4.7 Article

A comparative study on fly ash, geopolymer and faujasite block for Pb removal from aqueous solution

Journal

FUEL
Volume 185, Issue -, Pages 181-189

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2016.07.116

Keywords

Adsorption; Absorbent; Fly ash; Geopolymer; Faujasite; Lead

Funding

  1. Public Service Project of the Chinese Ministry of Land and Resources [201311024]
  2. Comprehensive Utilization Demonstration Base of Ganzhou Rare Earth Resource - Chinese Ministry of Land and Resources
  3. Australian Research Council [LP130101016]
  4. Australian Research Council [LP130101016] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This work aims to evaluate the efficiencies of fly ash, fly ash-based geopolymer and faujasite block, which is transformed from geopolymer, as sorbents for lead (Pb) from aqueous solutions. Comparative experiments were performed to examine the mineralogical features of the fly ash, geopolymer and faujasite block and their adsorption capacities. Equilibrium isotherms and thermodynamic parameters were obtained through systematic investigation of parameters including pH, initial Pb concentration, temperature and contact time. The adsorption kinetics of geopolymer and faujasite block fit well to the pseudo-second-order kinetic model, while the adsorption of fly ash fit to the pseudo-first-order kinetic model. The adsorption equilibrium data of fly ash, geopolymer and faujasite can be expressed using Langmuir model. The maximum adsorption capacities of fly ash, geopolymer and faujasite block at pH = 3 were determined to be 49.8, 118.6 and 143.3 mg/g, respectively. Through this study we demonstrate that both geopolymer and faujasite can effectively remove Pb from wastewater. Most importantly, we prove that geopolymer has the same adsorption mechanisms as faujasite or similar zeolite materials. This finding suggests geopolymer technology being an energy-saving, low cost and environmentally friendly process in adsorbent manufacturing. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available