4.7 Article

Twin Lotus Flower Adsorbents Derived from LaFe Cyanometallate for High-Performance Phosphorus Removal

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2022.120924

关键词

Adsorbent; Lanthanum oxides; Cyanometallate; Phosphorus removal

资金

  1. Zhuhai Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation [ZH22017003210025PWC]
  2. Advanced Institute of Natural Sciences, Beijing Normal University at Zhuhai
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [22006131]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study synthesized a lanthanum-iron cyanometallate framework with rich hierarchical pores, and the resulting twin lotus flower oxide exhibited high-performance phosphate adsorption and excellent removal ability for stubborn low concentration phosphorus pollution.
Phosphorus (P) discharge is well recognized as the chief culprit of eutrophication and algal blooms. It is of pressing need to remove excessive phosphorus to protect the important watershed. Lanthanum (La) based materials are one type of attention-grabbing adsorbent due to their superior affinity to phosphate. Here, a La-Fe cyanometallate (CM) framework with a novel twin lotus flower structure was synthesized and rich hierarchical pores were fabricated via pyrolysis. The resultant twin lotus flower oxide of LaFe CM-500 was demonstrated to be a high-performance adsorbent for phosphate removal with a saturated capacity as high as 45.03 mg P/g. It also possessed superior removal ability for the stubborn low concentration of P pollution. The abundant hierarchical pores (from macropore to micropore) render a rapid diffusion of phosphate on the LaFe CM-500. The La components on porous adsorbent were verified to be the key active sites that form stable LaPO4 via a ligand exchange process. The effects of solution conditions (temperature, pH, co-existing ions, and humic acid) were also investigated, and a high selectivity for phosphate adsorption enables the as-prepared twin lotus flower adsorbent to be competitive in practical water body treatment.

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