4.6 Article

Kinetics and Adsorption Equilibrium in the Removal of Azo-Anionic Dyes by Modified Cellulose

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 14, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su14063640

关键词

biomass; cellulose; Congo red; kinetic studies; removal; tartrazine

资金

  1. Universidad de Cartagena

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study introduced a new bio-friendly adsorbent based on natural materials and CTAC-modified wheat straw residues for dye removal. The modified adsorbent showed better adsorption capacity for tartrazine and Congo red, with adsorption processes following pseudo-second-order kinetics and Freundlich isotherm model.
This study introduces a new and bio-friendly adsorbent based on natural and cetyltrimethylammonium chloride (CTAC)-modified adsorbent prepared from wheat straw residues for the removal of Congo red (CR) and tartrazine azo-anionic dyes from aqueous solution. The adsorbent was characterized by thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), calorimetric differential (DSC), scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDX), and pH point of zero charge (pH(PZC)) techniques. It was found that decreasing the adsorbent dose and increasing the initial concentration favors the removal of tartrazine and Congo red. Tartrazine adsorption capacities were 2.31 mg/g for the cellulose extracted from wheat residues (WC) and 18.85 mg/g for the modified wheat residue cellulose (MWC) for tartrazine as well as 18.5 mg/g for WC and 19.92 for MWC during Congo red (CR) adsorption, respectively. Increasing the initial and decreasing the adsorbent dose concentration favored the adsorption process. From time effect analysis, it was found that the equilibrium time was reached at 120 min when modified wheat cellulose was used and at 480 min when wheat cellulose was used. The kinetics of adsorption were described by pseudo-second-order in all cases with R-2 > 0.95. The obtained data equilibrium from this research was well-fitted by the Freundlich isotherm model.

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

4.6
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