Graphene oxide nanomaterials for the removal of non-ionic surfactant from water

Prediger, Patrícia; Cheminski, Thais; Neves, Tauany de Figueiredo; Nunes, William Bardelin; Sabino, Livia Rodrigues; Picone, Carolina Siqueira Franco; Oliveira, Rafael L.; Correia, Carlos Roque Duarte

doi:10.1016/j.jece.2018.01.072

Cited by 48 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…GO TX-100 1203 (mg g −1 ) [26] Reduced GO TX-100 1683 (mg g −1 ) [26] MCM-41-C NP-10 641 (mg g −1 ) Present study use the data presented in Table 6 for comparison of the adsorbents. As it is evident from Table 6, GO and the reduced GO shows highest efficiency for adsorption of TX-100 (1203 and 1683 mg g −1 for GO and reduced GO, respectively).…”

Section: Comparison With Other Adsorbentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the recent years, adsorption techniques have been considered as simple and economical methods for surfactants removal from contaminated ground water and wastewater sources. Many natural or synthetic adsorbents including granular charcoal, [21] activated carbon [22] mineral clay, [23] multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), [24,25] graphene oxide (GO) nanomaterials, [26,27] montmorillonite, [28] and rice husk [29] have been used for elimination of nonionic surfactants. Among them, the porous materials such as activated carbon are distinctive because they provide a very high capacity due to their large pores and huge surface area.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Use of MCM‐41 as an Efficient Adsorbent for Removal of Nonionic Surfactant from Aqueous Solutions

Benghar

Zanjanchi

Sohrabnezhad

2021

CLEAN Soil Air Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The as‐synthesized MCM‐41 and its modified forms are used as adsorbents for the removal of nonylphenol ethoxylate (NP‐10) from aqueous solutions. The partial template containing MCM‐41 is prepared by treating the as‐synthesized sample with ethanolic ammonium nitrate solution. Complete removal of the template is performed using the calcination process. The prepared adsorbents are characterized by X‐ray diffraction, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, thermogravimetric analysis, transmission electron microscopy, and nitrogen physisorption techniques. The effect of adsorbent weight, pH, contact time, and initial concentration on the adsorption efficiency is studied. The equilibrium adsorption data are well defined, and they are fitted with Langmuir isotherm model. The maximum adsorption capacities (qm) and pseudo‐second‐order rate constants (k2) are calculated. The best adsorbent, in terms of removal efficiency, results to be the thermally treated MCM‐41, characterized by the highest surface area, and thus with the largest porosity. Specifically, the removal efficiency for NP‐10 is around 84% (558 mg g−1) with an initial concentration of 700 mg L−1, which is increased to 91% (455 mg g−1) for a 500 mg L−1 initial concentration. Thermodynamic studies depict that the adsorption of NP‐10 onto MCM‐41 is an endothermic process and the spontaneity is controlled by entropy.

show abstract

Section: Comparison With Other Adsorbentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of MCM‐41 as an Efficient Adsorbent for Removal of Nonionic Surfactant from Aqueous Solutions

Benghar

Zanjanchi

Sohrabnezhad

2021

CLEAN Soil Air Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The various forms of graphene, namely graphene oxide (GO) as well as reduced-graphene oxide (r-GO), have been utilized for the non-ionic surfactant (TX-100) adsorption by Prediger et al [ 85 ]. The test results confirmed that both r-GO and GO showed the maximum adsorption capacity for the surfactant TX-100 out of the different examined materials.…”

Section: Application Of Nanomaterials In the Aqueous Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developments in the Application of Nanomaterials for Water Treatment and Their Impact on the Environment

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanotechnology is an uppermost priority area of research in several nations presently because of its enormous capability and financial impact. One of the most promising environmental utilizations of nanotechnology has been in water treatment and remediation where various nanomaterials can purify water by means of several mechanisms inclusive of the adsorption of dyes, heavy metals, and other pollutants, inactivation and removal of pathogens, and conversion of harmful materials into less harmful compounds. To achieve this, nanomaterials have been generated in several shapes, integrated to form different composites and functionalized with active components. Additionally, the nanomaterials have been added to membranes that can assist to improve the water treatment efficiency. In this paper, we have discussed the advantages of nanomaterials in applications such as adsorbents (removal of dyes, heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, and organic contaminants from water), membrane materials, catalytic utilization, and microbial decontamination. We discuss the different carbon-based nanomaterials (carbon nanotubes, graphene, graphene oxide, fullerenes, etc.), and metal and metal-oxide based nanomaterials (zinc-oxide, titanium dioxide, nano zerovalent iron, etc.) for the water treatment application. It can be noted that the nanomaterials have the ability for improving the environmental remediation system. The examination of different studies confirmed that out of the various nanomaterials, graphene and its derivatives (e.g., reduced graphene oxide, graphene oxide, graphene-based metals, and graphene-based metal oxides) with huge surface area and increased purity, outstanding environmental compatibility and selectivity, display high absorption capability as they trap electrons, avoiding their recombination. Additionally, we discussed the negative impacts of nanomaterials such as membrane damage and cell damage to the living beings in the aqueous environment. Acknowledgment of the possible benefits and inadvertent hazards of nanomaterials to the environment is important for pursuing their future advancement.

show abstract

“…The simplest approach assumes that the Frumkin qm parameter is given by the plateau of an experimental isotherm [23] but it is prone to subjective interpretation when the isotherm exhibits no apparent saturation region. We mention in passing that many studies have applied the two-parameter Frumkin isotherm to experimental data without disclosing how the Frumkin qm parameter was estimated [24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the Frumkin (Fowler–Guggenheim) adsorption isotherm a two- or three-parameter equation?

Chu¹,

Tan²

2021

Colloid and Interface Science Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Graphene oxide nanomaterials for the removal of non-ionic surfactant from water

Cited by 48 publications

References 47 publications

Use of MCM‐41 as an Efficient Adsorbent for Removal of Nonionic Surfactant from Aqueous Solutions

Use of MCM‐41 as an Efficient Adsorbent for Removal of Nonionic Surfactant from Aqueous Solutions

Developments in the Application of Nanomaterials for Water Treatment and Their Impact on the Environment

Is the Frumkin (Fowler–Guggenheim) adsorption isotherm a two- or three-parameter equation?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About