Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 8, pp 7709–7718 | Cite as

Efficient removal of Hg2+ in aqueous solution with fishbone charcoal as adsorbent

  • Jishan Wu
  • Eustaquia De Antonio Mario
  • Bingqiao YangEmail author
  • Chang Liu
  • Feifei Jia
  • Shaoxian SongEmail author
Research Article

Abstract

The Hg2+ removal performance of fishbone charcoal prepared from discarded fishbone has been investigated in this work. The XRD, FTIR, and BET results demonstrated that the main composition of fishbone charcoal was hydroxyapatite and the specific surface area was 117 m2/g. The adsorption experiments indicated that fishbone charcoal had an extremely high adsorption capacity for Hg2+ (243.77 mg/g). The excellent Hg2+ adsorption capacity might be ascribed to the ion exchange of Hg2+ to the Ca2+ in the structure of fishbone charcoal, complexation of Hg2+ with ≡Ca(OH)2+ on the surface of fishbone charcoal, as well as electrostatic interaction between electronegative fishbone charcoal surface and cation Hg2+. This work transformed kitchen garbage (i.e., fishbone) into an effective mercury adsorbent with considerable capacity, giving a perspective sight for the utilization of solid waste.

Keywords

Mercury adsorption Fishbone charcoal Ion exchange Surface complexation Electrostatic interaction 

Notes

Funding information

The financial support for this work from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51704220 and 51704212), Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province (2016CFA013), and Wuhan Science and Technology Bureau (2016070204020156) were gratefully acknowledged.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Admassu W, Breese T (1999) Feasibility of using natural fishbone apatite as a substitute for hydroxyapatite in remediating aqueous heavy metals. J Hazard Mater 69(2):187–196.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894(99)00102-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Corami A, Mignardi S, Ferrini V (2008) Cadmium removal from single- and multi-metal (Cd + Pb + Zn + Cu) solutions by sorption on hydroxyapatite. J Colloid Interface Sci 317(2):402–408.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2007.09.075 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Deydier E, Guilet R, Sarda S, Sharrock P (2005) Physical and chemical characterisation of crude meat and bone meal combustion residue: “waste or raw material?”. J Hazard Mater 121(1-3):141–148.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.02.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gong Y, Liu Y, Xiong Z, Zhao D (2014) Immobilization of mercury by carboxymethyl cellulose stabilized iron sulfide nanoparticles: reaction mechanisms and effects of stabilizer and water chemistry. Environ Sci Technol 48(7):3986–3994.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es404418a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Grandjean P, Weihe P, White RF, Debes F, Araki S, Yokoyama K, Murata K, SØRENSEN N, Dahl R, JØRGENSEN PJ (1997) Cognitive deficit in 7-year-old children with prenatal exposure to methylmercury. Neurotoxicol Teratol 19(6):417–428.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-0362(97)00097-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hahne HCH, Kroontje W (1973) Significance of pH and chloride concentration on behavior of heavy metal pollutants: mercury(II), cadmium(II), zinc(II), and lead(II). J Environ Qual 2(4):444–450.  https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1973.00472425000200040007x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Holden JL, Phakey PP, Clement JG (1995) Scanning electron microscope observations of heat-treated human bone. Forensic Sci Int 74(1-2):29–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0379-0738(95)01735-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Humbert P (1986) An XPS and UPS photoemission study of HgO. Solid State Commun 60(1):21–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-1098(86)90007-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jia F, Wang Q, Wu J, Li Y, Song S (2017) Two-dimensional molybdenum disulfide as a superb adsorbent for removing Hg2+ from water. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 5(8):7410–7419.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b01880 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Krishnan KA, Anirudhan TS (2002) Removal of mercury(II) from aqueous solutions and chlor-alkali industry effluent by steam activated and sulphurised activated carbons prepared from bagasse pith: kinetics and equilibrium studies. J Hazard Mater 92(2):161–183.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894(02)00014-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kumar TSS, Sivakumar M, Kumar NP et al (1995) Synthesis and characterization of bioactive hydroxyapatite/fluoroapatite solid solutions using corals t. Mater Sci 18:955–961Google Scholar
  12. Lazarevi S, Jankovi I, Tanaskovi D et al (2008) Hydroxyapatite powder obtained by the hydrothermal method. J Environ Eng 134(8):683–688.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2008)134:8(683) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ma QY, Logan TJ, Traina SJ, Ryan JA (1994) Effects of NO3 -, Cl-, F-, SO4 2-, and CO3 2- on Pb2+ immobilization by hydroxyapatite. Environ Sci Technol 28(3):408–418.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es00052a011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Manohar DM, Krishnan KA, Anirudhan TS (2002) Removal of mercury(II) from aqueous solutions and chlor-alkali industry wastewater using 2-mercaptobenzimidazole-clay. Water Res 36(6):1609–1619.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00362-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nefedov VI, Salyn YV, Keller K (1979) X-ray electron studies of lead and mercury-compounds. Zh Neorg Khimii 24:2564–2566Google Scholar
  16. Oliva J, De Pablo J, Cortina JL, Cama J, Ayora C (2011) Removal of cadmium, copper, nickel, cobalt and mercury from water by Apatite II™: column experiments. J Hazard Mater 194:312–323.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.07.104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ozawa M, Suzuki S (2002) Microstructural development of natural hydroxyapatite originated from fish-bone waste through heat treatment. J Argent Chem Soc 17:2000–2002Google Scholar
  18. Piccirillo C, Silva MF, Pullar RC, Braga da Cruz I, Jorge R, Pintado MME, Castro PML (2013) Extraction and characterisation of apatite- and tricalcium phosphate-based materials from cod fish bones. Mater Sci Eng C 33(1):103–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2012.08.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rao RR, Roopa HN, Kannan TS (1997) Solid state synthesis and thermal stability of HAP and HAP—beta-TCP composite ceramic powders. J Mater Sci Mater Med 8(8):511–518.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018586412270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rapacz-Kmita A, Paluszkiewicz C, Ślósarczyk A, Paszkiewicz Z (2005) FTIR and XRD investigations on the thermal stability of hydroxyapatite during hot pressing and pressureless sintering processes. J Mol Struct 744-747:653–656.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molstruc.2004.11.070 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ryaboshapko A, Bullock R, Ebinghaus R, Ilyin I, Lohman K, Munthe J, Petersen G, Seigneur C, Wängberg I (2002) Comparison of mercury chemistry models. Atmos Environ 36(24):3881–3898.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(02)00351-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ślósarczyk A, Paszkiewicz Z, Paluszkiewicz C (2005) FTIR and XRD evaluation of carbonated hydroxyapatite powders synthesized by wet methods. J Mol Struct 744-747:657–661.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molstruc.2004.11.078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sun Y, Lou Z, Yu J, Zhou X, Lv D, Zhou J, Baig SA, Xu X (2017a) Immobilization of mercury (II) from aqueous solution using Al2O3-supported nanoscale FeS. Chem Eng J 323:483–491.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2017.04.095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sun Y, Lv D, Zhou J, Zhou X, Lou Z, Baig SA, Xu X (2017b) Adsorption of mercury (II) from aqueous solutions using FeS and pyrite: a comparative study. Chemosphere 185:452–461.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.07.047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tanizawa Y, Sawamura K, Suzuki TJ (1991) Reaction characteristics of hydroxyapatite with F? and PO3F2? ions. Chemical states of fluorine in hydroxyapatite. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans 87(14):2235–2240.  https://doi.org/10.1039/ft9918702235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tchounwou PB, Ayensu WK, Ninashvili N, Sutton D (2003) Environmental exposure to mercury and its toxicopathologic implications for public health. Environ Toxicol 18(3):149–175.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tox.10116 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Xu Y, Schwartz FW, Traina SJ (1994) Sorption of Zn2+ and Cd2+ on hydroxyapatite surfaces. Environ Sci Technol 28(8):1472–1480.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es00057a015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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(5):835–841.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(03)00267-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zahir F, Rizwi SJ, Haq SK, Khan RH (2005) Low dose mercury toxicity and human health. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 20(2):351–360.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2005.03.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhang F-S, Nriagu JO, Itoh H (2005) Mercury removal from water using activated carbons derived from organic sewage sludge. Water Res 39(2-3):389–395.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.09.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Resources and Environmental EngineeringWuhan University of TechnologyWuhanChina
  2. 2.School of Resource and Civil EngineeringWuhan Institute of TechnologyWuhanChina
  3. 3.Hubei Key Laboratory of Mineral Resources Processing and EnvironmentWuhanChina
  4. 4.Hubei Provincial Collaborative Innovation Center for High Efficient Utilization of Vanadium ResourcesWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations