Advertisement

Preparation of various thiol-functionalized carbon-based materials for enhanced removal of mercury from aqueous solution

  • Siyu Xia
  • Yao Huang
  • Jingchun TangEmail author
  • Lan Wang
Research Article
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

In this work, biochar (BC), activated carbon (AC), and graphene oxide (GO) were thiol-functionalized using 3-mercaptopropyltrimethoxysilane (3-MPTS) (named as BCS, ACS, and GOS, respectively). BCS, ACS, and GOS were synthesized mainly via the interaction between hydrolyzed 3-MPTS and surface oxygen-containing functional groups (e.g., –OH, O–C=O, and C=O) and π-π interaction. The materials before and after modification were characterized and tested for mercury removal, including sorption kinetics and isotherms, the effects of adsorbent dosage, initial pH, and ionic strength. Pseudo-second-order sorption kinetic model (R2 = 0.992~1.000) and Langmuir sorption isotherm model (R2 = 0.964~0.998) fitted well with the sorption data of mercury. GOS had the most –SH groups with the largest adsorption capacity for Hg2+ and CH3Hg+ (449.6 and 127.5 mg/g), followed by ACS (235.7 and 86.7 mg/g) and BCS (175.6 and 30.3 mg/g), which were much larger than GO (96.7 and 4.9 mg/g), AC (81.1 and 24.6 mg/g), and BC (95.6 and 9.4 mg/g). GOS and ACS showed stable mercury adsorption properties at a wide pH range (2~9) and ionic strength (0.01~0.1 mol/L). Mercury maybe removed by ligand exchange, surface complexation, and electrostatic attraction.

Keywords

Thiol-functionalization 3-Mercaptopropyltrimethoxysilane Carbon-based material Adsorption Hg2+ CH3Hg+ 

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by the following: (1) National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. U1806216, No. 41807115), (2) Tianjin S&T Program (17PTGCCX00240, 16YFXTSF00520, 17ZXSTSF00050), and (3) 111 program, Ministry of Education, China (T2017002).

Supplementary material

11356_2019_4320_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (857 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 856 kb)

References

  1. And JCM, Dougherty DA (1997) The cation−π interaction. Acc Chem Res 46:885–893Google Scholar
  2. Carriere B, Deville JP, Brion D, Escard J (1977) X-ray photoelectron study of some silicon-oxygen compounds. J Electron Spectrosc Relat Phenom 10:85–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0368-2048(77)85006-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gąsior D, Tic WJ (2016) Biochar application in the mercury ions adsorption from aqueous solutions. Environ Socio-Econ Stud 16:803–818Google Scholar
  4. Hadavifar M, Bahramifar N, Younesi H, Li Q (2014) Adsorption of mercury ions from synthetic and real wastewater aqueous solution by functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotube with both amino and thiolated groups. Chem Eng J 237:217–228.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2013.10.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hakami O, Zhang Y, Banks CJ (2012) Thiol-functionalised mesoporous silica-coated magnetite nanoparticles for high efficiency removal and recovery of Hg from water. Water Res 46:3913–3922.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2012.04.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. He F, Wang W, Moon J-W, Howe J, Pierce EM, Liang L (2012) Rapid removal of Hg(II) from aqueous solutions using thiol-functionalized Zn-doped biomagnetite particles. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 4:4373–4379.  https://doi.org/10.1021/am301031g CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ho YS, Porter JF, Mckay G (2002) Equilibrium isotherm studies for the sorption of divalent metal ions onto peat: copper, nickel and lead single component systems. Water Air Soil Pollut 141:1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huang Y, Tang J, Gai L, Gong Y, Guan H, He R, Lyu H (2017) Different approaches for preparing a novel thiol-functionalized graphene oxide/Fe-Mn and its application for aqueous methylmercury removal. Chem Eng J 319:229–239.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2017.03.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Huang Y, Gong Y, Tang J, Xia S (2018a) Effective removal of inorganic mercury and methylmercury from aqueous solution using novel thiol-functionalized graphene oxide/Fe-Mn composite. J Hazard Mater 366:130–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.11.074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Huang Y, Xia S, Lyu J, Tang J (2018b) Highly efficient removal of aqueous Hg2+ and CH3Hg+ by selective modification of biochar with 3-mercaptopropyltrimethoxysilane. Chem Eng J.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.10.231
  11. Inyang M, Gao B, Zimmerman A, Zhang M, Chen H (2014) Synthesis, characterization, and dye sorption ability of carbon nanotube–biochar nanocomposites. Chem Eng J 236:39–46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2013.09.074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kanzler CR, Lian P, Trainer EL, Yang X, Govind N, Parks JM, Graham AM (2018) Emerging investigator series: methylmercury speciation and dimethylmercury production in sulfidic solutions. Environ Sci: Processes Impacts 20:584–594.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c7em00533d Google Scholar
  13. Kazemi F, Younesi H, Ghoreyshi AA, Bahramifar N, Heidari A (2016) Thiol-incorporated activated carbon derived from fir wood sawdust as an efficient adsorbent for the removal of mercury ion: batch and fixed-bed column studies. Process Saf Environ Prot 100:22–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2015.12.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Krishna Kumar AS, Jiang S-J, Tseng W-L (2016) Facile synthesis and characterization of thiol-functionalized graphene oxide as effective adsorbent for Hg(II). J Environ Chem Eng 4:2052–2065.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2016.03.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kumar KY, Muralidhara HB, Nayaka YA, Balasubramanyam J, Hanumanthappa H (2013a) Low-cost synthesis of metal oxide nanoparticles and their application in adsorption of commercial dye and heavy metal ion in aqueous solution. Powder Technol 246:125–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kumar SV, Huang NM, Lim HN, Zainy M, Harrison I, Chia CH (2013b) Preparation of highly water dispersible functional graphene/silver nanocomposite for the detection of melamine. Sensors Actuators B Chem 181:885–893.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2013.02.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kushwaha S, Sreedhar B, Padmaja P (2010) Sorption of phenyl mercury, methyl mercury, and inorganic mercury onto chitosan and barbital immobilized chitosan: spectroscopic, potentiometric, kinetic, equilibrium, and selective desorption studies. J Chem Eng Data 55:4691–4698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee SJ, Jin HP, Ahn YT, Chung JW (2015) Comparison of heavy metal adsorption by peat moss and peat moss-derived biochar produced under different carbonization conditions. Water Air Soil Pollut 226:9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li B, Zhang Y, Ma D, Shi Z, Ma S (2014) Mercury nano-trap for effective and efficient removal of mercury(II) from aqueous solution. Nat Commun 5:5537.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms6537 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lin SY, Cheng YJ, Wen-Kai OU, Hai-Hua WU, Yang ZQ (2016) CV-AFS with ultrasonic extraction to determine the methyl mercury in common aquatic products from Foshan city. J Diseases Monit Control 11:872–873Google Scholar
  21. Liu Z, Zhang FS (2009) Removal of lead from water using biochars prepared from hydrothermal liquefaction of biomass. J Hazard Mater 167:933–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu P, Ptacek CJ, Blowes DW, Finfrock YZ, Gordon RA (2017) Stabilization of mercury in sediment by using biochars under reducing conditions. J Hazard Mater 325:120–128.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.11.033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu P, Ptacek CJ, Elena KMA, Blowes DW, Gould WD, Finfrock YZ, Wang AO, Landis RC (2018) Evaluation of mercury stabilization mechanisms by sulfurized biochars determined using X-ray absorption spectroscopy. J Hazard Mater 347:114–122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.12.051 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lv M, Wang X, Li J, Yang X, Zhang C, Yang J, Hu H (2013) Cyclodextrin-reduced graphene oxide hybrid nanosheets for the simultaneous determination of lead(II) and cadmium(II) using square wave anodic stripping voltammetry. Electrochim Acta 108:412–420.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2013.06.099 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lyu H, Gong Y, Tang J, Huang Y, Wang Q (2016) Immobilization of heavy metals in electroplating sludge by biochar and iron sulfide. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 23:14472–14488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moulder JF, Chastain J, King RC Jr (1979) Handbook of x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy : a reference book of standard spectra for identification and interpretation of XPS data. Chem Phys Lett 220:7–10Google Scholar
  27. Nuengmatcha P, Mahachai R, Chanthai S (2015) Adsorption of functionalized thiol-graphene oxide for removal of mercury from aqueous solution. Asian J Chem 27:4167–4170.  https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2015.19479 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Oztürk N, Kavak D (2005) Adsorption of boron from aqueous solutions using fly ash: batch and column studies. J Hazard Mater 127:81–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Peng Z, Zhao H, Lyu H, Wang L, Huang H, Nan Q, Tang J (2018) UV modification of biochar for enhanced hexavalent chromium removal from aqueous solution. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 25:10808–10819.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-1353-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Qin Y, Li G, Gao Y, Zhang L, Ok YS, An T (2018) Persistent free radicals in carbon-based materials on transformation of refractory organic contaminants (ROCs) in water: a critical review. Water Res 137:130–143.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.03.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sanchooli Moghaddam M, Rahdar S, Taghavi M (2016) Cadmium removal from aqueous solutions using saxaul tree ash. Iran J Chem Chem Eng 35:45–52Google Scholar
  32. Santhana Krishna Kumar A, Jiang S-J (2015) Preparation and characterization of exfoliated graphene oxide–l-cystine as an effective adsorbent of Hg(ii) adsorption. RSC Adv 5:6294–6304.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c4ra12564a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shen B, Tian L, Li F, Zhang X, Xu H, Singh S (2017) Elemental mercury removal by the modified bio-char from waste tea. Fuel 187:189–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Song M, Wei Y, Cai S, Yu L, Zhong Z, Jin B (2018) Study on adsorption properties and mechanism of Pb(2+) with different carbon based adsorbents. Sci Total Environ 618:1416–1422.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.268 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stafiej A, Pyrzynska K (2007) Adsorption of heavy metal ions with carbon nanotubes. Sep Purif Technol 58:49–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Taghavi M, Zazouli MA, Yousefi Z, Akbari-adergani B (2015) Kinetic and isotherm modeling of Cd (II) adsorption by L-cysteine functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotubes as adsorbent. Environ Monit Assess 187:682.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-4911-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tan G, Sun W, Xu Y, Wang H, Xu N (2016) Sorption of mercury (II) and atrazine by biochar, modified biochars and biochar based activated carbon in aqueous solution. Bioresour Technol 211:727–735.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.03.147 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tang J, Lv H, Gong Y, Huang Y (2015) Preparation and characterization of a novel graphene/biochar composite for aqueous phenanthrene and mercury removal. Bioresour Technol 196:355–363.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.07.047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tang J, Huang Y, Gong Y, Lyu H, Wang Q, Ma J (2016) Preparation of a novel graphene oxide/Fe-Mn composite and its application for aqueous Hg(II) removal. J Hazard Mater 316:151–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.05.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tang N, Niu CG, Li XT, Liang C, Guo H, Lin LS, Zheng CW, Zeng GM (2018) Efficient removal of Cd(2+) and Pb(2+) from aqueous solution with amino- and thiol-functionalized activated carbon: isotherm and kinetics modeling. Sci Total Environ 635:1331–1344.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.236 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tran L, Wu P, Zhu Y, Liu S, Zhu N (2015) Comparative study of Hg(II) adsorption by thiol- and hydroxyl-containing bifunctional montmorillonite and vermiculite. Appl Surf Sci 356:91–101.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2015.08.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang J, Chen Z, Chen B (2014) Adsorption of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by graphene and graphene oxide nanosheets. Environ Sci Technol 48:4817–4825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wang Z, Xu J, Hu Y, Zhao H, Zhou J, Liu Y, Lou Z, Xu X (2016) Functional nanomaterials: study on aqueous Hg(II) adsorption by magnetic Fe3O4@SiO2-SH nanoparticles. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 60:394–402.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2015.10.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Xia ZY, Baird L, Zimmerman N, Yeager M (2017) Heavy metal ion removal by thiol functionalized aluminum oxide hydroxide nanowhiskers. Appl Surf Sci 416:565–573.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.04.095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Xiao LL, Wang N, Ping NA (2013) Preparation and properties of thiol-functionalized activated carbon for selective removal of mercury(II) ions Mod Chem Ind 10:70–75Google Scholar
  46. Xu D, Tan X, Chen C, Wang X (2008) Removal of Pb(II) from aqueous solution by oxidized multiwalled carbon nanotubes. J Hazard Mater 154:407–416.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.10.059 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Xu J, Cao Z, Zhang Y, Yuan Z, Lou Z, Xu X, Wang X (2018) A review of functionalized carbon nanotubes and graphene for heavy metal adsorption from water: preparation, application, and mechanism. Chemosphere 195:351–364.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.12.061 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yang J, Zhao Y, Ma S, Zhu B, Zhang J, Zheng C (2016) Mercury removal by magnetic biochar derived from simultaneous activation and magnetization of sawdust. Environ Sci Technol 50:12040–12047.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b03743 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yu L, Fu R, Lou Z, Fang W, Wang Z, Xu X (2015) Preparation of functional carbon-based materials for removal of heavy metals from aqueous solution. Prog Chem 27:1665–1678Google Scholar
  50. Yu JG, Yue BY, Wu XW, Liu Q, Jiao FP, Jiang XY, Chen XQ (2016) Removal of mercury by adsorption: a review. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 23:5056–5076.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5880-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang FS, Nriagu JO, Itoh H (2005) Mercury removal from water using activated carbons derived from organic sewage sludge. Water Res 39:389–395.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.09.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Pollution Processes and Environmental Criteria (Ministry of Education), Tianjin Engineering Research Center of Environmental Diagnosis and Contamination Remediation, College of Environmental Science and EngineeringNankai UniversityTianjinChina
  2. 2.School of Environment, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Environmental Pollution and HealthJinan UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations