Heavy metals removal in aqueous environments using bark as a biosorbent

  • A. Şen
  • H. Pereira
  • M. A. Olivella
  • I. Villaescusa
Review
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Tree bark is among the widely available and low-cost sorbents for metal adsorption in aqueous environments. A state-of-the-art review is compiled carrying out a comprehensive literature search on the biosorption of heavy metals in solution onto different bark species, including a characterization of bark structure and chemistry. The results indicate that biosorption has been gaining importance for bark valorization purposes. Promising heavy metal uptake values have already been attained using different bark species. These values are comparable to those obtained with commercial activated carbons. Bark has a cost advantage over activated carbon and can be used without any pretreatment. Thus, bark offers a green alternative to remove heavy metals from industrial waters. A brief survey of the chemical composition and structure of different bark species is presented. Suggestions are made to improve screening of bark species for specific heavy metal ions sorption.

Keywords

Bark Adsorption Heavy metal Water effluents Low-cost sorbents 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The Forest Research Centre is a research unit funded by the Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation (FCT) through project PEst-OE/AGR/UI0239/2011. The first author acknowledges a postdoctoral scholarship from FCT.

References

  1. Aharoni C, Ungarish M (1977) Kinetics of activated chemisorption. Part 2. Theoretical models. J Chem Soc, Faraday Trans 73:456–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Asheh S, Duvnjak Z (1997) Sorption of cadmium and other heavy metals by pine bark. J Hazard Mater 56:35–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aoyama M, Tsuda M (2001) Removal of Cr(VI) from aqueous solutions by larch bark. Wood Sci Technol 35:425–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aoyama M, Kishino M, Jo TS (2004) Biosorption of Cr(VI)on Japanese cedar bark. Sep Sci Technol 39(5):1149–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bailey SE, Olin TJ, Bricka RM, Adrian DD (1999) A review of potentially low-cost sorbents for heavy metals. Water Res 33:2469–2479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boving TB, Klement J, Rowell R, Xing B (2008) Effectiveness of wood and bark in removing organic and inorganic contaminates from aqueous solution. Mol Cryst Liq Cryst 483(1):339–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brás I, Lemos LT, Alves A, Pereira MFR (2004) Application of pine bark as a sorbent for organic pollutants in effluents. Manag Environ Qual 15(5):491–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chubar N, Carvalho JR, Correia MNJ (2004a) Cork biomass as biosorbent for Cu(II), Zn(II) and Ni(II). Colloid Surf A 230:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chubar N, Carvalho JR, Correia MJN (2004b) Heavy metals biosorption on cork biomass: effect of the pre-treatment. Colloid Surf A 238:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Corder SE (1976) Properties and uses of bark as an energy source. XVI IUFRO World Congress, OsloGoogle Scholar
  11. Escudero C, Fiol N, Poch J, Villaescusa I (2008a) The kinetics of copper sorption onto yohimbe bark wastes. Int J Environ Pollut 34(1–4):215–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Escudero C, Gabaldon C, Marzal P, Villaescusa I (2008b) Effect of EDTA on divalent metal adsorption onto grape stalks and exhausted coffee wastes. J Hazard Mat 152:476–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Escudero C, Poch J, Villaescusa I (2013) Modelling of breakthrough curves of single and binary mixtures of Cu(II), Cd(II), Ni(II) and Pb(II) sorption onto grape stalks waste. Chem Eng J 217:129–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2011) State of the world’s forests 2011. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  15. Fiol N, Villaescusa I (2009) Determination of sorbent point zero charge: usefulness in adsorption studies. Environ Chem Lett 7:79–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fiol N, Villaescusa I, Martinez M, Miralles N, Poch J, Serarols J (2003) Biosorption of Cr(VI) using low cost sorbents. Environ Chem Lett 1:135–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foo KY, Hameed BH (2010) Insights into the modeling of adsorption isotherm systems. Chem Eng J 156:2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freer J, Baeza J, Maturana H, Palma G, Duran N (1989) Removal and recovery of uranium by modified Pinus radiata D. Don bark. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 46(1):41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gaballah I, Kilbertus G (1998) Recovery of heavy metal ions through decontamination of synthetic solutions and industrial effluents using modified barks. J Geochem Explor 62(1–3):241–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ghodbane I, Nouri K, Hamdaoui O, Chiha M (2008) Kinetic and equilibrium study for the sorption of cadmium (II) ions from aqueous phase by eucalyptus bark. J Hazard Mater 152:148–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gloaguen V, Morvan H (1997) Removal of heavy metal ions from aqueous solution by modified barks. J Environ Sci Health, Part A 32(4):901–912Google Scholar
  22. Gundogdu A, Ozdes D, Duran C, Bulut VN, Soylak M, Senturk HB (2009) Biosorption of Pb(II) ions from aqueous solution by pine bark (Pinus brutia Ten.). Chem Eng J 153:62–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanzlik J, Jehlicka J, Sebek O, Weishauptova Z, Machovic V (2004) Multi-component adsorption of Ag (I), Cd (II) and Cu (II) by natural carbonaceous materials. Water Res 38:2178–2184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harkin JM, Rowe JW (1971) Bark and its possible uses. Research note. Forest Products Laboratory. http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/Pubs/5760. Accessed 30 June 2012
  25. Haussard M, Gaballah I, Kanari N, De Donato O, Barres O, Villieras F (2003) Separation of hydrocarbons and lipid from water using treated bark. Water Res 37(2):362–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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
  27. Horsfall M, Ogban FE, Akporhonor EE (2006) Recovery of lead and cadmium ions from metal-loaded biomass of wild cocoyam (Caladium bicolor) using acidic, basic and neutral eluent solutions. Electron J Biotechnol 9(2):152–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jauberty L, Gloaguen V, Astier C, Krausz P, Delpech V, Berland A, Granger V, Niort I, Royer A, Decossas JL (2011) Bark, a suitable biosorbent for the removal of uranium from waste water-From laboratory to industry. Radioprotection 46(4):443–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jové P, Olivella MA, Cano L (2011) Study of the variability in chemical composition of bark layers of Quercus suber L. from different production areas. BioResources 6(2):1806–1815Google Scholar
  30. Khokhotva AP (2010) Adsorption of heavy metals by a sorbent based on pine bark. J Water Chem Technol 32(6):336–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kumar U (2006) Agricultural products and by-products as a low-cost adsorbent for heavy metal removal from water and waste-water: a review. Sci Res Essays 1(2):33–37Google Scholar
  32. Li F, Li LY (2003) An equation characterizing multi-heavy-metal sorption onto bentonite, forest soil and spruce bark. Environ Technol 24:1479–1490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. López-Mesas M, Navarrete ER, Carrillo F, Palet C (2011) Bioseparation of Pb(II) and Cd (II) from aqueous solution using cork waste biomass. Modelling and optimization of the parameters of the biosorption step. Chem Eng J 174:9–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Marques AV, Pereira H (2013) Lignin monomeric composition of corks from the barks of Betula pendula, Quercus suber and Quercus cerris determined by Py–GC–MS/FID. J Anal Appl Pyrol 100:88–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Marques AV, Pereira H, Meier D, Faix O (2005) Structural characterization of cork lignin by thioacidolysis and permanganate oxidation. Holzforschung 53(2):167–174Google Scholar
  36. Martin-Dupont F, Gloaguen V, Granet R, Guilloton M, Morvan H, Krausz P (2002) Heavy metal adsorption by crude coniferous barks: a modelling study. J Environ Sci Health, Part A 37(6):1063–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Martin-Dupont F, Gloaguen V, Granet R, Guilloton M, Krausz P (2004) Chemical modifications of Douglas fir bark, a lignocellulosic by-product-enhancement of their lead (II) binding capacities. Sep Sci Technol 39(7):1595–1610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Martin-Dupont F, Gloaguen V, Guilloton M, Granet R, Krausz P (2006) Study of the chemical interaction between the barks and heavy metal cations in the sorption process. J Environ Sci Health, Part A 41(2):149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Masri MS, Reuter FW, Friedman M (1974) Binding of metal cations by natural substances. J Appl Polym Sci 18:675–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Matsumoto M, Kawabata D, Takatani T, Yoshida Y, Kondo K (2013) Selective adsorption of oxometallic and gold ions on filter paper containing cedar bark. Solvent Extr Ion Exch. doi: 10.1080/07366299.2013.850005
  41. Miralles N, Martínez M, Florido A, Casas I, Fiol N, Villaescusa I (2008) Grape stalks waste as low cost biosorbents: an alternative for metal removal from aqueous solutions. Solvent Extr Ion Exch 26:261–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miranda I, Gominho J, Mirra I, Pereira H (2012) Chemical characterization of barks from Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris after fractioning into different particle sizes. Ind Crops Prod 36:395–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Miranda I, Gominho J, Mirra I, Pereira H (2013) Fractioning and chemical characterization of barks of Betula pendula and Eucalyptus globulus. Ind Crops Prod 41:299–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Naja GM, Volesky B, Murphy V (2009) Biosorption, metals. In: Flickinger MC (ed) Encyclopedia of industrial biotechnology, bioprocess, bioseparation, and cell technology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Netzahuatl-Muñoz AR, Gullién-Jiménez FM, Chávez-Gómez B, Villegas-Garrido TL, Cristiani-Urbina E (2012) Kinetic study of the effect of pH on hexavalent and trivalent chromium removal from aqueous solution by Cupressus lusitanica bark. Water Air Soil Pollut 223:625–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nurchi VM, Villaescusa I (2008) Agricultural biomasses as sorbents of some trace metals. Coord Chem Rev 252:1178–1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nurchi VM, Villaescusa I (2012) Sorption of toxic metal ions by solid sorbents: a predictive speciation approach based on complex formation constants in aqueous solution. Coord Chem Rev 256:212–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Nurchi VM, Crisponi G, Villaescusa I (2010) Chemical equilibria in wastewaters during toxic metal ion removal by agricultural biomass. Coord Chem Rev 254:2181–2192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Oh M, Tshabalala M (2007) Pelletized ponderosa pine bark for adsorption of toxic heavy metals from water. BioResources 2(1):66–81Google Scholar
  50. Olivella MA, Jové P, Şen A, Pereira H, Villaescusa I, Fiol N (2011) Sorption performance of Quercus cerris cork with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and toxicity testing. BioResources 6(3):3363–3375Google Scholar
  51. Palma G, Freer J, Baeza J (2003) Removal of metal ions by modified Pinus radiata bark and tannins from water solutions. Water Res 37:4974–4980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Park D, Yun YS, Park JM (2010) The past, present, and future trends of biosorption. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 15:86–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pereira H (2007) Cork: biology, production and uses. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  54. Pereira H (2012a) Anatomical studies of barks. I SINBOT. In: International symposium on applied botany. Federal University of Lavras, Lavras, Brasil, 4–6 OctoberGoogle Scholar
  55. Pereira H (2012b) The importance of biomass structure and chemical composition for biorefineries. In: 2012 IUFRO conference. 8–13 July, Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  56. Pereira H (2013) Cork chemical variability. BioResources 8:2246–2256Google Scholar
  57. Poch J, Villaescusa I (2012) Orthogonal distance regression: a good alternative to least squares for modelling sorption data. J Chem Eng Data 57:490–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Psareva TS, Zakutevskyy OI, Chubar NI, Strelko VV, Shaposhinikova TO, Carvalho JR, Correia MJN (2005) Uranium sorption on cork biomass. Colloid Surf A 252:231–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pujol D, Bartoli M, Torre F, Villaescusa I, Poch J (2013) Modelling synergistic sorption of Cr(VI), Cu (II) and Ni (II) onto exhausted coffee wastes from binary mixtures Cr(VI)–Cu(II) and Cr(VI)–Ni (II). Chem Eng J 230:396–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rowell RM (2006) Removal of metal ions from contaminated water using agricultural residues. In: Ecowood 2006: 2nd international conference on environmentally-compatible forest products. Fernando Pessoa University. Oporto, Portugal, 20–22 SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  61. Rowell RM (2012) Handbook of wood chemistry and wood composites. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Saka C, Şahin Ö, Küçük MM (2012) Applications on agricultural and forest waste adsorbents for the removal of lead (II) from contaminated waters. IJEST 9(2):379–394Google Scholar
  63. Sarin V, Pant KK (2006) Removal of chromium from industrial waste by using eucalyptus bark. Bioresour Technol 97:15–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Seki K, Saito N, Aoyama M (1997) Removal of heavy metal ions from solutions by coniferous barks. Wood Sci Technol 31:441–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Şen A, Miranda I, Santos S, Graça J, Pereira H (2010) The chemical composition of cork and phloem in the rhytidome of Quercus cerris bark. Ind Crops Prod 31:417–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Şen A, Olivella MA, Fiol N, Miranda I, Villaescusa I, Pereira H (2012) Removal of chromium (VI) in aqueous environments using cork and heat treated cork samples from Quercus cerris and Quercus suber. BioResources 7(4):4843–4857Google Scholar
  67. Shin EW (2005) Cadmium removal by Juniperus monosperma. The role of calcium oxalate monohydrate structure in bark. Korean J Chem Eng 22(4):599–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Shin EW, Karthikeyan KG, Tshabalala MA (2007) Adsorption mechanism of cadmium on juniper bark and wood. Bioresour Technol 98:588–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tuck CO, Pérez E, Horváth IT, Sheldon RA, Poliakoff M (2012) Valorization of biomass: deriving more value from waste. Science 337:695–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vazquez G, González-Álvarez J, Freire S, López-Lorenzo M, Antorrena G (2002) Removal of cadmium and mercury ions from aqueous solution by sorption on treated Pinus pinaster bark: kinetics and isotherms. Bioresour Technol 82:247–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Villaescusa I, Martinez M, Miralles N (2000) Heavy metal uptake from aqueous solution by cork and yohimbe bark wastes. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 75:812–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Villaescusa I, Fiol N, Cristiani F, Floris C, Lai S, Nurchi VM (2002) Copper (II) and nickel (II) uptake from aqueous solutions by cork wastes: a NMR and potentiometric study. Polyhedron 21:1363–1367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wigginton N, Yeston J, Malakoff D (2012) Infographic: World of waste. Science 337:664–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Şen
    • 1
  • H. Pereira
    • 1
  • M. A. Olivella
    • 2
  • I. Villaescusa
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre of Forest Studies, School of AgricultureTechnical University of LisbonLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Department of Chemistry, Sciences FacultyUniversity of GironaGironaSpain
  3. 3.Department of Chemical Engineering, Technical CollegeUniversity of GironaGironaSpain

Personalised recommendations