4.7 Article

Comparison of the adsorption behaviors for methylene blue on two renewable gels with different physical state

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 254, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113117

关键词

Adsorption; Methylene blue; Reusability; Aerogels; Hydrogels

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51522805, 51708281]
  2. Nanjing University Innovation and Creative Program for PhD candidate [CXCY17-21]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High removal efficiency and excellent recyclability are the fundamental qualities that an outstanding adsorbent used for organic dye removal should possess. In this study, two recyclable gels (sodium alginate/Ca/fiber: SCFA hydrogels; cellulose nanofiber/chitosan: CNFCS aerogels) were successfully fabricated using the facile method. Additionally, the as-prepared adsorbents were investigated using a series of characterizations. The adsorption behavior and anti-interference performance of the synthesized gels were compared by choosing methylene blue (MB) as the model pollutant. The kinetic behavior of the gels towards MB was consistent with the pseudo first-order model, and the SCFA hydrogels reached adsorption equilibrium faster than the CNFCS aerogels. The maximum adsorption capacity of MB on the SCFA hydrogels and CNFCS aerogels was 1335.0 and 164.5 mg g(-1) (pH = 7.0, dosage: 0.5 g/L; initial concentration from 15 to 180 mg L-1), respectively. More specifically, we found that the co-existing anions had different effects on MB adsorption over the gels used for MB removal. Furthermore, for the SCFA hydrogels, co-existing natural organic matter (NOM) at low concentrations enhanced MB adsorption, and then stabilized as the concentration of NOM increased. However, this increasing trend was not observed for MB adsorption on CNFCS aerogels; these gels exhibited a slight decrease at first, and then showed no change. Nevertheless, both the gels exhibited superior regeneration and recycling abilities. (C) 2019 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