4.4 Review

Review on solvent desorption study from exhausted adsorbent

期刊

JOURNAL OF SAUDI CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 25, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jscs.2021.101302

关键词

Solvent desorption; Eluent; Desorption efficiency; Desorption cycle

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper discusses the basic information and methods of desorption of hazardous solid waste, emphasizing that desorption mainly depends on ion exchange processes. Successfully conducting desorption of metals and dyes by using acidic and alkaline eluents demonstrates the feasibility of selectively desorbing substances with different charges.
Hazardous solid waste is one of the most serious problem faced by all over the World, which comprises spent solid adsorbents. Spent solid adsorbents are generally regenerated by different methods including solvent desorption, owning its merits and demerits. Basic information of desorption and eluent like desorption efficiency, desorption cycle, desorption breakthrough curve and eluent parameters are elucidated. Main objective of this review paper is explored batch and column desorption of metal, dye and other hazardous compounds using ion exchange compounds (such as acid and alkaline solution), organic solvent and mixture of these as an eluent in desorption study; and revealed that desorption is mostly depends upon ion exchange process. Desorption of positively charged metals is conducted using acid eluent, while alkaline solution is used to elute negatively charged dyes and other contaminations due to electrostatic attraction. Acidic eluent hydrochloric acid and alkaline eluent sodium hydroxide solution are most utilized for desorption study to elute copper(II) and anionic dye. Feasibility of these eluents using desorption cycles and its efficiency is also discussed in this paper. (c) 2021 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

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

4.4
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