Advertisement

Graphene oxide MgFe2O4 nanocomposites for Cr(VI) remediation: a comparative modeling study

  • Seyed Ali Hosseini
  • Sahar Talebipour
  • Mahmoud Reza Neyestani
  • Shivendu Ranjan
  • Nandita Dasgupta
Original Paper
  • 145 Downloads

Abstract

The article describes the synthesis and application of magnesium ferrite nanoparticles (MgFe2O4 NPs) and engineered MgFe2O4 nanocomposites (NCs) by graphene oxide as green and easy separable magnetic adsorbents in removal of Cr(VI) from environmental pollutant. The statistical study of the adsorption process and optimization was accomplished with central composite design method of response surface methodology (RSM) approach. The optimum conditions, predicted by RSM, were achieved at pH, contact time, initial Cr(VI) concentration and adsorbent dosage of 2, 60 min, 40 mg L−1 and 0.15 g, respectively. The removal of Cr(VI) under optimum situations was 97%, and the achieved result in practice was found to be 99%. Pareto analysis suggests the importance relative order of the factors as: pH > concentration of Cr(VI) > time > adsorbent dosage under optimized situations. The engineered nanocomposite was further analyzed for real groundwater samples, and 92% Cr(VI) remediation was resulted. The study is the first study for efficient Cr(VI) remediation from real groundwater sample using novel engineered nanocomposites and has potential to have societal as well as industrial impact in the form of process or product development.

Keywords

Nano magnetic adsorption Cr(VI) pollutant Real samples Response surface design Novel nanocomposite 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Especial thanks to Iranian Nanotechnology Initiative Council for the encouraging support. SR and ND are acknowledging Director, Indian Institute of Food Processing Technology, for constant encouragement and support.

References

  1. 1.
    Serrano-Gómez J, Olguiin MT (2015) Separation of Cr(VI) from aqueous solutions by adsorption on the microfungus Ustilago maydis. Int J Environ Sci Technol 12:2559–2566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Martinez LJ, Munoz-Bonilla A, Mazario E, Recio FJ, Palomares FJ, Herrasti P (2015) Adsorption of chromium (VI) onto electrochemically obtained magnetite nanoparticles. Int J Environ Sci Technol 12:4017–4024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lan C-R, Tseng C-L, Yang M-H, Alfassi ZB (1991) Two-step coprecipitation method for differentiating chromium species in water followed by determination of chromium by neutron activation analysis. Analyst 116:35–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yusof AM, Malek NANN (2009) Removal of Cr(VI) and As (V) from aqueous solutions by HDTMA-modified zeolite Y. J Hazard Mater 162:1019–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mädler S, Todd A, Pamuku M, Sun F, Tat C, Tooley RJ, Switzer TA, Furdui VI (2016) Ultra-trace level speciated isotope dilution measurement of Cr(VI) using ion chromatography tandem mass spectrometry in environmental waters. Talanta 156:104–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hu J, Lo IMC, Chen G (2005) Fast removal and recovery of Cr(VI) using surface-modified jacobsite (MnFe2O4) nanoparticles. Langmuir 21:11173–11179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bahadir Z, Bulut VN, Hidalgo M, Soylak M, Margui E (2016) Cr speciation in water samples by dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction combined with total reflection X-ray fluorescence spectrometry. Spectrochim Acta Part B At Spectrosc 115:46–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Diao Z-H, Xu X-R, Chen H, Jiang D, Yang Y-X, Kong L-J, Sun Y-X, Hu Y-X, Hao Q-W, Liu L (2016) Simultaneous removal of Cr(VI) and phenol by persulfate activated with bentonite-supported nanoscale zero-valent iron: reactivity and mechanism. J Hazard Mater 316:186–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhitkovich A (2011) Chromium in drinking water: sources, metabolism, and cancer risks. Chem Res Toxicol 24:1617–1629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rengaraj S, Joo CK, Kim Y, Yi J (2003) Kinetics of removal of chromium from water and electronic process wastewater by ion exchange resins: 1200H, 1500H and IRN97H. J Hazard Mater 102:257–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Uysal M, Ar I (2007) Removal of Cr(VI) from industrial wastewaters by adsorption: part I: determination of optimum conditions. J Hazard Mater 149:482–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fu F, Wang Q (2011) Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: a review. J Environ Manage 92:407–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gheju M, Balcu I (2011) Removal of chromium from Cr(VI) polluted wastewaters by reduction with scrap iron and subsequent precipitation of resulted cations. J Hazard Mater 196:131–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barkat M, Nibou D, Chegrouche S, Mellah A (2009) Kinetics and thermodynamics studies of chromium (VI) ions adsorption onto activated carbon from aqueous solutions. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 48:38–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rengaraj S, Yeon K-H, Moon S-H (2001) Removal of chromium from water and wastewater by ion exchange resins. J Hazard Mater 87:273–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abubakar Sani H, Ahmada MB, Saleh TA (2016) Synthesis of zinc oxide/talc nanocomposite for enhanced lead adsorption from aqueous solutions. RSC Adv 110:108819–108827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Saleh TA, Sari A, Tuzen M (2017) Effective adsorption of antimony (III) from aqueous solutions by polyamide-graphene composite as a novel adsorbent. Chem Eng J 307:230–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Saleh TA (2016) Nanocomposite of carbon nanotubes/silica nanoparticles and their use for adsorption of Pb (II): from surface properties to sorption mechanism. Desalin Water Treat 57:10730–10744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gore CT, Omwoma S, Chen W, Song Y-F (2016) Interweaved LDH/PAN nanocomposite films: application in the design of effective hexavalent chromium adsorption technology. Chem Eng J 284:794–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhu C, Liu G, Yu Q, Pfeffer R, Dave RN, Nam CH (2004) Sound assisted fluidization of nanoparticle agglomerates. Powder Technol 141:119–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang L, Li J, Wang Y, Zhao L, Jiang Q (2012) Adsorption capability for Congo red on nanocrystalline MFe 2 O 4 (M=Mn, Fe Co, Ni) spinel ferrites. Chem Eng J 181:72–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wei J, Zhang X, Liu Q, Li Z, Liu L, Wang J (2014) Magnetic separation of uranium by CoFe2 O4 hollow spheres. Chem Eng J 241:228–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sharma YC, Srivastava V, Singh VK, Kaul SN, Weng CH (2009) Nano-adsorbents for the removal of metallic pollutants from water and wastewater. Environ Technol 30:583–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Omer MIM, Elbadawi AA, Yassin OA (2013) Synthesis and structural properties of MgFe2O4 ferrite nano-particles. J Appl Ind Sci 1:20–23Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dasgupta N, Ranjan S, Chakraborty AR, Ramalingam C, Shanker R, Kumar A (2016) Nanoagriculture and water quality management. Nanosci Food Agric 1(1):1–18Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dasgupta N, Ranjan S, Ramalingam C (2017) Applications of nanotechnology in agriculture and water quality management. Environ Chem Lett 15(4):591–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Saleh AA, Gupta VK (2016) Nanomaterial and polymer membranes, synthesis, characterization, and applications, 1st edn. Netherland, ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Saleh A A (217) Advanced nanomaterials for water engineering, treatment, and hydraulics, 1st ed., IGIGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lingamdinne LP, Koduru JR, Choi Y-L, Chang Y-Y, Yang J-K (2016) Studies on removal of Pb (II) and Cr (III) using graphene oxide based inverse spinel nickel ferrite nano-composite as sorbent. Hydrometallurgy 165:64–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Babu Maddinedi S, Mandal BK, Patil SH, Andhalkar VV, Ranjan S, Dasgupta N (2017) Diastase induced green synthesis of bilayered reduced graphene oxide and its decoration with gold nanoparticles. J Photochem Photobiol B Biol 166:252–258.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2016.12.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Essandoh M, Wolgemuth D, Pittman CU, Mohan D, Mlsna T (2017) Adsorption of metribuzin from aqueous solution using magnetic and nonmagnetic sustainable low-cost biochar adsorbents. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:4577–4590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Virkutyte J, Rokhina E, Jegatheesan V (2010) Optimisation of Electro-Fenton denitrification of a model wastewater using a response surface methodology. Bioresour Technol 101:1440–1446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zabeti M, Daud WMAW, Aroua MK (2009) Optimization of the activity of CaO/Al2 O3 catalyst for biodiesel production using response surface methodology. Appl Catal A Gen 366:154–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Garg UK, Kaur MP, Sud D, Garg VK (2009) Removal of hexavalent chromium from aqueous solution by adsorption on treated sugarcane bagasse using response surface methodological approach. Desalination 249:475–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Reddy KJ, McDonald KJ, King H (2013) A novel arsenic removal process for water using cupric oxide nanoparticles. J Colloid Interface Sci 397:96–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pradeep A, Priyadharsini P, Chandrasekaran G (2008) Sol-gel route of synthesis of nanoparticles of MgFe2O4 and XRD, FTIR and VSM study. J Magn Magn Mater 320:2774–2779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Reddy S, Swamy BEK, Chandra U, Mahathesha KR, Sathisha TV, Jayadevappa H (2011) Synthesis of MgFe2O4 nanoparticles and MgFe2O4 nanoparticles/CPE for electrochemical investigation of dopamine. Anal Methods 3:2792–2796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hu J, Lo IMC, Chen G (2007) Comparative study of various magnetic nanoparticles for Cr(VI) removal. Sep Purif Technol 56:249–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Khataee AR, Safarpour M, Naseri A, Zarei M (2012) Photoelectro-Fenton/nanophotocatalysis decolorization of three textile dyes mixture: response surface modeling and multivariate calibration procedure for simultaneous determination. J Electroanal Chem 672:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wu D, Zhou J, Li Y (2009) Effect of the sulfidation process on the mechanical properties of a CoMoP/Al2O3 hydrotreating catalyst. Chem Eng Sci 64:198–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Deng H, Lu J, Li G, Zhang G, Wang X (2011) Adsorption of methylene blue on adsorbent materials produced from cotton stalk. Chem Eng J 172:326–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Adinarayana K, Ellaiah P (2002) Response surface optimization of the critical medium components for the production of alkaline protease by a newly isolated Bacillus sp. J Pharm Pharm Sci 5:272–278Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dehghani MH, Sanaei D, Ali I, Bhatnagar A (2016) Removal of chromium (VI) from aqueous solution using treated waste newspaper as a low-cost adsorbent: kinetic modeling and isotherm studies. J Mol Liq 215:671–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Malwade K, Lataye D, Mhaisalkar V, Kurwadkar S, Ramirez D (2016) Adsorption of hexavalent chromium onto activated carbon derived from Leucaena leucocephala waste sawdust: kinetics, equilibrium and thermodynamics. Int J Environ Sci Technol 13:2107–2116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dubey S, Upadhyay SN, Sharma YC (2016) Optimization of removal of Cr by γ-alumina nano-adsorbent using response surface methodology. Ecol Eng 97:272–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Verma A, Chakraborty S, Basu JK (2006) Adsorption study of hexavalent chromium using tamarind hull-based adsorbents. Sep Purif Technol 50:336–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hashemi L, Morsali A (2014) A new lead (II) nanoporous three-dimensional coordination polymer: pore size effect on iodine adsorption affinity. CrystEngComm 16:4955–4958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hashemi FSM, Prasittichai C, Bent SF (2014) A new resist for area selective atomic and molecular layer deposition on metal-dielectric patterns. J Phys Chem C 118:10957–10962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Mirzayi B, Shayan NN (2014) Adsorption kinetics and catalytic oxidation of asphaltene on synthesized maghemite nanoparticles. J Pet Sci Eng 121:134–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Peng Z, Xiong C, Wang W, Tan F, Xu Y, Wang X, Qiao X (2017) Facile modification of nanoscale zero-valent iron with high stability for Cr(VI) remediation. Sci Total Environ 596–597:266–273.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Setshedi KZ, Bhaumik M, Onyango MS, Maity A (2015) High-performance towards Cr(VI) removal using multi-active sites of polypyrrole-graphene oxide nanocomposites: batch and column studies. Chem Eng J 262:921–931.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2014.10.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Khare P, Yadav A, Ramkumar J, Verma N (2016) Microchannel-embedded metal-carbon-polymer nanocomposite as a novel support for chitosan for efficient removal of hexavalent chromium from water under dynamic conditions. Chem Eng J 293:44–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.02.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Dima JB, Sequeiros C, Zaritzky NE (2015) Hexavalent chromium removal in contaminated water using reticulated chitosan micro/nanoparticles from seafood processing wastes. Chemosphere 141:100–111.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.06.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Gokila S, Gomathi T, Sudha PN, Anil S (2017) Removal of the heavy metal ion chromiuim(VI) using Chitosan and Alginate nanocomposites. Int J Biol Macromol 104:1459–1468.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.05.117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Chávez-Guajardo AE, Medina-Llamas JC, Maqueira L, Andrade CAS, Alves KGB, de Melo CP (2015) Efficient removal of Cr(VI) and Cu(II) ions from aqueous media by use of polypyrrole/maghemite and polyaniline/maghemite magnetic nanocomposites. Chem Eng J 281:826–836.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bhaumik M, Agarwal S, Gupta VK, Maity A (2016) Enhanced removal of Cr(VI) from aqueous solutions using polypyrrole wrapped oxidized MWCNTs nanocomposites adsorbent. J Colloid Interface Sci 470:257–267.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2016.02.054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Chauke VP, Maity A, Chetty A (2015) High-performance towards removal of toxic hexavalent chromium from aqueous solution using graphene oxide-alpha cyclodextrin-polypyrrole nanocomposites. J Mol Liq 211:71–77.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2015.06.044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Guan X, Yan S, Xu Z, Fan H (2017) Gallic acid-conjugated iron oxide nanocomposite: an efficient, separable, and reusable adsorbent for remediation of Al (III)-contaminated tannery wastewater. J Environ Chem Eng 5:479–487.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2016.12.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Grewal JK, Kaur M (2017) Effect of core-shell reversal on the structural, magnetic and adsorptive properties of Fe2O3-GO nanocomposites. Ceram Int 43:16611–16621.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.09.051 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kalidhasan S, Santhana Krishna Kumar A, Rajesh V, Rajesh N (2016) The journey traversed in the remediation of hexavalent chromium and the road ahead toward greener alternatives-A perspective. Coord Chem Rev 317:157–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sherlala A, Raman A, Bello M, Asghar A (2018) A review of the applications of organo-functionalized magnetic graphene oxide nanocomposites for heavy metal adsorption. Chemosphere 193:1004–1017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.11.093 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Chemistry, Faculty of ChemistryUrmia UniversityUrmiaIran
  2. 2.Department of Chemistry, Faculty of ScienceZanjan UniversityZanjanIran
  3. 3.R&D and Technology Development, E-Spin Nanotech Pvt Ltd, SIDBI Incubation CenterIIT KanpurKanpurIndia
  4. 4.Nano-food Research Group, School of Bio Sciences and TechnologyVIT UniversityVelloreIndia

Personalised recommendations