Superhydrophobic and stable mesoporous polymeric adsorbent for siloxane removal: D4 super-adsorbent

Abstract

Synthesis of a new class of siloxane adsorbent (D4) was done to purify methane-rich gases including biogas and digester gas, at near ambient temperature and atmospheric pressure. The nanoporous polymeric adsorbent with controlled wettability was successfully prepared under solvothermal conditions. Imidazole groups were introduced into the samples by copolymerization of divinylbenzene (DVB) with 1vinylimidazole (VI). The copolymer composition was varied to obtain optimum adsorption performance.Low-cost PDVB and PDVB-VI were evaluated under different adsorption conditions with a gas flow rate of 10 mL min À1 . To simulate near real time biogas composition, 50%-relative humidity at 25 C was maintained to assess the effect of humidity on D4 removal efficiency. In addition, the mixture gas was used to evaluate the adsorptive activity in the presence of CO 2 (up to 35%). While PDVB alone demonstrates a significant adsorption activity with a capacity of 1951 AE 74 mg g À1 , an improvement in adsorption capacity to 2370 AE 92 mg g À1 , was noted with PDVB-VI. Characterization of exhausted adsorbent demonstrates the correlation between D4 adsorption and PDVB-VI-x textural properties. Finally, PDVB-VI-x was readily regenerated after five cycles with less than 10% loss in adsorption activity under both dry and humid conditions.

Microwave-assisted synthesis of amine functionalized mesoporous polydivinylbenzene for CO2 adsorption

“…Previously, PDVB based polymers have been synthesized with various morphologies and textural properties including monodispersed microspheres [58], macroporous [59], nanoporous sheets [60] and as mesoporous materials [61]. Biogas purification from siloxane impurities has been conducted by highly hydrophobic mesoporous PDVB based materials [61,62].…”

“…Previously, PDVB based polymers have been synthesized with various morphologies and textural properties including monodispersed microspheres [58], macroporous [59], nanoporous sheets [60] and as mesoporous materials [61]. Biogas purification from siloxane impurities has been conducted by highly hydrophobic mesoporous PDVB based materials [61,62]. The effect of synthesis parameters such as various solvent effects (type and ratio of solvent mixture), [63] synthesis temperature, [64] and initiator amount [65] have also been studied on textural properties of PDVB-based materials.…”

Synthesis of Molecularly Imprinted Polymer via Visible Light Activated RAFT Polymerization in Aqueous Media at Room Temperature for Highly Selective Electrochemical Assay of Glucose

“…Figure showed that the N 2 adsorption–desorption isotherm revealed the similar properties of MIPs and NIPs in the profile curves. The shapes of the MIPs and NIPs N 2 adsorption–desorption isotherm were a mixture of types III and IV with hysteresis loop ( p / p 0 > 0.85), which indicated that MIPs and NIPs have microporous structures . In addition, the volume of N 2 adsorbed to MIPs was ≈100 mL g −1 , which was double than that of NIPs (50 mL g −1 ), indicating that MIPs had numerous imprinted cavities and should have higher surface area and pore volume.…”

“…The shapes of the MIPs and NIPs N 2 adsorption-desorption isotherm were a mixture of types III and IV with hysteresis loop (p/p 0 > 0.85), which indicated that MIPs and NIPs have microporous structures. [33] In addition, the volume of N 2 adsorbed to MIPs was ≈100 mL g −1 , which was double than that of NIPs (50 mL g −1 ), indicating that MIPs had numerous imprinted cavities and should have higher surface area and pore volume. The BET surface area and average pore size of MIPs were 106.01 m 2 g −1 and 1.70 nm, respectively, which were only slightly different from those of NIPs (102.61 m 2 g −1 and 1.67 nm; Table S2, Figure S3, Supporting Information).…”

Fabrication of Fe3O4/ZIF‐67 composite for removal of direct blue 80 from water

“…Among these methods, adsorption technology is regarded as one of the most promising methods due to its high efficiency, low cost, and facile operation. Up to now, a number of materials including active carbon (Choy, Porter, & McKay, ; Dias, Alvim‐Ferraz, Almeida, Rivera‐Utrilla, & Sánchez‐Polo, ; Kadirvelu, Karthika, Vennilamani, & Pattabhi, ; Li, Liu, & Zhu, ; Maneerung et al, ; Sharma & Upadhyay, ; Tan, Hameed, & Ahmad, ), zeolite (Delkash, Bakhshayesh, & Kazemian, ; Noroozifar, Khorasani‐Motlagh, & Naderpour, ; Wang & Peng, ), resin (Han et al, ; Jafari, Noshadi, Khakpash, & Suib, ; Jia & Liu, ; Li, Wu, et al, ; Li, Wang, Zhang, Liang, & Sun, ; Wu, Zhang, Li, & Wang, ; Yang, Han, Du, Luo, & Wang, ), and MOF (Dias & Petit, ; Huo & Yan, ; Lin et al, ; Yan et al, ; Zhao et al, ) have been explored for the removal of dye. MOFs as adsorbents have been extensively investigated due to their high porosities and specific interactions between adsorbate and adsorbent (Dias & Petit, ).…”