3.9 Article Proceedings Paper

A Comparison among Synthetic Layered Double Hydroxides (LDHs) as Effective Adsorbents of Inorganic Arsenic from Contaminated Soil-Water Systems

Journal

SOIL SYSTEMS
Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/soilsystems4020037

Keywords

inorganic arsenic contamination; layered double hydroxides; arsenate; arsenite; adsorption; Langmuir isotherm; competing anions; adsorption inhibition; kinetics of desorption; phosphate

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The need for cost-effective adsorbents of inorganic arsenic (As(III) and As(V)) stimulates the academia to synthesize and test novel materials that can be profitably applied at large-scale in most affected areas worldwide. In this study, four different layered double hydroxides (Cu-Al-, Mg-Al-, Mg-Fe- and Zn-Al-LDH), previously synthesized and studied for As(III) removal capacity, were evaluated as potential adsorbents of As(V) from contaminated systems, in absence or presence of common inorganic anions (Cl-, F-, SO42-, HCO(3)(-)and H2PO4-). The As(V) desorption by H(2)PO(4)(-)was also assessed. Lastly, the As(V) adsorption capacities of the four layered double hydroxides (LDHs) were compared with those observed with As(III) in a complementary paper. All the LDHs adsorbed higher amounts of As(V) than As(III). Fe-Mg-LDH and Cu-Al-LDH showed higher adsorption capacities in comparison to Mg-Al-LDH and Zn-Al-LDH. The presence of competing anions inhibited the adsorption of two toxic anions according to the sequence: Cl-< F-< SO42-< HCO3-< < H2PO4-, in particular on Mg-Al-LDH and Zn-Al-LDH. The kinetics of As(V) desorption by H(2)PO(4)(-)indicated a higher occurrence of more easily desorbable As(V) on Zn-Al-LDH vs. Cu-Al-LDH. In conclusion, synthetic Cu- and Fe-based LDHs can be good candidates for an efficient removal of inorganic As, however, further studies are necessary to prove their real feasibility and safety.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available