4.7 Article

Non-competitive and competitive adsorption of Cd2+, Ni2+, and Cu2+ by biogenic vaterite

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 659, 期 -, 页码 122-130

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.199

关键词

Biogenic vaterite; Adsorption; Interaction; Heavy metal; Mechanism

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41772360, 41373078]
  2. Postgraduate Research & Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province [KYCX18_1194]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ubiquitous bio-minerals exert significant effects on the migration and transformation of metal ions in the environment, however, research into the adsorption of heavy metals by biogenic vaterite (BV) has rarely been reported. The aim of our research was to evaluate the removal effects of Cd2+, Ni2+, and Cu2+ in single and multi-metal ion aqueous solutions using BV induced by Bacillus subtilis. The results demonstrate that the adsorption data of BV for metal ions are more accurately fitted to the Langmuir model compared with the Freundlich model. The max adsorption capacity (mg/g) order of BV was Ni (270.27) > Cu (178.57) > Cd (172.41) in a single-metal system, and Cu (175.44) > Ni (94.34) > Cd (30.30) in a multi-metal system (pH = 5.0, 2.5 g/L). A competitive effect exists amongst heavy metals in multi-metal ion systems, and Cu2+ adsorption is less affected by other two ions. Furthermore, BV can maintain favourable adsorption characteristics even in a very strong acidic environment (pH = 3.0), and its adsorptive capability becomes more favourable at higher temperatures. Kinetic analysis shows that the adsorption process can be better described by a pseudo-second-order model. XRD, FTIR, and SEM-EDS results reveal that metal ion adsorption on BV mostly happened through physical means, and the favourable adsorption characteristics of BV might be attributable to its larger specific surface area, aggregated spherical polyporous and organic-inorganic structure. (c) 2018 Elsevier B.V. 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