4.4 Article

Adsorption of Chromium (VI) from Aqueous Solution Using Palm Leaf-Derived Biochar: Kinetic and Isothermal Studies

期刊

SEPARATIONS
卷 10, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/separations10040260

关键词

palm leaves; biochar; adsorption kinetics; adsorption isotherms; Cr (VI) removal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, palm leaf biochar was treated with phosphoric acid to enhance its sorption efficiency of Cr(VI) from aqueous solutions. Characterization experiments showed that the phosphoric acid-treated biochar (TBC-P) exhibited more surface oxygenated functional groups, surface area, pore size, and internal structure compared to palm leaves and untreated biochar. Batch adsorption experiments demonstrated that TBC-P had a strong sorption ability to Cr(VI), with a removal efficiency of 99% at pH 2.0, significantly higher than untreated biochar. The TBC-P could be successfully regenerated using a 0.1 M HCl solution.
In this study, biochar produced by low-temperature pyrolysis from palm leaves was treated with phosphoric acid in order to increase the sorption efficiency of Cr (VI) from aqueous solutions. Numerous characterization experiments using BET surface area, FE-SEM and FT-IR showed that the phosphoric acid-treated biochar (TBC-P) was covered with P particles. In comparison to the palm leaves and biochar, the TBC-P also had more surface oxygenated functional groups, surface area, pore size and internal structure. FTIR analysis showed that the functional groups of pretreated biochar were similar to those of biochar. Batch adsorption experiments showed that the TBC-P had a strong sorption ability to Cr (VI), with the highest removal efficiency of 99% at a low pH value of 2.0, which was significantly higher than that of the untreated biochar. The kinetic study has shown that the mechanism of the reaction was well represented by the second-order model, while isotherm data were well presented by the Langmuir model. The TBC-P was successfully regenerated using a 0.1 M HCl solution.

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