Current Research Bulletin

This study evaluated the effectiveness of electrokinetic remediation (EKR) using aluminium, carbon, and graphite electrodes in improving the environmental and geotechnical properties of lead-contaminated soil. The untreated soil was classified as A-7-6 according to the AASHTO classification system and CL (lean clay) under the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), indicating a fine-grained soil with moderate plasticity. The results demonstrated that electrokinetic remediation effectively removed lead and other contaminants from the soil. The aluminium electrode achieved the highest PbO removal efficiency of 84.20%, followed by the carbon (82.60%) and graphite (68.80%) electrodes. Significant removal efficiencies were also recorded for Fe₂O₃, Cr₂O₃, SO₃, and K₂O, confirming the effectiveness of the remediation process. Furthermore, the engineering properties of the soil improved following remediation. The liquid limit decreased from 48.0% in the untreated soil to 45.3%, 46.2%, and 41.4% for the aluminium-, carbon-, and graphite-treated soils, respectively, while the plasticity index reduced from 19.8% to 18.8%, 16.7%, and 15.6%. Similarly, the specific gravity increased from 2.41 to 2.57, 2.53, and 2.58, respectively. The findings demonstrate that electrokinetic remediation using aluminium, carbon, and graphite electrodes significantly enhanced both the environmental quality and engineering performance of the lead-contaminated soil, with the aluminium electrode exhibiting the highest lead removal efficiency.

electrokinetic remediation (EKR), Specific gravity, Atterberg limit, sieve analysis, aluminium, carbon, and graphite electrodes.

1. Abou-Shady, A., Eissa, D., Abd-Elmottaleb, O., Bahgaat, A. K., Osman, M. A., et al. (2024). Optimizing electrokinetic remediation for pollutant removal and electroosmosis/dewatering using lateral anode configurations. Scientific Reports, 14, 25380.
2. Acar, Y. B., Gale, R. J., Alshawabkeh, A. N., Marks, R. E., Puppala, S., Bricka, M., & Parker, R. (1995). Electrokinetic remediation: Basics and technology status. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 40(2), 117–137.
3. Adebayo, K., Moses, G., Sani, J. E., Ibrahim, B. H., & Balarabe, F. (2023). Filter media enhanced electrokinetic remediated crude oil contaminated soil: Investigation of its engineering properties and its suitability for road construction. Nigerian Journal of Technology, 42(2), 175–184.
4. Adebayo, K., Sani, J. E., Musa, A., George, M., & Oluwasanmi, I. O. (2025). Effect of charcoal and active carbon as filter media on electrokinetic remediated crude oil-contaminated soil. Archives of Advanced Engineering Science, 3(4), 235–240.
5. Amir, M., Khan, M. S., & Ahmad, I. (2021). Heavy metal contamination in soils: Sources, environmental impacts, and remediation technologies. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 24, 101876.
6. BS 1377. (1990). Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. British Standards Institution.
7. Chen, F., Li, Y., Zhu, Y., Sun, Y., Ma, J., & Wang, L. (2023). Enhanced electrokinetic remediation by magnetic induction for treatment of co-contaminated soil. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 452, 131264.
8. Edeh, J. E., & Amadi, A. A. (2014). Stabilization of lateritic soil using rice husk ash and cement for road construction. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 32(4), 1135–1146.
9. Gidudu, B., & Chirwa, E. M. N. (2022). The role of pH, electrodes, surfactants and electrolytes in electrokinetic remediation of contaminated soil. Molecules, 27(21), 7381.
10. Haruna, B. I., Adebayo, K., Sani, J. E., Moses, G., & Ibrahim, S. I. (2023). Effect of ethanol and acetone cosolvents in enhancing electrokinetic remediation of crude oil contaminated soil obtained from a pipeline and storage company, Kaduna, Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management, 27(5), 933–937.
11. Hu, W., Cheng, W. C., Wen, S., & Kang, N. (2022). Revealing underlying mechanisms affecting electrokinetic remediation of Cu- and Pb-contaminated loess. Frontiers in Materials, 9, 967871.
12. Jiang, X., & Shukui, L. (2019). Electrokinetic remediation technology for heavy metal contaminated soils: Progress and prospects. Environmental Engineering Research, 24(3), 335–347.
13. Kumar, A., & Singh, R. (2022). Influence of electrode materials on electrokinetic remediation efficiency of heavy metal contaminated soils. Chemosphere, 307, 135905.
14. Li, G., Xu, S., Wu, B., Li, F., & Guo, S. (2023). Removal of organic pollutants via electrochemical oxidation near anodes during electrokinetic remediation: Proof of concept. Environmental Engineering Science, 40(2), 147–157.
15. Luo, Y., Zhang, H., Wang, X., & Chen, Z. (2022). Electrokinetic transport mechanisms and remediation efficiency in heavy metal contaminated clay soils. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 10(5), 108219.
16. Moses, G., & Sani, J. E. (2022). Electrokinetic remediation of heavy metal contaminated lateritic soil: Effects on engineering properties. Nigerian Journal of Technology, 41(3), 421–431.
17. Oves, M., Khan, M. S., Zaidi, A., & Ahmad, E. (2019). Soil contamination, heavy metals and sustainable remediation strategies. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 191, 98.
18. Sani, J. E., Ijimdiya, T. S., Moses, G., & Lawal, A. A. (2023a). Use of an electrokinetic remediated soil as a road subgrade material. Iranian Journal of Energy and Environment, 14(4), 352–359.
19. Sani, J. E., Tijani, S., Rotimi, A. J., & Moses, G. (2023b). Impact of voltage on electrokinetic remediated lead contaminated soil for use as road base material. Journal of Inventive Engineering and Technology, 3(3), 1–12.
20. Selvi, A., & Aruliah, R. (2018). Bioremediation of heavy metal contaminated soils: A review. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 15(6), 1245–1258.
21. Sharma, P., Singh, R., Kumar, V., & Sharma, S. (2023). Sustainable remediation technologies for heavy metal contaminated soils: Recent advances and future perspectives. Science of the Total Environment, 876, 162742.
22. Sun, Z., Xu, S., Zhang, J., Eugene, B. D., & Li, S. (2024). Effect of electrode positioning on electrokinetic remediation of contaminated soft clay with surface electrolyte. Toxics, 12(10), 758.
23. Taneja, S., Karaca, O., & Haritash, A. K. (2024). Electrokinetic remediation: Past experiences and future roadmap for sustainable remediation of metal-contaminated soils. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 259, 107437.
24. Wang, Y., Shi, X., Xue, Y., Zheng, J., & Chen, G. (2023). Experimental study on electrokinetic remediation of cadmium-contaminated clayey soil. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 45(Supplement 1), 16–19.
25. Zhang, J., Sun, Z., Xu, S., & Li, S. (2024). Effect of electrode configuration on electrokinetic remediation of heavy metal contaminated soft clay. Toxics, 12(10), 758.
26. Zhao, M., Song, C., Zhang, F., Jia, X., & Ma, D. (2023). New-style electrokinetic-adsorption remediation of cadmium-contaminated soil using double-group electrodes coupled with chitosan-activated carbon composite membranes. Science of the Total Environment, 904, 166919.
27. Zheng, Y., Yu, Q., Yu, L., Zhang, P., Zeng, L., Lin, X., Han, R., & Li, D. (2022). Enhanced remediation of surface-bound hexavalent chromium in soils using the acidic and alkaline fronts of electrokinetic technology. Che