# Efficient Inorganic Stabilization Materials for Chromium and Arsenic Pollution in Water and Soil
## 5 Conclusions  
Chromium and arsenic heavy metal pollution is one of the most severe environmental problems facing the world today. Therefore, the preparation of materials with efficient fixation and long-term stability to remove chromium and arsenic elements from natural environments has become a research hotspot. The use of heavy metal stabilization materials to remove chromium and arsenic to improve soil and groundwater is a widespread, efficient, and cost-effective approach. However, the effectiveness and applicability of stabilization materials need to be comprehensively evaluated based on the forms of chromium and arsenic, environmental conditions, and material characteristics. Research has shown that using chromium and arsenic stabilization materials to remediate contaminated sites is effective. Chromium and arsenic stabilization materials remove pollutants through mechanisms such as adsorption, ion exchange, redox reactions, surface complexation, and electron transfer [108]. Most stabilization processes are favorable under acidic conditions and are influenced by different coexisting ions in environment [109]. During different stable cycles, the stabilization products are altered with the environmental changes [110]. Despite the promising prospects of chromium and arsenic stabilization materials, there are still some issues that need to be considered, The following summarizes eight future development prospects for chromium and arsenic stabilization Materials (Figure 13):1. In practical applications, remediation should be carried out based on the form of pollutants and the characteristics of the site. The forms of pollutants, such as the valence and occurrence forms of chromium and arsenic, directly affect toxicity and mobility, determining the stabilization pathway (reduction, adsorption, or physical fixation). The characteristics of the site (pH, organic matter, permeability, interfering ions, and soil type) and climatic conditions (temperature, humidity, and precipitation) determine the suitability and reaction efficiency of the material [117], avoiding stability failure or secondary release caused by unsuitable environmental conditions. 2. The selection and targeting of stabilization materials directly determine the stabilization efficiency of chromium and arsenic. Different materials have different mechanisms of action on chromium (such as zero-valent iron reducing Cr(VI)) and iron-based materials adsorbing As(V)), and precise matching of pollutant characteristics is required. In addition, material costs and engineering feasibility also need to be comprehensively balanced. 3. When using stabilization materials, the feed material, reaction time, pH range, and cost range should be considered. If these parameters are mismatched, it may result in substandard processing or resource waste. Optimizing parameters can simultaneously improve efficiency and engineering sustainability. 4. Risk control and long-term management should be considered before applying chromium and arsenic stabilization materials. It is necessary to prevent and control the risk of secondary release after stabilization and reduce environmental expo  
Figure 13: The challenges and future development of chromium and arsenic stabilization materials [111; 112; 113; 114; 115; 116]. sure through monitoring frequency and emergency plans (such as supplementing iron-based materials). At the same time, long-term stability depends on the anti-aging ability of materials (such as sulfide failure under oxidation conditions) and environmental fluctuations (such as pH sudden changes). * Future research should pay more attention to evaluating chromium and arsenic stabilization materials in practical complex environments. Most current research focuses on static experiments, whereas real environments should simulate dynamic processes such as wet-dry alternation, freeze-thaw cycles, and thermal aging.