Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Perspective Chapter: The Toxic Silver (Hg)

Written By

Ahmed A. Abdelhafez, Abdel Aziz Tantawy, Mohamed H.H. Abbas, Shawky M. Metwally, Amera Sh. Metwally, Aya Sh. Metwally, Rasha R.M. Mansour, Sedky H. Hassan, Hassan H. Abbas, Ihab M. Farid, Nermeen N. Nasralla, Ahmed S.H. Soliman, Mohammed E. Younis, Ghada S.A. Sayed, Mahfouz Z. Ahmed, Ehdaa Alaa Mohamed Abed, Ahmed Farouk Al-Hossainy, Heidi Ahmed Ali Abouzeid, Mahdy H. Hamed, Mahmoud I. El-Kelawy, Gamal Hassan Kamel, Hussein Ferweez and Ahmed M. Diab

Submitted: 16 February 2023 Reviewed: 29 March 2023 Published: 18 May 2023

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.111464

From the Edited Volume

Marine Pollution - Recent Developments

Edited by Monique Mancuso, Mohamed H.H. Abbas, Teresa Bottari and Ahmed A. Abdelhafez

Chapter metrics overview

110 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

In the late 1950s, residents of a Japanese fishing village known as “Minamata” began falling ill and dying at an alarming rate. The Japanese authorities stated that methyl-mercury-rich seafood and shellfish caused the sickness. Burning fossil fuels represent ≈52.7% of Hg emissions. The majorities of mercury’s compounds are volatile and thus travel hundreds of miles with wind before being deposited on the earth’s surface. High acidity and dissolved organic carbon increase Hg-mobility in soil to enter the food chain. Additionally, Hg is taken up by areal plant parts via gas exchange. Mercury has no identified role in plants while exhibiting high affinity to form complexes with soft ligands such as sulfur and this consequently inactivates amino acids and sulfur-containing antioxidants. Long-term human exposure to Hg leads to neurotoxicity in children and adults, immunological, cardiac, and motor reproductive and genetic disorders. Accordingly, remediating contaminated soils has become an obligation. Mercury, like other potentially toxic elements, is not biodegradable, and therefore, its remediation should encompass either removal of Hg from soils or even its immobilization. This chapter discusses Hg’s chemical behavior, sources, health dangers, and soil remediation methods to lower Hg levels.

Keywords

  • Hg sources
  • soil contamination
  • Hg poisoning
  • chemical behavior
  • remediation techniques

1. Introduction

In the late 1950s, people and animals of a Japanese fishing village, called Minamata fell ill one after another and suffered from the same symptoms then died [1, 2]. The Japanese government named this strange disease “Minamat” and announced officially that its cause was the consumption of fish and shellfish that contained high levels of methyl-mercury due to mixing the bay water therein with industrial wastes coming from a chemical factory [3]. Since then, the scientists and government administrators tried hard to avoid a repeat of such type of incidents [4]. Mercury (Hg) is one of the 10 leading worldwide chemicals of concern [5, 6]. This element is denoted by the symbol “Hg” with atomic number equal to 80. Its melting point is −38.83°C while the boiling point is 356.73°C. In the periodic table, only Hg is a metal found in a liquid state at standard temperature and pressure [6]. Generally, mercury level increases progressively in the environment due to anthropogenic activities [7]. All mercury forms that are released during mining and other industries will eventually wind up in soils or surface water representing a potential threat to human health, and the surrounding ecosystem. Every living organism, in the environment (humans, animals, and plants to the smaller ones such as bacteria), is vulnerable to the effects of mercury poisoning. As a result, countries stand to lose millions of dollars in earning potential every year due to mercury contamination.

Advertisement

2. Forms of mercury in the environment

Mercury (Hg) is recognized by its characteristic shiny silver appearance. In the environment, it occurs in different inorganic (mercurous ion (Hg+1) and mercuric ion (Hg+2), and organic forms (methyl mercury (CH3Hg+), ethyl mercury (C2H5Hg+), and phenyl mercury (C6H5Hg+). The elemental mercury is the purest form [8, 9] and, at the same time, exhibits the least toxicity [10]. Under anoxic and suboxic conditions, inorganic Hg can be transformed into CH3Hg+ through sulfate-reducing and iron-reducing bacteria [6].

2.1 Sources of mercury

Mercury is introduced into the environment via natural and anthropogenic pathways. The first route results from volcanoes, weathering of rocks, forest fires, and soils [11]. The second one represents one-third of its content in nature which is related to anthropogenic activities coming from industrial processes [12] such as the burning of fossil fuels which represent up to 52.7% of Hg emissions [13], gold mining, cement production [9] and combustion of fossil fuel and agricultural additives that increases Hg levels in soil, for example, municipal [6], sludge, fertilizers, lime, and manures [10].

Long-term mining and smelting activities could bring considerable amount of Hg to the surroundings [14]. The majority of mercury’s compounds are very volatile and thus travel hundreds of miles with the wind before being deposited on the earth’s surface, hence contaminating the surrounding areas [15]. Generally, mercury in air can be carried by rain and eroded soils and run off to the surface waters and no one becomes safe [13]. In a study by Rodríguez Martín [16], most emitted Hg results from power plants that burn coal to create electricity; they account for about 42% of all manmade mercury emissions.

The main countries, contributing to the majority of emitted mercury (kg year−1) according to the United Nations Environment Program report in 2018, are: China (572,195), India (205862), Indonesia (156766), Brazil (71470), and Russia (60,949 tonnes), representing an average percentage of 25.73, 9.25, 7.05, 3.21, and 2.74% of total emitted mercury, respectively [17].

Advertisement

3. Mercury in medicine

Mercury is used in dental amalgam fillings to increase its strength and longevity; yet it plays a negative role in increasing human toxicity [18, 19]. Although this type of pollution is going down as the number of medical waste incinerators is reduced, the health community is concerned about patients and other vulnerable groups who are exposed to in healthcare products [20]. Thiomersal is an organic compound used as a preservative in vaccines, and Merbromin (Mercurochrome) is a topical antiseptic used for minor cuts and scrapes and is still in use in some countries [21]. Mercury compounds are found in some over-the-counter drugs, including topical antiseptics, stimulant laxatives, diaper-rash ointment, eye drops, and nasal sprays [22]. The skin-whitening cosmetic products can also be a source of Hg pollution [23]. Even some traditional medicines in China as Siddha and Ayurveda may contain mercury that causes chronic poisoning [24]. Overall, air, water, food, cosmetics, and even vaccines are potential sources of human pollution with Hg [25]. Mercury and most of its compounds are extremely toxic and must be handled with care.

Advertisement

4. Mercury in food chain

Mercury enters the food chain via various pathways. Chloralkali industry is one of the European users that pollute Europe’s aquatic environments with tones of mercury [20]. In aquatic environments, inorganic mercury biotransforms into methyl mercury, which makes mercury biomagnify in food chains [13]. High acidity and high concentration of dissolved organic carbon in the water enhance the mobility of mercury that enters the food chain [26, 27]. People, who eat a lot of fresh or marine food, have the high risk of mercury intake [28].

On the other hand, this pollutant (Hg) is highly mobile in soils; and can be absorbed easily by plant roots [12]; yet, in the presence of organic additives, the mobility of inorganic and organic forms of Hg could be diminished considerably, forming low mobile complexes [29]. Also, Hg in the atmosphere is taken up in substantial amounts by areal plant parts via gas exchange [30], accumulates in edible plant parts [8], and hence enters the food chain [6, 18, 19]. Additionally, sewage irrigation practices account for further soil contamination with Hg [31]. Anyhow, this contaminant has no identified biological role in plants [8]; nevertheless, it exhibits high affinity to forms complexes with soft ligands such as sulfur in the form of insoluble and stable compounds [32]. This in turn inactivates numerous enzymatic reactions, amino acids, and sulfur-containing antioxidants [33].

Advertisement

5. Mercury in sewage effluents

Municipal sewage has been noted as a significant environmental mercury (Hg) source. Mercury in the effluents of waste water treatment plants and mercury-based fungicides increase the discharge of mercury to the aquatic environment [34, 35]. Consumption of Hg-containing foods [12, 36] and exposure to common items like batteries [29] would increase the risks of mercury being excreted and flushed away in the city’s sewage system. The mercury released by hospitals, dentist clinics, and other service facilities is a major source of Hg in sewage [37]. A total of 30 tons of total Hg (organic and inorganic) was loaded into sludge in China in 2019, accounting for around 3.6% of the total anthropogenic Hg release (including direct and secondary anthropogenic releases). It is worth noting that sludge treatment methods such as incineration, carbonization, and sludge/brick/cement manufacture pose the greatest threat to atmospheric Hg pollution [27]. Therefore, attention should be paid regarding Hg pollution of sewage effluents and standard regulations should be formulated in order to prevent the environment and human health.

Advertisement

6. Health risks associated with mercury hazards

The excessive population growth, Industrial Revolution, and unmanaged development led to negative impacts on the surrounding environment [34, 35].

Consumption of food high in its content of mercury is the main route of Hg-mediated health risks [12, 36]. Long-term human exposure to Hg increases its level in blood, sometimes exceeding 150 ng mL−1 [37], and this results in negative health risks related to neurodevelopment and neurotoxicity in children and adults [8, 23, 38], immunological, cardiac, motor reproductive and genetic disorders [13], nephrotic syndrome, peripheral neuropathy complications, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, autism, lupus and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis [39]. Other symptoms may be included such as poor muscle coordination, tingling, numbness in fingers and toes [40, 41], reduced oxidative defense, thrombosis, vascular smooth muscle dysfunction, endothelial dysfunction, and dyslipidemia [33].

Advertisement

7. How to reduce human exposure from mercury sources

  • Using clean renewable energy sources rather than the coal;

  • Eliminate the use of mercury in mining, gold extraction and other industrial processes;

  • Phase out use of non-essential mercury-containing products and implement safe handling, and use and disposal of remaining mercury-containing products [42].

Selenium and fish containing omega-3 fatty acids are thought to diminish mercury toxicity [33] via “restoring seleno protein activity” protection against mitochondrial injury and DNA damage, demethylation of methyl mercury and sequestration in complexes, as well as redistribution in the blood away from brain [43].

Advertisement

8. Remediation of Hg-contaminated soils and water

Increasing Hg emissions due to anthropogenic activities caused severe soil pollution issues [44, 45, 46]. As a crucial link between the atmosphere and water, soil plays a central role in the global Hg cycle [47]. Soil is not only an Hg sink, receiving Hg input from the environment but also reemitting it to the atmosphere [48, 49], water [4250], or the plants grown thereon [39].

Mercury, like other potentially toxic elements, is not biodegradable, and therefore, its remediation should encompass either removal from soil or immobilization [32]. The main Hg removal technologies are physical and chemical remediation methods, as well as bioremediation technology. Adsorption of Hg2+ and Hg(0) from water on surfaces of high surface area and high porosity such as chitosan derivatives, synthesized thioether-functionalized covalent triazine nanospheres, pentasil zeolite (type ZSM-5), and utilized silica-coated magnetic nanoparticles are the most common physical approaches for remediating Hg-contaminated soil [51]. Other techniques could help such as soil replacement, physical separation, soil vapor extraction, fixed/stabilized soil, vitrification, thermal desorption, and electrokinetic remediation technology [6]. The latter technique (electrokinetic remediation) depends on passing a direct current between electrodes through the soil to make the Hg ions move through an ion exchange membrane from the soil to the electrodes. The addition of chelating agents to soil could effectively increase the solubility and removal efficiency of Hg [6]. Recently, He and his research group introduced a novel in situ immobilization technology by injecting stabilized iron sulfide nanoparticles into soil to immobilize Hg [32].

The in situ thermal desorption is a promising technique of Hg remediation that does not need to dig up the contaminated soil; instead, thermal conductive heating (TCH) elements are inserted into the soil in order to directly transfer heat to above 600°C to volatilize various species of mercury, such as HgO, HgS, HgCl2, and mercury associated with organic matter and thus achieve an acceptable decontamination level [51].

Biological remediation/bioremediation depends on plant and microbial in remediation soils [6]. In particular, genetically engineered plants can change methylmercury complexes, and mercury ions into metallic forms of lower toxicity, and then extract, detoxify, and/or sequester this contaminant from soil and water [10]. Phytoremediation is an umbrella term, which refers to the different low cost and ecofriendly technologies that utilize plants in decontaminating areas [52]. This includes: phytostabilization, phytoextraction, and phytovolatilization. This in situ application of phytoremediation lessens the disturbance of the surrounding environment and also declines the spread of contamination via air and water [32]. There are many other technologies such as the use of nanoparticles to remove/absorb Hg from soil, water, and flue gas, owing to their high adsorption capacity, small dimension, and other unique electrical, mechanical, and chemical properties [53].

Continuous monitoring of Hg levels in air, soils, water, and foods is necessity to ensure their sustainable safe use in order to protect human health and the surrounding ecosystem. In addition, increasing the awareness of humans about the danger of Hg is a proactive step to prevent and reduce the danger of Hg pollution. Furthermore, remediation protocols should be followed in Hg-contaminated areas to lessen its toxicity.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Energy, Environment and Water Nexus (ASRT-APPLE), project number (9112).

References

  1. 1. Aoyama M. In: Block P, Kasnitz D, Nishida A, Pollard N, editors. Occupying Disability: Critical Approaches to Community, Justice, and Decolonizing Disability. Netherlands: Springer; 2016. pp. 31-45
  2. 2. Ekino S, Susa M, Ninomiya T, Imamura K, Kitamura T. Minamata disease revisited: An update on the acute and chronic manifestations of methyl mercury poisoning. Journal of the Neurological Sciences. 2007;262:131-144. DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2007.06.036
  3. 3. Eto K, Marumoto M, Takeya M. The pathology of methylmercury poisoning (Minamata disease). Neuropathology. 2010;30:471-479. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1789.2010.01119.x
  4. 4. Yokoyama H. In: Yokoyama H, editor. Mercury Pollution in Minamata. Singapore: Springer; 2018. pp. 53-67
  5. 5. Raj D, Maiti SK. Sources, toxicity, and remediation of mercury: An essence review. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2019;191:566. DOI: 10.1007/s10661-019-7743-2
  6. 6. Teng D et al. Describing the toxicity and sources and the remediation technologies for mercury-contaminated soil. RSC Advances. 2020;10:23221-23232. DOI: 10.1039/d0ra01507e
  7. 7. Mekawi EM et al. Potential hazards and health assessment associated with different water uses in the main industrial cities of Egypt. Journal of Saudi Chemical Society. 2023;27:101587. DOI: 10.1016/j.jscs.2022.101587
  8. 8. Sharma BM, Sáňka O, Kalina J, Scheringer M. An overview of worldwide and regional time trends in total mercury levels in human blood and breast milk from 1966 to 2015 and their associations with health effects. Environment International. 2019;125:300-319. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.12.016
  9. 9. Nagpal N, Bettiol SS, Isham A, Hoang H, Crocombe LA. A review of mercury exposure and health of dental personnel. Safety and Health at Work. 2017;8:1-10
  10. 10. Patra M, Sharma A. Mercury toxicity in plants. The Botanical Review. 2000;66:379-422. DOI: 10.1007/bf02868923
  11. 11. Magos L, Clarkson TW. Overview of the clinical toxicity of mercury. Annals of Clinical Biochemistry. 2006;43:257-268. DOI: 10.1258/000456306777695654
  12. 12. Natasha et al. A critical review of mercury speciation, bioavailability, toxicity and detoxification in soil-plant environment: Ecotoxicology and health risk assessment. Science of the Total Environment. 2020;711:134749. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134749
  13. 13. Zahir F, Rizwi SJ, Haq SK, Khan RH. Low dose mercury toxicity and human health. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2005;20:351-360. DOI: 10.1016/j.etap.2005.03.007
  14. 14. Dai Z et al. Assessing anthropogenic sources of mercury in soil in Wanshan Hg mining area, Guizhou, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2013;20:7560-7569. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-013-1616-y
  15. 15. Pacyna JM. Recent advances in mercury research. Science of The Total Environment. 2020;738:139955. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139955
  16. 16. Rodríguez Martín JA, Nanos N. Soil as an archive of coal-fired power plant mercury deposition. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2016;308:131-138. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.01.026
  17. 17. Programme, U. N. E. Global mercury assessment. 2018. Available from: https://www.unep.org/explore-topics/chemicals-waste/what-we-do/mercury/global-mercury-assessment
  18. 18. Burns M. Death is not the end. Renew: Technology for a Sustainable Futures. 2022:53-56
  19. 19. Joy A, Qureshi A. Mercury in dental amalgam, online retail, and the Minamata convention on mercury. Environmental Science & Technology. 2020;54:14139-14142. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.0c01248
  20. 20. Tibau AV, Grube BD. Mercury contamination from dental amalgam. Journal of Health & Pollution. 2019;9:190612. DOI: 10.5696/2156-9614-9.22.190612
  21. 21. Ball LK, Ball R, Pratt RD. An assessment of thimerosal use in childhood vaccines. Pediatrics. 2001;107:1147-1154. DOI: 10.1542/peds.107.5.1147
  22. 22. Mohamed ME-B, El-Meligy MMS, Bushra RR, Mohamed EK. Effect of mercuric chloride exposure during pregnancy and lactation on the postnatal development of the liver in the albino rat. The Egyptian Journal of Anatomy. 2019;42:10-27. DOI: 10.21608/ejana.2019.251310
  23. 23. Yawei S, Jianhai L, Junxiu Z, Xiaobo P, Zewu Q. Epidemiology, clinical presentation, treatment, and follow-up of chronic mercury poisoning in China: A retrospective analysis. BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology. 2021;22:25. DOI: 10.1186/s40360-021-00493-y
  24. 24. Doshi M, Annigeri RA, Kowdle PC, Subba Rao B, Varman M. Membranous nephropathy due to chronic mercury poisoning from traditional Indian medicines: report of five cases. Clinical Kidney Journal. 2018;12:239-244. DOI: 10.1093/ckj/sfy031
  25. 25. Usman S et al. Microplastics pollution as an invisible potential threat to food safety and security, policy challenges and the way forward. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17:9591
  26. 26. Ravichandran M. Interactions between mercury and dissolved organic matter––A review. Chemosphere. 2004;55:319-331. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2003.11.011
  27. 27. Lu X, Jaffe R. Interaction between Hg(II) and natural dissolved organic matter: A fluorescence spectroscopy based study. Water Research. 2001;35:1793-1803. DOI: 10.1016/S0043-1354(00)00423-1
  28. 28. Liu M et al. Impacts of farmed fish consumption and food trade on methylmercury exposure in China. Environment International. 2018;120:333-344. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.08.017
  29. 29. Šípková A, Száková J, Hanč A, Tlustoš P. Mobility of mercury in soil as affected by soil physicochemical properties. Journal of Soils and Sediments. 2016;16:2234-2241. DOI: 10.1007/s11368-016-1420-7
  30. 30. Naharro R, Esbrí JM, Amorós JÁ, García-Navarro FJ, Higueras P. Assessment of mercury uptake routes at the soil-plant-atmosphere interface. Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, Analysis. 2018;19:146-154. DOI: 10.1144/geochem2018-019
  31. 31. Wang S et al. Accumulation, transfer, and potential sources of mercury in the soil-wheat system under field conditions over the loess plateau, Northwest China. Science of the Total Environment. 2016;568:245-252. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.034
  32. 32. He F et al. In situ remediation technologies for mercury-contaminated soil. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2015;22:8124-8147
  33. 33. Houston MC. Role of mercury toxicity in hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. The Journal of Clinical Hypertension. 2011;13:621-627. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2011.00489.x
  34. 34. Abdelhafez AA, Li J. Environmental monitoring of heavy metal status and human health risk assessment in the agricultural soils of the Jinxi River area, China. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. 2015;21:952-971
  35. 35. Abdelhafez AA, Li J, Abbas MHH. Feasibility of biochar manufactured from organic wastes on the stabilization of heavy metals in a metal smelter contaminated soil. Chemosphere. 2015;117:66-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.05.086
  36. 36. Branco V et al. Biomarkers of mercury toxicity: Past, present, and future trends. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B. 2017;20:119-154. DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2017.1289834
  37. 37. Kamensky OL, Horton D, Kingsley DP, Bridges CC. A case of accidental mercury intoxication. The Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2019;56:275-278. DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2018.12.039
  38. 38. Carocci A, Rovito N, Sinicropi MS, Genchi G. In: Whitacre DM, editor. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. New York, Dordrecht, London: Springer International Publishing; 2014. pp. 1-18
  39. 39. Khan F, Momtaz S, Abdollahi M. The relationship between mercury exposure and epigenetic alterations regarding human health, risk assessment and diagnostic strategies. Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology. 2019;52:37-47
  40. 40. Matta G, Gjyli L. Mercury, lead and arsenic: Impact on environment and human health. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2016;9:718-725
  41. 41. Caroline MD, Frederic D. Nervous system disorders induced by occupational and environmental toxic exposure. Open Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2012;2:272-278
  42. 42. Yan X et al. Recent progress in the removal of mercury ions from water based MOFs materials. Coordination Chemistry Reviews. 2021;443:214034. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2021.214034
  43. 43. Spiller HA, Hays HL, Casavant MJ. Rethinking treatment of mercury poisoning: The roles of selenium, acetylcysteine, and thiol chelators in the treatment of mercury poisoning: A narrative review. Toxicology Communications. 2021;5:19-59. DOI: 10.1080/24734306.2020.1870077
  44. 44. Daim Q , Feng X, Tang G. The geochemical behavior of mercury in soil and its pollution control. Geologygeochemistry. 2002;30:75-78
  45. 45. Hoyer M, Burke J, Keeler G. Atmospheric sources, transport and deposition of mercury in Michigan: Two years of event precipitation. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 1995;80:199-208. DOI: 10.1007/BF01189668
  46. 46. Li P, Feng XB, Qiu GL, Shang LH, Li ZG. Mercury pollution in Asia: A review of the contaminated sites. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2009;168:591-601. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.03.031
  47. 47. Reis AT, Davidson CM, Vale C, Pereira E. Overview and challenges of mercury fractionation and speciation in soils. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry. 2016;82:109-117. DOI: 10.1016/j.trac.2016.05.008
  48. 48. Carpi A, Lindberg SE, Prestbo EM, Bloom NS. Methyl mercury contamination and emission to the atmosphere from soil amended with municipal sewage sludge. Journal of Environmental Quality. 1997;26:1650-1655. DOI: 10.2134/jeq1997.00472425002600060027x
  49. 49. Liu K et al. Measure-specific effectiveness of air pollution control on China’s atmospheric mercury concentration and deposition during 2013-2017. Environmental Science & Technology. 2019;53:8938-8946. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.9b02428
  50. 50. Balogh SJ, Meyer ML, Johnson DK. Transport of mercury in three contrasting river basins. Environmental Science & Technology. 1998;32:456-462. DOI: 10.1021/es970506q
  51. 51. Wang L et al. Remediation of mercury contaminated soil, water, and air: A review of emerging materials and innovative technologies. Environment International. 2020;134:105281. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2019.105281
  52. 52. Jhilta P, Dipta B, Rana A. In: Prasad R, editor. Phytoremediation for Environmental Sustainability. Springer Nature Singapore; 2021. pp. 83-111
  53. 53. Wang Y et al. Green synthesis of nanoparticles for the remediation of contaminated waters and soils: Constituents, synthesizing methods, and influencing factors. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019;226:540-549. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.128

Written By

Ahmed A. Abdelhafez, Abdel Aziz Tantawy, Mohamed H.H. Abbas, Shawky M. Metwally, Amera Sh. Metwally, Aya Sh. Metwally, Rasha R.M. Mansour, Sedky H. Hassan, Hassan H. Abbas, Ihab M. Farid, Nermeen N. Nasralla, Ahmed S.H. Soliman, Mohammed E. Younis, Ghada S.A. Sayed, Mahfouz Z. Ahmed, Ehdaa Alaa Mohamed Abed, Ahmed Farouk Al-Hossainy, Heidi Ahmed Ali Abouzeid, Mahdy H. Hamed, Mahmoud I. El-Kelawy, Gamal Hassan Kamel, Hussein Ferweez and Ahmed M. Diab

Submitted: 16 February 2023 Reviewed: 29 March 2023 Published: 18 May 2023