4.4 Article

Removal of nitrate from water by adsorption onto zinc chloride treated activated carbon

期刊

SEPARATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 43, 期 4, 页码 886-907

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/01496390701787461

关键词

water treatment; nitrate removal; ZnCl2 treated activated carbon; adsorption isotherms; kinetic modeling

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adsorption study with untreated and zinc chloride (ZnCl2) treated coconut granular activated carbon (GAC) for nitrate removal from water has been carried out. Untreated coconut GAC was treated with ZnCl2 and carbonized. The optimal conditions were selected by studying the influence of process variables such as chemical ratio and activation temperature. Experimental results reveal that chemical weight ratio of 200% and temperature of 500 degrees C was found to be optimum for the maximum removal of nitrate from water. Both untreated and ZnCl2 treated coconut GACs were characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Brunauer Emmett Teller (BET) N-2-gas adsorption, surface area and Energy Dispersive X-Ray (EDX) analysis. The comparison between untreated and ZnCl2 treated GAC indicates that treatment with ZnCl2 has significantly improved the adsorption efficacy of untreated GAC. The adsorption capacity of untreated and ZnCl2 treated coconut GACs were found 1.7 and 10.2 mg/g, respectively. The adsorption of nitrate on ZnCl2 treated coconut GAC was studied as a function of contact time, initial concentration of nitrate anion, temperature, and pH by batch mode adsorption experiments. The kinetic study reveals that equilibrium was achieved within one hour. The adsorption data conform best fit to the Langmuir isotherm. Kinetic study results reveal that present adsorption system followed a pseudo-second-order kinetics with pore-diffusion-controlled. Results of the present study recommend that the adsorption process using ZnCl2 treated coconut GAC might be a promising innovative technology in future for nitrates removal from drinking water.

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

4.4
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