| Literature DB >> 31193228 |
Sobia Ashraf1, Asima Siddiqa2, Shabnam Shahida1, Sara Qaisar2.
Abstract
Arsenic is highly carcinogenic element and less concentration of this chemical element makes natural water unsafe for human consumption. Versatile techniques including adsorption method have been established to remove the arsenic from water. However, adsorption is found to be one of effective method for the remediation of arsenic from contaminated water. Different types of natural adsorbents i.e. clays, waste materials, carbon based material have been studied widely for the adsorption of arsenic. Recently, nanotechnology is considered to be one of the best technology for waste water treatment. Therefore researchers have synthesized several types of nanoadsorbents and investigated them for the removal of various pollutants including arsenic from water. Now days, attention is paid on development of nanocomposite materials which are proven as competent arsenic adsorbent candidate as compared to other adsorbents due to dominant structural and surface features. Various metal/metal oxide based nanocomposites have been developed and studied for arsenic removal from aqueous media. It has been reported that TiO2 based nanocomposite exhibit stong affinity for both inorganic form of arsenic. Therefore, in this review numerous metal or metal oxide based titania nanocomposites i.e. TiO2-αFe2O3, NHITO, Ce-Ti oxide, Zr-TiO2, RGO-MFT etc. have been discussed in details for the water treatment containing arsenic. This review also presents an overview of low cost adsorbents, titania based nanoadsorbent and hybrid titania nanostructures for the removal of arsenic. In this review paper the particle size, surface area and adsorption efficiency of these titania based materials at different pH are also been presented in tabulated form. It provides the opportunity to choose best titania based nanocomposites for the treatment of arsenic polluted water.Entities:
Keywords: Chemistry; Engineering; Environmental science; Materials science
Year: 2019 PMID: 31193228 PMCID: PMC6522689 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01577
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Comparison of advantages and disadvantages of different technologies.
| Methods | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Air oxidation | Easy and low cost, oxidizes other organic and inorganic constituents in water | Slow process and increases the rate of oxidation, eliminates arsenic (v) mostly. | |
| Chemical oxidation | Natural process, operates rapidly, cause oxidation of other impurities and minimum waste production. | Depend highly on pH and requires oxidation step. | |
| Adsorption (activated alumina, iron oxides, titania etc. | Simple and easily controlled. No other reagents and additional steps required. Adsorbent can be regenerated. | ||
| Nano-filtration | High removal capacity. Well- defined process. | Economically not effective process, high water rejection. | |
| Reverse osmosis | Toxic waste is not produced. High efficiency for the removal of arsenic. | Difficult to operate. | |
| Electrodialysis | Can also be used for the removal of other pollutants. | Production of toxic waste water. |
Fig. 1Low cost adsorbent for the removal of arsenic.
Comparison of hybrid titania nanostructures for the adsorption of arsenic.
| Materials | Particle size (nm) | Surface area (m2/g) | pH | Adsorption capacity (mg/g) | Forms of Arsenic | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hydrous TiO2 | 3–8 | 312 | 7.0 | 83 | As(III) | |
| Hydrous TiO2 | 10.8 mm | 280 | 4.0 | 33.4 | As(V) | |
| Granular TiO2 | 0.15–0.6 mm | 250.7 | 7.0 | 41.4 | As(V) | |
| CHTO | 0.14–0.29 mm | 163.6 | 7.0 | 72–75 g/kg | As(III) | |
| TICB | … | 0.56 | 7.0 | 2050 μg/g | As(V) | |
| TICB under UV-light | … | 3.06 | 7.0 | 2988 μg/g | As(V) | |
| TNTs | 2–6 | 312 | 7.0 | 60 | As(III) | |
| TiO2-CNTs | 2.7 | 196 | 7.0 | 1.8 | As (III) | |
| TiO2/MMT | 1.83–4 | 176.4 | 7.0 | 4.58 | As(III | |
| TiO2/MMT | … | … | … | 5.19 | As(III) | … |
Abbreviations: CHTO, crystalline hydrous titanium oxide; TICB, titania impregnated chitosan bead; TNTs, titania nanotubes CNTs, carbon nanotubes; MMT, monotomrolonite.
Evaluation of metal/metal oxide based titania nanocomposites for the removal of arsenic.
| Materials | Particle Size (nm) | Surface Area (m2/g) | pH | Adsorption capacity (mg/g) | Forms of arsenic | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| m- TiO2-αFe2O3 | 26.7 | 95 | 3.0 | 80% | As(III) | |
| TiO2-Fe2O3 bi-composite | 20 μm | 133.5 | 5.0 | 12.4 | As(V) | |
| Fe-TNTs | 8–11 | 162.8 | 2.5 | 80.67 | As(V) | |
| NHITO | 7.0–11 | 77.8 | 7.0 | 85 | As(III) | |
| RGO-MFT | 20–45 | 275.23 | 6.0 | 77.6 | As(V) | |
| FTSZ | 61 nm | 189.2 | 7.0 | As (III) | ||
| Ce-Ti oxide | 100–200 nm | 38.2–68.8 | 6.5 | 6.8 | As (III) | |
| Zr-Ti oxide | …… | 114 | 9.0 | 28.6 | As(III) | |
| Ti-BYC | 10–30 nm | 82 | 7.0 | 348.5 | As(V) |
Abbreviations: TNTs, titania nanotubes; NHITO; Iron (III) titanium (IV) mixed binary oxide; RGO-MFT, reduced graphene oxide/magnetite iron-titania ternary; FTSZ, iron, titania/silica modified with zinc.
Fig. 2(a) Individually added alumina chitosan bead (AlCB) and titania chitosan bead (TICB) to form mixed batch system (b) mixed impregnated chitosan bead preparation (MICB) by mixing chitosan, alumina and titania.
Fig. 3Schematic representation of adsorption of As (V) on meso- Ti /α H3AsO3 (As III) oxidized into As (V) i.e. HAsO4−2 and H2AsO4−2.
Fig. 4Suggested mechanism of photoxidation of arsenite on V2O5/TiO2 nanocomposites. Electrons and holes are generated which convert oxygen and hydroxyl into O2•/OH• radicals that cause the oxidation of As (III) into As (V).