4.7 Article

Phosphorus adsorption behavior of industrial waste biomass-based adsorbent, esterified polyethylenimine-coated polysulfone-Escherichia coli biomass composite fibers in aqueous solution

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 400, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123217

关键词

Phosphorus; Adsorption; Waste biomass; Escherichia coli (E. coli); Polyethylenimine (PEI)

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [2018R1A6A3A11045442, 2019R1A2C2087449]
  2. BK21 Plus Eco-leader Education center (ELEC) of Korea university
  3. OJeong Eco-Resilience Institute (OJERI)
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [2019R1A2C2087449, 2018R1A6A3A11045442] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study sought to develop a highly efficient adsorbent material for phosphorus (P) removal via valorization of industrial Escherichia coli biomass waste. To ensure an easy and fast recovery after the sorption process, the E. coli biomass waste was immobilized into polysulfone matrix. Additionally, to improve P sorption capacity, the sorbent surface was coated with polyethylenimine (PEI) and further chemically modified. The P uptakes of the developed sorbent (decarboxylated PEI-modified polysulfone-biomass composite fiber, DC-PEI-PEF) were significantly affected by pH. Moreover, the maximum sorption capacity (qmax) of DC-PEI-PEF was estimated as 30.46 +/- 1.09 mg/g at neutral pH, as determined by a Langmuir isotherm model. Furthermore, DC-PEI-PEF could reach sorption equilibrium within 5 min and exhibited reusability potential. The partition coefficient of the newly developed material (DC-PEI-PEF) was calculated as 0.387 mg/g.mu M at 4 mg/L of initial P concentration and decreased as initial P concentrations increased. Therefore, DC-PEI-PEF could be suggested as a promising adsorbent for application in direct phosphorus removal from natural aquatic environments.

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