4.7 Article

Green synthesis of nanoparticles: Current developments and limitations

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eti.2022.102336

关键词

Expectations; Extracts; Limitations; Nanoscale metals; Plants

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province [GB20041290039]
  2. College of Environment at Zhejiang University of Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review evaluates the current developments in green synthesis of nanoscale metals, highlighting the advantages and limitations of this method compared to chemical synthesis, and discussing its potential applications in environmental protection and human health.
Nanoscale metals are widely used in many fields such as environment, medicine, and engineering that synthesis of nanoscale metals is a timely topic. At present, nanoscale metals are mainly synthesized by chemical methods that have unintended effects such as environmental pollution, large energy consumption, and potential health problems. In response to these challenges, green synthesis, which uses plant extracts instead of industrial chemical agents to reduce metal ions, has been developed. Green synthesis is more beneficial than traditional chemical synthesis because it costs less, decreases pollution, and improves environmental and human health safety. In this review, current developments in the green synthesis of nanoparticles of gold (Au NPs), silver (Ag NPs), palladium (Pd NPs), copper (Cu NPs), and iron and its oxide (Fe NPs) were evaluated. Major findings reveal the complexity in geographical and seasonal distributions of plants and their compositions that green synthesis is limited by time and place of production as well as issues with low purity and poor yield. However, considering current environmental problems and pollution associated with chemical synthesis, green synthesis offers alternative development prospects and potential applications. Keywords: Expectations Extracts Limitations Nanoscale metals Plants (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.

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