4.3 Article

Arsenic Adsorption by TiO2 Nanoparticles Under Conditions Similar to Groundwater: Batch and Column Studies

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER INT PUBL AG
DOI: 10.1007/s41742-020-00298-7

Keywords

TiO2 nanoparticles; Arsenic; Isotherm; Kinetic; Column studies

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In natural groundwater conditions, nano-sized TiO2 particles containing anatase and rutile showed effective arsenic removal, with different adsorption efficiency and maximum adsorption capacity. Increasing the adsorbent concentration and adjusting the pH can enhance arsenic adsorption.
Nano-sized TiO2 particles containing anatase and rutile were applied to arsenic removal from water in natural groundwater conditions in the batch and column experiments. Arsenic concentrations were 200 mu g L-1 and the pH range was 6-8.5 (similar to groundwater conditions). The results showed that anatase and rutile could adsorb 95.5% and 63.5% of arsenic in a solution after 60 min, respectively. In both adsorbents, arsenic adsorption was increased by increasing the adsorbent concentration. Increasing pH results increased adsorption in rutile more than anatase. The maximum adsorption capacity of 2.58 mg g(-1) and 1.86 mg g(-1) were calculated for anatase and rutile, respectively at the adsorbent concentration of 3 g L-1. Isotherm studies showed Freundlich model was more valid to the empirical adsorption data for both nanoparticles. The kinetics of the adsorption processes fitted well the pseudo-first-order adsorption model. To investigate the dynamic sorption, column study was carried out with fine and coarse silica sand porous media. According to the batch experiments, only anatase nanoparticles were injected into the column as an adsorbent at different doses. Breakthrough curves (BTC) showed the best efficiency of arsenic removal can be obtained by an adsorbent dose of 8 g L-1 in the fine sand column.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available