4.7 Article

Interactions of Chlorella vulgaris and fly ash cenospheres in heat-aided ballasted flotation

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.algal.2020.101813

关键词

Microalgae harvesting; Fly ash cenospheres; Waste heat; Ballasted flotation; XDLVO

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41230314]
  2. Fund Project of Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Land Consolidation [2018-ZD04]
  3. Special Fund for Basic Scientific Research of Central Colleges, Chang'an University [300102299703, 300102299708]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heat-aided ballasted flotation using industrial waste heat is a cog-effective and eco-friendly technology to harvest microalgae from aquatic environment. However, the underlying mechanism of this process is not yet fully understood. This study investigates the interactions between Chlorella vulgaris and fly ash cenospheres in heat-aided ballasted flotation based on the Extended Derjaguin-Landau-Verwey-Overbeek approach. The results indicated that Lifshitz-van der Waals interaction played an important role in the attachment of algal cell on fly ash cenospheres. Furthermore, the Lewis acid-base interaction changed from repulsion to attraction in the system due to heating, which promoted the algal cells to attach on fly ash cenospheres, resulting in a higher harvesting efficiency. However, when the temperature was increased to 90 degrees C, the Lifshitz-van der Waals interaction was reversed, which resulted in an energy barrier. The total attractive interaction increased with the decrease in pH from 10 to 4, due to changes in electrostatic interaction. After surface modification of fly ash cenospheres, the electrostatic interaction was always attractive in this system at pH of 7 regardless of temperature variations. Finally, according to the experimental results and the Extended Derjaguin-Landau-VerweyOverbeek analysis, the usage of surface modified fly ash cenospheres for heat-aided ballasted flotation can be advantageous for environmental safety and high efficiency.

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