4.7 Article

Cationic Pollutant Removal from Aqueous Solution Using Reduced Graphene Oxide

期刊

NANOMATERIALS
卷 12, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nano12030309

关键词

graphene oxide; reduce graphene oxide; dyes; heavy metals; pollutant removal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, pristine reduced graphene oxide (rGO) was used to remove cationic pollutants from water, such as methylene blue and mercury ions. The pristine rGO showed high adsorption capacity and short adsorption time, and exhibited a mixed physisorption-chemisorption process. These findings provide a new perspective for the removal of cationic pollutants using oxidized graphene materials.
Reduced graphene oxide (rGO) is one of the most well-known graphene derivatives, which, due to its outstanding physical and chemical properties as well as its oxygen content, has been used for wastewater treatment technologies. Particularly, extra functionalized rGO is widely preferred for treating wastewater containing dyes or heavy metals. Nevertheless, the use of non-extra functionalized (pristine) rGO for the removal of cationic pollutants is not explored in detail or is ambiguous. Herein, pristine rGO-prepared by an eco-friendly protocol-is used for the removal of cationic pollutants from water, i.e., methylene blue (MB) and mercury-(II) (Hg-(II)). This work includes the eco-friendly synthesis process and related spectroscopical and morphological characterization. Most importantly, the investigated rGO shows an adsorption capacity of 121.95 mg g(-1) for MB and 109.49 mg g(-1) for Hg (II) at 298 K. A record adsorption time of 30 min was found for MB and 20 min for Hg (II) with an efficiency of about 89% and 73%, respectively. The capture of tested cationic pollutants on rGO exhibits a mixed physisorption-chemisorption process. The present work, therefore, presents new findings for cationic pollutant adsorbent materials based on oxidized graphenes, providing a new perspective for removing MB molecules and Hg(II) ions.

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