4.7 Article

Nitrogen-doped flower-like porous carbon nanostructures for fast removal of sulfamethazine from water

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 255, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113229

关键词

N-doped flower-like porous carbon; Adsorption; Sulfamethazine; Isotherm; Kinetic

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21777089, 21477068]
  2. Key Research and Development Program of Shandong Province [2017GSF17107]
  3. Youth Science Funds of Shandong Academy of Sciences [2018QN002]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2018LB033, ZR2017LB026]
  5. Taishan Scholar Program of Shandong Province [ts201712063]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The increasing concern for the toxicity of sulfamethazine (SMT) in water requires the establishment of effective water treatment processes to remove it. In this study, a novel adsorbent of nitrogen-doped flower-like porous carbon nanostnictures (N-doped FPC) was proposed for the adsorption removal of SMT. The N-doped FPC possessed high surface area, good water dispersibility, and alkaline surface, endowing it with great adsorption efficiency towards SMT. The adsorption equilibrium data can be well fitted by both the Langmuir and Temkin models, and the maximum monolayer adsorption capacity of Ndoped FPC was 610 mg g(-1) for SMT at 298 K. The N-doped FPC exhibited fast adsorption rate for SMT and adsorption equilibrium reached within only 5 min. The pseudo-first-order model described adsorption kinetics data well and the external mass transport was the rate-limiting step. The thermodynamic parameters (AG, OH, and.S) showed that the adsorption of SMT onto N-doped FPC was a feasible, spontaneous, and endothermic physisorption process. After five consecutive sorption/desorption cycles, the N-doped FPC retained more than 85% adsorption capacity. This study confirmed the promising potential of N-doped FPC as high-performance adsorbents for water purification. (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