4.8 Article

Adsorptive removal of ciprofloxacin and sulfamethoxazole from aqueous matrices using sawdust and plastic waste-derived biochar: A sustainable fight against antibiotic resistance

期刊

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
卷 387, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2023.129537

关键词

Sawdust; Plastic waste; Antibiotics; Adsorptive removal; Chemisorption

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study produced carbon-negative biochar from the pyrolysis of sawdust biomass alone and from the co-pyrolysis of sawdust and plastic waste. The pyrolyzed biochar showed better removal efficiencies for ciprofloxacin and sulfamethoxazole compared to the co-pyrolyzed biochar. The adsorption process involved mechanisms such as H bonding, electrostatic interactions, and 7C-7C electron donor-acceptor interactions, and followed a pseudo-second-order kinetic model.
We produced carbon-negative biochar from the pyrolysis of sawdust biomass alone (SB) and from the co pyrolysis of sawdust and plastic waste (SPB). The co-pyrolysis approach in this study was driven by several hypothetical factors, such as increased porosity, surface chemistry, stability, as well as waste management. We applied pyrolyzed and co-pyrolyzed biochars for the removal of ciprofloxacin (CFX) and sulfamethoxazole (SMX). Due tYo its more alkaline and amorphous nature, SB showed better removal efficiencies compared to SPB. The maximum removals of CFX and SMX with SB were observed as similar to 95% and >95%, respectively whereas with SPB were 58.8%, and 34.9%, respectively. The primary mechanisms involved in the adsorption process were H bonding, electrostatic and 7C-7C electron donor-acceptor interactions. Homogenously and heterogeneously driven adsorption of both antibiotics followed the pseudo-second-order kinetic model, implying electron sharing/transfer (chemisorption) mediated adsorption. The work is highly pertinent in the context of emerging concerns related to drivers that promote antimicrobial resistance.

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

4.8
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