Literature DB >> 19679331

Removal of toxic ions (chromate, arsenate, and perchlorate) using reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, and ultrafiltration membranes.

Jaekyung Yoon1, Gary Amy, Jinwook Chung, Jinsik Sohn, Yeomin Yoon.   

Abstract

Rejection characteristics of chromate, arsenate, and perchlorate were examined for one reverse osmosis (RO, LFC-1), two nanofiltration (NF, ESNA, and MX07), and one ultrafiltration (UF and GM) membranes that are commercially available. A bench-scale cross-flow flat-sheet filtration system was employed to determine the toxic ion rejection and the membrane flux. Both model and natural waters were used to prepare chromate, arsenate, and perchlorate solutions (approximately 100microgL(-1) for each anion) in mixtures in the presence of other salts (KCl, K(2)SO(4), and CaCl(2)); and at varying pH conditions (4, 6, 8, and 10) and solution conductivities (30, 60, and 115mSm(-1)). The rejection of target ions by the membranes increases with increasing solution pH due to the increasingly negative membrane charge with synthetic model waters. Cr(VI), As(V), and ClO(4)(-) rejection follows the order LFC-1 (>90%) > MX07 (25-95%) congruent withESNA (30-90%)>GM (3-47%) at all pH conditions. In contrast, the rejection of target ions by the membranes decreases with increasing solution conductivity due to the decreasingly negative membrane charge. Cr(VI), As(V), and ClO(4)(-) rejection follows the order CaCl(2)<KCl congruent withK(2)SO(4) at constant pH and conductivity conditions for the NF and UF membranes tested. For natural waters the LFC-1 RO membrane with a small pore size (0.34nm) had a significantly greater rejection for those target anions (>90%) excluding NO(3)(-) (71-74%) than the ESNA NF membrane (11-56%) with a relatively large pore size (0.44nm), indicating that size exclusion is at least partially responsible for the rejection. The ratio of solute radius (r(i,s)) to effective membrane pore radius (r(p)) was employed to compare ion rejection. For all of the ions, the rejection is higher than 70% when the r(i,s)/r(p) ratio is greater than 0.4 for the LFC-1 membrane, while for di-valent ions (CrO(4)(2-), SO(4)(2-), and HAsSO(4)(2-)) the rejection (38-56%) is fairly proportional to the r(i,s)/r(p) ratio (0.32-0.62) for the ESNA membrane.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19679331     DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2009.07.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chemosphere        ISSN: 0045-6535            Impact factor:   7.086


  5 in total

1.  Removal of arsenic III and V from laboratory solutions and contaminated groundwater by metallurgical slag through anion-induced precipitation.

Authors:  Rafael Schouwenaars; Claudia Victoria Montoya-Bautista; Elizabeth Diane Isaacs-Páez; Myriam Solís-López; Rosa María Ramírez-Zamora
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-09-17       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Removal of Hexavalent Chromium(VI) from Wastewater Using Chitosan-Coated Iron Oxide Nanocomposite Membranes.

Authors:  Jung Eun Park; Jun-Ho Shin; Wonzin Oh; Sang-June Choi; Jeongju Kim; Chorong Kim; Jongho Jeon
Journal:  Toxics       Date:  2022-02-19

Review 3.  A critical review on arsenic removal from water using iron-based adsorbents.

Authors:  Linlin Hao; Mengzhu Liu; Nannan Wang; Guiju Li
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2018-11-27       Impact factor: 4.036

4.  Adsorption of Chromate Ions by Layered Double Hydroxide-Bentonite Nanocomposite for Groundwater Remediation.

Authors:  Yoogyeong Kim; Yeongkyun Son; Sungjun Bae; Tae-Hyun Kim; Yuhoon Hwang
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 5.076

5.  Calcium Alginate Beads with Entrapped Iron Oxide Magnetic Nanoparticles Functionalized with Methionine-A Versatile Adsorbent for Arsenic Removal.

Authors:  Surbhi Lilhare; Sunitha B Mathew; Ajaya K Singh; Sónia A C Carabineiro
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 5.076

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.