Journal of Porous Materials

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 719–726 | Cite as

Highly efficient removal of phenol from aqueous solutions using graphene oxide/Al2O3 composite membrane

  • Xuebing Hu
  • Yun Yu
  • Shuang Ren
  • Na Lin
  • Yongqing Wang
  • Jianer Zhou


To achieve superior separation performance in the phenol aqueous solutions treatment, a novel graphene oxide/Al2O3 composite membrane was prepared by a spin coating process. The microstructure measurement shows that the composite membrane has a multilayer structure and graphene oxide has been tightly coated on the surface of the Al2O3 membrane interlayer homogeneously. During the treatment of phenol aqueous solutions, the permeation flux and phenol rejection of the composite membrane were investigated. The results show the permeation flux of the membrane is about 1.153 L m−2 h−1 bar−1 and the phenol rejection of the membrane increases to 99.9% when the phenol concentration is 0.01 g L−1. The high phenol rejection of the composite membrane is mainly attributed to the physical sieving, the solution–diffusion effect and the hydrophobic nature of graphene oxide. All these results indicate the GO/Al2O3 composite membrane is a suitable material for the removal of phenol from aqueous solutions in environmental pollution management.


Graphene oxide Al2O3 composite membrane Phenol rejection Aqueous solutions 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of this research by the National Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51662019) and the Foundation of Jiangxi Science and Technology Committee (Grant Nos. 20161ACB21008, 20143ACB21022). The project also was funded by the Foundation of Jiangxi Educational Committee (Grant No. GJJ150929) and the Foundation of Jiangxi universities of the young teacher development program for visiting scholar (Grant No. 2016169). The editor and reviewers are gratefully acknowledged for their good advices.


  1. 1.
    C. Santhosh, V. Velmurugan, G. Jacob, S.K. Jeong, A.N. Grace, A. Bhatnagar, Role of nanomaterials in water treatment applications: a review. Chem. Eng. J 306, 1116–1137 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S.N. Gosling, N.W. Arnell, A global assessment of the impact of climate change on water scarcity. Clim. Change 134, 371–385 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    C.H. Loh, Y. Zhang, S. Goh, R. Wang, A.G. Fane, Composite hollow fiber membranes with different poly (dimethylsiloxane) intrusions into substrate for phenol removal via extractive membrane bioreactor. J. Membr. Sci. 500, 236–244 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Mohammadi, A. Kargari, H. Sanaeepur, K. Abbassian, A. Najafi, E. Mofarrah, Phenol removal from industrial wastewaters: a short review. Desalin. Water Treat. 53, 2215–2234 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. Wang, Novel high performance magnetic activated carbon for phenol removal: equilibrium, kinetics and thermodynamics. J. Porous Mater. 24, 1–9 (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L.G.C. Villegas, N. Mashhadi, M. Chen, D. Mukherjee, K.E. Taylor, N. Biswas, A short review of techniques for phenol removal from wastewater. Curr. Pollut. Rep. 2, 157–167 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    X. Wang, M. Lu, H. Wang, Y. Pei, H. Rao, X. Du, Three-dimensional graphene aerogels-mesoporous silica frameworks for superior adsorption capability of phenols. Sep. Purif. Technol. 153, 7–13 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    X. Wang, S. Huang, L. Zhu, X. Tian, S. Li, H. Tang, Correlation between the adsorption ability and reduction degree of graphene oxide and tuning of adsorption of phenolic compounds. Carbon 69, 101–112 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Marone, A.A. Carmona-Martínez, Y. Sire, E. Meudec, J.P. Steyer, N. Bernet, E. Trably, Bioelectrochemical treatment of table olive brine processing wastewater for biogas production and phenolic compounds removal. Water Res. 100, 316–325 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    L. Yu, J. Chen, Z. Liang, W. Xu, L. Chen, D. Ye, Degradation of phenol using Fe3O4-GO nanocomposite as a heterogeneous photo-Fenton catalyst. Sep. Purif. Technol. 171, 80–87 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    L.A. Ioannou, G.L. Puma, D. Fatta-Kassinos, Treatment of winery wastewater by physicochemical, biological and advanced processes: a review. J. Hazard. Mater. 286, 343–368 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    B. Abussaud, H.A. Asmaly, Ihsanullah, T.A. Saleh, V.K. Gupta, T. laoui, M.A. Atieh, Sorption of phenol from waters on activated carbon impregnated with iron oxide, aluminum oxide and titanium oxide. J. Mol. Liq. 213, 351–359 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Ray, P. Bhattacharya, R. Das et al., Preparation and characterization of macroporous pure alumina capillary membrane using boehmite as binder for filtration application. J. Porous Mater. 22, 1043–1052 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Yu, Y. Pan, C. Wang, Z. Lai, ZIF-8 membranes with improved reproducibility fabricated from sputter-coated ZnO/alumina supports. Chem. Eng. J. 141, 119–124 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. Shang, A. Goulas, C.Y. Tang, X.F. Serra, L.C. Rietveld, S.G.J. Heijman, Atmospheric pressure atomic layer deposition for tight ceramic nanofiltration membranes: synthesis and application in water purification. J. Membr. Sci. 528, 163–170 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Liu, H. Hou, X. Liu, J. Duan, Y. Yao, Q. Liao, High performance binder-free reduced graphene oxide nanosheets/Cu foam anode for lithium ion battery. J. Porous Mater. 24, 141–147 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    H. Yan, H. Wu, K. Li, Y. Wang, X. Tao, H. Yang, A. Li, R. Cheng, Influence of the surface structure of graphene oxide on the adsorption of aromatic organic compounds from water. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 7, 6690–6697 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. Yu, B. Zhang, F. Yan, J. Zhao, J. Li, L. Li, J. Li, Engineering nano-porous graphene oxide by hydroxyl radicals. Carbon 105, 291–296 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Bhadra, S. Roy, S. Mitra, Desalination across a graphene oxide membrane via direct contact membrane distillation. Desalination 378, 37–43 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Aghigh, V. Alizadeh, H.Y. Wong, M.S. Islam, N. Amin, M. Zaman, Recent advances in utilization of graphene for filtration and desalination of water: a review. Desalination 365, 389–397 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    B. Chen, H. Jiang, X. Liu, X. Hu, Observation and analysis of water transport through graphene oxide interlamination. J. Phys. Chem. C 121, 1321–1328 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    K. Huang, G. Liu, Y. Lou, Z. Dong, J. Shen, W. Jin, A graphene oxide membrane with highly selective molecular separation of aqueous organic solution. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53, 6929–6932 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    R.K. Joshi, P. Carbone, F.C. Wang, V.G. Kravets, Y. Su, I.V. Grigorieva, H.A. Wu, A.K. Geim, R.R. Nair, Precise and ultrafast molecular sieving through graphene oxide membranes. Science 343, 752–754 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    H. Li, Z. Song, X. Zhang, Y. Huang, S. Li, Y. Mao, H.J. Ploehn, Y. Bao M. Yu, Ultrathin, molecular-sieving graphene oxide membranes for selective hydrogen separation. Science 342, 95–98 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    L. Huang, J. Chen, T. Gao, M. Zhang, Y. Li, L. Dai, L. Qu, G. Shi, Reduced graphene oxide membranes for ultrafast organic solvent nanofiltration. Adv. Mater. 28, 8669–8674 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    X. Hu, Y. Yu, W. Hou, J. Zhou, L. Song, Effects of particle size and pH value on the hydrophilicity of graphene oxide. Appl. Surf. Sci. 273, 118–121 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    W. Choi, K.Y. Chun, J. Kim, C.S. Han, Ion transport through thermally reduced and mechanically stretched graphene oxide membrane. Carbon 114, 377–382 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Z. Jia, Y. Wang, Covalently crosslinked graphene oxide membranes by esterification reactions for ions separation. J. Mater. Chem. A 3, 4405–4412 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    D. Konios, M.M. Stylianakis, E. Stratakis, E. Kymakis, Dispersion behaviour of graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 430, 108–112 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    H. Zanin, E. Saito, F.R. Marciano, H.J. Ceragioli, A.E.C. Granato, M. Porcionatto, A.O. Lobo, Fast preparation of nano-hydroxyapatite/superhydrophilic reduced graphene oxide composites for bioactive applications. J. Mater. Chem. B 1, 4947–4955 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    X. Hu, Y. Yu, J. Zhou, L. Song, Effect of graphite precursor on oxidation degree, hydrophilicity and microstructure of graphene oxide. Nano 9, 14500371–14500378 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    X. Hu, Y. Yu, Y. Wang, Y. Wang, J. Zhou, L. Song, Highly transparent superhydrophilic graphene oxide coating for antifogging. Mater. Lett. 182, 372–375 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    X. Hu, Y. Yu, J. Zhou, Y. Wang, J. Liang, X. Zhang, Q. Chang, L. Song, The improved oil/water separation performance of graphene oxide modified Al2O3 microfiltration membrane. J. Membr. Sci. 476, 200–204 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    T. Xiao, L.D. Nghiem, J. Song, R. Bao, X. Li, T. He, Phenol rejection by cellulose triacetate and thin film composite forward osmosis membranes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 186, 45–54 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    M.N. Sule, M.R. Templeton, T. Bond, Rejection of organic micro-pollutants from water by a tubular, hydrophilic pervaporative membrane designed for irrigation applications. Environ. Technol. 37, 1382–1389 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Y. Cui, X.Y. Liu, T.S. Chung, M. Weber, C. Staudt, C. Maletzko, Removal of organic micro-pollutants (phenol, aniline and nitrobenzene) via forward osmosis (FO) process: evaluation of FO as an alternative method to reverse osmosis (RO). Water Res. 91, 104–114 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    B. Mi, Graphene oxide membranes for ionic and molecular sieving. Science 343, 740–742 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    H. Sun, X. Feng, S. Wang, H.M. Ang, M.O. Tadé, Combination of adsorption, photochemical and photocatalytic degradation of phenol solution over supported zinc oxide: effects of support and sulphate oxidant. Chem. Eng. J. 170, 270–277 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    T.O. Mahlangu, E.M.V. Hoek, B.B. Mamba, A.R.D. Verliefde, Influence of organic, colloidal and combined fouling on NF rejection of NaCl and carbamazepine: role of solute-foulant-membrane interactions and cake-enhanced concentration polarization. J. Membr. Sci. 471, 35–46 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    J. Wang, P. Zhang, B. Liang, Y. Liu, T. Xu, L. Wang, B. Cao, K. Pan, Graphene oxide as an effective barrier on a porous nanofibrous membrane for water treatment. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 8, 6211–6218 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    J. Yin, G. Zhu, B. Deng, Graphene oxide (GO) enhanced polyamide (PA) thin-film nanocomposite (TFN) membrane for water purification. Desalination 379, 93–101 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xuebing Hu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yun Yu
    • 2
  • Shuang Ren
    • 1
  • Na Lin
    • 1
  • Yongqing Wang
    • 1
  • Jianer Zhou
    • 1
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Inorganic MembraneJingdezhen Ceramic InstituteJingdezhenPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Inorganic Coating Materials, Shanghai Institute of CeramicsChinese Academy of ScienceShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations