4.7 Article

Interpretation of single and competitive adsorption of cadmium and zinc on activated carbon using monolayer and exclusive extended monolayer models

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 24, 页码 19902-19908

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-9562-8

关键词

Single and competitive adsorption; Statistical physics models; Zinc; Cadmium; Activated carbon

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this work, a modeling analysis based on experimental tests of cadmium/zinc adsorption, in both single-compound and binary systems, was carried out. All the experimental tests were conducted at constant pH (around neutrality) and temperature (20 A degrees C). The experimental results showed that the zinc adsorption capacity was higher than that of cadmium and it does not depend on cadmium presence in binary system. Conversely, cadmium adsorption is affected by zinc presence. In order to provide good understanding of the adsorption process, two statistical physics models were proposed. A monolayer and exclusive extended monolayer models were applied to interpret the single-compound and binary adsorption isotherms of zinc and cadmium on activated carbon. Based on these models, the modeling analysis demonstrated that zinc is dominant in solution and more favorably adsorbed on activated carbon surface. For instance, in single-compound systems, the number of ions bound per each receptor site was n (Zn2+) = 2.12 > n (Cd2+) = 0.98. Thus, the receptor sites of activated carbon are more selective for Zn2+ than for Cd2+. Moreover, the determination of adsorption energy through the adopted models confirmed that zinc is more favored for adsorption in single-compound system (adsorption energies equal to 12.12 and 7.12 kJ/mol for Zn and Cd, respectively) and its adsorption energy does not depend on the cadmium presence in binary system. Finally, the adsorption energy values suggested that single-compound and binary adsorption of zinc and cadmium is a physisorption.

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