Journal of Nanostructure in Chemistry

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 1–14 | Cite as

The role of nanomaterials as effective adsorbents and their applications in wastewater treatment

Open Access
Review

Abstract

Nanomaterials have been extensively studied for heavy metal ions and dye removals from wastewater. This article reviews the role of nanomaterials as effective adsorbents for wastewater purification. In recent years, numerous novel nanomaterial adsorbents have been developed for enhancing the efficiency and adsorption capacities of removing contaminants from wastewater. The innovation, forthcoming development, and challenges of cost-effective and environmentally acceptable nanomaterials for water purification are discussed and reviewed in this article. This review concludes that nanomaterials have many unique morphological and structural properties that qualify them to be used as effective adsorbents to solve several environmental problems.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Nanomaterials Heavy metal ions Dyes Adsorption Wastewater treatment 

Introduction

Treatment processes for wastewater as well as drinking water are one of the major prerequisites for developing, growing the economy as well as health maintaining. Therefore, it is crucial to develop and implement innovative technologies for treating water at high efficiencies and low energy consumption. On a global scale, waterborne diseases are still a major cause of death in developing countries where access to safe drinking water is often limited. With the introduction of disinfection processes (mainly using chlorine), waterborne infectious diseases have been significantly reduced. However, it is known that the application of disinfection agents such as chlorine, chlorine dioxide or ozone is associated with the formation of disinfection by-products (e.g., trihalomethanes, halo-phenols, ketones, aldehydes) with a high mutagenic and/or carcinogenic potential [1, 2, 3, 4]. Chlorination also affects the taste and odor of drinking water. Therefore, the reduction/elimination of toxic by-products formation resulting from disinfection processes is necessary. Further, many toxic materials such as heavy metal ions and azo dyes in wastewaters cannot be completely removed during wastewater treatment processes that are commonly used on a large scale [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. Thus, these toxic materials are permanently introduced into rivers and streams by wastewater discharges, while diffuse sources such as runoff from agricultural fields are possible, but frequently contribute to a much smaller extent to the overall pollution [7, 11, 12].

The most common toxic materials in wastewaters responsible for particular problems are heavy metal ions and azo dyes [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18]. Despite the fact that the human body needs low doses of metal ions such as for example Zn(II) ions, their excess may cause eminent health problems such as depression, lethargy, neurological signs and increased thirst. In addition, exposure to metal ions, often toxic, can cause health problems such as liver or kidney damage, Wilson disease, insomnia, cancer, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, dermatitis, chronic asthma, coughing and headaches [19, 20, 21].

Removal of toxic materials from wastewater is necessary for health and environmental protection. For this purpose, conventional methods such as reduction, precipitation, adsorption, oxidation and ion exchange are commonly used. However, among them the adsorption process is the most suitable method because of its high efficiency and economic consideration [22, 23, 24, 25, 26]. Such adsorbents such as activated carbon (AC), zeolites, biomaterials, polymers, have been used extensively for wastewater treatment [22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31]. However, the adsorption efficiency of these materials is relatively low [26]. Therefore, it has become essential to find more efficient adsorbents.

Recently, there has been a remarkable potential for the remediation of environmental problems as a result of nanoscience and nanotechnology developments [32, 33]. In comparison to conventional materials, the nanostructured adsorbents, mainly due to the exceptionally high surface area, show much higher efficiencies and faster adsorption rates in water treatment [34, 35, 36]. A variety of efficient, low-cost and eco-friendly nanomaterials with unique functionalities have been proposed for potential applications in detoxification of industrial effluents, groundwater, surface water and drinking water [34, 37]. An ideal adsorbent for wastewater treatment purposes should satisfy the following criteria [26]: (1) should be environmentally benign; (2) should demonstrate a high sorption capacity and high selectivity especially to the pollutants occurring in water at low concentration; (3) the adsorbed pollutants can be easily removed from its surface, and (4) should be recyclable. In recent years, many studies have proved that the nanomaterials can satisfy most of these requirements [38, 39, 40].

It was demonstrated that the nanomaterials such as carbon nanotubes (CNTs), graphene, ferric oxide (Fe3O4), manganese oxide (MnO2), titanium oxide (TiO2), magnesium oxide (MgO) and zinc oxide (ZnO) may play an important role in the waste water treatment processes [41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49]. The nanomaterials may be successfully used as efficient, cost-effective and environmentally friendly adsorbents for the removal of various toxic substrates from wastewater such as heavy metals, azo dyes, etc. [2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 34, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 49, 50, 51].

Adsorption phenomenon

The adsorption process is a surface phenomenon in which the adsorbate is accumulated on the adsorbent surface. When a solution containing absorbable solute comes into contact with a solid with a highly porous surface structure, liquid–solid intermolecular forces of attraction cause some of the solute molecules from the solution to be concentrated or deposited on the solid surface [46, 47, 48]. In case of bulk materials, all the bonding requirements (ionic, covalent, or metallic) of the material constituent atoms are filled by other atoms in the material. However, the atoms on the surface of the adsorbent are not wholly surrounded by other adsorbent atoms, therefore they can attract adsorbates [48, 49, 50, 51, 52]. The exact nature of the bonding depends on the details of the species involved, but the adsorption process is generally classified as physisorption (an adsorbate bound to the surface by weak van der Waals forces), chemisorption (an adsorbate tethered through covalent bonding [53] or due to electrostatic attraction [26]).

The equilibrium stage of adsorption between the solution and adsorbent is attained (where the adsorption of solute from the bulk onto the adsorbent is minimum) and the adsorption amount (qe, mmol g−1) of the molecules at the equilibrium could be calculated according to the following equation [48, 53]:
$$q_{\text{e}} = \frac{{V\left( {C_{0} - C_{\text{e}} } \right)}}{m},$$
(1)
where V is the solution volume (L); m is the mass of adsorbents (g); and C0 and Ce are the initial and equilibrium adsorbate concentrations, respectively. In addition, adsorption maybe defined as the mass transfer process by which a substance is transferred from the liquid phase to the surface of a solid, and becomes bound by physical and/or chemical interactions [54]. It is worth pointing out that the large surface area of adsorbent allows achieving a high adsorption capacity and surface reactivity [54].

Adsorption isotherm models

The adsorption isotherm models present of the amount of solute adsorbed per unit weight of adsorbent as a function of the equilibrium concentration in the bulk solution at constant temperature [52, 54, 55, 56]. There are many isotherm models such as: Langmuir and Freundlich, Temkin, Harkin–Jura and Dubinin–Radushkevich. Among of them, Langmuir and Freundlich models are commonly used for the description of adsorption data [48, 55, 56, 57].

The Langmuir equation is expressed as [48, 56]:
$$\frac{{C_{\text{e}} }}{{q_{\text{e}} }} = \frac{1}{{Q_{\hbox{max} } K_{\text{l}} }} + \left( {\frac{1}{{Q_{\hbox{max} } }}} \right)C_{{{\text{e}} }} ,$$
(2)
where Ce is the equilibrium concentration (mg L−1), qe is the amount of adsorbate adsorbed per unit mass of adsorbent (mg g−1), and Qmax and Kl are Langmuir constants related to monolayer adsorption capacity and affinity of adsorbent toward adsorbate, respectively.
On the other hand, Freundlich isotherm describes heterogeneous surface adsorption. The energy distribution for adsorptive sites (in Freundlich isotherm) follows an exponential type function which is close to the real situation. The rate of adsorption/desorption varies with the strength of the energy at the adsorptive sites. The Freundlich equation is expressed as [48]:
$$\log q_{\text{e}} = \log K_{\text{F}} + \frac{1}{n}\;\log C_{\text{e}} ,$$
(3)
where k (mg g−1) and 1/n are the constant characteristics of the system [56, 58]. An example of the linear relation of Freundlich and Langmuir isotherms is displayed in Fig. 1 for MB adsorption on Co3O4/SiO2 nanocomposites [57].
Fig. 1

Freundlich (left) and Langmuir (right) isotherms for MB adsorption on Co3O4/SiO2 nanocomposite, The solid lines are the linear fits (copied form Ref. [57])

Kinetic models

An applicable kinetic model is necessary to analyze the rate and the mechanism of adsorption processes (e.g., mass transfer and chemical reaction). Several kinetic models such as simple-first-order, pseudo-first-order, pseudo-second-order and intra-particle diffusion models [48, 53, 57, 59, 60] have been applied to disclose the adsorbate-adsorption phenomenon.

The simple-first-order and pseudo-first-order rate equations are given by Eqs. (4) and (5), respectively [48, 56, 57]:
$$\log q_{t} = \frac{{k_{s} }}{2.303}t + \log q_{\text{e}}$$
(4)
$$\log (q_{\text{e}} - q_{t} ) = \log q_{\text{e}} - \frac{{k_{1} }}{2.303} t,$$
(5)
where qe and qt are the amounts of adsorbate (mg g−1) at equilibrium and at time t, respectively. ks and k1 are the rate constants (h−1).
On the other hand, the pseudo-second-order rate formula is as following [48, 56, 57, 60]:
$$\frac{t}{{q_{t} }} = \frac{1}{{k_{2 } q_{\text{e}}^{2} }} + \frac{1}{{q_{\text{e}} }}t,$$
(6)
where k2 is the equilibrium rate constant (g mg−1 h−1). The slopes and intercepts t/q versus t plot are used to calculate k2.
In addition, intraparticle diffusion model which can be described as follows [56, 57]:
$$q_{t} = k_{\text{p}} t^{1/2} + C,$$
(7)
where C is the intercept and kp is the intra-particle-diffusion rate constant (mg g−1 h1/2), which can be evaluated from the slope of the linear plot of qt versus t1/2.

Development of nanomaterials as adsorbent for wastewater treatment

The most widely studied nanomaterials for wastewater treatment are AC, CNTs, graphene, Fe3O4, MnO2, Co3O4, TiO2, MgO and ZnO, etc. [22, 43, 46, 52, 57, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68]. They may be prepared in different morphological forms such as particles, tubes and sheets [26].

Hereby we review recent advances in heavy metals and dye removal from wastewater using nanomaterials as effective adsorbents and perspectives in this area of research.

Carbon-based nanomaterials

Different types of carbon-based nanomaterials have been used widely for heavy metals and dye removal in recent decades due to their nontoxicity, abundance, ease of preparation, high surface area and porosity, stable structure and high sorption capacities [38, 41, 52, 69, 70, 71].

Activated carbon (AC)

AC was used initially as sorbents; however, due to the difficulties associated with heavy metals and dye removal at ppb levels, CNTs, fullerenes, and graphene were used as nanosorbents to overcome this difficulty. AC typically has high porosity, high surface area, and can be prepared from readily available carbonaceous precursors such as coal, wood, coconut shells and agricultural wastes [72, 73, 74, 75]. AC is extensively used for the removal of inorganic and organic pollutants from effluent streams and in water treatment [22]. In addition, it possesses a significantly weak acidic ion exchange character, enabling it to remove metal contaminants and to adsorb pollutants from wastewater [22]. The sorption of pentavalent arsenic on granular activated carbon (GAC) was experimentally studied [75]. AC prepared from coconut tree sawdust was used as an adsorbent for the removal of Cr(VI) from aqueous solution [76]. Sorption and stability of mercury on AC for emission control were also reported [72]. Powdered activated carbon (PAC) prepared from Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehn bark was studied and showed a sorption capacities (qm) at 60 °C, of 0.85 and 0.89 mmol g−1 for Cu(II) and Pb(II), respectively [73]. A novel sodium polyacrylate grafted AC was produced using gamma radiation to increase the number of functional groups on the surface which increased the efficiency of metal ions sorption by AC [74]. Their high sorption ability and low price make AC promising materials for heavy metals and dye removal.

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs)

CNTs (Fig. 2), which were first developed by Iijima [77], have a unique structural, electronic, optoelectronic, and semiconductor, as well as mechanical, chemical and physical properties [22, 23]. CNTs have been applied widely to remove heavy metals and dyes in wastewater treatment [6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 41, 71, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82].
Fig. 2

Schematics of SWCNTs (a) and MWCNTs (b) (copied form Ref. [22])

CNTs are considered to be one of the most promising adsorbents for wastewater treatment because of their large adsorption capacity for synthetic dyes [15]. Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) have been shown to surpass cadmium hydroxide nanowire-loaded AC (Cd(OH)2–NW–AC) with respect to their efficient removal of safranin O (SO) from wastewater [83]. However, only few studies were reported on the application of CNTs for dye removal from aqueous solution [41, 69, 76, 84, 85, 86]. Moreover, CNTs were typically used directly without further treatment [41, 69, 85]. Therefore, CNT functionalization has been initiated to introduce various functional groups that provide new adsorption sites [15]. Among such modifications, oxidation is an easy method for introducing hydroxyl and carbonyl groups to the sidewalls of CNTs. Oxidized MWCNTs were found to be effective in the removal of methylene red (MR) and methylene blue (MB) from aqueous solutions [87, 88]. Yao et al. [89] reported an adsorption capacity of 41.63 mg g−1 at 333 K for the removal of MB onto CNTs. Shahryari et al. [90] performed the same batch of experiments on MWCNTs having a higher surface area of 280 m2 g−1 as compared to that of CNTs (160 m2 g−1) used by Yao et al. and reported a higher MB adsorption of 132.6 mg g−1 at 310 K. In addition, cellulose grafted with soy protein isolate/hydroxyapatite rod-like nanocrystals showed a high MB adsorption capacity of 454 mg g−1 [91].

The adsorption capacity also depends on the experimental conditions, nature and type of adsorbent. The comparative adsorption of anionic orange II (OII) from aqueous solution using MWNTs and carbon nanofibers (CNF) as adsorbents was studied in batch experiments by Rodríguez et al. [75]. They found that the adsorption of II (OII) onto MWCNTs was slightly higher than CNF (the adsorption capacity in case of MWCNTs was 77.83 mg g−1, while it was 66.12 mg g−1 in case of CNF [75]). In addition, MWCNTs showed higher adsorption than PAC for removal of reactive red M-2BE (RRM). The maximum amounts of RRM uptake were 335.7 and 260.7 mg g−1 for MWCNTs and PAC, respectively [76]. The higher adsorption capacity can be explained on the basis of higher average pore diameter of MWCNTs, which was 7.62 nm as compared to 3.52 nm of PAC. It seems that dye molecules can easily be diffused from the surface to pores of MWCNTs due to larger pore size.

CNT-impregnated chitosan hydrogel beads (CSBs) have been developed for the removal of congo red (CR). CSBs demonstrated a higher maximum adsorption capacity (450.4 mg g−1) than chitosan without impregnation (200 mg g−1) based on Langmuir adsorption modeling [72]. A new generation of CSBs has been prepared by sodium dodecyl sulfate and MWCNTs to improve the mechanical properties [73]. The new CSBs have demonstrated a high maximum adsorption capacity for CR of 375.94 mg g−1 [73]. Compared to MWCNTs and hybrid CNTs (HCNTs), single wall carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) can demonstrate better adsorption properties for organic contaminants because of their higher specific surface area. SWCNTs are more efficient for removing benzene and toluene and have shown maximum adsorption capacities of 9.98 and 9.96 mg g−1, respectively [74]. A maximum adsorption capacity of 496 mg g−1 was achieved when a reactive blue 29 (RB29) has been removed from aqueous solution by using SWCNTs [92].

On the other hand, CNTs showed high sorption efficiency of divalent metal ions. The advantages and drawbacks of Co(II) and Cu(II) removal using AC, CNTs, and carbon-encapsulated magnetic nanoparticles were reported by Pyrzyńska and Bystrzejewski [80]. The results showed that the carbon nanomaterials have significantly higher sorption efficiency compared to commercial AC. Meanwhile, Stafiej and Pyrzynska [79] found out that the solution conditions such as pH and metal ion concentrations could affect the adsorption characteristics of CNTs. Oxidized CNTs have also shown exceptionally high sorption capacity and efficiency for Pb(II), Cd(II) and Cr(VI) from water [78, 93, 94]. CNTs were also reported as good adsorbents for multi-component sorption of metal ions [71]. The sorption mechanisms were reported to be governed by the surface features, ion exchange process and electrochemical potential [95]. The latter plays a significant role in multi-component sorption where redox reactions, not only on the adsorbent surface but also among the different adsorbates, are likely to occur. MWCNTs were found to adsorb 243Am with extraordinarily high efficiency by forming very stable complexes [96]. The sorption characteristic of Pb(II) from aqueous solution was studied using oxidized MWCNTs [81]. The reported results showed a slope of V/m and intercept of Co V/m for the same initial concentration of Pb(II) and the same content of oxidized MWCNTs for each experimental data [81]. Oxidized MWCNTs were also applied to adsorb Ni(II) from aqueous solution [41]. The predominant mechanism of Ni(II) sorption onto MWCNTs was reported to be ion exchanged at low pH values and by strong surface complexation at high pH values [41]. It was also reported that oxidized MWCNTs can be potentially promising materials for the pre-concentration and solidification of heavy metal ions [70].

The sorption and kinetic desorption of 152+154Eu(III) on MWCNTs have also been studied [97]. It was found that MWCNTs were a suitable material for pre-concentration of lanthanides from large volumes of aqueous solutions in radioactive nuclear waste management with the strong surface complexation and/or chemisorption mechanism [97]. With the aid of FITEQL 3.2, Chen et al. [82] characterized the surface properties of MWCNTs at different ionic strengths and pH values, and modeled Sr(II) and Eu(III) sorption onto oxidized MWCNTs by applying surface complexation model, and found that the diffuse layer model (DLM) fit the experimental data very well. The removal of divalent metal ions [Cd(II), Cu(II), Ni(II), Pb(II), Zn(II)] from aqueous solution using various kinds of CNTs have been studied [98]. It has been proved that the CNTs are very promising adsorbents for environmental protection applications because of their superior sorption capacity and in the same time ability to effective desorption of divalent metal ions [98].

It is worth noting that the CNTs can be potentially produced on a large scale using different methods such as chemical vapor deposition to reduce the cost of production and increase their future use in environmental protection applications.

Graphene

Graphene (Fig. 3), which can be used as nanosorbents, typically consists of one or more atomic-layered carbon atoms, and possesses a unique two-dimensional structure and excellent mechanical, thermal and electrical properties [99, 100]. Using Van der Waals’ forces and ππ stacking interactions, the adsorption of dyes on few-layered graphene nanosheets can be realized (see Fig. 4). For modify the chemical and physical properties and improve the manufacturing of reduced graphene oxide (rGONSs) graphene oxide nanosheets (GONSs), it can be first incorporated into composite materials. Both rGONSs layers and single GONSs layers have high aspect ratios and large π-electronic surfaces that provide strong intermolecular forces among adsorbates [101]. Due to the opened-up layer structure, rGONSs exhibit markedly faster adsorption kinetics than CNTs [63, 102]. Among different carbon-based materials (coal base AC (HD4000), SWCNTs and MWCNTs), rGONSs exhibited better adsorption capacities for two synthetic organic compounds (SOCs; phenanthrene and biphenyl) in aqueous solutions [52]. More importantly, rGONSs are much cheaper than SWCNTs [103]. rGONSs have already been used as adsorbents for the removal of cationic red X-GRL [104], MB [66, 105], methyl orange (MO) [106], CR [107] and other organic materials from aqueous solutions. The maximum adsorption capacities of p-toluenesulfonic acid (p-TA), 1-naphthalenesulfonic acid (1-NA) and MB on GNS reach up to 1430, 1460 and 1520 mg g−1 at 303 K, respectively, which are the highest among all nanomaterials studied in this field to date [108]. The observed adsorption capacities for the adsorption of three types of pesticides [chlorpyrifos (CP), endosulfan (ES), and malathion (ML)] onto GONSs and rGONSs from water are as high as 1200, 1100 and 800 mg g−1, respectively, and GONSs and rGONSs were unprecedented substrates for these adsorption technologies [109].
Fig. 3

Schematics structure of graphene (a) and graphene oxide (b) (copied form Ref. [57])

Fig. 4

Schematic representation of possible interactions between GONSs and pollutants (copied form Ref. [110])

The few-layered GONSs through the modified Hummers’ method have been synthesized [111]. These rGONSs can be used as sorbents for the removal of Cd(II) and Co(II) ions from aqueous solution [111]. It was reported that heavy metal ions sorption on nanosheets is dependent on pH and ionic strength [111]. The abundant oxygen-containing functional groups on the surfaces of graphene oxide nanosheets were reported to play an important role on sorption [111].

Magnetite–graphene composite adsorbent with a particle size of ~10 nm was reported to give a high binding capacity for As(III) and As(V) [112]. The high binding capacity was due to the increased adsorption sites in the graphene composite [112]. The strong functional groups on the graphene oxide (GO) surface make it a potential adsorbent for metal ion complexation through both electrostatic and coordinate approaches. Generally, GO showed high adsorption capacity for cationic metals. rGONSs can be used for adsorption of both cationic and anionic metals. After modification of GO with organics or metal oxides, its composites can also be used for anionic metal removal due to functionalization. Cu(II)–GO interaction in aqueous solution showed that Cu(II) causes GO sheets to be folded and form large aggregates [113]. The coordination between Cu(II) and oxygen atoms on GO was the primary driving force. GO has a Cu(II) adsorption capacity of 46.6 mg g−1, which is higher than that of CNTs (28.5 mg g−1) and AC (4–5 mg g−1) [113].

The removal of Cd(II) [71, 111], Co(II) [111], Pb(II) [71, 114], and U(VI) [115] ions from aqueous solutions have been studied using few-layered GONSs. It was found that the abundant oxygen-containing functional groups on GONSs surfaces play an important role in metal sorption, which was in agreement with the results of Zhao et al. [111]. It was also reported that Cd(II) and Co(II) sorption on GONSs is strongly dependent on pH and weakly dependent on ionic strength. The presence of humic acid reduced Cd(II) and Co(II) sorption on GONSs at pH < 8. The maximum sorption capacities of Cd(II) and Co(II) on GONSs at pH 6.0 and 303 K were about 106.3 and 68.2 mg g−1, respectively. For Pb(II), the maximum adsorption capacities were about 842, 1150, and 1850 mg g−1 at 293, 313, and 333 K, respectively [114], but sorption capacity of U(VI) at pH 5.0, 293 K was 97.5 mg g−1 [115].

Modification of GO with organic materials can change the surface functional groups for better adsorption of various metal ion species. A modified GO with thiol (SH) groups by diazonium chemistry was reported to adsorb sixfold higher concentration of Hg(II)ions than GO and AC [116]. When N-(trimethoxysilylpropyl) ethylenediaminetriacetic acid (EDTA-silane) was used to obtain a chelating GO for Pb(II) removal, the adsorption was fast and completed within 20 min, with an adsorption capacity of 479 mg g−1 at pH 6.8 [117]. Compared to AC and CNTs, GO and GNs present stronger adsorption for many water pollutants.

Metal oxide-based nanomaterials

Metal or metal oxide-based nanomaterials are other inorganic nanomaterials, which are widely used to remove heavy metal ions and dyes. Nanosized metals or metal oxides, including Fe3O4 [118], MnO2 [62], TiO2 [43], MgO [119], CdO [120] and ZnO [68], provide high surface area and specific affinity. Metal oxides possess minimal environmental impact, low solubility, and are not involved in secondary pollution formation; they have also been adopted as sorbents to remove heavy metals and dyes.

Iron is one of the most widespread elements in the earth. The facileness of resource and ease of synthesis render nanosized ferric oxides to be low-cost adsorbents for toxic metal sorption. Since elemental iron is environmentally friendly, nanosized ferric oxides can be pumped directly to contaminated sites with negligible risks of secondary contamination [121, 122]. Many reports discussed the influence of different parameters on the removal of metal ions by Fe3O4 magnetic nanoparticles [47, 123]. For example, the adsorption efficiency of Ni(II), Cu(II), Cd(II) and Cr(VI) ions by Fe3O4 nanoparticles was strongly dependent on pH, temperature, amount of the adsorbent and the incubation time [124, 125, 126, 127]. Further, a higher removal efficiency of these metal ions at a 3.5 mg mL−1 dose of nanoadsorbent with an optimum pH of 4 was obtained. In comparison to bare Fe3O4 nanoparticles, surface functionalized Fe3O4 nanoparticles have been extensively used for the removal of toxic metal ions [124, 125, 126, 127]. Singh et al. [46] reported the removal of toxic metal ions from wastewater using carboxyl-, amine- and thiol-functionalized Fe3O4 nanoparticles (succinic acid, ethylenediamine and 2,3-dimercaptosuccinic acid, respectively). Depending upon the surface functionality (COOH, NH2 or SH), these magnetic nanoadsorbents capture metal ions either by forming chelate complexes, by ion exchange process or else through electrostatic interaction. It has been reported that these surface-engineered Fe3O4 nanoparticles have a strong affinity for the simultaneous adsorption of Cr(III), Co(II), Ni(II), Cu(II), Cd(II), Pb(II) and As3+ from wastewater [45, 47, 48, 51, 68, 118, 123, 124, 125, 126]. In addition, the adsorption process was found to be highly dependent on the amount, surface functionality and pH of the medium, which caused these nanoparticles to selectively adsorb metal ions [125, 126, 127]. An almost 100% removal rate of Cr(III), Co(II), Ni(II), Cu(II), Cd(II) and Pb(II) ions from water was reported at pH > 8 by these functionalized nanoparticles [124, 125, 126, 127].

The removal efficiency of As(III) by carboxyl, amine and thiol-functionalized Fe3O4 was found to be 91, 95 and 97%, respectively, at pH 8 [43]. The adsorption–desorption behavior of metal ions on amine-functionalized Fe3O4 showed an 85% desorption ratio in the first cycle, which indicates their excellent regeneration capacity for their further use. It was reported that ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid-functionalized (EDTA) Fe3O4 nanomagnetic chelators (NMCs), show a strong tendency towards the adsorption of Cr(III), Co(II), Ni(II), Cu(II), Cd(II) and Pb(II) from wastewater [67].

Ozmen et al. [124] reported the use of 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane and glutaraldehyde-modified Fe3O4 nanoparticles for the removal of Cu(II) from the water. Ge et al. [125] have studied the effective removal of heavy metal ions [Cd(II), Zn(II), Pb(II)and Cu(II)] from an aqueous solution using a polymer-modified magnetic nanoparticles. They reported a higher removal efficiency of metal ions in acidic pH 5.5 and a lower one in alkaline pH. Based on their results, they have suggested that the polymer-modified Fe3O4 was more efficient than bare Fe3O4. The reported studies suggest that the functional groups present on the surface of magnetic nanoparticles provide a large number of active sites as well as aqueous stability, which is necessary for the successful adsorption of toxic metals from water. More specifically, these surface-engineered magnetic nanoparticles are highly effective, efficient, economically viable, and reusable magnetic nanoadsorbents for the removal of toxic metal ions from water.

Magnetic nanoparticles were also successfully used as adsorbents of toxic metal ions from different sources. Rhodamine hydrazide modifying Fe3O4 microspheres (Fe3O4-R6G) has been reported for the selective detection and removal of mercury ions from different environmental samples, such as tap water, lake water and river water [126]. It was found that, 1.5 × 10−7 mol L−1 is the detection limit for Hg(II) and that 37.4 μ mol g−1 is the maximum adsorption of Hg(II) in 3 mL sample with 5 mg Fe3O4-R6G. In addition, the regeneration capability for up to three cycles was studied, and observed that it could reversibly bind with Hg ions repeatedly. Table 1 compares the adsorption capacities and removal rates for some dyes and metal ions on different kinds of nanomaterials. A comparison between the removal of different dyes using MWCNTs and the removal of methylene blue, Cd(II) and Pd(II) by different nanomaterials is displayed in Fig. 5.
Table 1

Comparison of different nanomaterials of metal ions and dye removal in view of adsorption capacities and removal rates

Nanomaterials

Adsorbent

Adsorbate

Adsorption capacity (mg g−1)

Rate constants (k1, h−1)

References

Carbon-based nanomaterials

AC

Reactive red M-2BE

260.7

1.503

[76]

 

PAC

Nitrofurazone

50.8

0.1129

[128]

 

SWCNTs

Reactive blue 29 (RB29)

496

[92]

  

Acid red 18

166.67

21.12

[129]

  

Reactive red 120

426.49

[130]

  

Cr(VI)

1.26

[131]

 

MWCNTs

Reactive red M-2BE

335.7

2.860

[76]

  

Nitrofurazone

59.9

0.2082

[128]

  

MB

95.3

[132]

  

CR

352.1

3.18

[133]

  

Maxilon blue

260.7

[134]

  

Cr(VI)

2.35

0.42

[131]

 

Oxidized MWCNTs

Bromothymol blue (BTB)

55

0.042

[88]

 

Diethylenetriamine-MWCNTs

Pb(II)

58.26

[135]

  

Cd(II)

31.45

 
 

GO

MB

714

[66]

 

rGONSs

Chlorpyrifos

1200

[109]

  

Endosulfan

1100

[109]

  

Malathion

800

[109]

 

Graphene

Cd(II)

106.3

[111]

  

Co(II)

68.2

 
 

GONSs

Pb(II)

842

[114]

 

GNS

Ni(II)

3.00

0.0576

[136]

Metal oxide-based nanomaterials

Co3O4/SiO2 nanocomposite

MB

53.87

1.821

[57]

 

TiO2

Cd(II)

16.69

2.244a

[67]

  

Cu(II)

5.18

0.927a

 
  

MO

85.39

 
 

TiO2 nanotubes/CNT

Cu(II)

83–124

[137]

  

Pb(II)

192–588

 
 

Fe3O4 magnetic nanoparticles

Cu(II)

61.07

[124]

 

Modifying Fe3O4 microspheres

Hg(II)

37.4 (μmol g−1)

[126]

 

Ethylenediamine-functionalized nano-Fe3O4

Cr(VI)

136.98

47.172a

[51]

 

MgO

Reactive blue 19

166.7

4.2

[138]

  

Reactive red 198

123.5

5.4

 
 

δ-MnO2

Ni(II)

30.63

0.108

[136]

Carbon and metal oxide hybrid nanomaterials

Graphene oxide–Fe3O4 hybrid composite

MB

167.2

[65]

  

Neutral Red (NR)

171.3

 
 

GNS/δ-MnO2 composite

Ni(II)

46.55

0.0432

[136]

 

RGO/TiO2

MB

467.6

3.1278

[139]

 

Al2O3/MWCNTs

Trichloroethylene

19.84

1.1048a

[140]

  

Cd(II)

27.21

5.7644a

 
 

MnO2/CNTs

Pb(II)

78.74

0.816

[64]

 

Ni@C composite nanostructures

Pb(II)

21.45

[141]

  

Cu(II)

14.3

 
  

Cd(II)

6.43

 

Polymer-based nanomaterials

Polyvinyl alcohol

BTB

276.2

4.266

[56]

  

MB

123.3

4.854

 
 

Polyaniline (PAn)/rice husk nanocomposite

Zn(II)

24.3

[142]

 

Polypyrrole/Fe3O4 magnetic nanocomposite

Cr(VI)

169.4

11.28

[143]

 

Polyacrylamide/Ni0.02Zn0.98O nanocomposite

Malachite green (MG)

6.12

[144]

  

Rhodamine B (RB)

8.88

 

a(k2, g mg−1 h−1)

Fig. 5

A comparison of removal of different dyes by MWCNTs; and removal of methylene blue, Cd(II) and Pd(II) by different nanomaterials

Conclusions

The presence of heavy metal ions and dyes in wastewater is a major concern for environment conservation and human health. The removal process of these ions has not reached the optimum conditions. Based on the unique properties of nanomaterials, they have been widely studied for heavy metals and dye removals from wastewater due to their high surface area, low particles size which leads to high numbers of adsorption active centers. Adsorption processes using nanomaterials are highly effective, may be easily performed and employed for the removal of organic and inorganic pollutants. It seems very plausible that these types of adsorbents may find wide commercial application in wastewater treatment in the near future.

This article reviews the past, present and future approaches for using nanomaterials as effective adsorbents for the removal of heavy metal ions and dyes from wastewater. The recent trends of using nanomaterials as cost-effective and environmentally acceptable adsorbents for water purification were discussed in this article. This review highlights the promising future applications of nanomaterials as adsorbents because of their unique morphological and structural properties.

References

  1. 1.
    Becher, G.: Drinking water chlorination and health. Acta Hydrochim. Hydrobiol. 27(2), 100–102 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zwiener, C., Richardson, S.D., De Marini, D.M., Grummt, T., Glauner, T., Frimmel, F.H.: Drowning in disinfection byproducts? Assessing swimming pool water. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41(2), 363–372 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Karnik, B., Davies, S., Baumann, M., Masten, S.: The effects of combined ozonation and filtration on disinfection by-product formation. Water Res. 39(13), 2839–2850 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhang, X., Minear, R.A., Guo, Y., Hwang, C.J., Barrett, S.E., Ikeda, K., Shimizu, Y., Matsui, S.: An electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry method for identifying chlorinated drinking water disinfection byproducts. Water Res. 38(18), 3920–3930 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carballa, M., Omil, F., Lema, J.M., Llompart, M.A., Garcίa-Jares, C., Rodrίguez, I., Gomez, M., Ternes, T.: Behavior of pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and hormones in a sewage treatment plant. Water Res. 38(12), 2918–2926 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Joss, A., Zabczynski, S., Göbel, A., Hoffmann, B., Löffler, D., McArdell, C.S., Ternes, T.A., Thomsen, A., Siegrist, H.: Biological degradation of pharmaceuticals in municipal wastewater treatment: proposing a classification scheme. Water Res. 40(8), 1686–1696 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lissemore, L., Hao, C., Yang, P., Sibley, P.K., Mabury, S., Solomon, K.R.: An exposure assessment for selected pharmaceuticals within a watershed in Southern Ontario. Chemosphere 64(5), 717–729 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andersen, H., Siegrist, H., Halling-Sørensen, B., Ternes, T.A.: Fate of estrogens in a municipal sewage treatment plant. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37(18), 4021–4026 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miao, X.-S., Bishay, F., Chen, M., Metcalfe, C.D.: Occurrence of antimicrobials in the final effluents of wastewater treatment plants in Canada. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38(13), 3533–3541 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saha, N., Rahman, M.S., Ahmed, M.B., Zhou, J.L., Ngo, H.H., Guo, W.: Industrial metal pollution in water and probabilistic assessment of human health risk. J. Environ. Manag. 185, 70–78 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Halling-Sørensen, B., Nielsen, S.N., Lanzky, P., Ingerslev, F., Lützhøft, H.H., Jørgensen, S.: Occurrence, fate and effects of pharmaceutical substances in the environment—a review. Chemosphere 36(2), 357–393 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Glassmeyer, S.T., Furlong, E.T., Kolpin, D.W., Cahill, J.D., Zaugg, S.D., Werner, S.L., Meyer, M.T., Kryak, D.D.: Transport of chemical and microbial compounds from known wastewater discharges: potential for use as indicators of human fecal contamination. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39(14), 5157–5169 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Molinari, R., Poerio, T., Cassano, R., Picci, N., Argurio, P.: Copper (II) removal from wastewaters by a new synthesized selective extractant and SLM viability. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 43(2), 623–628 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Al-Degs, Y.S., El-Barghouthi, M.I., Issa, A.A., Khraisheh, M.A., Walker, G.M.: Sorption of Zn (II), Pb(II), and Co (II) using natural sorbents: equilibrium and kinetic studies. Water Res. 40(14), 2645–2658 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sadegh, H., Shahryari-ghoshekandi, R., Agarwal, S., Tyagi, I., Asif, M., Gupta, V.K.: Microwave-assisted removal of malachite green by carboxylate functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotubes: kinetics and equilibrium study. J. Mol. Liq. 206, 151–158 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Babel, S., Kurniawan, T.A.: Low-cost adsorbents for heavy metals uptake from contaminated water: a review. J. Hazard. Mater. 97(1), 219–243 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Karimi, L., Zohoori, S.: Superior photocatalytic degradation of azo dyes in aqueous solutions using TiO2/SrTiO3 nanocomposite. J. Nanostruct. Chem. 3(1), 32 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Islam, M.S., Choi, W.S., Nam, B., Yoon, C., Lee, H.-J.: Needle-like iron oxide@CaCO3 adsorbents for ultrafast removal of anionic and cationic heavy metal ions. Chem. Eng. J. 307, 208–219 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bansal, R.C., Goyal, M.: Activated Carbon Adsorption. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khlifi, R., Hamza-Chaffai, A.: Head and neck cancer due to heavy metal exposure via tobacco smoking and professional exposure: a review. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 248(2), 71–88 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ernhart, C.B.: A critical review of low-level prenatal lead exposure in the human: 1. Effects on the fetus and newborn. Reprod. Toxicol. 6(1), 9–19 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zare, K., Gupta, V.K., Moradi, O., Makhlouf, A.S.H., Sillanpää, M., Nadagouda, M.N., Sadegh, H., Shahryari-ghoshekandi, R., Pal, A., Wang, Z.-J.: A comparative study on the basis of adsorption capacity between CNTs and activated carbon as adsorbents for removal of noxious synthetic dyes: a review. J. Nanostruct. Chem. 5(2), 227–236 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sadegh, H., Shahryari-Ghoshekandi, R., Tyagi, I., Agarwal, S., Gupta, V.K.: Kinetic and thermodynamic studies for alizarin removal from liquid phase using poly-2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (PHEMA). J. Mol. Liq. 207, 21–27 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rao, M.M., Ramesh, A., Rao, G.P.C., Seshaiah, K.: Removal of copper and cadmium from the aqueous solutions by activated carbon derived from Ceiba pentandra hulls. J. Hazard. Mater. 129(1), 123–129 (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Biškup, B., Subotić, B.: Removal of heavy metal ions from solutions using zeolites. III. Influence of sodium ion concentration in the liquid phase on the kinetics of exchange processes between cadmium ions from solution and sodium ions from zeolite A. Sep. Sci. Technol. 39(4), 925–940 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gupta, V., Moradi, O., Tyagi, I., Agarwal, S., Sadegh, H., Shahryari-Ghoshekandi, R., Makhlouf, A., Goodarzi, M., Garshasbi, A.: Study on the removal of heavy metal ions from industry waste by carbon nanotubes: effect of the surface modification: a review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46(2), 93–118 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ekmekyapar, F., Aslan, A., Bayhan, Y.K., Cakici, A.: Biosorption of copper (II) by nonliving lichen biomass of Cladonia rangiformis hoffm. J. Hazard. Mater. 137(1), 293–298 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Arias, M., Barral, M., Mejuto, J.: Enhancement of copper and cadmium adsorption on kaolin by the presence of humic acids. Chemosphere 48(10), 1081–1088 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gupta, V.K., Tyagi, I., Agarwal, S., Sadegh, H., Shahryari-ghoshekandi, R., Yari, M., Yousefi-nejat, O.: Experimental study of surfaces of hydrogel polymers HEMA, HEMA–EEMA–MA, and PVA as adsorbent for removal of azo dyes from liquid phase. J. Mol. Liq. 206, 129–136 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chu, W.: Lead metal removal by recycled alum sludge. Water Res. 33(13), 3019–3025 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sublet, R., Simonnot, M.-O., Boireau, A., Sardin, M.: Selection of an adsorbent for lead removal from drinking water by a point-of-use treatment device. Water Res. 37(20), 4904–4912 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rickerby, D., Morrison, M.: Nanotechnology and the environment: a European perspective. Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 8(1), 19–24 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brumfiel, G.: Nanotechnology: a little knowledge. Nature 424(6946), 246–248 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sadegh, H., Ghoshekandi, R.S., Masjedi, A., Mahmoodi, Z., Kazemi, M.: A review on Carbon nanotubes adsorbents for the removal of pollutants from aqueous solutions. Int. J. Nano Dimens. 7(2), 109 (2016) Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Theron, J., Walker, J., Cloete, T.: Nanotechnology and water treatment: applications and emerging opportunities. Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 34(1), 43–69 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dil, E.A., Ghaedi, M., Asfaram, A.: The performance of nanorods material as adsorbent for removal of azo dyes and heavy metal ions: application of ultrasound wave, optimization and modeling. Ultrason. Sonochem. 34, 792–802 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Savage, N., Diallo, M.S.: Nanomaterials and water purification: opportunities and challenges. J. Nanopart. Res. 7(4–5), 331–342 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Machida, M., Mochimaru, T., Tatsumoto, H.: Lead (II) adsorption onto the graphene layer of carbonaceous materials in aqueous solution. Carbon 44(13), 2681–2688 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sharma, Y., Srivastava, V., Singh, V., Kaul, S., Weng, C.: Nano-adsorbents for the removal of metallic pollutants from water and wastewater. Environ. Technol. 30(6), 583–609 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ali, I.: New generation adsorbents for water treatment. Chem. Rev. 112(10), 5073–5091 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chen, C., Wang, X.: Adsorption of Ni (II) from aqueous solution using oxidized multiwall carbon nanotubes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 45(26), 9144–9149 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wang, S., Sun, H., Ang, H.-M., Tadé, M.: Adsorptive remediation of environmental pollutants using novel graphene-based nanomaterials. Chem. Eng. J. 226, 336–347 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Luo, T., Cui, J., Hu, S., Huang, Y., Jing, C.: Arsenic removal and recovery from copper smelting wastewater using TiO2. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44(23), 9094–9098 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Singh, S., Barick, K., Bahadur, D.: Functional oxide nanomaterials and nanocomposites for the removal of heavy metals and dyes. Nanomater. Nanotechnol. 3, 3–20 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Feng, J., Zhang, D.-D., Liu, Y.-F., Bai, Y., Chen, Q.-D., Liu, S.-Y., Sun, H.-B.: Magnetic nanofilm of Fe3O4 for highly efficient organic light-emitting devices. J. Phys. Chem. C 114(14), 6718–6721 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Singh, S., Barick, K., Bahadur, D.: Novel and efficient three dimensional mesoporous ZnO nanoassemblies for environmental remediation. Int. J. Nanosci. 10(4–5), 1001–1005 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Shen, Y., Tang, J., Nie, Z., Wang, Y., Ren, Y., Zuo, L.: Preparation and application of magnetic Fe3O4 nanoparticles for wastewater purification. Sep. Purif. Technol. 68(3), 312–319 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wang, L., Li, J., Jiang, Q., Zhao, L.: Water-soluble Fe3O4 nanoparticles with high solubility for removal of heavy-metal ions from waste water. Dalton Trans. 41(15), 4544–4551 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Tuzen, M., Soylak, M.: Multiwalled carbon nanotubes for speciation of chromium in environmental samples. J. Hazard. Mater. 147(1), 219–225 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Moradi, O., Sadegh, H., Shahryari-Ghoshekandi, R., Norouzi, M.: Application of Carbon Nanotubes in Nanomedicine: New Medical Approach for Tomorrow, pp. 90–128. Handbook of Research on Diverse Applications of Nanotechnology in Biomedicine, Chemistry, and Engineering, Hershey (2015)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zhao, Y.-G., Shen, H.-Y., Pan, S.-D., Hu, M.-Q., Xia, Q.-H.: Preparation and characterization of amino-functionalized nano-Fe3O4 magnetic polymer adsorbents for removal of chromium (VI) ions. J. Mater. Sci. 45(19), 5291–5301 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Apul, O.G., Wang, Q., Zhou, Y., Karanfil, T.: Adsorption of aromatic organic contaminants by graphene nanosheets: comparison with carbon nanotubes and activated carbon. Water Res. 47(4), 1648–1654 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sadegh, H., Zare, K., Maazinejad, B., Shahryari-Ghoshekandi, R., Tyagi, I., Agarwal, S., Gupta, V.K.: Synthesis of MWCNT-COOH-Cysteamine composite and its application for dye removal. J. Mol. Liq. 215, 221–228 (2016)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kurniawan, T.A., Lo, W.-H.: Removal of refractory compounds from stabilized landfill leachate using an integrated H2O2 oxidation and granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption treatment. Water Res. 43(16), 4079–4091 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ho, Y.-S., McKay, G.: Sorption of dye from aqueous solution by peat. Chem. Eng. J. 70(2), 115–124 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Agarwal, S., Sadegh, H., Monajjemi, M., Hamdy, A.S., Ali, G.A.M., Memar, A.O., Shahryari-ghoshekandi, R., Tyagi, I., Gupta, V.K.: Efficient removal of toxic bromothymol blue and methylene blue from wastewater by polyvinyl alcohol. J. Mol. Liq. 218, 191–197 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Abdel Ghafar, H.H., Ali, G.A.M., Fouad, O.A., Makhlouf, S.A.: Enhancement of adsorption efficiency of methylene blue on Co3O4/SiO2 nanocomposite. Desalin. Water Treat. 53(11), 2980–2989 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Faust, S.D., Aly, O.M.: Adsorption Processes for Water Treatment. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2013)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Yuh-Shan, H.: Citation review of Lagergren kinetic rate equation on adsorption reactions. Scientometrics 59(1), 171–177 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ho, Y.-S.: Review of second-order models for adsorption systems. J. Hazard. Mater. 136(3), 681–689 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Graydon, J.W., Zhang, X., Kirk, D.W., Jia, C.Q.: Sorption and stability of mercury on activated carbon for emission control. J. Hazard. Mater. 168(2), 978–982 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gupta, K., Bhattacharya, S., Chattopadhyay, D., Mukhopadhyay, A., Biswas, H., Dutta, J., Ray, N.R., Ghosh, U.C.: Ceria associated manganese oxide nanoparticles: synthesis, characterization and arsenic (V) sorption behavior. Chem. Eng. J. 172(1), 219–229 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ji, L., Chen, W., Xu, Z., Zheng, S., Zhu, D.: Graphene nanosheets and graphite oxide as promising adsorbents for removal of organic contaminants from aqueous solution. J. Environ. Qual. 42(1), 191–198 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Wang, S.-G., Gong, W.-X., Liu, X.-W., Yao, Y.-W., Gao, B.-Y., Yue, Q.-Y.: Removal of lead(II) from aqueous solution by adsorption onto manganese oxide-coated carbon nanotubes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 58(1), 17–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Xie, G., Xi, P., Liu, H., Chen, F., Huang, L., Shi, Y., Hou, F., Zeng, Z., Shao, C., Wang, J.: A facile chemical method to produce superparamagnetic graphene oxide–Fe3O4 hybrid composite and its application in the removal of dyes from aqueous solution. J. Mater. Chem. 22(3), 1033–1039 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Yang, S.-T., Chen, S., Chang, Y., Cao, A., Liu, Y., Wang, H.: Removal of methylene blue from aqueous solution by graphene oxide. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 359(1), 24–29 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Visa, M., Carcel, R.A., Andronic, L., Duta, A.: Advanced treatment of wastewater with methyl orange and heavy metals on TiO2, fly ash and their mixtures. Catal. Today 144(1), 137–142 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Singh, S., Barick, K., Bahadur, D.: Fe3O4 embedded ZnO nanocomposites for the removal of toxic metal ions, organic dyes and bacterial pathogens. J. Mater. Chem. A 1(10), 3325–3333 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ghaedi, M., Shokrollahi, A., Tavallali, H., Shojaiepoor, F., Keshavarz, B., Hossainian, H., Soylak, M., Purkait, M.: Activated carbon and multiwalled carbon nanotubes as efficient adsorbents for removal of arsenazo (ΙΙΙ) and methyl red from waste water. Toxicol. Environ. Chem. 93(3), 438–449 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Chen, C., Li, X., Zhao, D., Tan, X., Wang, X.: Adsorption kinetic, thermodynamic and desorption studies of Th(IV) on oxidized multi-wall carbon nanotubes. Colloids Surf. A 302(1), 449–454 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Li, Y.-H., Ding, J., Luan, Z., Di, Z., Zhu, Y., Xu, C., Wu, D., Wei, B.: Competitive adsorption of Pb2+, Cu2+ and Cd2+ ions from aqueous solutions by multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Carbon 41(14), 2787–2792 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Chatterjee, S., Lee, M.W., Woo, S.H.: Adsorption of congo red by chitosan hydrogel beads impregnated with carbon nanotubes. Bioresour. Technol. 101(6), 1800–1806 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Chatterjee, S., Chatterjee, T., Lim, S.-R., Woo, S.H.: Effect of the addition mode of carbon nanotubes for the production of chitosan hydrogel core–shell beads on adsorption of Congo red from aqueous solution. Bioresour. Technol. 102(6), 4402–4409 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Bina, B., Amin, M., Rashidi, A., Pourzamani, H.: Benzene and toluene removal by carbon nanotubes from aqueous solution. Arch. Environ. Prot. 38(1), 3–25 (2012)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Rodríguez, A., Ovejero, G., Sotelo, J.L., Mestanza, M., García, J.: Adsorption of dyes on carbon nanomaterials from aqueous solutions. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 45(12), 1642–1653 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Machado, F.M., Bergmann, C.P., Fernandes, T.H.M., Lima, E.C., Royer, B., Calvete, T., Fagan, S.B.: Adsorption of Reactive Red M-2BE dye from water solutions by multi-walled carbon nanotubes and activated carbon. J. Hazard. Mater. 192(3), 1122–1131 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Iijima, S.: Helical microtubules of graphitic carbon. Nature 354(6348), 56–58 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Li, Y.-H., Wang, S., Luan, Z., Ding, J., Xu, C., Wu, D.: Adsorption of cadmium (II) from aqueous solution by surface oxidized carbon nanotubes. Carbon 41(5), 1057–1062 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Stafiej, A., Pyrzynska, K.: Adsorption of heavy metal ions with carbon nanotubes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 58(1), 49–52 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Pyrzyńska, K., Bystrzejewski, M.: Comparative study of heavy metal ions sorption onto activated carbon, carbon nanotubes, and carbon-encapsulated magnetic nanoparticles. Colloids Surf. A 362(1), 102–109 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Xu, D., Tan, X., Chen, C., Wang, X.: Removal of Pb(II) from aqueous solution by oxidized multiwalled carbon nanotubes. J. Hazard. Mater. 154(1), 407–416 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Chen, C., Hu, J., Xu, D., Tan, X., Meng, Y., Wang, X.: Surface complexation modeling of Sr (II) and Eu(III) adsorption onto oxidized multiwall carbon nanotubes. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 323(1), 33–41 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Ghaedi, M., Haghdoust, S., Kokhdan, S.N., Mihandoost, A., Sahraie, R., Daneshfar, A.: Comparison of activated carbon, multiwalled carbon nanotubes, and cadmium hydroxide nanowire loaded on activated carbon as adsorbents for kinetic and equilibrium study of removal of Safranine O. Spectrosc. Lett. 45(7), 500–510 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Bahgat, M., Farghali, A., El Rouby, W., Khedr, M.: Synthesis and modification of multi-walled carbon nano-tubes (MWCNTs) for water treatment applications. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 92(2), 307–313 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Ghaedi, M., Shokrollahi, A., Hossainian, H., Kokhdan, S.N.: Comparison of activated carbon and multiwalled carbon nanotubes for efficient removal of eriochrome cyanine R (ECR): kinetic, isotherm, and thermodynamic study of the removal process. J. Chem. Eng. Data 56(7), 3227–3235 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Chang, Z.-D., Zhang, J.-H., Liu, Y.: Removal of methyl orange from aqueous solution by magnetic carbon nanotubes. Spectrosc. Spectr. Anal. 31(1), 205–209 (2011)Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Ghaedi, M., Kokhdan, S.N.: Oxidized multiwalled carbon nanotubes for the removal of methyl red (MR): kinetics and equilibrium study. Desalination Water Treat. 49(1–3), 317–325 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Ghaedi, M., Khajehsharifi, H., Yadkuri, A.H., Roosta, M., Asghari, A.: Oxidized multiwalled carbon nanotubes as efficient adsorbent for bromothymol blue. Toxicol. Environ. Chem. 94(5), 873–883 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Yao, Y., Xu, F., Chen, M., Xu, Z., Zhu, Z.: Adsorption of cationic methyl violet and methylene blue dyes onto carbon nanotubes. In: Nano/Micro Engineered and Molecular Systems (NEMS), 2010 5th IEEE International Conference on (2010)Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Shahryari, Z., Goharrizi, A.S., Azadi, M.: Experimental study of methylene blue adsorption from aqueous solutions onto carbon nano tubes. Int. J. Water Res. Environ. Eng. 2(2), 16–28 (2010)Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Salama, A.: New sustainable hybrid material as adsorbent for dye removal from aqueous solutions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 487, 348–353 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Nadafi, K., Mesdaghinia, A., Nabizadeh, R., Younesian, M., Rad, M.J.: The combination and optimization study on RB29 dye removal from water by peroxy acid and single-wall carbon nanotubes. Desalination Water Treat. 27(1–3), 237–242 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Li, Y.-H., Wang, S., Wei, J., Zhang, X., Xu, C., Luan, Z., Wu, D., Wei, B.: Lead adsorption on carbon nanotubes. Chem. Phys. Lett. 357(3), 263–266 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Robati, D.: Pseudo-second-order kinetic equations for modeling adsorption systems for removal of lead ions using multi-walled carbon nanotube. J. Nanostruct. Chem. 3(1), 55 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Gao, Z., Bandosz, T.J., Zhao, Z., Han, M., Qiu, J.: Investigation of factors affecting adsorption of transition metals on oxidized carbon nanotubes. J. Hazard. Mater. 167(1), 357–365 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Wang, X., Chen, C., Hu, W., Ding, A., Xu, D., Zhou, X.: Sorption of 243Am (III) to multiwall carbon nanotubes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39(8), 2856–2860 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Tan, X., Xu, D., Chen, C., Wang, X., Hu, W.: Adsorption and kinetic desorption study of 152 + 154Eu (III) on multiwall carbon nanotubes from aqueous solution by using chelating resin and XPS methods. Radiochim. Acta 96(1/2008), 23–29 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Rao, G.P., Lu, C., Su, F.: Sorption of divalent metal ions from aqueous solution by carbon nanotubes: a review. Sep. Purif. Technol. 58(1), 224–231 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Moradi, O., Gupta, V.K., Agarwal, S., Tyagi, I., Asif, M., Makhlouf, A.S.H., Sadegh, H., Shahryari-ghoshekandi, R.: Characteristics and electrical conductivity of graphene and graphene oxide for adsorption of cationic dyes from liquids: kinetic and thermodynamic study. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 28, 294–301 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Shahryari-ghoshekandi, R., Sadegh, H.: Kinetic study of the adsorption of synthetic dyes on graphene surfaces. Jordan J. Chem. 9(4), 267–278 (2014)Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Denis, P.A., Iribarne, F.: A first-principles study on the interaction between alkyl radicals and graphene. Chem. Eur. J. 18(24), 7568–7574 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Yu, J.-G., Zhao, X.-H., Yang, H., Chen, X.-H., Yang, Q., Yu, L.-Y., Jiang, J.-H., Chen, X.-Q.: Aqueous adsorption and removal of organic contaminants by carbon nanotubes. Sci. Total Environ. 482, 241–251 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Kotov, N.A.: Materials science: carbon sheet solutions. Nature 442(7100), 254–255 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Li, Y., Liu, T., Du, Q., Sun, J., Xia, Y., Wang, Z., Zhang, W., Wang, K., Zhu, H., Wu, D.: Adsorption of cationic red X-GRL from aqueous solutions by graphene: equilibrium, kinetics and thermodynamics study. Chem. Biochem. Eng. Q 25(4), 483–491 (2012)Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Li, B., Cao, H., Yin, G.: Mg(OH)2@ reduced graphene oxide composite for removal of dyes from water. J. Mater. Chem. 21(36), 13765–13768 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Li, N., Zheng, M., Chang, X., Ji, G., Lu, H., Xue, L., Pan, L., Cao, J.: Preparation of magnetic CoFe2O4-functionalized graphene sheets via a facile hydrothermal method and their adsorption properties. J. Solid State Chem. 184(4), 953–958 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Du, Q., Sun, J., Li, Y., Yang, X., Wang, X., Wang, Z., Xia, L.: Highly enhanced adsorption of congo red onto graphene oxide/chitosan fibers by wet-chemical etching off silica nanoparticles. Chem. Eng. J. 245, 99–106 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Wu, T., Cai, X., Tan, S., Li, H., Liu, J., Yang, W.: Adsorption characteristics of acrylonitrile, p-toluenesulfonic acid, 1-naphthalenesulfonic acid and methyl blue on graphene in aqueous solutions. Chem. Eng. J. 173(1), 144–149 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Maliyekkal, S.M., Sreeprasad, T.S., Krishnan, D., Kouser, S., Mishra, A.K., Waghmare, U.V., Pradeep, T.: Graphene: a reusable substrate for unprecedented adsorption of pesticides. Small 9(2), 273–283 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Yu, J.-G., Yu, L.-Y., Yang, H., Liu, Q., Chen, X.-H., Jiang, X.-Y., Chen, X.-Q., Jiao, F.-P.: Graphene nanosheets as novel adsorbents in adsorption, preconcentration and removal of gases, organic compounds and metal ions. Sci. Total Environ. 502, 70–79 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Zhao, G., Li, J., Ren, X., Chen, C., Wang, X.: Few-layered graphene oxide nanosheets as superior sorbents for heavy metal ion pollution management. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45(24), 10454–10462 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Chandra, V., Park, J., Chun, Y., Lee, J.W., Hwang, I.-C., Kim, K.S.: Water-dispersible magnetite-reduced graphene oxide composites for arsenic removal. ACS Nano 4(7), 3979–3986 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Yang, S.-T., Chang, Y., Wang, H., Liu, G., Chen, S., Wang, Y., Liu, Y., Cao, A.: Folding/aggregation of graphene oxide and its application in Cu2+ removal. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 351(1), 122–127 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Zhao, G., Ren, X., Gao, X., Tan, X., Li, J., Chen, C., Huang, Y., Wang, X.: Removal of Pb(II) ions from aqueous solutions on few-layered graphene oxide nanosheets. Dalton Trans. 40(41), 10945–10952 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Zhao, G., Wen, T., Yang, X., Yang, S., Liao, J., Hu, J., Shao, D., Wang, X.: Preconcentration of U (VI) ions on few-layered graphene oxide nanosheets from aqueous solutions. Dalton Trans. 41(20), 6182–6188 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Gao, W., Majumder, M., Alemany, L.B., Narayanan, T.N., Ibarra, M.A., Pradhan, B.K., Ajayan, P.M.: Engineered graphite oxide materials for application in water purification. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 3(6), 1821–1826 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Madadrang, C.J., Kim, H.Y., Gao, G., Wang, N., Zhu, J., Feng, H., Gorring, M., Kasner, M.L., Hou, S.: Adsorption behavior of EDTA-graphene oxide for Pb(II) removal. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 4(3), 1186–1193 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Feng, L., Cao, M., Ma, X., Zhu, Y., Hu, C.: Superparamagnetic high-surface-area Fe3O4 nanoparticles as adsorbents for arsenic removal. J. Hazard. Mater. 217, 439–446 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Gao, C., Zhang, W., Li, H., Lang, L., Xu, Z.: Controllable fabrication of mesoporous MgO with various morphologies and their absorption performance for toxic pollutants in water. Cryst. Growth Des. 8(10), 3785–3790 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Tadjarodi, A., Imani, M., Kerdari, H.: Adsorption kinetics, thermodynamic studies, and high performance of CdO cauliflower-like nanostructure on the removal of Congo red from aqueous solution. J. Nanostruct. Chem. 3(1), 51 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Cao, C.-Y., Cui, Z.-M., Chen, C.-Q., Song, W.-G., Cai, W.: Ceria hollow nanospheres produced by a template-free microwave-assisted hydrothermal method for heavy metal ion removal and catalysis. J. Phys. Chem. C 114(21), 9865–9870 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Deliyanni, E.A., Lazaridis, N.K., Peleka, E.N., Matis, K.A.: Metals removal from aqueous solution by iron-based bonding agents. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 11(1), 18–21 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Zare, K., Sadegh, H., Shahryari-ghoshekandi, R., Asif, M., Tyagi, I., Agarwal, S., Gupta, V.K.: Equilibrium and kinetic study of ammonium ion adsorption by Fe3O4 nanoparticles from aqueous solutions. J. Mol. Liq. 213, 345–350 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Ozmen, M., Can, K., Arslan, G., Tor, A., Cengeloglu, Y., Ersoz, M.: Adsorption of Cu (II) from aqueous solution by using modified Fe3O4 magnetic nanoparticles. Desalination 254(1), 162–169 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Ge, F., Li, M.-M., Ye, H., Zhao, B.-X.: Effective removal of heavy metal ions Cd2+, Zn2+, Pb2+, Cu2+ from aqueous solution by polymer-modified magnetic nanoparticles. J. Hazard. Mater. 211, 366–372 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Wang, Z., Wu, D., Wu, G., Yang, N., Wu, A.: Modifying Fe3O4 microspheres with rhodamine hydrazide for selective detection and removal of Hg2+ ion in water. J. Hazard. Mater. 244, 621–627 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Warner, C.L., Addleman, R.S., Cinson, A.D., Droubay, T.C., Engelhard, M.H., Nash, M.A., Yantasee, W., Warner, M.G.: High-performance, superparamagnetic, nanoparticle-based heavy metal sorbents for removal of contaminants from natural waters. ChemSusChem 3(6), 749–757 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Ying-Ying, W., Zhen-Hu, X.: Multi-walled carbon nanotubes and powder-activated carbon adsorbents for the removal of nitrofurazone from aqueous solution. J. Dispers. Sci. Technol. 37(5), 613–624 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Shirmardi, M., Mahvi, A.H., Mesdaghinia, A., Nasseri, S., Nabizadeh, R.: Adsorption of acid red18 dye from aqueous solution using single-wall carbon nanotubes: kinetic and equilibrium. Desalination Water Treat. 51(34–36), 6507–6516 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Bazrafshan, E., Mostafapour, F.K., Hosseini, A.R., Raksh Khorshid, A., Mahvi, A.H.: Decolorisation of reactive red 120 dye by using single-walled carbon nanotubes in aqueous solutions. J. Chem. (2013). doi:10.1155/2013/938374 Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Dehghani, M.H., Taher, M.M., Bajpai, A.K., Heibati, B., Tyagi, I., Asif, M., Agarwal, S., Gupta, V.K.: Removal of noxious Cr(VI) ions using single-walled carbon nanotubes and multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Chem. Eng. J. 279, 344–352 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Selen, V., Güler, Ö., Özer, D., Evin, E.: Synthesized multi-walled carbon nanotubes as a potential adsorbent for the removal of methylene blue dye: kinetics, isotherms, and thermodynamics. Desalination Water Treat. 57(19), 8826–8838 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Zare, K., Sadegh, H., Shahryari-Ghoshekandi, R., Maazinejad, B., Ali, V., Tyagi, I., Agarwal, S., Gupta, V.K.: Enhanced removal of toxic Congo red dye using multi walled carbon nanotubes: kinetic, equilibrium studies and its comparison with other adsorbents. J. Mol. Liq. 212, 266–271 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Alkaim, A.F., Sadik, Z., Mahdi, D.K., Alshrefi, S.M., Al-Sammarraie, A.M., Alamgir, F.M., Singh, P.M., Aljeboree, A.M.: Preparation, structure and adsorption properties of synthesized multiwall carbon nanotubes for highly effective removal of maxilon blue dye. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 32(12), 2456–2462 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Vukovic, G.D., Marinkovic, A.D., Skapin, S.D., Ristic, M.Ð., Aleksic, R., Peric-Grujic, A.A., Uskokovic, P.S.: Removal of lead from water by amino modified multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Chem. Eng. J. 173(3), 855–865 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Ren, Y., Yan, N., Wen, Q., Fan, Z., Wei, T., Zhang, M., Ma, J.: Graphene/δ-MnO2 composite as adsorbent for the removal of nickel ions from wastewater. Chem. Eng. J. 175, 1–7 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Doong, R.-A., Chiang, L.-F.: Coupled removal of organic compounds and heavy metals by titanate/carbon nanotube composites. Water Sci. Technol. 58(10), 1985–1992 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Moussavi, G., Mahmoudi, M.: Removal of azo and anthraquinone reactive dyes from industrial wastewaters using MgO nanoparticles. J. Hazard. Mater. 168(2), 806–812 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Wang, H., Gao, H., Chen, M., Xu, X., Wang, X., Pan, C., Gao, J.: Microwave-assisted synthesis of reduced graphene oxide/titania nanocomposites as an adsorbent for methylene blue adsorption. Appl. Surf. Sci. 360, 840–848 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Liang, J., Liu, J., Yuan, X., Dong, H., Zeng, G., Wu, H., Wang, H., Liu, J., Hua, S., Zhang, S., Yu, Z., He, X., He, Y.: Facile synthesis of alumina-decorated multi-walled carbon nanotubes for simultaneous adsorption of cadmium ion and trichloroethylene. Chem. Eng. J. 273, 101–110 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Ni, Y., Jin, L., Zhang, L., Hong, J.: Honeycomb-like Ni@ C composite nanostructures: synthesis, properties and applications in the detection of glucose and the removal of heavy-metal ions. J. Mater. Chem. 20(31), 6430–6436 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Ghorbani, M., Eisazadeh, H., Ghoreyshi, A.: Removal of zinc ions from aqueous solution using polyaniline nanocomposite coated on rice husk. Iran. J. Energy Environ. 3(1), 83–88 (2012)Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Bhaumik, M., Maity, A., Srinivasu, V., Onyango, M.S.: Enhanced removal of Cr(VI) from aqueous solution using polypyrrole/Fe3O4 magnetic nanocomposite. J. Hazard. Mater. 190(1), 381–390 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Kumar, A., Sharma, G., Naushad, M., Singh, P., Kalia, S.: Polyacrylamide/Ni0. 02Zn0. 98O nanocomposite with high solar light photocatalytic activity and efficient adsorption capacity for toxic dye removal. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 53(40), 15549–15560 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemistry, Science and Research BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Chemistry Department, Faculty of ScienceAl-Azhar UniversityAssiutEgypt
  3. 3.Al-Azhar Center of Nanoscience and Applications (ACNA)Al-Azhar UniversityAssiutEgypt
  4. 4.Faculty of Industrial Sciences and TechnologyUniversiti Malaysia PahangGambangMalaysia
  5. 5.Department of Applied ChemistryUniversity of JohannesburgJohannesburgSouth Africa
  6. 6.Department of Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering and Computer ScienceUniversity of Texas Rio Grande ValleyEdinburgUSA
  7. 7.Department of Mechanical and Materials EngineeringWright State UniversityDaytonUSA
  8. 8.Laboratory of Green ChemistryLappeenranta University of TechnologyMikkeliFinland
  9. 9.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringFlorida International UniversityMiamiUSA
  10. 10.University of Warsaw, Faculty of ChemistryWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations