting into a glasslike solid), encapsulation, excavation (removed and placed in landfill),

SC
and isolation (placing subsurface barriers such as clay or plastic liners) (KabataPendias 2011).

NU
A common method appears to be soil amendment since the processing can take place onsite and

is relatively low cost. This is also the choice of treatment for antimony immobilization in many
MA
sites such as naturally polluted soils, industrial, and shooting range soils. Many materials have

been tested over the past several years, as noted by lvarezAyuso et al. (2013), which include
D
TE

phosphate and sulfurbased amendments, sodium humate, drinking water deironing sludge,

calcium hydroxide, green waste compost mulch, Portland cement, wood bark, and phosphate
P

fertilizers. Of these, sulfurbased amendments, drinking water deiron sludge, calcium

CE

hydroxide, and Portland cement have proven to be effective. However, there is a lack of
AC

implementation of effective methods to treating mining derived wastes. From lab-scale tests

there are numerous metal oxides and oxyhydroxides such as iron and manganese oxyhydroxide

that have demonstrated high extraction of antimony from soils, however, largescale execution

has yet to be established (KabataPendias 2011; lvarezAyuso et al. 2013).

Antimony removal from industrial effluents (aqueous) is normally performed at

wastewater treatment plants. A variety of methods are encompassed in treatment plants such as

adsorption, membrane separation, and aluminum/iron based coagulationflocculation

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

sedimentation (Gannon et al. 1986; Wu et al. 2010). Treatment of antimony aqueous waste

streams may be similar to arsenic, which has been studied extensively (Guo et al. 2009).

3. Industrial processing and treatment

PT
3.1 Antimony metallurgy

RI
Worldwide antimony production statistics and ore body reserves are summarized in Table

SC
4, with China being the main producer, accounting for almost 80% of total production (U.S.

Geological Survey 2015). Antimony minerals are processed in many different ways and the

NU
proper method is chosen based on several factors, i.e. grade and type of antimony mineral in ore
MA
feed, presence of other metals, type of final product and product quality. Like most other

minerals, the processing of antimony can be reduced into three subindustries; mineral
D

processing, pyrometallurgy, and hydrometallurgy. Alkaline sulfide leaching of stibnite from base
TE

metal and gold industries is presented due to the overwhelming number of plants operating under

such conditions as opposed to acidic chloride leaching (Anderson 2012).

P
CE

3.2 Mineral processing

Like most mineral processing, antimony ore processing consists of ore crushing,
AC

grinding, classification (gravity separation and cyclones) and flotation. The feed ore typically

contains stibnite along with other gangue minerals. In China, it is pyrite, quartz, calcite, barite,

kaolin, and gypsum. The feed grade is usually between 2 3% antimony and treated through

hand sorting, spiral concentration, and flotation. In depth reviews of antimony ore processing are

presented by Lager and Forssberg (1989 a,b), Solozhenkin and Alekseev (2010a), and Anderson

(2012). In the literature there are various flotation reagent schemes available for such ores and

their implementation is largely dependent on whether the antimony is to be recovered as

concentrate (floated) or rejected to the tails (depressed). Aside from antimony ore grade, this

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

decision falls on the minerals association with other metals, for e.g. lead, copper, iron, mercury,

arsenic, silver and gold, as well as other parameters such as ore matrix and type (sulfide or

oxide). For simple antimony ores (primarily stibnite with minimal impurities), stibnite is

PT
activated by lead ions (i.e. Pb(NO3)2) at natural pH and floated with an amyl xanthate collector

RI
and traditional frothers (e.g. methyl isobutyl carbinol) (Lager and Forssberg 1989 a,b). In cases

where appreciable amounts of arsenic is present, butyl dithiophosphate collector is preferred as it

SC
appears to be more selective towards antimony. For more complex ores, intricate regent schemes

NU
are employed to recover antimony and precious metals into the concentrate or if it is a

contaminant, its rejection is accomplished by the use of depressants (e.g. K2Cr2O7) at high pH
MA
(alkaline conditions, pH > 10, are detrimental to antimony mineral flotation).
D

3.3 Pyrometallurgy
TE

There are different pyrometallurgical methods available to process antimonybearing

ores, however, the ore/concentrate antimony grade dictates the most suitable method. Feedstocks
P

containing 5 25% antimony are volatized by roasting at ~ 1000 oC; this treatment removes
CE

sulfur as SO2 offgas and antimony trioxide, Sb2O3, is retrieved as flue dust which can then be
AC

reduced to antimony metal in reverberatory furnaces using carbon as the reductant (Hua et al.

2003; Anderson 2012; Qin et al. 2015). The reactions are presented in Equations (1) and (2):

2Sb2S3 + 9O2 2Sb2O3 + 6SO2 (1)

Sb2O3 + 3C 2Sb + 3CO (2)

Feedstocks with grades in the range of 25 40% are subjected to smelting in a blast furnace at

13001400 oC to yield pure antimony metal. Lastly, antimony raw materials, such as antimony

sulphideSb2S3 containing 45 60% antimony, are liquefied by heating at 550 600 oC after

which it is reduced to pure antimony metal. Historically, SO2 release has been a major concern

when smelting sulfidic ores, especially those containing antimony and arsenic as they are easily

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

volatilized and become an environmental issue near smelting sites. Thus, more research has been

focused on reducing emissions all the while increasing metal production, a difficult task since

lower grade ore processing is becoming common practice and requires more ore to yield the

PT
same metal tonnage. This has prompted researchers to develop methods to reduce emissions

RI
while accommodating lowgrade ores, one of which includes the use of ZnO as sulfurfixing

agent in a carbonate melt (either Na2CO3 alone or Na2CO3/NaCl mixture) (Yang et al. 2011; Ye

SC
et al. 2015).

NU
3.4 Hydrometallurgy
MA
Many simple and complex lowgrade antimony sulfide ores can be processed through

hydrometallugical techniques, for both antimony and other valuable metals, some even
D

incorporate biotechnology for improved extraction/efficiency (Solozhenkin and Lyalikova-

TE

Medvedeva 2001; Solozhenkin and Alekseev 2010b). Typically the main objective of the process

is to recover a desired metal associated with the antimony mineral, primarily gold. In some
P
CE

instances, pretreatment of sulfide concentrates (such as copper) is required to selectively

remove antimony/arsenic impurities to make it more suitable for pyrometallurgical processing

AC

(Awe and Sandstrm 2010). In both cases, the most effective and widely used method is alkaline

sulfide leaching which is very selective for antimony, gold, arsenic, mercury, and tin minerals.

The other method is acidic chloride leaching (FeCl3 as leaching agent), however, it is much less

preferred due to chemical complexity, corrosion/acid mist issues, ferric ion accumulation, and

lower antimony/arsenic leaching rates (below 100 oC) as compared to alkaline sulfide leaching

(Yang et al. 2010; Awe and Sandstrm 2010; Anderson 2012). On the other hand, depending on

the ore/concentrate, alkaline sulfide leaching has its disadvantages as well such as high reagent

consumption and adverse effects on downstream metal recovery (i.e. gold), under such

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

conditions researchers give preference to an optimized acidic chloride system (Kanarskii and

Adamov 2012). In recent years, a variation of the acidic chloride leaching using antimony

pentachloride (SbCl5) both as leaching agent and oxidant has also shown promise in yielding

PT
high purity antimony metal/powders while still being efficient. The method uses optimized

RI
parameters with circular leaching (recycling SbCl5), solution purification steps, and

electrowinning (Solozhenkin and Alekseev 2010b; Yang et al. 2010; Yang and Wu 2014).

SC
In alkaline sulfide leaching, the commonly used lixiviant to leach antimony and gold is

NU
a mixture of sodium sulfide and sodium hydroxide. The sodium hydroxide is used to ensure

alkalinity (normally above pH 12) and to prevent the hydrolysis of sodium sulfide and toxic
MA
hydrogen sulfide gas generation. These reactions are summarized in Equations (3) and (4):

Na2S + H2O NaHS + NaOH

D

(3)
NaHS + H2O H2S + NaOH (4)
TE

The presence of sodium hydroxide, i.e. external reagent addition, largely prevents the
P

completion of reaction (1) and (2) (Ubaldini et al. 2000; Awe et al. 2013). During the leaching
CE

stage, stibnite reacts with sodium sulfide to form sodium thioantimonite, Na3SbS3, demonstrated
AC

in Equations (5) and (6):

Na2S + Sb2S3 2NaSbS2 (aq) (5)

NaSbS2 (aq) + Na2S Na3SbS3 (aq) (6)

Dissolution of elemental sulfur in sodium hydroxide is used as a lixiviant as well. The

chemistry can be more complex than reactions (5) and (6), involving several sulphur and Sb(V)

species such as sulfide, S2, metastable polysufide, Sx2, metastable thiosulfate, S2O32, and

sodium thioantimonate, Na3SbS4 (Jeffrey and Anderson 2003).

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The antimonybearing solution is then passed to the electrowinning stage where solid

antimony metal is plated at the cathode; Equations (7), (8), and (9) display the primary cathode

and anode reactions (Anderson 2012; Awe et al. 2013):

PT
CATHODE: SbS33 + 3e Sbo + 3S2 (7)
4OH 4e + H2O + O2

RI
ANODE: (8)
2 o
ANODE: S 2e + S (9)

SC
3.5 Industrial treatment and antimony recovery

NU
Remediation efforts have increased over the years to recover antimony from a variety of

sources, primarily from intermediate smelter products such as anode slimes, slags, drosses, flue
MA
dusts, and residues from copper and lead smelters (Anderson 2001; Cornelis et al. 2008; Cao et

al. 2010; Liu et al. 2014). More specifically, these include leadsmelter speiss (containing
D

precious metals), leadsoftening skims (common in lead refining), leadsmelter copper dross
TE

flue dust (common in lead processing), and pyrometallurgical plant antimony oxide residue
P

(collected at the electrostatic precipitator). These antimony residues contain significant amounts
CE

of precious and base metals that must be recovered before recycling the antimony into the feed.

It can be treated in a number of ways, alkaline sulfide leaching being common, where at least
AC

90% antimony recovery is practised (Anderson and Twidwell 2008). An example of the

conditions yielding more than 99% of antimony removal is outlined by Anderson (2001) where

the pyrometallurgical antimony oxide residue was subjected to 6 hrs of leaching, at 105 oC,

sulfide and free hydroxide concentrations of 100 and 25 gL1, respectively. Other secondary

sources of antimony include recycled batteries, processed in a blast furnace to make lead

bullions, and spent antimony catalysts from the petrochemical industry. Treatment of aqueous

media (wastewater and leach solutions) was previously summarized in the environmental

treatment section (see Section 2.4), typically the residue (usually alkaline) is neutralized with an

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

acidic waste solution after which the wastewater may be further treated to retrieve antimony and

precious metals.

4. Antimony speciation

PT
4.1 The SbH2O system

RI
Antimony can exist in four oxidation states, 3, 0, +3, and +5, however, in aqueous

SC
solutions, the predominant species exist in +3 and +5 oxidation states, Sb(III) and Sb(V).

Computer simulations of the relative abundance of both Sb(III) and Sb(V) species in oxic and

NU
anoxic waters, based on the best thermodynamic data currently available (Table 5), showed that
o
Sb(OH)
6 is exclusively present in oxic waters, whereas, Sb(OH)3 is exclusively present in
MA
anoxic waters (Filella and May 2003). In reality, several sources have reported the presence of
D

both Sb(III) and Sb(V) in both oxic and anoxic waters, which contradicts the calculated
TE

thermodynamic data (Andreae and Froelich 1984; Filella et al. 2009). Some researchers have

attributed this to the result of biological activity, however, others have indicated the more likely
P
CE

causes, slow oxidation kinetics between Sb(III) and oxygen in oxic waters and Sb(III) oxidation

to Sb(V) perhaps by polysulfide species (Quentel and Filella 2002; Helz et al. 2002; Leuz and
AC

Johnson 2005). Thermodynamic data for Sb(III) and Sb(V) is limited in literature as compared to

more common systems. According to the calculated Pourbaix diagram (Figure 1), the hydrolytic

Sb(V) species, Sb(OH)

6 , is dominant at pH values greater than ~ 2.5 under oxic conditions. At

reasonably reducing conditions, the dominant hydrolytic Sb(III) species is Sb(OH)+

2 , at pH

values less than ~ 2, Sb(OH)o3 , at pH values between ~ 2 and 12, and Sb(OH)
4 , at pH values

higher than ~ 12 (Krupka and Serne 2002). For very dilute systems such as the one depicted in

Figure 1, < 0.001M Sb, the dominant species are said to be independent of antimony

concentrations. However, where more concentrated solutions are concerned, > 0.001M Sb, Sb(V)

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

may form polynuclear species under acidic conditions (pH < 7). Sb(III) is insignificantly affected

by this at concentrations lower than 0.1M Sb (Krupka and Serne 2002). The polynuclear Sb(V)

5 6
species are Sb12 (OH)4 7
64 , Sb12 (OH)65 , Sb12 (OH)66 , and Sb12 (OH)67 (Accornero et al. 2008).

PT
Some stability diagrams for aqueous antimony species are presented as follows, although, it must

RI
be noted that the data relates to very dilute solutions and direct application to concentrated

SC
solutions may not be relevant.

Figure 2 displays the change in the EhpH diagram of Figure 1 when antimony

NU
concentrations are increased to 107 and 105 molL1, resulting in solid species (Sb2O3 and

Sb2O4). The solubility of the solid species was obtained from limited thermodynamic data and
MA
the results are qualitative at most, as stated by Krupka and Serne (2002).

Figure 3 displays the speciation of Sb(III) and Sb(V) as a function of pH in anoxic and
D
TE

oxic conditions, respectively, for dilute aqueous solutions.

Figure 4 displays the change in speciation of an Sb(III) aqueous system, studied over a
P

large temperature range (25 300 oC) by ZakaznovaHerzog and Porkovski (2006). It can be
CE

seen that in the acidic region, there is a small change in speciation (relatively unchanged when
AC

comparing 25 oC and 300 oC). On the other hand, there is a significant decrease in the relative

speciation of Sb(OH)o3 , demonstrating decreased stability at higher temperatures.

4.2 The SbSH2O system

Due to the relevance of antimony in hydrothermal sulfidic solutions, acidic and

especially alkaline, many studies have been carried out to understand the complex speciation of

the SbSH2O system. The results are quite varied and Filella et al. (2002b) have suggested

discrepancies may arise from variation in the concentrations of reagents (Na2S in particular) and

the crystallinity of stibnite, Sb2S3. Filella and May (2003) have compiled the best available

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

thermodynamic data on the antimonysulfur system, presented in Table 6. Relevant speciation

diagrams at different pH values of sulfiderich freshwaters are plotted in Figure 5. Both

antimony sulfide and hydroxide species, SbS43 and Sb(OH)

6 , co-exist at virtually all pH

PT
conditions, the relative abundance of each depends on the redox condition of the solution (p). In

RI
the literature, redox values are stated as Eh (voltage in reference to the standard hydrogen

electrode) or to p, which is the negative log activity of the electron (log(e)), the two are

SC
(2.303)RT
related by the Nernst factor: Eh = p; where R is the gas constant (8.314 Jmol1K1), T
F

NU
is the absolute temperature (K), and F is the Faraday constant (96,485 Cmol1) At 25 oC, Eh
MA
(0.05916 p) V.

Antimonysulfide speciation has been researched at different antimony concentrations

D

and temperatures. Sherman et al. (2000) studied the complexation of Sb(V) in alkaline sulfide
TE

solutions between 25 and 300 oC, and stated that the dominant species was Sb(HS)+
4 for all three
P

o
solutions under 150 C, while higher temperatures yielded mixedligand species
CE

Sb(HS)4n (OH)+ o
n , which further polymerize past 250 C. The three solutions were: (1) 0.1M Sb

+ 1.15M Na2S; (2) 0.05M Sb + 0.2M NaHS + 0.06M NaOH; (3) 0.05M Sb + 0.2M NaHS +
AC

1M NaCl + 0.06M NaOH. The study incorporated the use of Xray absorption fine structure

spectra (EXAFS) to determine Sb(V) speciation in solution, which could not distinguish between

unprotonated SbS43 and fully protonated Sb(HS)+ +

4 , Sherman et al. (2000) chose Sb(HS)4 as the

more likely species based on the higher presence of HS in the system. In another study,

conducted by Mosselmans et al. (2000), EXAFS analysis was performed on a variety of

antimony concentrated solutions and temperatures, ranging from 1100 mM Sb, 0.009 2.5 M

HS, and 193200 oC. Many of the solutions contained species of antimony bonded to four

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

sulfur atoms, thus consistent with the SbS43 species, supporting the results of Sherman et al.

(2000) and Filella and May (2003) (depicted in Figure 5).

Thermodynamic data for the aqueous antimony system has been critically reviewed by

PT
the aforementioned authors (notably Filella and May 2003) and appears to model the real

RI
systems (SbH2O, SbClH2O, and SbSH2O) fairly well. Discrepancies with experimental

SC
data are attributed to kinetic factors that still require extensive study, especially where complex

environmental and biological systems are concerned. Dilute aqueous antimony systems (<

NU
o
0.001M Sb) are well characterized and are remarkably simple with Sb(OH)
6 and Sb(OH)3 as the

dominant species in oxidizing and reducing conditions, respectively, over the environmental pH
MA
range (5 9). For concentrated systems (> 0.001M Sb), possible formation of Sb(V) polynuclear

species and precipitation of Sb2O3 (Sb3+ 3+ 5+

2 O3 ) and Sb2O4 (Sb Sb O4 ) phases results in a
D
TE

heterogeneous system. For aqueous antimonysulfide systems, based on individual studies

several researchers have proposed SbS43 (with Sb(OH)

6 ) as the dominant species in oxidizing
P

conditions and SbS2 (with Sb(OH)o3 ) in reducing conditions. Temperature effects on speciation
CE

have been much less studied and point to decreased stability of Sb(V) and Sb(III) species with
AC

increased temperature in the alkaline region.

5. Antimony oxidation Sb(III) to Sb(V)

Over the past decade, the oxidation of antimony (with different oxidants) in aqueous

solutions has received much interest in particular in relation to its adsorption onto iron and

manganese hydroxides and oxyhydroxides (Belzile et al. 2001; Leuz et al. 2006b). Another

interest has been the study of antimony oxidation, especially the kinetics, from +3 to +5 since it

plays a major role on the environmental speciation of antimony and thus greatly impacts its

reactivity. Some of the information that is of relevance has been summarized.

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

5.1 Oxygen (O2)

Leuz and Johnson (2005) studied the oxidation kinetics of Sb(III) via atmospheric

oxygen at 25 oC and concluded that there was no significant oxidation between the pH range 3.6

PT
to 9.8, even after 200 days. In the pH range of 10.9 to 12.9, they reported significant oxidation

RI
within 4 to 420 days, more so at pH 12.9. They credited the relative increase in oxidation at

higher pH to a more thermodynamically favourable transformation of Sb(III) species. It is more

SC
o
favourable to change from Sb(OH)
4 to Sb(OH)6 (+45.8 kJ/mol) than Sb(OH)3 to Sb(OH)6

NU
(+110.6 kJ/mol). At higher pH, the presence of Sb(OH)
4 is increased (Figure 3(a)), especially

past pH 12. Further, there is evidence that the oxidation kinetics can be increased due to
MA
hydrolysis, as noted by other researchers for cases of Fe(II) and Mn(II) oxidation (Leuz and

Johnson 2005).
D
TE

5.2 Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)

Hydrogen peroxide is a stronger oxidizing agent than oxygen and is present in surface
P
CE

waters between 108 and 106 M, which is why it is also considered in oxidation kinetic studies of

natural waters (Leuz and Johnson 2005). Only in the past decade has the influence of H2O2 on
AC

the oxidation kinetics been studied with effective results. Leuz and Johnson (2005) and Quentel

et al. (2004) both studied the oxidation kinetics of Sb(III) by hydrogen peroxide and determined

it was much faster than oxygen. The former researchers determined the reaction kinetics of

Sb(III) to be independent of pH after ~ 11.7, below this it is first order dependent on pH,

following the rate law:

d[Sb(III)]tot
= [Sb(III)]tot [H2 O2 ]tot (k dependent on pH below 11.7) (1)
dt

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

This pH dependence of oxidation was also validated by Quentel et al. (2004) in the pH range of 8

to 9.7 and stated that there was no detection of oxidation below pH 7, where the existence of

Sb(OH)o3 prevailed. Quentel et al. (2004) proposed the identical rate law for alkaline solutions,

PT
however, also elaborated on its ionic strength and temperature dependence, where an increase in

RI
both variables demonstrated linear increase in the oxidation rate:

d[Sb(III)]tot

SC
= [Sb(III)]tot [H2 O2 ]tot (2)
dt

Where, log k = 1.26 + 1.01I 0.22I 2603/T

NU
5.3 Trace metal effects on oxidation kinetics
MA
Due to the presence of trace metals in many aqueous solutions containing antimony,

especially seawaters, their effects on Sb(III) oxidation by hydrogen peroxide has been the focus
D

of a few studies. The trace metals Cu(II), Mn(II), Zn(II), and Pb(II) were studied by Elleouet et
TE

al. (2005), while Fe(II) and Fe(III) effects were investigated by Leuz et al. (2006a). Elleouet et

al. (2005) concluded that the oxidation kinetics in the presence of most of the observed trace
P
CE

metals did indeed increase in the natural water pH range and concentrations. Zinc(II) had no

effect at all, whereas Cu(II), Mn(II), and Pb(II) did. Copper(II) accelerated the oxidation kinetics
AC

whereas the effect of Mn and Pb was not as pronounced. Leuz et al. (2006a) demonstrated the

effectiveness of ironassisted oxidation, where within the acidic pH range the cooxidation with

Sb(III) was similar for both Fe(II) and Fe(III). However, in the neutral to alkaline region, only

Fe(II)assisted oxidation was effective in accelerating oxidation kinetics by means of

intermediate oxidants (possibly Fe(IV)) consuming and regenerating Fe(II).

Based on these studies on Sb(III) oxidation, it was observed that at 25 oC oxygen was a

very poor oxidant in the pH range 3.6 9.8, it was determined to be significant in highly alkaline

solutions (pH > 12.9). Hydrogen peroxide was found to be a better oxidant than oxygen, where

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

its oxidative influence was proportional to pH (after pH 11.7, oxidation rate of Sb(III) remained

constant). The presence of many trace metals (Cu(II), Mn(II), Pb(II)) was found to generally

increase Sb(III) oxidation (Zn(II) had no impact at all) where Cu(II) greatly accelerated the

PT
kinetics. Iron assisted oxidation was also confirmed, both Fe(II) and Fe(III) increased the rate in

RI
the acidic region, however, only Fe(II) remained effective in the neutral to alkaline pH, possibly

due to intermediate oxidants such as Fe(IV).

SC
6. Ultimate sinks of antimony in the environment

NU
6.1 Potential candidates immobilizing antimony
MA
Historically, secondary antimony minerals formed as a result of primary mineral

dissolution in oxygenrich environments, where it was commonly accepted that antimony

D

(especially Sb(V)) was largely mobile in the supergene environment. This perception was in part
TE

based on the fact that the end antimony member in oxidizing conditions, antimony pentoxide

(Sb2O5), was unstable and thus unable to immobilize antimony (Vink 1996; Diemar et al. 2009;
P
CE

Filella et al. 2009). Relatively recent studies, however, have correctly noted that Sb2O5 is

metastable and by no means should be considered as a candidate that can fix antimony. It is, on
AC

the contrary, antimony is actually quite immobile in the supergene environment and appears to

be fixed by several minerals, formation of each depending on the geochemistry of its

surroundings. In Tables 1 and 2, various primary and secondary antimony minerals along with

their respective occurrences were summarized. Using this information, some minerals

(valentinite/snarmontite polymorphs Sb2O3, cervantite Sb2O4, romite Ca2Sb2O7,

bindheimite Pb2Sb2O7, schafarzikite FeSb2O4, and tripuhyite FeSbO4,) have been identified

by several researchers (Diemar et al. 2009; Mitsunobu et al. 2011; Leverett et al. 2012; and

Roper et al. 2012) to serve as possible model compounds for fixing antimony that was mobilized

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

as a result of mineral processing activities.. There is still a lack of reliable thermodynamic data,

however, relating to the formation of secondary minerals, especially Sb(V) precipitates from

aqueous solutions (Selim 2012; Roper et al. 2012). Furthermore, the kinetics of crystallization

PT
and transformation of secondary minerals into other ones still remains to be fully understood.

RI
Due to the abundance of calcium, magnesium, sodium and potassium in soils, antimony

compounds typically form precipitates with these elements. Many of these alkali metal

SC
hydroxyantimonate salts have a high solubility at ambient conditions: 0.4 gL1 for mopungite,

NU
Na[Sb(OH)6]; 0.5 gL1 for brandholzite, [Mg(H2O)6][Sb(OH)6]2; and 15 gL1 for potassium

hexahydroxoantimonate, K[Sb(OH)6] (Selim 2012). Calcium antimonates, normally referred to

MA
as the romite group, have shown to limit the solubility of antimony in supergene environments

such as shooting range and mine site soils, where antimony concentrations are extremely high
D
TE

(Okkenhaug et al. 2011). Many calcium antimonates such as Ca[Sb(OH)6]2 and Ca2Sb2O7 appear

to be among the most insoluble antimony compounds in soils, having a solubility of 0.016 gL1
P

and 0.040 mgL1, respectively, although it is important to note that the former has yet to be
CE

confirmed to be a naturally occurring mineral (Diemar et al. 2009; Selim 2012). Furthermore, the
AC

latter compound romite, Ca2Sb2O7, as reported by Diemar et al. (2009) was shown to have a

solubility that was three orders of magnitude smaller than previously reported by other

researchers, which was attributed to the higher crystallinity of the compound. The synthesis pH

can also have a profound effect on the solubility of the mineral, Cornelis et al. (2011)

synthesized romite at pH 6.5 and 12 and showed that the resulting precipitate formula was

Ca1+xSb2O6OH22x. With increasing pH, the calcium content in the precipitate increased

(Ca(OH)2 was used to reach pH 12 while hydroxyl content decreased, reaching the ideal romite

formula (Ca2Sb2O7) at higher pH. The researchers concluded that calcium leached incongruently

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

from the synthetic romites, however, antimonate was less soluble from those romites made in

alkaline conditions. Thus, conditions of mineral synthesis, mainly the ratio Sb:Ca and pH, can

influence the final crystalline structure and therefore its stability (Selim 2012).

PT
Antimony species, especially oxyanions, have shown to form precipitates in soils with

RI
heavy metals as well. Heavy metals normally include lead, nickel, and iron, and are usually more

plentiful in areas near anthropogenic sites. In particular, bindheimite, Pb2Sb2O7, and iron

SC
antimonates schafarzikite, FeSb2O4, and tripuhyite, FeSbO4, have demonstrated extremely low

NU
solubilities, up to 9.3 gL1 and a few gL1, respectively (Diemar et al. 2009; Selim 2012).

There is also ample evidence of adsorption of antimony onto iron and manganese oxyhydroxides
MA
that largely limit mobility in oxic environments (Belzile et al. 2001; Mitsunobu et al. 2010).

Due to its increasing documentation in the environment along with demonstrated

D
TE

industrial applications, tripuhyite has been the subject of several studies. Only in the past decade

has it received more attention as a mineral that could limit the mobility of antimony. Its historic
P

occurrences were likely overlooked because of its physical resemblance to goethite (Diemar et
CE

al. 2009; Leverett et al., 2012). Moreover, it has also been found in soils near antimony mine
AC

tailing sites. Mitsunobu et al. (2011) speculated that it likely formed in the aqueous wastewater

solution and subsequently adsorbed onto soil grains. If this was the case, then tripuhyite may

limit the mobility of antimony in both water and soil systems. Lastly, Leverett et al. (2012) have

associated both tripuhyite and schafarzikite as being ultimate sinks of antimony in the natural

environment because of their exceptional stabilities, likewise, Roper et al. (2012) concur and

state that these minerals are extraordinarily important with respect to immobilizing Sb under

supergene conditions at ambient temperatures.

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

6.2 Stability of tripuhyite and schafarzikite

With evergrowing interest in antimony especially in natural systems, several

researchers have highlighted the large occurrences of tripuhyite and schafarzikite in the

PT
supergene environment, indicating minerals with reasonably high stabilities (Diemar et al. 2009;

RI
Mitsunobu et al. 2011; Leverett et al. 2012; and Roper et al. 2012). As such, preliminary stability

studies showed that these minerals can limit the mobility of antimony to a few gL1 in the soil

SC
environment (Selim, 2012). Thus far, indepth thermodynamic stability analyses of the two

NU
minerals are limited to a few reports in the literature. A detailed investigation of the stabilities of

tripuhyite and schafarzikite was conducted by Leverett et al. (2012) with important findings. The
MA
authors synthesized both minerals and conducted solubility tests, resulting in stability constants

of log K = 10.68 0.10 and Gfo = 836.8 2.2 kJ/mol for tripuhyite (25 oC, 0.195 M HNO3),
D

and log K = 0.81 0.01 and Gfo = 959.4 4.3 kJ/mol for schafarzikite (25 oC, 0.1 M HNO3).
TE

They further extrapolated high temperature Gibbs free energies (from 771981 K) from
P

relationships determined by Swaminathan and Sreedharan (2003) and found these calculated
CE

values in excellent agreement with theirs at 298 K, demonstrating the viability of the relationship
AC

over a very large temperature range. To illustrate the FeSbH2O behaviour for dilute systems at

ambient temperatures, a Pourbaix diagram (Figure 6) was developed based on reactions and log

K values outlined in Leverett et al. (2012), which could prove useful in tripuhyite synthesis from

aqueous solutions. Antimony immobilization by means of tripuhyite synthesis is favoured over

schafarzikite as the former is stable over a larger pH range as well as residing in the oxic region,

which correlate directly to the supergene environment.

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

7. Review of tripuhyite synthesis

Since at least the 1980s, tripuhyite has received attention for its properties as a catalyst

for hydrocarbon (amm)oxidation and gas sensing technologies (Teller et al. 1985; Centi et al.

PT
1986; Tojo et al. 2008). There are a few methods of preparation, most of which consist of high

RI
temperature treatment rather than complete insolution crystallization. The traditional

methodology has been insolution precursor precipitation with subsequent high temperature

SC
calcination or solely high temperature calcination of iron and antimony compounds. The main

NU
reason for adopting this method was that the insolution precipitation method almost always

resulted in amorphous or poorly crystalline tripuhyite, not suitable for the intended application
MA
thus requiring high temperature treatments for inducing crystallinity. There are many research

papers that have followed this methodology and it appears to have been the accepted norm where
D
TE

tripuhyite, or sometimes referred to as iron(III) antimonate, production is concerned. Although

these methods may not be necessarily suitable for direct application to treatment of effluents,
P

metallurgical flue dusts or residues, nevertheless, they can provide useful insight, hence they are
CE

reviewed.
AC

7.1 Precipitation and calcination

Iron and antimony compounds (equimolar Fe and Sb, various initial concentrations,

some researchers used 0.2M) are introduced into an acidic medium (very acidic to mildly acidic),

typically hydrochloric or nitric acid, followed by dropwise neutralization with 1M ammonia or

ammonium hydroxide to neutral or alkaline pH (7 10) (Berry et al. 1987; Gadgil et al. 1995;

Tianshu and Hing 1999; Sasaki 2000; Huang et al. 2006, Nag et al. 2012). The reaction

mechanism is very complex and changes based on antimony (III,V) and iron (II,III) initial

oxidation states and whether a chloride or sulfate system is employed, generally, the assumption

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

is that an amorphous tripuhyite precipitate eventually forms (although other competitive theories

also exist which state that iron hydroxides precipitate after which antimony ions subsequently

adsorb thereby creating an intermediate amorphous compound). This precursor precipitate is then

PT
filtered, washed, dried, ground and then calcined in an oven at varying temperatures (25 1000
o
C) and 3 8 hrs of time (Figure 7 and 8). An enhancement to this procedure was introduced by

RI
Nag et al. (2012) where prior to and after neutralization the solution was sonicated with

SC
ultrasound for 30 minutes, after which the precipitate was calcined at lower temperatures (300

NU
and 450 oC). The results indicate the presence of tripuhyite at lower temperatures in comparison

to historic results, and, increased crystallinity at higher calcination temperatures (Figure 8(b)).
MA
7.2 Grinding and/or calcination
D

7.2.1 Grinding and calcination

TE

A few studies have tried to determine the effectiveness of solidstate reactions

(grinding) prior to calcination as opposed to precipitation. Hematite, Fe2O3, ground with

P
CE

antimony trioxide, Sb2O3, followed by calcination was the method used in studies by Tianshu

and Hing (1999) and Huang et al. (2005). The results demonstrate the plausibility of producing
AC

tripuhyite in this fashion, however, due to the incongruent oxidation of both compounds, the

production of tripuhyite still takes place at fairly high calcination temperatures (> 800 oC) with

other species still present until ~ 1000 oC, the reactions are given in Equations (1) and (2):

1
Sb2 O3 + O2 Sb2 O4 (1)
2
1
Sb2 O4 + Fe2 O3 + O2 FeSbO4 (2)
2

7.2.2 Grinding only

The production of tripuhyite by milling without the addition of heat or subsequent

calcination was studied by Berry and Ren (2004) and Tojo et al. (2008). Berry and Ren (2004)

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

used mixtures of Fe2O3 and Sb2O3 at various grind times to determine phase changes of the

compounds and residence time requirements for tripuhyite synthesis. Their results are

summarized in Figure 9 where the onset of tripuhyite formation takes place at ~ 190 hours, after

PT
which its crystallinity increases with more grind time. Tojo et al. (2008) also performed

RI
mechanical milling at room temperature on iron and antimony powders, however, they chose

iron oxyhydroxide (goethite), FeOOH, and antimony pentoxide, Sb2O5, as their starting raw

SC
materials, the reaction given by Equation (3):

NU
2FeOOH + Sb2 O5 2FeSbO4 + H2 O (3)

As a result of the substitution, the residence time for tripuhyite synthesis was considerably
MA
reduced, where the onset of formation took place at ~ 1 hour after which subsequent grinding

resulted in increased crystallinity (Figure 10(a)). Moreover, the authors also varied the starting
D
TE

Fe:Sb ratio to determine its effect, the results in Figure 10(b) show the decreasing peak intensity

of tripuhyite with increasing Fe:Sb ratios, demonstrating the importance of initial Fe:Sb ratios on
P

product crystallinity.
CE

From an industrial point of view, synthesizing tripuhyite for market or environmental

AC

waste disposal from these methods, whether calcination or grinding alone at room temperatures,

seems to be very energy intensive and therefore costly. A process that is cost effective and better

suited for large scale miningderived Sbbearing waste treatment is favoured. Although

unsuccessful up to date in the case of Sb compounds, insolution crystallization seems to be an

attractive method considering that antimony is either in effluent solutions or previously dissolved

before being fixed in mineral processing applications. Historically, the very stable arsenic

compound scorodite, FeAsO42H2O, has been produced in solution to immobilize arsenic, either

with hydrothermal autoclave treatment or supersaturation control at relatively low temperatures

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(< 100 oC), yielding highly crystalline products (Filippou and Demopoulos 1997; Fujita et al.

2009; Demopoulos 2009). Antimony, which has many similarities with arsenic, can likely be

treated in solution to yield highly crystalline tripuhyite. Mitsunobu et al. (2011) alluded to this

PT
methodology where tripuhyite was observed in mine soils, the authors believed its formation

RI
likely involved direct precipitation via neutralization from the acidic mine wastewater.

SC
8. Summary

In comparison to historical practices, antimony, like arsenic, is being processed at a

NU
larger scale because of increased mining activities. As a result, there is a higher probability of
MA
encountering antimony in the supergene environment and since it is classified as a toxic

substance (a carcinogen perhaps) its immobilization is of paramount importance.

D

Its concentration in the air, water, and soil systems was reviewed and relevant
TE

worldwide limits on its disposal were given. Its industrial processing (mineral processing,
P

pyrometallurgy, and hydrometallurgy) and treatments (direct recycling or leaching residues and
CE

speiss) were briefly mentioned. Antimony speciation was presented at various conditions (pH,

Eh, temperature, and concentration) to provide a basis of its aqueous behaviour, an important
AC

foundation for industrial effluent treatment. Information on oxidation kinetics was provided to

demonstrate the effects of common oxidants (O2, H2O2, trace metals Cu(II), Mn(II), Pb(II),

Zn(II), Fe(II), and Fe(III)). For immobilizing antimony in the environment several mineral

candidates were named, a few of which were very promising (romite, Ca2Sb2O7, bindheimite,

Pb2Sb2O7, schafarzikite, FeSb2O4, and tripuhyite, FeSbO4). Of these, tripuhyite was proposed as

the most attractive candidate as it limited antimony solubility to a few gL1 (lowest reported

solubility in the literature), extremely stable in oxidizing conditions and environmentally

relevant pH (5 9), and possible to synthesize from industrial effluents given the correct

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

conditions (Fe:Sb ratio, pH, temperature). Further, it was demonstrated that with post

precipitation treatments (grinding and/or calcination) tripuhyite mineral crystallinity could be

greatly increased (higher crystallinity was shown to correlate with increased mineral stability).

PT
The material presented in this review provides a general context of antimony in the

RI
metallurgical industry, its chemical behaviour in aqueous systems, and proposes a few minerals

SC
capable of effectively fixing antimony (with preference to tripuhyite). Such information should

prove useful to those seeking to immobilize antimony.

NU
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by NSERCs Discovery Grant program.
MA
D
P TE
CE
AC

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

References

Accornero, M., Marini, L., & Lelli, M. (2008). The dissociation constant of antimonic acid at
1040C. Journal of Solution Chemistry, 37(6), 785800.

PT
lvarezAyuso, E., Otones, V., Murciego, A, & GarcaSnchez, A. (2013). Evaluation of
different amendments to stabilize antimony in mining polluted soils. Chemosphere,
90(8), 22339.

RI
Anderson, C.G. (2001). Hydrometallurgically treating antimonybearing industrial wastes. JOM,
53(1), 1820.

SC
Anderson, C.G., & Twidwell, L.G. (2008). The alkaline sulfide hydrometallurgical separation,
recovery and fixation of tin, arsenic, antimony, mercury and gold. Lead and Zinc, (3),

NU
121132.

Anderson, C.G. (2012). The metallurgy of antimony. Chemie Der Erde Geochemistry, 72(S4),
MA
38.

Andreae, M.O., & Froelich, P.N. (1984). Arsenic, antimony, and germanium biogeochemistry in
the Baltic Sea. Tellus, 36B(2), 101117.
D
TE

Awe, S. A., & Sandstrm, . (2010). Selective leaching of arsenic and antimony from a
tetrahedrite rich complex sulphide concentrate using alkaline sulphide solution.
Minerals Engineering, 23(15), 12271236.
P

Awe, S. A., Sundkvist, J.-E., Bolin, N.-J., & Sandstrm, . (2013). Process flowsheet
CE

development for recovering antimony from Sb-bearing copper concentrates. Minerals

Engineering, 49, 4553.
AC

Belzile, N., Chen, Y.W., & Wang, Z. (2001). Oxidation of antimony(III) by amorphous iron
and manganese oxyhydroxides. Chemical Geology, 174, 379387.

Belzile, N., Chen, Y.W., & Filella, M. (2011). Human exposure to antimony: I. sources and
intake. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 41(14), 13091373.

Berry, F.J., Holden, J.G., Loretto, M.H., & Urch, D.S. (1987). Iron antimonate. Journal of the
Chemical Society, Dalton Transactions, (7), 17271731.

Berry, F.J., & Ren, X. (2004). The formation of metal antimonates by mechanical milling and the
conversion of Sb2O4 to Sb2O4. Journal of Materials Science, 39(4), 11791183.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (1999), Canadian Environmental Quality

Objectives, Canadian National Ambient Air Quality Objectives: Appendix 1. [Online].
Available: http://ceqg-rcqe.ccme.ca/download/en/133/. [Accessed: March, 2014].

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Cao, H., Chen, J., Yuan, H., & Zheng, G. (2010). Preparation of pure SbCl3 from lead anode
slime bearing high antimony and low silver. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society
of China, 20(12), 23972403.

Centi, G., & Trifiro, F. (1986). Oxidation catalysts based on antimony mixed oxides with rutile

PT
type structures. Catalysis Reviews, 28(23), 165184.

Cornelis, G., Johnson, C.A., Gerven, T. Van, & Vandecasteele, C. (2008). Leaching mechanisms

RI
of oxyanionic metalloid and metal species in alkaline solid wastes: A review. Applied
Geochemistry, 23(5), 955976.

SC
Cornelis, G., Gerven, T. Van, Snellings, R., Verbinnen, B., Elsen, J., & Vandecasteele, C.
(2011). Stability of pyrochlores in alkaline matrices: solubility of calcium antimonate.
Applied Geochemistry, 26(5), 809817.

NU
Council of the European Union, (1998). Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the
quality of water intended for human consumption. Official Journal L 330, 05/12/1998,
MA
pp. 3254. [Online]. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:31998L0083. [Accessed: September, 2014].

Demopoulos, G.P. (2009). Aqueous precipitation and crystallization for the production of
D

particulate solids with desired properties. Hydrometallurgy, 96(3), 199214.

TE

Diemar, G.A., Filella, M., Leverett, P., & Williams, P.A. (2009). Dispersion of antimony from
oxidizing ore deposits. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 81(9), 15471553.
P

Elleouet, C., Quentel, F., Madec, C.L., & Filella, M. (2005). The effect of the presence of trace
CE

metals on the oxidation of Sb(III) by hydrogen peroxide in aqueous solution. Journal of

Environmental Monitoring, 7(12), 12205.
AC

Filella, M., Belzile, N., & Chen, Y. (2002a). Antimony in the environment: a review focused on
natural waters. I. Occurrence. EarthScience Reviews, 57, 125176.

Filella, M., Belzile, N., & Chen, Y. (2002b). Antimony in the environment: a review focused on
natural waters. II. Relevant solution chemistry. EarthScience Reviews, 59, 265285.

Filella, M., & May, P.M. (2003). Computer simulation of the lowmolecularweight inorganic
species distribution of antimony(III) and antimony(V) in natural waters. Geochimica et
Cosmochimica Acta, 67(21), 40134031.

Filella, M., Williams, P.A., & Belzile, N. (2009). Antimony in the environment: knowns and
unknowns. Environmental Chemistry, 6(2), 95.

Filippou, D., & Demopoulos, G.P. (1997). Arsenic immobilization by controlled scorodite
precipitation. JOM, 14(12), 5255.

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fujita, T., Taguchi, R., Abumiya, M., Matsumoto, M., Shibata, E., & Nakamura, T. (2009).
Effect of pH on atmospheric scorodite synthesis by oxidation of ferrous ions: Physical
properties and stability of the scorodite. Hydrometallurgy, 96(3), 189198.

Gannon, K., & Wilson, D.J. (1986). Removal of antimony from aqueous systems. Separation

PT
Science and Technology, 21(5), 475493.

Gadgil, M.M., & Kulshreshtha, S.K. (1995). CO oxidation over Pd/FeSbO4, catalyst. Journal of

RI
Molecular Catalysis A: Chemical, 211222.

Gebel, T. (1997). Arsenic and antimony: comparative approach on mechanistic toxicology.

SC
ChemicoBiological Interactions, 107(3), 13144.

Government of Canada (2014). Schedule 4 Metal Mining Effluent Regulations. Nov 25, 2014.

NU
[Online]. Available: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2002-222/page-
17.html#h-51. [Accessed: December, 2014].
MA
Guo, X., Wu, Z., & He, M. (2009). Removal of antimony(V) and antimony(III) from drinking
water by coagulationflocculationsedimentation (CFS). Water Research, 43(17),
432735.
D

He, M., Wang, X., Wu, F., & Fu, Z. (2012). Antimony pollution in China. The Science of the
TE

Total Environment, 421422(19), 4150.

Helz, G.R., Valerio, M.S., & Capps, N.E. (2002). Antimony speciation in alkaline sulfide
P

solutions: role of zerovalent sulfur. Environmental Science & Technology, 36(5), 9438.
CE

Hua, Y., Yang, Y., & Zhu, F. (2003). Volatilization kinetics of Sb2S3 in steam atmosphere.
Journal of Materials Sciences and Technology, 19(6), 619622.
AC

Huang, Y., & Ruiz, P. (2005). Antimony dispersion and phase evolution in the Sb2O3Fe2O3
system. The Journal of Physical Chemistry. B, 109(47), 224205.

Huang, Y., & Ruiz, P. (2006). The nature of antimonyenriched surface layer of FeSb mixed
oxides. Applied Surface Science, 252(22), 78497855.

IARC (1980). Antimony trioxide and antimony trisulfide. Lyon, 47, 291305.

Jeffrey, M., & Anderson, C.G. (2003). A fundamental study of the alkaline sulfide leaching of
gold. The European Journal of Mineral Processing and Environmental Protection, 3(3),
336343.

KabataPendias, A. (2011). Trace Elements in Soils and Plants, 4th edition. Boca Raton, Florida:
CRC Press, pp. 534.

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Kanarskii, A.V., & Adamov, E.V. (2012). Development of a low-waste technology for
processing sulfide gold-antimony concentrates. Metallurgist, 56(1), 2430.

Krupka, K.M., & Serne, R.J. (2002). Geochemical Factors Affecting the Behavior of Antimony,
Cobalt, Europium, Technetium, and Uranium in Vadose Sediments. Washington:

PT
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, pp. 95.

Lager, T., & Forssberg, K.S.E. (1989a). Beneficiation characteristics of antimony minerals. A

RI
review - Part 1. Minerals Engineering, 2(3), 321336.

Lager, T., & Forssberg, K.S.E. (1989b). Current processing technology for antimony-bearing

SC
ores. A review - Part 2. Minerals Engineering, 2(4), 543556.

Leuz, A.K., & Johnson, C.A. (2005). Oxidation of Sb(III) to Sb(V) by O2 and H2O2 in aqueous

NU
solutions. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 69(5), 11651172.

Leuz, A.K., Hug, S.J., Wehrli, B., & Johnson, C.A. (2006a). Ironmediated oxidation of
MA
antimony(III) by oxygen and hydrogen peroxide compared to arsenic(III) oxidation.
Environmental Science & Technology, 40(8), 256571.

Leuz, A., Monch, H., & Johnson, C.A. (2006b). Sorption of Sb(III) and Sb(V) to goethite:
D

Influence on Sb(III) oxidation and mobilization. Environmental Science & Technology,

TE

40(23), 72777282.

Leverett, P., Reynolds, J.K., Roper, A.J., & Williams, P.A. (2012). Tripuhyite and schafarzikite:
P

two of the ultimate sinks for antimony in the natural environment. Mineralogical
Magazine, 76(4), 891902.
CE

Lide, D.R. (ed.) (2007). The Elements. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 87th edition.
Boca Raton, Florida: Taylor and Francis.
AC

Liu, W., Yang, T., Zhang, D., Chen, L., & Liu, Y. (2014). A new pyrometallurgical process for
producing antimony white from by-product of lead smelting. JOM, 66(9), 16941700.

Mitsunobu, S., Takahashi, Y., Terada, Y., & Sakata, M. (2010). Antimony(V) incorporation into
synthetic ferrihydrite, goethite, and natural iron oxyhydroxides. Environmental Science
& Technology, 44(10), 37128.

Mitsunobu, S., Takahashi, Y., Utsunomiya, S., Marcus, M. a., Terada, Y., Iwamura, T., &
Sakata, M. (2011). Identification and characterization of nanosized tripuhyite in soil
near Sb mine tailings. American Mineralogist, 96(7), 11711181.

Mosselmans, J.F.W., Helz, G.R., Pattrick, R.A.D., Charnock, J.M., & Vaughan, D.J. (2000). A
study of speciation of Sb in bisulfide solutions by Xray absorption spectroscopy.
Applied Geochemistry, 15, 879889.

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nag, P., Banerjee, S., Lee, Y., Bumajdad, A., Lee, Y., & Devi, P.S. (2012). Sonochemical
synthesis and properties of nanoparticles of FeSbO4. Inorganic Chemistry, 51(2), 844
850.

Okkenhaug, G., Zhu, Y.G., Luo, L., Lei, M., Li, X., & Mulder, J. (2011). Distribution,

PT
speciation and availability of antimony (Sb) in soils and terrestrial plants from an active
Sb mining area. Environmental Pollution, 159(10), 242734.

RI
Okkenhaug, G., Breedveld, G.D., Kirkeng, T., Lgreid, M., Mhlum, T., & Mulder, J. (2013).
Treatment of air pollution control residues with iron rich waste sulfuric acid: does it
work for antimony (Sb)? Journal of Hazardous Materials, 248249, 15966.

SC
Puigdomenech, I. (2009). HYDRA: Hydrochemical EquilibriumConstant Database, 18th August
2009 ed. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.

NU
Puigdomenech, I. (2010). MEDUSA: Make Equilibrium Diagrams Using Sophisticated
Algorithms, 16th December 2010 ed. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
MA
Qin, W., Luo, H., Liu, W., Zheng, Y., Yang, K., & Han, J. (2015). Mechanism of stibnite
volatilization at high temperature. Journal of Central South University, 22(3), 868873.
D

Quentel, F., & Filella, M. (2002). Determination of inorganic antimony species in seawater by
TE

differential pulse anodic stripping voltammetry: stability of the trivalent state. Analytica
Chimica Acta, 452(2), 237244.
P

Quentel, F., Filella, M., Elleouet, C., & Madec, C.L. (2004). Kinetic studies on Sb(III)
oxidation by hydrogen peroxide in aqueous solution. Environmental Science &
CE

Technology, 38(10), 28438.

Rawat, J.P., & Singh, D.K. (1976). Synthesis, ionexchange properties and analytical
AC

applications of Iron(III) antimonate. Analytica Chimica Acta, 87, 157162.

Rawat, J.P., & Singh, B. (1984). Ion exchange equilibria between alkali metals and hydrogen
Ions on iron(III) antimonate, an inorganic ion exchanger. The Chemical Society of
Japan, 57(3), 862865.

Roper, A.J., Williams, P.A., & Filella, M. (2012). Secondary antimony minerals: phases that
control the dispersion of antimony in the supergene zone. Chemie Der Erde
Geochemistry, 72(S4), 914.

Sasaki, Y. (2000). Preparation and performance of iron antimonate catalysts for fluidbed
ammoxidation. Applied Catalysis A: General, 194195, 497505.

Selim, H.M. (Ed.). (2012). Competitive Sorption and Transport of Heavy Metals in Soils and
Geological Media Sorption. Florida, USA: CRC Press, pp. 119145.

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Sherman, D.M., Ragnarsdottir, K.V., & Oelkers, E.H. (2000). Antimony transport in
hydrothermal solutions: an EXAFS study of antimony (V) complexation in alkaline
sulfide and sulfide chloride brines at temperatures from 25 oC to 300 oC at Psat.
Chemical Geology, 167, 161167.

PT
Shortland, A.J. (2002). The use and origin of antimonate colorants in early Egyptian glass.
Archaeometry, 44(4), 517530.

RI
Solozhenkin, P.M., & Lyalikova-Medvedeva, N.N. (2001). Biotechnology of concentrate and
antimony ore processing. Journal of Mining Science, 37(5), 534541.

SC
Solozhenkin, P.M., & Alekseev, A.N. (2010a). Innovative processing and hydrometallurgical
treatment methods for complex antimony ores and concentrates. Part I. Journal of
Mining Science, 46(2), 203209.

NU
Solozhenkin, P.M., & Alekseev, A.N. (2010b). Innovative processing and hydrometallurgical
treatment methods for complex antimony ores and concentrates. Part II:
MA
hydrometallurgy of complex antimony ores. Journal of Mining Science, 46(4), 446452.

Swaminathan, K., & Sreedharan, O.M. (2003). High temperature stabilities of interoxides in the
system FeSbO and their comparison with the interoxides in other MSbO (M=Cr,
D

Ni or Co) systems. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 358, 4855.

TE

Teller, G., Brazdil, F., Grasselli, K., & Sohio, T. (1985). Phase cooperation in oxidation
catalysis. Structural studies of the iron antimonateantimony oxide system. Journal of
P

the Chemical Society, Faraday Transactions 1: Physical Chemistry in Condensed

Phases, 81, 16931704.
CE

Tianshu, Z., & Hing, P. (1999). FeSbO4 semiconductor ceramics: a new material for sensing
liquidpetroleum gas. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, 10, 509
AC

518.

Tojo, T., Zhang, Q., & Saito, F. (2008). Mechanochemical synthesis of FeSbO4based materials
from FeOOH and Sb2O5 powders. Powder Technology, 181(3), 281284.

Ubaldini, S., Vegli, F., Fornari, P., & Abbruzzese, C. (2000). Process flowsheet for gold and
antimony recovery from stibnite. Hydrometallurgy, 57(3), 187199.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1999). National Primary Drinking Water
Standards. USEPA Office of Water, Washington, DC, USA, Doc. 810F94001.

U.S. Geological Survey. (2015). Mineral commodity summaries 2015. U.S. Geological Survey.

Vink, B. W. (1996). Stability relations of antimony and arsenic compounds in the light of revised
and extended EhpH diagrams. Chemical Geology, 130(12), 2130.

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

WHO. (2006). Guidelines for Drinkingwater Quality. 3rd Edition. World Health Organization,
Geneva (Vol. 1, pp. 595).

Wilson, N.J., Craw, D., & Hunter, K. (2004). Antimony distribution and environmental mobility
at an historic antimony smelter site, New Zealand. Environmental Pollution, 129(2),

PT
25766.

Wilson, S. C., Lockwood, P. V, Ashley, P. M., & Tighe, M. (2010). The chemistry and

RI
behaviour of antimony in the soil environment with comparisons to arsenic: a critical
review. Environmental Pollution, 158(5), 116981.

SC
Wu, Z., He, M., Guo, X., & Zhou, R. (2010). Removal of antimony(III) and antimony(V) from
drinking water by ferric chloride coagulation: Competing ion effect and the mechanism
analysis. Separation and Purification Technology, 76(2), 184190.

NU
Yang, J.-G., Yang, S.-H., & Tang, C.-B. (2010). The membrane electrowinning separation of
antimony from a stibnite concentrate. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B-
MA
Process Metallurgy and Materials Processing Science, 41(3), 527534.

Yang, J.-G., Tang, C.-B., Chen, Y.-M., He, J., & Tang, M.-T. (2011). Separation of antimony
from a stibnite concentrate through a low-temperature smelting process to eliminate
D

SO2 emission. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B-Process Metallurgy and

TE

Materials Processing Science, 42(1), 749756.

Yang, J.-G., & Wu, Y.-T. (2014). A hydrometallurgical process for the separation and recovery
P

of antimony. Hydrometallurgy, 143, 6874.

CE

Ye, L., Tang, C., Chen, Y., Yang, S., Yang, J., & Zhang, W. (2015). One-step extraction of
antimony from low-grade stibnite in sodium carbonate sodium chloride binary molten
salt. Journal of Cleaner Production, 93, 134139.
AC

ZakaznovaHerzog, V.P., & Seward, T.M. (2006). Antimonous acid protonation/deprotonation

equilibria in hydrothermal solutions to 300C. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta,
70(9), 22982310.

33
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Mineral Stoichiometry Mineral Stoichiometry Mineral Stoichiometry

Andorite AgPbSb3S6 Gabrielite Tl6Ag3Cu6(As,Sb)9S21 Stibiconite Sb2O4H2O

Annivite Cu12(As,Bi,Sb)4S13 Geocronite Pb5(As,Sb)12S8 Stibiobismuthine (Bi,Sb)4S7
Aurostibite AuSb2 Gerstleyite Na2(As,Sb)8S132H2O Stibiocolumbite Sb(Nb,Ta)O4
Berthierite FeSb2S4 Gudmundite FeSbS Stibiodomeykite Cu3(As,Sb)

PT
Boulangerite Pb5Sb4S11 Horsfordite Cu6Sb Stibioenargite Cu3(As,Sb)4
Bournonite PbCuSbS3 Jamesonite Pb4FeSb6S14 Stibioluzonite Cu3(As,Sb)S4

RI
Breithauptite NiSb Kermesite Sb2S2O Stibio-tellurobismutite (Bi,Sb)2Te3
Cervantite Sb2O4 Livingstonite HgSb4S7 Stibnite Sb2S3
Cylindrite Pb3Sn4Sb2S14 Meneghinite Pb4Sb2S7 Tetrahedrite Cu12Sb4S13

SC
Dyscrasite Ag3Sb Ramdohrite Ag2Pb3Sb3S9 Ullmannite NiSbS
Falkmanite Pb3Sb2S6 Romeite 5CaO3Sb2O5 Valentinite Sb2O3
Famatinite Cu3SbS4 Senarmontite Sb2O3 Zinckenite PbSb2S4

NU
Franckeite Pb5Sn3Sb2S14 Stenhuggarite CaFeSbAs2O7
Freibergite (Cu,Ag)12Sb4S13 Stephanite Ag5SbS4
MA
Table 1 Primary antimony minerals, adapted from Anderson (2012).
D
P TE
CE
AC

34
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Mineral Stoichiometry Frequency of Occurrence

Biehlite [(Sb,As)O]2MoO4 1
Bindheimite Pb2Sb2O7 394
Bismutostibiconite BiSb2O6OH 6
Bottinoite Ni[Sb(OH)6]26H2O 14

PT
Brandholzite Mg[Sb(OH)6]26H2O 4
Braithwaiteite NaCu5(Ti,Sb)2O2(AsO4)[AsO3(OH)]28H2O 1
Brizziite NaSbO3 1

RI
Bystrmite MgSb2O6 2
Camerolaite Cu4Al2(HSbO4,SO4)CO3(OH)102H2O 10
Sb3+Sb5+O4

SC
Cervantite 227
Cetineite (K,Na)6(Sb2O3)6(SbS3)2[(H2O)6 - x(OH)x](x - 0.5) 6
Clinocervantite Sb3+Sb5+O4 2
Coquandite Sb6O8SO4H2O 7

NU
Cualstibite Cu2Al[Sb(OH)6](OH)6 4
Cyanophyllite Cu2Al[Sb(OH)6](OH)6 8
Jolbruggerite Pb3Zn3Sb5+As2O13(OH) MA 1
Kelyanite Hg12Sb(Cl,Br)3O6 1
Kermesite Sb2S2O 201
Klebelsbergite Sb4O4SO4(OH)2 15
Mallestigite Pb3Sb(SO4)(AsO4)(OH)63H2O 2
Mammothite Pb6Cu4AlSbO2(SO4)2Cl4(OH)16 7
D

Mopungite NaSb(OH)6 6
TE

Nadorite PbSbO2Cl 14
Onoratoite Sb8O11Cl2 2
Ordezite ZnSb2O6 2
P

Ottensite (Na,K)3(Sb2O3)3(SbS3)3H2O 1
Partzite Cu2Sb2(O,OH)7 57
CE

Peretaite CaSb4O4(SO4)2(OH)22H2O 4
Richelsdorfite Ca2Cu5[Sb(OH)6](AsO4)4Cl6H2O 43
Romite Ca2Sb2O7 32
AC

Rosiaite PbSb2O6 8
Sabelliite Cu2Zn(AsO4,SbO4)(OH)3 3
Schafarzikite FeSb2O4 11
Snarmontite Sb2O3 147
Shakhovite Hg4SbO3(OH)3 6
Stetefeldtite Ag2Sb2(O,OH)7 23
Stibiconite Sb3+Sb5+2O6(OH) 373
Stibioclaudetite AsSbO3 1
Theisite Cu5Zn5(AsO4,SbO4)2(OH)14 45
Thorikosite Pb3(Sb,As)O3(OH)Cl2 4
Tungstibite Sb2WO6 1
Tripuhyite FeSbO4 48
Valentinite Sb2O3 296
Zincalstibite Zn2Al[Sb(OH)6](OH)6 3

Table 2 Secondary antimony minerals, adapted from Roper et al. (2012).

35
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Soil Sb
concentration Contamination Source Comments
range (mgkg1)

80,200 Smelter site From one sample classified as soil

2.5 175 Urban soils impacted by lead zinc smelter 0 25 cm surface soils

PT
0 1,090 Area surrounding a goldantimony mine A horizon samples up to 7.5 km from tailing dam (in prevailing
wind direction)
11.9 710 Previous mining activities Low levels of watersoluble Sb

RI
27.7 15,100 Previous mining activities Shoots and leaf accumulation for 3 species of up to 1,160 and
1,370 mgkg1
2.5 237 Previous mining activities Soils classified as highly contaminated

SC
31 5,986 Abandoned mine area B horizon soils, Portugal
0.1 39.4 Antimony mine 300 km upstream Floodplain in NSW Australia, moderately contaminated with Sb
180 554 Antimony mine area approx. 2 km upstream Rhizosphere soil adjacent to contaminated creek, NSW

NU
7.4 13,610 Previous mining activities A horizon soils
26 1,150 Mining contaminated area, S. France Surface soils
35 17,500 Shooting range, Switzerland < 0.5 mm soil fraction. High concentrations associated with Sb in
MA bullets
1,300 17,500 Shooting range 0 0.45 cm depth
629 8,230 Shooting range 0.2 10 cm depth Rhizosphere soil

Table 3 Antimony concentration in contaminated soils from anthropogenic activities, adapted from Wilson et al. (2010).
D
P TE
CE

Mine Production (metric tons)

Country Ore Reserves (metric tons)
2013 2014

United States -- -- --
AC

Bolivia 5,000 5,000 310,000

Burma 9,000 9,000 --
China 120,000 125,000 950,000
Russia 7,000 7,000 350,000
South Africa 3,100 3,100 27,000
Tajikistan 4,700 4,700 50,000
Other Countries 5,200 5,200 150,000

World Total (rounded) 154,000 160,000 1,800,000

Table 4 Worldwide antimony production and ore body reserves from 2013 and 2014, U.S. Geological Survey (2015).

36
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Reaction log

Sb(OH)o3 + 6H + + 6e 3H2 O + () 13.62

2Sb(OH)o3 3H2 O + () 8.480

PT
Sb(OH)o3 () () 0.2327
2Sb(OH)o3 3H2 O + (, ) 11.44

RI
2Sb(OH)o3 3H2 O + (, ) 10.00
Sb(OH)o3 H2 O + () 4.371

SC
2Sb(OH)o3 2H + + 2e + 2H2 O + () 1.680
4Sb(OH)o3 6H2 O + () 18.53

NU
2Sb(OH)o3 4H + + 4e + H2 O + () 37.26
4Sb(OH)o3 6H2 O + (, )
MA 18.56
4Sb(OH)o3 6H2 O + (, ) 17.71
Sb(OH)o3 + 3H + + 3e 3H2 O + () 12.26

Sb(OH)o3 + 3H + 3H2 O + + 0.01864

D

Sb(OH)o3 + 2H + 2H2 O + ()+ 1.190

TE

Sb(OH)o3 + H + H2 O + ()+
1.371

2Sb(OH)o3 + 4H + 4H2 O + ()+

3.545
P

Sb(OH)o3 + H2 O H + + ()
11.70
CE

Sb(OH)o3 + H2 O H + + 2e + ()+
24.61
Sb(OH)o3 + 2H2 O 2H + + 2e + () 22.33
AC

Sb(OH)o3 + 3H2 O 3H + + 2e + ()
25.15

Table 5 Best stability constant values for all acidbase and oxide antimony species are presented, adapted from
Filella and May (2003).

37
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Reaction log

2Sb(OH)o3 + 3S 2 + 6H + 6H2 O + () 91.83

2Sb(OH)o3 + 4S 2 + 7H + 6H2 O + 102.4

PT
2Sb(OH)o3 + 4S 2 + 6H + 6H2 O + 90.94

2Sb(OH)o3 + 4S 2 + 8H + 6H2 O + 105.9

RI
2Sb(OH)o3 + 2S 2 + 4H + 4H2 O + () 57.67

SC
Sb(OH)o3 + 3S 2 + 3H + 3H2 O + 46.80
Sb(OH)o3 + 2S 2 + 3H + 3H2 O + 47.92

NU
4Sb(OH)o3 + 7S 2 + 12H + 12H2 O + 183.2

Sb(OH)o3 + 4S 2 + 3H + 3H2 O + 2e + 68.20

Sb(OH)o3 + S 2 + H + H2 O + ()
MA 14.78

Table 6 Best stability constant values for all antimonysulfide species are presented, adapted from Filella and
May (2003).
D
P TE
CE
AC

38
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
Figure 1 EhpH diagram for dilute aqueous antimony solutions, calculated at 25 oC, 1010 molL1 Sb using
HYDRA and MEDUSA (Puigdomenech 2009; Puigdomenech 2010).
D
P TE
CE
AC

(a) (b)
Figure 2 EhpH diagram for more concentrated aqueous antimony solutions, calculated at 25 oC using HYDRA
and MEDUSA (Puigdomenech 2009; Puigdomenech 2010): (a) 107 molL1 Sb, (b) 105 molL1 Sb.

39
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
(a) (b)
Figure 3 Speciation diagram for (a) Sb(III), (b) Sb(V) in aqueous solutions as a function of pH, calculated at 25

NU
o
C using HYDRA and MEDUSA (Puigdomenech 2009; Puigdomenech 2010).
MA
D
P TE
CE
AC

Figure 4 Comparison of speciation of Sb(III) at 25 oC and 300 oC, 0.0001 molL1 Sb, reproduced from
ZakaznovaHerzog and Seward (2006).

40
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D
P TE
CE
AC

Figure 5 Antimonysulfide system speciation as a function of redox conditions at different pH values.

Concentrations: 1.109 molL1 Sb, 1.106 molL1 S, to resemble natural freshwater and sediment systems. The p
refers to the activity of the electron (p = log[e]), analogous to the redox potential Eh, the positive and negative
values refer to oxidizing and reducing conditions, respectively. Note: this system assumes the system is in a quasi
equilibrium where the oxidation of sulfide is kinetically precluded, reproduced from Filella and May (2003).

41
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
Figure 6 EhpH diagram for the FeSbH2O system, calculated at 25 oC and total dissolved Sb and Fe
concentrations of 106 molL1 using HYDRA and MEDUSA (Puigdomenech 2009; Puigdomenech 2010). Tripuhyite
(FeSbO4) and schafarzikite (FeSb2O4) reactions and log K values were obtained from Leverett et al. (2012).
D
P TE
CE
AC

Figure 7 General flow sheet depicting the precipitation and calcination procedure to form crystalline tripuhyite,
FeSbO4.

42
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
(a) (b)
Figure 8 (a) Xray diffraction patterns of coprecipitated powders calcined at room temperature to 1000 oC for 3
D

hrs in air, reproduced from Tianshu and Hing (1999); (b) Xray diffraction patterns of coprecipitated powders, (1)
as prepared, (2) 300 oC calcined for 6 hrs, (3) 450 oC calcined for 6 hrs, Reprinted (adapted) with permission from
TE

[Nag, P., Banerjee, S., Lee, Y., Bumajdad, A., Lee, Y., & Devi, P.S. (2012). Sonochemical synthesis and properties of
nanoparticles of FeSbO4. Inorganic Chemistry, 51(2), 844 850]. Copyright [2012] American Chemical Society.
P
CE
AC

43
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D

Figure 9 Xray powder diffraction patterns of Fe2O3 and Sb2O3 mixtures (1:1 Fe:Sb molar ratio) at various
TE

mechanical milling times, reproduced from Berry and Ren (2004).

P
CE
AC

(a) (b)
Figure 10 (a) Xray powder diffraction patterns of FeOOH and Sb 2O5 mixtures (1:1 Fe:Sb molar ratio) at various
mechanical milling times. (b) Xray powder diffraction patterns of FeOOH and Sb2O5 at different Fe:Sb ratios,
milled for 120 minutes, reproduced from Tojo et al. (2008).

44
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
Highlights
Antimony in the environment and industrial processing/treatment was reviewed

RI
Antimony aqueous chemistry presented for different pH/Eh/temperature/concentrations
Most ideal candidate for antimony fixation from effluents was tripuhyite, FeSbO4

SC
With postprecipitation treatments mineral crystallinity/stability can be increased

NU
MA
D
P TE
CE
AC

45