Advertisement

Removal of Heavy Metal from Wastewater Using Ion Exchange Membranes

  • Z. F. Pan
  • L. AnEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Clean water supplies are vital for industry, agriculture, and energy production. However, the water pollution issue is becoming more serious due to ever-increasing wastewater discharges from the industries into the environment. As the freshwater resource is limited, it is extremely crucial to reuse the wastewater after it has been treated to remove the heavy metal ions and other organic pollutants, which is believed to be the only way to find the new water resource. In view of the significance of treatment of wastewater contaminants, various remediation technologies are proposed and developed for efficient removal of heavy metal ions, including ultrafiltration, nanofiltration, reverse osmosis, forward osmosis, adsorption, electrodialysis method, and fuel cell method. This chapter starts with a brief introduction of heavy metals, which are chromium, nickel, copper, zinc, cadmium, mercury, and lead. Then both physical treatment and chemical treatment are summarized. Finally, the remaining challenges and future perspectives are highlighted.

Keywords

Heavy metal ions Ion exchange membrane Ion removal Physical treatment Chemical treatment 

Abbreviations

AAEM

Alkaline anion exchange membrane

AC

Ativated carbon

AFM

Atomic force microscope

AMAH

2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonic acid based hydrogel

APTES

Aminopropyltriethoxysilane

BET

Brunauer–Emmett–Teller

BSA

Bovine serum albumin

CdS

Cadmium sulfide

CEM

Cation exchange membrane

CPANM

Chitosan/poly(ethylene oxide)/activated carbon (AC) nanofibrous membrane

CPF

Chitosan/PEO fiber

EDA

Ethylenediamine

FTIR

Fourier transform infrared

GO

Graphene oxide

HFO

Hydrous ferric oxide

HMO

Hydrous manganese dioxide

HNT

Halloysite nanotube

HPEI

Hyperbranched polyethylenimine

IEM

Ion exchange membrane

MMM

Mixed matrix membrane

MOF

Metal–organic framework

NP

Nanoparticle

PA

Polyamide

PANI

Polyaniline

PDA

Polydopamine

PEO

Poly(ethylene oxide)

PES

Polyethersulfone

PPy

Polypyrrole

PSf

Polysulfone

PVA

Polyvinyl alcohol

PVC

Polyvinyl chloride

PVDF

Polyvinylidene fluoride

SEM

Scanning electron microscope

TEM

Transmission electron microscope

TFC

Thin-film composite

UCrFC

Urine/Cr(VI) fuel cell

XRD

X-ray diffractor

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was fully supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. 25211817).

References

  1. 1.
    Carolin CF, Kumar PS, Saravanan A, Joshiba GJ, Naushad M (2017) Efficient techniques for the removal of toxic heavy metals from aquatic environment: a review. J Environ Chem Eng 5(3):2782–2799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Fu F, Wang Q (2011) Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: a review. J Environ Manage 92(3):407–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reddy DHK, Lee SM (2013) Application of magnetic chitosan composites for the removal of toxic metal and dyes from aqueous solutions. Adv Coll Interface Sci 201:68–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Srivastava N, Majumder C (2008) Novel biofiltration methods for the treatment of heavy metals from industrial wastewater. J Hazard Mater 151(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lesmana SO, Febriana N, Soetaredjo FE, Sunarso J, Ismadji S (2009) Studies on potential applications of biomass for the separation of heavy metals from water and wastewater. Biochem Eng J 44(1):19–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boamah PO, Huang Y, Hua M, Zhang Q, Wu J, Onumah J, Sam-Amoah LK, Boamah PO (2015) Sorption of heavy metal ions onto carboxylate chitosan derivatives—a mini-review. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 116:113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ahmed MJK, Ahmaruzzaman M (2016) A review on potential usage of industrial waste materials for binding heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions. J Water Process Eng 10:39–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nordberg G, Fowler B, Nordberg M, Friberg L (2007) Handbook of the toxicology of metals, 3rd edn. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ali H, Khan E, Sajad MA (2013) Phytoremediation of heavy metals—concepts and applications. Chemosphere 91(7):869–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Demim S, Drouiche N, Aouabed A, Benayad, T, Dendene-Badache, O, Semsari S (2013) Cadmium and nickel: assessment of the physiological effects and heavy metal removal using a response surface approach by L. gibba. Ecol Eng, 61:426–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miretzky P, Cirelli AF (2010) Cr (VI) and Cr (III) removal from aqueous solution by raw and modified lignocellulosic materials: a review. J Hazard Mater 180(1–3):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hu J, Chen C, Zhu X, Wang X (2009) Removal of chromium from aqueous solution by using oxidized multiwalled carbon nanotubes. J Hazard Mater 162(2–3):1542–1550Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang S, Li J, Shao D, Hu J, Wang X (2009) Adsorption of Ni(II) on oxidized multi-walled carbon nanotubes: effect of contact time, pH, foreign ions and PAA. J Hazard Mater 166(1):109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mobasherpour I, Salahi E, Ebrahimi M (2012) Removal of divalent nickel cations from aqueous solution by multi-walled carbon nano tubes: equilibrium and kinetic processes. Res Chem Intermed 38(9):2205–2222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Malamis S, Katsou E (2013) A review on zinc and nickel adsorption on natural and modified zeolite, bentonite and vermiculite: examination of process parameters, kinetics and isotherms. J Hazard Mater 252:428–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Awual MR, Ismael M, Khaleque MA, Yaita T (2014) Ultra-trace copper (II) detection and removal from wastewater using novel meso-adsorbent. J Ind Eng Chem 20(4):2332–2340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tang WW, Zeng GM, Gong JL, Liang J, Xu P, Zhang C, Huang BB (2014) Impact of humic/fulvic acid on the removal of heavy metals from aqueous solutions using nanomaterials: a review. Sci Total Environ 468:1014–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cristian P, Violeta P, Anita-Laura R, Raluca I, Alexandrescu E, Andrei S, Daniela IE, Raluca MA, Cristina M, Ioana CA (2015) Removal of zinc ions from model wastewater system using bicopolymer membranes with fumed silica. J Water Process Eng 8:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen M, Chen R, Zhu X, Liao Q, An L, Ye D, Zhou Y, He X, Zhang W (2017) A membrane electrode assembled photoelectrochemical cell with a solar-responsive cadmium sulfide-zinc sulfide-titanium dioxide/mesoporous silica photoanode. J Power Sources 371:96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee CH, Hsi CS (2002) Recycling of scrap cathode ray tubes. Environ Sci Technol 36(1):69–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Filipič M (2012) Mechanisms of cadmium induced genomic instability. Mutat Res/Fundam Mol Mech Mutagen 733(1):69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kumari S, Chauhan GS (2014) New cellulose–lysine schiff-base-based sensor–adsorbent for mercury ions. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 6(8):5908–5917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Windham-Myers L, Fleck JA, Ackerman JT, Marvin-DiPasquale M, Stricker CA, Heim WA, Bachand PA, Eagles-Smith CA, Gill G, Stephenson M (2014) Mercury cycling in agricultural and managed wetlands: a synthesis of methylmercury production, hydrologic export, and bioaccumulation from an integrated field study. Sci Total Environ 484:221–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Malar S, Sahi SV, Favas PJ, Venkatachalam P. (2015) Mercury heavy-metal-induced physiochemical changes and genotoxic alterations in water hyacinths [Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.)]. Environ Sci Poll Res 22(6):4597–4608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li P, Feng X, Qiu G, Shang L, Li Z (2009) Mercury pollution in Asia: a review of the contaminated sites. J Hazard Mater 168(2–3):591–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Acharya J, Sahu J, Mohanty C, Meikap B (2009) Removal of lead (II) from wastewater by activated carbon developed from Tamarind wood by zinc chloride activation. Chem Eng J 149(1–3):249–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Qu X, Alvarez PJ, Li Q (2013) Applications of nanotechnology in water and wastewater treatment. Water Res 47(12):3931–3946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cechinel MAP, de Souza AAU (2014) Study of lead(II) adsorption onto activated carbon originating from cow bone. J Clean Prod 65:342–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sun J, Hu C, Tong T, Zhao K, Qu J, Liu H, Elimelech M (2017) Performance and mechanisms of ultrafiltration membrane fouling mitigation by coupling coagulation and applied electric field in a novel electrocoagulation membrane reactor. Environ Sci Technol 51(15):8544–8551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Daraei P, Madaeni SS, Ghaemi N, Salehi E, Khadivi MA, Moradian R, Astinchap B (2012) Novel polyethersulfone nanocomposite membrane prepared by PANI/Fe3O4 nanoparticles with enhanced performance for Cu(II) removal from water. J Membr Sci 415–416:250–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gohari RJ, Lau WJ, Matsuura T, Halakoo E, Ismail AF (2013) Adsorptive removal of Pb(II) from aqueous solution by novel PES/HMO ultrafiltration mixed matrix membrane. Sep Purif Technol 120:59–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ghaemi N, Daraei P (2016) Enhancement in copper ion removal by PPy@Al2O3 polymeric nanocomposite membrane. J Ind Eng Chem 40:26–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ghaemi N (2016) A new approach to copper ion removal from water by polymeric nanocomposite membrane embedded with γ-alumina nanoparticles. Appl Surf Sci 364:221–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mukherjee R, Bhunia P, De S (2016) Impact of graphene oxide on removal of heavy metals using mixed matrix membrane. Chem Eng J 292:284–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Abdullah N, Gohari RJ, Yusof N, Ismail AF, Juhana J, Lau WJ, Matsuura T (2016) Polysulfone/hydrous ferric oxide ultrafiltration mixed matrix membrane: preparation, characterization and its adsorptive removal of lead (II) from aqueous solution. Chem Eng J 289:28–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bilal M, Shah JA, Ashfaq T, Gardazi SMH, Tahir AA, Pervez A, Haroon H, Mahmood Q (2013) Waste biomass adsorbents for copper removal from industrial wastewater—a review. J Hazard Mater 263:322–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhang Y, Zhang S, Chung TS (2015) Nanometric graphene oxide framework membranes with enhanced heavy metal removal via nanofiltration. Environ Sci Technol 49(16):10235–10242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ghaemi N, Madaeni SS, Daraei P, Rajabi H, Zinadini S, Alizadeh A, Heydari R, Beygzadeh M, Ghouzivand S (2015) Polyethersulfone membrane enhanced with iron oxide nanoparticles for copper removal from water: application of new functionalized Fe3O4 nanoparticles. Chem Eng J 263:101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bolisetty S, Mezzenga R (2016) Amyloid-carbon hybrid membranes for universal water purification. Nat Nanotechnol 11(4):365–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zeng G, He Y, Zhan Y, Zhang L, Pan Y, Zhang C, Yu Z (2016) Novel polyvinylidene fluoride nanofiltration membrane blended with functionalized halloysite nanotubes for dye and heavy metal ions removal. J Hazard Mater 317:60–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Habiba U, Afifi AM, Salleh A, Ang BC (2017) Chitosan/(polyvinyl alcohol)/zeolite electrospun composite nanofibrous membrane for adsorption of Cr(6+), Fe(3+) and Ni(2+). J Hazard Materi 322(Part A):182–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rao Z, Feng K, Tang B, Wu P (2017) Surface decoration of amino-functionalized metal-organic framework/graphene oxide composite onto polydopamine-coated membrane substrate for highly efficient heavy metal removal. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9(3):2594–2605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Meschke K, Hansen N, Hofmann R, Haseneder R, Repke JU (2018) Characterization and performance evaluation of polymeric nanofiltration membranes for the separation of strategic elements from aqueous solutions. J Membr Sci 546:246–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Meschke K, Daus B, Haseneder R, Repke JU (2017) Strategic elements from leaching solutions by nanofiltration–Influence of pH on separation performance. Sep Purif Technol 184:264–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Li Y, Xu Z, Liu S, Zhang J, Yang X (2017) Molecular simulation of reverse osmosis for heavy metal ions using functionalized nanoporous graphenes. Comput Mater Sci 139:65–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Petrinic I, Korenak J, Povodnik D, Hélix-Nielsen C (2015) A feasibility study of ultrafiltration/reverse osmosis (UF/RO)-based wastewater treatment and reuse in the metal finishing industry. J Clean Prod 101:292–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    You S, Lu J, Tang CY, Wang X (2017) Rejection of heavy metals in acidic wastewater by a novel thin-film inorganic forward osmosis membrane. Chem Eng J 320:532–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Cui Y, Ge Q, Liu XY, Chung TS (2014) Novel forward osmosis process to effectively remove heavy metal ions. J Membr Sci 467:188–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhao X, Liu C (2018) Efficient removal of heavy metal ions based on the optimized dissolution-diffusion-flow forward osmosis process. Chem Eng J 334:1128–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Demirbas A (2008) Heavy metal adsorption onto agro-based waste materials: a review. J Hazard Mater 157(2–3):220–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Li X, Zhou H, Wu W, Wei S, Xu Y, Kuang Y (2015) Studies of heavy metal ion adsorption on chitosan/sulfydryl-functionalized graphene oxide composites. J Colloid Interface Sci 448:389–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Chen D, Zhang H, Yang K, Wang H (2016) Functionalization of 4-aminothiophenol and 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane with graphene oxide for potential dye and copper removal. J Hazard Mater 310:179–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Henriques B, Goncalves G, Emami N, Pereira E, Vila M, Marques PA (2016) Optimized graphene oxide foam with enhanced performance and high selectivity for mercury removal from water. J Hazard Mater 301:453–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wan S, He F, Wu J, Wan W, Gu Y, Gao B (2016) Rapid and highly selective removal of lead from water using graphene oxide-hydrated manganese oxide nanocomposites. J Hazard Mater 314:32–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Tang J, Huang Y, Gong Y, Lyu H, Wang Q, Ma J (2016) Preparation of a novel graphene oxide/Fe-Mn composite and its application for aqueous Hg(II) removal. J Hazard Mater 316:151–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Shariful MI, Sharif SB, Lee JJL, Habiba U, Ang BC, Amalina MA (2017) Adsorption of divalent heavy metal ion by mesoporous-high surface area chitosan/poly (ethylene oxide) nanofibrous membrane. Carbohyd Polym 157:57–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Shariful MI, Sepehr T, Mehrali M, Ang BC, Amalina MA (2018) Adsorption capability of heavy metals by chitosan/poly(ethylene oxide)/activated carbon electrospun nanofibrous membrane. J Appl Polym Sci 135(7):45851–45864 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Porada S, Egmond W, Post J, Saakes M, Hamelers H (2018) Tailoring ion exchange membranes to enable low osmotic water transport and energy efficient electrodialysis. J Membr Sci 552:22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Nemati M, Hosseini S, Shabanian M (2017) Novel electrodialysis cation exchange membrane prepared by 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonic acid; heavy metal ions removal. J Hazard Mater 337:90–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Babilas D, Dydo P (2018) Selective zinc recovery from electroplating wastewaters by electrodialysis enhanced with complex formation. Sep Purif Technol 192:419–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ge L, Wu B, Li Q, Wang Y, Yu D, Wu L, Pan J, Miao J, Xu T (2016) Electrodialysis with nanofiltration membrane (EDNF) for high-efficiency cations fractionation. J Membr Sci 498:192–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Wu QX, Pan ZF, An L (2018) Recent advances in alkali-doped polybenzimidazole membranes for fuel cell applications. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 89:168–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pan ZF, An L, Zhao TS, Tang ZK (2018) Advances and challenges in alkaline anion exchange membrane fuel cells. Prog Energy Combust Sci 66:141–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    An L, Zhao TS (2018) Anion exchange membrane fuel cells: principles, materials and systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham, SwitzerlandCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Pan ZF, Chen R, An L, Li YS (2017) Alkaline anion exchange membrane fuel cells for cogeneration of electricity and valuable chemicals. J Power Sources 365:430–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Zhang H, Xu W, Wu Z, Zhou M, Jin T (2013) Removal of Cr (VI) with cogeneration of electricity by an alkaline fuel cell reactor. The J Phys Chem C 117(28):14479–14484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Xu W, Zhang H, Li G, Wu Z (2016) A urine/Cr (VI) fuel cell—electrical power from processing heavy metal and human urine. J Electroanal Chem 764:38–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Zhang HM, Xu W, Fan Z, Liu X, Wu ZC, Zhou MH (2017) Simultaneous removal of phenol and dichromate from aqueous solution through a phenol-Cr (VI) coupled redox fuel cell reactor. Sep Purif Technol 172:152–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Qian Y, Huang L, Pan Y, Quan X, Lian H, Yang J (2018) Dependency of migration and reduction of mixed Cr2O72−, Cu2+ and Cd2+ on electric field, ion exchange membrane and metal concentration in microbial fuel cells. Sep Purif Technol 192:78–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityHung Hom, KowloonHong Kong SAR, China

Personalised recommendations