Isothermal, kinetic, and thermodynamic studies for solid-phase extraction of uranium (VI) via hydrazine-impregnated carbon-based material as efficient adsorbent

Recycling waste polymer packaging materials as an effective active carbon porous materials for uranium removal from commercial phosphoric acid

“…This stage characterized by high boundary effect (C: 0.49; D: 0.53) and low rate of reaction (0.01 and 0.03 for Sorbents C and D respectively) which could be owned to the saturation of most of sorbent surface active sites, hence, the intra-particle mechanism take place (Taha 2020(Taha , 2021Elzoghby 2021). The same multiple reaction mechanism was reported for the application of hydrazine impregnated activated carbon (Morsy et al 2019), metal modified bio-char (Morshedy et al 2021), and thermal activated kaolinite (Taha et al 2018).…”

“…In addition, the calculated sorption capacity qecal for carbons C (5.5 mg g -1 ) and carbon D (6.2 mg g -1 ) are close to the experimental sorption capacities qeexp (C: 5.3 mg g -1 ; D: 6.0 mg g -1 ) which means that the uranium uptake process using the prepared carbons C and d is described well using Pseudo second order kinetic models. This declares the chemisorption nature of the sorption process and the uranium uptake involved sharing of electrons between uranium species and the active sites of the applied carbons (Abdel-Magied 2017; Taha et al 2018;Morsy et al 2019). This kinetic performance (chemisorption nature) is also reported for U(VI) removal from phosphoric acid using hydrazine impregnated activated carbon (Morsy et al 2019), kaolinite and meta kaolinite sorbents (Taha et al 2018), and cobalt and nickel modified bio-char (Morshedy et al 2021).…”

“…This declares the chemisorption nature of the sorption process and the uranium uptake involved sharing of electrons between uranium species and the active sites of the applied carbons (Abdel-Magied 2017; Taha et al 2018;Morsy et al 2019). This kinetic performance (chemisorption nature) is also reported for U(VI) removal from phosphoric acid using hydrazine impregnated activated carbon (Morsy et al 2019), kaolinite and meta kaolinite sorbents (Taha et al 2018), and cobalt and nickel modified bio-char (Morshedy et al 2021). The sorption capacity could be ranked as carbon D > carbon C which reflects that the increase in pyrolysis temperature enhance the sorption characteristics of the yield carbon.…”

“…Several methods have been used for the recovery and elimination of uranium from wet-process phosphoric acid, including chemical precipitation (Mousa et al 2013), solvent extraction (Ali et al 2012;TAHA 2017), solid impregnated solids (Aly et al 2013;El-Maadawy 2019)ion exchange (Taha 2020(Taha , 2021Elzoghby 2021), and adsorption (Hussein and Morsy 2017;Ali et al 2020). In these ways, adsorption method has a lot of reasonable advantages, containing environment friendly, simple operation, and financial efficiency, and it has been widely used in the decontamination of wet-process phosphoric acid as well as some other aqueous systems (Hussein and Morsy 2017;Abdel-Magied 2017;Taha et al 2018;Morsy et al 2019;Ali et al 2020).…”

“…In this regard, various promising adsorbents were developed for uranium adsorption such as activated carbon (Morsy et al 2019), activated kaolinite (Taha et al 2018), ceramics (Hussein and Morsy 2017), mesoporous carbon material (Morshedy et al 2021), and activated bio-char sorbent (Ali et al 2020). The mainly significant features of adsorbents include high surface area, high stability, high porosity, high adsorption capacity, and excellent recyclability (Abdel-Magied 2017; Taha et al 2018;Morsy et al 2019;Morshedy et al 2021). On the other hand, the main challenges of several adsorbent materials such as nanomaterials are high costly and difficult to generate on a large scale, thus causing some adsorbents to be less practicable for industrial purposes (Beltrami et al 2014a).…”