4.7 Article

Comparison of two adsorbents for the removal of pentavalent arsenic from aqueous solutions

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 98, 期 -, 页码 98-106

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.12.018

关键词

Magnesia-loaded fly ash cenospheres; Manganese-loaded fly ash cenospheres; Fly ash cenospheres; Adsorption; Arsenic removal

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [51008154]
  2. Jiangsu Natural Science Foundation [SBK201022682]
  3. Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China [20090091120007]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [1112021101]
  5. Scientific Research Foundation of Graduate School of Nanjing University [2010CL07]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two adsorbents, magnesia-loaded fly ash cenospheres (MGLC) and manganese-loaded fly ash cenospheres (MNLC), were prepared by wet impregnation of fly ash cenospheres with MgCl2 solution or a mixed solution of MnCl2 and KMnO4, respectively. Their physicochemical properties were characterized by scanning electron microscopy, X-ray diffractometry, X-ray fluorescence spectrometry, and Fourier transform infrared spectrometry. Sorption experiments were conducted to examine the effects of adsorbent dosage, pH, time, temperature, ionic strength and competing anions on As(V) removal by MGLC and MNLC. Both MGLC and MNLC had greater pH buffering capacity and were less affected by changes in ionic strength. Competing anions (carbonate and dihydric phosphate) had a larger impact on As(V) removal by MNLC than by MGLC. Adsorption on MNLC reached equilibrium at 60 min, while adsorption on MGLC reached equilibrium at 120 min. The Langmuir adsorption isotherm was a good fit for the experimental data of As(V) adsorption on MGLC and MNLC, and the adsorption kinetics for both followed the pseudo-second-order rate equation. MGLC and MNLC had a larger removal capacity for As(V) than the cenospheres. Compared with MNLC, MGLC is a better absorbent. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据