Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 22, Issue 21, pp 16721–16731 | Cite as

Isotherm, kinetic, and thermodynamic studies on Hg(II) adsorption from aqueous solution by silica- multiwall carbon nanotubes

  • Tawfik A. SalehEmail author
Research Article

Abstract

Silica combined with 2 % multiwall carbon nanotubes (SiO2-CNT) was synthesized and characterized. Its sorption efficacy was investigated for the Hg(II) removal from an aqueous solution. The effect of pH on the percentage removal by the prepared material was examined in the range from 3 to 7. The adsorption kinetics were well fitted by using a pseudo-second-order model at various initial Hg(II) concentrations with R 2 of >0.99. The experimental data were plotted using the interparticle diffusion model, which indicated that the interparticle diffusion is not the only rate-limiting step. The data is well described by the Freundlich isotherm equation. The activation energy (Ea) for adsorption was 12.7 kJ mol−1, indicating the process is to be physisorption. Consistent with an endothermic process, an increase in the temperature resulted in increasing mercury removal with a ∆Ho of 13.3 kJ/mol and a ∆So 67.5 J/mol K. The experimental results demonstrate that the combining of silica and nanotubes is a promising alternative material, which can be used to remove the mercury from wastewaters.

Keywords

SiO2-CNT Environmental degradation Surface analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to acknowledge the support provided by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR) at King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM) for funding this work through project No. JF121009.

References

  1. Anderson DR (1974) In: Lee Smith A (ed) Analysis of Silicones. Wiley-Intersciences, New York, Chapter 10Google Scholar
  2. Anirudhan TS, Divya L, Ramachandran M (2008) Mercury(II) removal from aqueous solutions and wastewaters using a novel cation exchanger derived from coconut coir pith and its recovery. J Hazard Mater 157:620–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cui H, Qian Y, Li Q, Zhang Q, Zhai J (2012) Adsorption of aqueous Hg(II) by a polyaniline/attapulgite composite,”. Chem Eng J 211–212:216–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. El-Gamel EA, Wortmann L, Arroubb K, Mathur S (2011) SiO2@Fe2O3 core–shell nanoparticles for covalent immobilization and release of sparfloxacin drugw. Chem Commun 47:10076–10078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Freundlich H (1906) Uber die adsorption in losungen (adsorption in solution). Z Phys Chem 57:384–470Google Scholar
  6. Fu X, Feng X, Sommar J, Wang S (2012) A review of studies on atmospheric mercury in China. Sci Total Environ 421–422:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Iijima S (1991) Helical microtubes of graphitic carbon. Nature 354:56–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Insin N, Tracy JB, Lee H, Zimmer JP, Westervelt RM, Bawendi MG (2008) Incorporation of iron oxide nanoparticles and quantum dots into silica microspheres. ACS Nano 2:197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kadirvelu K, Kavipriya M, Karthika C, Vennilamani N, Pattabhi S (2004) Mercury (II) adsorption by activated carbon made from sago waste. Carbon 42:745–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kadirvelu K, Goel J, Rajagopal C (2008) Sorption of lead, mercury and cadmium ions in multi-component system using carbon aerogel as adsorbent. J Hazard Mater 153:502–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim MH, Na HK, Kim YK, Ryoo SR, Cho HS, Lee KE, Jeon H, Ryoo R, Min DH (2011) Facile synthesis of monodispersed mesoporous silica nanoparticles with ultralarge pores and their application in gene delivery. ACS Nano 5:3568–3576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Knocke WR, Hemphill LH (1981) Mercury(II) sorption by waste rubber. Water Res 15:275–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Labidi NS (2008) Removal of mercury from aqueous solutions by waste brick. Int J Environ Res 2:275–278Google Scholar
  14. Lagergren S (1898) About the theory of so-called adsorption of solution substances, kunglia srenska vertens Ka psakademiens Handlingar. 24: 1–39Google Scholar
  15. Langmuir I (1918) The adsorption of gases on plane surfaces of glass, mica and platinum. J Am Chem Soc 40:1362–1403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mehdinia A, Akbari M, Baradaran T, Azad M (2015) High-efficient mercury removal from environmental water samples using di-thio grafted on magnetic mesoporous silica nanoparticles. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22:2155–2165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Saifuddin N, Raziah AZ (2007) Removal of heavy metals fromindustrialeffluent using Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Baker’s yeast) immobilized in chitosan/lignosulphonate matrix. J Appl Sci Res 3:2091–2099Google Scholar
  18. Saikia BJ, Parthasarathy G (2010) Fourier transform infrared spectroscopic characterization of kaolinite from Assam and Meghalaya, Northeastern India. J Mod Phys 1:206–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Saleh TA (2011) The influence of treatment temperature on the acidity of MWCNT oxidized by HNO3 or a mixture of HNO3/H2SO4. Appl Surf Sci 257(17):7746–7751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Saleh TA, Gupta VK (2011) Functionalization of tungsten oxide into MWCNT and its application for sunlight-induced degradation of rhodamine B. J Colloid Interface Sci 362(2):337–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Saleh TA, Gupta VK (2014) Processing methods, characteristics and adsorption behavior of tire derived carbons: a review. Adv Colloid Interf Sci 211:93–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sari A, Tuzen M (2009) Removal of mercury(II) from aqueous solution using moss (Drepanocladus revolvens) biomass: Equilibrium, thermodynamic and kinetic studies. J Hazard Mater 171:500–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shadbad MJ, Mohebbi A, Soltani A (2011) Mercury(II) removal from aqueous solutions by adsorption on multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Korean J Chem Eng 28:1029–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shawky HA, El-Aassar A, Abo-Zeid DE (2012) Chitosan/carbon nanotube composite beads: Preparation, characterization, and cost evaluation for mercury removal from wastewater of some industrial cities in Egypt. J Appl Polym Sci 125:E93–E101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Treybal RE (1968) Mass Transfer Operations, 2nd edn. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Unuabonah EI, Adebowale KO, Olu-Owolabi BO (2007) Kinetic and thermodynamic studies of the adsorption of lead (II) ions onto phosphate-modified kaolinite clay. J Hazard Mater 144:386–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vasudevan S, Lakshmi J, Sozhan G (2012) Optimization of electrocoagulation process for the simultaneous removal of mercury, lead, and nickel from contaminated water. Environ Sci Pollut Res 19:2734–2744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wang J, Feng X, Anderson CWN, Xing Y, Shang L (2012) Remediation of mercury contaminated sites—a review. J Hazard Mater 221–222:1–18Google Scholar
  29. Wang Q, Qin W, Chai L, Li Q (2014) Understanding the formation of colloidal mercury in acidic wastewater with high concentration of chloride ions by electrocapillary curves. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21:3866–3872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Webber TN, Chakravarti RK (1974) Pore and solid diffusion models for fixed bed adsorbers. J Am Inst Chem Eng 20:228–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yardim MF, Budinova T, Ekinci E, Petrov N, Razvigorova M, Minkova V (2003) Removal of mercury (II) from aqueous solution by activated carbon obtained from furfural. Chemosphere 52:835–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yin ZH, Liu X, Su ZX (2010) Novel fabrication of silica nanotubes using multi-walled carbon nanotubes as template. Bull Mater Sci 33:351–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yu Y, Addai-Mensah J, Losic D (2012) Functionalized diatom silica microparticles for removal of mercury ions. Sci Technol Adv Mater 13:015008 (11pp)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhang M, Wu Y, Feng X, He X, Chen L, Zhang Y (2010) Fabrication of mesoporous silica-coated CNTs and application in size-selective protein separation. J Mater Chem 20:5835–5842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang S, Zhang Y, Liu J, Xu Q, Xiao H, Wang X, Xu H, Zhou J (2013) Thiol modified Fe3O4@SiO2 as a robust, high effective, and recycling magnetic sorbent for mercury removal. Chem Eng J 226:30–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhanga F, Nriagu JO, Itoh H (2005) Mercury removal from water using activated carbons derived from organic sewage sludge. Water Res 39:389–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zhu J, Yang J, Deng B (2009) Enhanced mercury ion adsorption by amine-modified activated carbon. J Hazard Mater 166:866–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemistry DepartmentKing Fahd University of Petroleum & MineralsDhahranSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations