Seung Mo Kong1, Youngbae Han2, Nam-Il Won3, Yang Ho Na1. 1. Department of Advanced Materials, Hannam University, Daejeon 34054, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Mechanical and System Engineering, Korea Military Academy, Seoul 01805, Republic of Korea. 3. Water Resources Management Research Center, K-water Institute, Korea Water Resources Corporation, Daejeon 34045, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
Oil spill accidents contaminate the oceanic environment and cause economic distress, and they continue to occur. Many methods have been developed to restore waters contaminated with spilled oil. However, still most commercially available methods are not environmentally or economically sustainable solutions. Therefore, there is a need for the development of sustainable materials with running water treatment capabilities. In recent years, a polyurethane (PU) sponge-based adsorbent has been reported as an oil-water separation and reusable adsorbent. This is because the porous 3D structure of the PU sponge provides a large surface area. However, as the PU sponge has a carboxyl group and an amino group, it exhibits hydrophilicity, so surface modification is essential for oil-water separation. Therefore, to modify the surface of PU to have hydrophobic/oleophilic properties, a hydrophobic/oleophilic adsorbent (HOA) was prepared using graphite and polydimethylsiloxane. On the basis of this, a PU sponge, a porous material, was used to manufacture an adsorbent that can be used in a sustainable and environmentally friendly way. The prepared HOA can selectively adsorb water or oil and can be reused. Furthermore, continuous oil-water separation is possible through a simple flow of fluid. Therefore, it is confirmed that the studied HOA can have great potential for ocean restoration in the future as an adsorbent that mitigates the disadvantages of the currently commercialized method.
Oil spill accidents contaminate the oceanic environment and cause economic distress, and they continue to occur. Many methods have been developed to restore waters contaminated with spilled oil. However, still most commercially available methods are not environmentally or economically sustainable solutions. Therefore, there is a need for the development of sustainable materials with running water treatment capabilities. In recent years, a polyurethane (PU) sponge-based adsorbent has been reported as an oil-water separation and reusable adsorbent. This is because the porous 3D structure of the PU sponge provides a large surface area. However, as the PU sponge has a carboxyl group and an amino group, it exhibits hydrophilicity, so surface modification is essential for oil-water separation. Therefore, to modify the surface of PU to have hydrophobic/oleophilic properties, a hydrophobic/oleophilic adsorbent (HOA) was prepared using graphite and polydimethylsiloxane. On the basis of this, a PU sponge, a porous material, was used to manufacture an adsorbent that can be used in a sustainable and environmentally friendly way. The prepared HOA can selectively adsorb water or oil and can be reused. Furthermore, continuous oil-water separation is possible through a simple flow of fluid. Therefore, it is confirmed that the studied HOA can have great potential for ocean restoration in the future as an adsorbent that mitigates the disadvantages of the currently commercialized method.
In
the past, the ocean was like a wall that could no longer be
crossed, but in the present, it has turned into a stage for transportation
and trade and has become a platform for the further development of
mankind. However, due to these advances, the sea is polluted by a
variety of factors. Among them, oil spill accidents are of great concern
to humans, along with increasing environmental problems in recent
years.[1] Spilled oil forms an oil film on
the ocean that causes toxicity and suffocation, resulting in damage
to the cellular functions and physical damage, to marine organisms.[2] In addition, after a spill, light oil and heavy
oil affect the coastal or intertidal zone in different ways over time.[2] Accordingly, the importance of rapid recovery
in the case of oil accidents is emerging, and adsorbents, dispersants,
skimmers, and on-site combustion methods are widely used. While these
oil treatment methods are useful in some situations, they have fatal
drawbacks in terms of environmental impact. Although an adsorbent
has a high adsorption capacity, it generates a lot of waste after
use,[3] while a dispersant prevents the formation
of an oil film but produces fine oil droplets.[4] In the case of skimming, oil–water separation is possible,
but the adsorption rate is low and the efficiency may not be constant,
depending on natural phenomena, such as waves.[5] Lastly, the in situ combustion method can be processed quickly but
has the disadvantage of generating oxides.[6] To solve this problem, a reusable polyurethane (PU) sponge-based
adsorbent with hydrophobic/oleophilic properties has been reported
for oil–water separation.[7−20] This is because the PU sponge has the advantages of high elasticity,
elastic recovery, and relatively light weight as an adsorbent and
ultimately provides a large surface area due to its porous 3D structure.
However, the surface of PU is composed of carboxyl and amino groups
and is generally hydrophilic, so a modified form of the surface of
the PU sponge is required. For example, by using the sequential infiltration
synthesis technique, the deposition parameters are adjusted, and the
coating is made as a thin film,[7,8] or hydrophobic and magnetic
materials are introduced on the base,[9−13] or high-density polyethylene is dissolved in an organic
solvent to coat PU.[10,14] We have paid attention to adsorbents
coated with carbon-based materials such as carbon nanotubes (CNTs),
nanodiamonds, reduced graphene oxide (RGO), and graphite among various
hydrophobic materials.[11−13,15−20] This is because carbon-based materials have unique properties of
being hydrophobic in air through chemical stability and hydrophobic
interactions.[21−23] Depending on their shape, these carbon-based materials
may provide a large specific surface area. For example, RGO, which
increases the specific surface area by generating and reducing graphene
oxide through oxidation of graphite,[11,15,18,20] and CNTs, which has
a large specific surface area with a unique porous structure,[13,16,19] are sometimes used. However,
these require additional manufacturing processes and costs because
of the different forms or structural differences of graphite. Most
importantly, when evaluating cytotoxicity using graphite, long multiwalled
CNTs, and short multiwalled CNTs, a noticeable increase in reactive
oxygen species and a decrease in cell viability were reported in short
multiwalled CNTs.[24] This is because the
large specific surface area of the particles acts as a factor influencing
toxicity.[25,26] This can cause major problems if leaked
during actual use. In contrast, graphite has a relatively low specific
surface area.[27] Therefore, graphite induces
cytotoxicity only at high concentrations, which has been reported
as a possible mechanism for oxidative stress.[28] In addition, even if graphite loses its hydrophobic properties due
to surface modification by ultraviolet rays or ozone, its hydrophobic
properties are quickly restored by the adsorption of hydrocarbons
in air.[21,22] This has important implications for marine
environments that are always exposed to ultraviolet rays or ozone.
That is why we believe that graphite should be used because it takes
advantage of the inherent advantages of carbon-based materials and
at the same time has a relatively less environmental impact than other
extended carbon-based materials. We used ethanol to effectively disperse
graphite and effectively incorporate graphite into the PU sponge base[29] and used PDMS for binding the PU sponge surface
and graphite.[30] In addition, in order to
take advantage of the 3D porous structure of the PU sponge, we diluted
PDMS to thinly coat it, then subjecting it to a dip-coating process,
and cured.[30,31] PDMS is a polymer made of silicone
that exhibits liquid-like properties. When cross-linked using a curing
agent, the properties change to those of a solid.[32] Cured PDMS is an inert, chemically stable, hydrophobic
polymer with a low surface energy. It can make the surface of PU more
hydrophobic.[33] That is, as shown in Scheme , HOA is first coated
with graphite on the surface of PU. It is then prepared by coating
PDMS, which acts as a binder between the coated graphite and PU.
Scheme 1
HOA is First Coated with Graphite on the PU Surface
It
is then prepared by coating
PDMS, which acts as a binder between the coated graphite and PU.
HOA is First Coated with Graphite on the PU Surface
It
is then prepared by coating
PDMS, which acts as a binder between the coated graphite and PU.Furthermore, differences in solubility according
to the diluting
organic solvent of PDMS have been reported.[34] This suggests that the coating may be affected depending on the
solvent and the dilution ratio. In summary, our study aims to introduce
the chemical stability and hydrophobic properties of carbon-based
materials, which are the advantages of carbon-based materials, by
coating carbon-based materials on PU sponge bases for oil/water separation.
In this case, graphite, which is judged to have little impact on the
environment among carbon-based materials, was used. In addition, PDMS
was used to introduce graphite on the surface of the PU sponge relatively
simply. Additionally, repeated adsorption/desorption processes for
oil–water separation may be inefficient. Therefore, the efficiency
of the method using the pressure difference caused by the airflow,
as in Scheme for
continuous oil–water separation with the prepared HOA was tested.
Scheme 2
Continuous Oil–Water Separation Device Using the Pressure
Difference
The features are that the air
inlet and the oil outlet are separated, and only the adsorbent is
replaced at the same time as oil/water separation, so that the performance
of the device is maintained.
Continuous Oil–Water Separation Device Using the Pressure
Difference
The features are that the air
inlet and the oil outlet are separated, and only the adsorbent is
replaced at the same time as oil/water separation, so that the performance
of the device is maintained.
Results
and Discussion
Preparation and Characterization
of HOA
Graphite and PDMS were sequentially dip-coated onto
the PU base.
At this time, to completely wet the solid with the solution, the surface
energy of the solution must be lower than the surface energy of the
solid.[35,36] Therefore, using ethanol, which has a lower
surface energy than PU and can disperse graphite well, a dip coating
of graphite on PU can be smoothly performed.[35,37] The surface of graphite-coated PU was studied from Figure a, which was obtained using
a scanning electron microscope. In addition, it can be seen from Figure b–d that when
the above process is repeated, the roughness of the surface increases
as the content of graphite to be coated increases. However, if the
number of repetitions is further increased, graphite is coated in
a multilayer, which can be easily removed or detached because the
secondary junction of additional graphite is coated on graphite in
a multilayer form in the primary junction. This is due to the π
interaction, which is an electrostatic force due to the π structure
of graphite.[38,39] This is a state in which graphite
is weakly bonded to the PU base or bonded to graphite. This is the
reason why we used PDMS for binding. Furthermore, to use the 3D porous
structure of the PU sponge during the secondary coating process, PDMS
must be thinly coated as a secondary coating material. Therefore,
even if the number of coatings is increased, the loss of graphite
not bound to PDMS occurs. On the one hand, Figure S1 of the Supporting Information shows the mass and contact
angle for different graphite coating methods. At this time, the increase
in the coating content of graphite was confirmed in samples that were
dip-coated several times. However, there is no increase in the content
in the dip coating process according to the excess content of graphite.
It is believed that excess graphite was easily desorbed during the
coating process, and no increase in weight was observed. In other
words, if graphite is dip-coated several times, it means that the
already coated graphite is not easily desorbed and is coated effectively.
These results suggest that the graphite and PDMS diluent can be easily
desorbed when one-pot dip coating is performed. Therefore, we coated
PDMS after coating graphite on the surface of the PU sponge.
Figure 1
SEM measurement
by repeating the number of graphite coatings; (a)
pristine sponge, (b) 1× coating, (c) 2× coating, and (d)
3× coating.
SEM measurement
by repeating the number of graphite coatings; (a)
pristine sponge, (b) 1× coating, (c) 2× coating, and (d)
3× coating.Then, with graphite coated
on PU in a monolayer, PDMS was dip-coated
in a solution diluted with toluene to bind the empty space between
PU and graphite. After that, it was cured in an oven and thinly coated.
The cured PDMS is a hydrophobic polymer that is an inert substance,
chemically stable, and has low surface energy, and can make the surface
of PU more hydrophobic.[33] As a result (Figure
S2 of the Supporting Information), when
PDMS is coated, the water contact angle (WCA) increases, as compared
with that when only graphite is coated. However, the contact angle,
according to the PDMS content, does not show a significant change.
Also, Figure shows
that the lower the dilution ratio, the more is the surface of the
primary bonded graphite that is covered. Figure a shows that the higher the dilution rate,
the higher is the degree of exposure of the graphite surface. Also,
if the dilution rate is too high, it can play a weak binding role.
Figure 2
SEM measurement
according to the PDMS content: (a) PDMS, 0.25 g;
(b) PDMS, 0.5 g; (c) PDMS, 1 g; and (d) PDMS, 2 g.
SEM measurement
according to the PDMS content: (a) PDMS, 0.25 g;
(b) PDMS, 0.5 g; (c) PDMS, 1 g; and (d) PDMS, 2 g.Moreover, Figure S3 of the Supporting Information shows that as the content of PDMS increases, the
space inside the
sponge becomes smaller, and the adsorption rate decreases. Therefore,
the content of PDMS was determined to be 0.25 g, and the curing agent
was prepared in a ratio of 10:1. As a result of the inductively coupled
plasma-optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) measurement of the
final HOA prepared in this way, it was confirmed that the Si element
was (3.12 ± 0.24) wt % of the total weight. The cause of the
error appears to be due to the irregular porous structure of the sponge. Figure a shows that for
the HOA fabricated through the above process, WCA increased from 85.5°
± 3° to 145° ± 5.5°. It sometimes exhibits
more than 150°, indicating superhydrophobicity.
Figure 3
(a) WCA measurement before
and after coating: PU based on coating
has an initial WCA of 85.5° ± 3°, but after surface
coating, it increased to 145° ± 5.5°. (b) Oil red O
chloroform/DW separation: it was confirmed that only chloroform could
be selectively adsorbed. (c) Drop scene by solvent type: when DW,
xylene, and gasoline are dropped with a micropipette, and only DW
creates water droplets.
(a) WCA measurement before
and after coating: PU based on coating
has an initial WCA of 85.5° ± 3°, but after surface
coating, it increased to 145° ± 5.5°. (b) Oil red O
chloroform/DW separation: it was confirmed that only chloroform could
be selectively adsorbed. (c) Drop scene by solvent type: when DW,
xylene, and gasoline are dropped with a micropipette, and only DW
creates water droplets.
Oil/Water
Separation Test
HOA with
hydrophobic properties did not adsorb distilled water (DW) but only
adsorbed xylene and gasoline (see Figure c and Movie S1 of the Supporting Information). The oil–water separation
test shows hydrophobicity/oleophilicity that can selectively adsorb
only chloroform between chloroform and DW as an alternative oil dyed
with oil red O (see Figure b and Movie S2 of the Supporting
Information). These results suggest that the prepared HOA may be capable
of oil–water separation in water containing sinking oil, such
as a water column.
Mass Adsorption Capacity
and Reusability
The adsorption capacity of HOA prepared using
toluene, xylene,
hexane, gasoline, chloroform, silicone oil, and soybean oil, among
various organic solvents and oils widely used in industry and daily
life, was evaluated. HOA shows high adsorption of these substances
(Figure ).
Figure 4
Mass adsorption
capacity by organic solvent type. The prepared
HOA has various adsorption rates, depending on the type of organic
solvent.
Mass adsorption
capacity by organic solvent type. The prepared
HOA has various adsorption rates, depending on the type of organic
solvent.The adsorption capacity of the
prepared HOA is different for each
organic solvent because the adsorption rate depends mainly on the
density of the organic solvent. For example, the adsorption capacity
of HOA for chloroform (1.49 g/cm3) was about 48 g/g, and
for hexane (0.65 g/cm3), the adsorption capacity was about
21 g/g. Additionally, the kinematic viscosity and surface tension
of the organic solvent may affect the adsorption capacity. Table S1
of the Supporting Information lists the
density, kinematic viscosity, and surface tension of the organic solvents
used. In contrast, Table S2 of the Supporting Information compares the adsorption capacity of adsorbents
coated with carbon-based materials based on PU sponges previously
studied based on the adsorption capacity of hexane and gasoline in
HOA.[11,15−20] Although the adsorption capacity is different, the prepared adsorbent
is more efficient in terms of cost and time when considering the time
and cost required for the manufacturing process of carbon-based materials
such as reduced graphene oxide. Also, in the case of the reusability
test, Figure shows
that the adsorption amount during 10 cycles did not change significantly.
In addition, the WCA measurements shows that it can be regarded as
being reusable because the WCA is 90° or more and is therefore
hydrophobic. Movie S3 of the Supporting Information shows that the reusability can also be confirmed when used between
DW and gasoline.
Figure 5
Mass adsorption capacity and WCA by cycle. The adsorption
rate
was measured using the fabricated HOA and gasoline, and the WCA was
measured using DW. The adsorption rate and WCA were maintained during
10 repetitions.
Mass adsorption capacity and WCA by cycle. The adsorption
rate
was measured using the fabricated HOA and gasoline, and the WCA was
measured using DW. The adsorption rate and WCA were maintained during
10 repetitions.
Continuous
Oil Removal Test of HOA
The HOA is confirmed to be reusable.
However, if the adsorption/dehydration
cycle should be repeated, such as squeezing the sponge, it would be
difficult to apply to a real separation system. Therefore, organic
contaminants must be able to be continuously adsorbed and removed.
Accordingly, a continuous process is proposed using pressure difference
(Scheme ). As the
air flows through the pipe, the pressure inside the pipe becomes lower
than the external pressure. Due to the pressure difference, the organic
pollutants flow into the pipe and go out with the airflow. The emission
rate changes depending on the detailed location or length of the device.
The test conditions (length, width, organic pollutant volume, etc.)
were maintained in the same way as described in Section . The experimental setup
was adjusted to maximize the emission rate. Gasoline was used as an
organic pollutant. Figure and Movie S4 of the Supporting
Information show that if the air flows weakly, gasoline cannot be
drawn in, while if the air flows too fast, the air will be directed
to the HOA and causes bubbles. The emission rate showed the highest
value when the compressor pressure was 0.05 MPa. As a result, the
oil–water separation test was performed at the air pressure
of 0.05 MPa. It was confirmed that only gasoline was continuously
removed between water and gasoline using a simple principle through
the flow of air (Movie S5 of the Supporting Information).
Figure 6
Emissions from the organic pollutant treatment sustained. If the
airflow is weak, gasoline is not raised, and the emission rate is
low. When the airflow is strong, air is directed toward the HOA. Therefore,
bubbles are generated toward the solution, resulting in low emissions
(Movie S4 of the Supporting Information).
Emissions from the organic pollutant treatment sustained. If the
airflow is weak, gasoline is not raised, and the emission rate is
low. When the airflow is strong, air is directed toward the HOA. Therefore,
bubbles are generated toward the solution, resulting in low emissions
(Movie S4 of the Supporting Information).
Conclusions
Depending on the easily available PU, the surface of PU is first
coated with graphite, which is known to be hydrophobic in air; then,
PDMS with a low surface energy is secondarily coated on the first
coating. HOA was fabricated through a binding process in the empty
space between PU and graphite in a monolayer coated with graphite
on PU. The HOA was inexpensive, easy to make, could be selectively
adsorbed between water and oil, and at the same time could be reused.
Further, continuous oil–water separation is possible in the
process through simple fluid flow, and it is confirmed that there
is great potential in the form that complements the shortcomings of
the current commercialized methods.
Experimental
Section
Materials
The base PU sponge (25
kg/m3) was obtained from Total Sponge Co., Ltd. Graphite
powder has a size of 20 μm or less as a coating material, and
the products of Sigma-Aldrich Chemistry Co., Ltd. were used. Ethanol
(99.0%, C2H5OH) for dispersing graphite was
purchased from Samchun Pure Chemical Co., Ltd. Dow Corning Sylgard
184 base and curing agent product was used as the curing agent for
curing PDMS and PDMS with another coating material. Toluene (99.9%,
C7H8) used for diluting PDMS was a product of
SK Chemicals. For performance testing, we used gasoline, a product
of SK energy, soybean oil, xylene (99.0%, C8H10), a Sigma-Aldrich Co., Ltd. product, and hexane (99.9%, C6H6) and chloroform (99.5%, CHCl3) from Samchun
Pure Chemical Co., Ltd. For silicone oil, KF-96 from Shin-Etsu Chemical
Co., Ltd. was used. Lastly, oil red O (dye content ≥ 75%, C26H24N4O) used for dyeing organic solvents
was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. Co., Ltd.
Sample
Preparation
Step 1: Graphite Coating
on PU
To coat graphite on PU, graphite powder (0.2 wt %)
was added to ethanol
and dispersed for 20 min. The prepared base PU sponge (25 kg/m3, 1 cm × 1 cm × 2 cm) was immersed into the dispersed
solution and dip-coated for 1 min. After that, it was dried for 3
h at 80 °C through oven-drying. In addition, the above process
was repeated several times to allow more graphite to be coated onto
the PU sponge surface.
Step 2: Binder Coating
between Graphite
Coated on PU
In order to thinly coat PDMS, which can serve
as a binder between the coated graphite and PU, certain amounts of
PDMS and curing agent were added to toluene (100 mL) at a weight ratio
of 10:1 and diluted through stirring for 20 min. The adsorbent prepared
in the first coating process was then dip-coated in the diluted solution
for 1 min. Finally, the HOA was prepared by drying in oven at 60 °C
overnight (Scheme ).
Characterization
After primary graphite
coating, the graphite content was calculated according to eq QW: graphite content
ratio to total weight; AC: graphite-coated
sponge weight; and AB: base sponge.To analyze the surface of HOA, it was subjected to Ar sputtering
treatment and then SEM (Hitachi, S-3000N, Japan) was carried out at
25 kV. In addition, ICP-OES (PerkinElmer, OPTIMA 5300DV, U.S.) was
used to identify the PDMS coatings and Si elements in the final fabricated
HOA. A WCA measuring device (Rame-Hart Instrument Co., Goniometer
100-00-115, US) was used to check the wettability of the surface.
The tangent method was used to measure the contact angle, considering
the nonsmooth surface due to the nature of the sponge. First, an imaginary
point is drawn on the surface of the liquid droplet, and an imaginary
circle is drawn connecting the points. The tangent of the imaginary
circle is drawn to measure the angle between the surface and the tangent.
At this time, the left and right contact angles are measured, and
the rough surface is corrected by averaging these values.
Oil/Water Separation Test
To check
whether the prepared HOA is capable of oil/water separation in water
containing sunken oil, chloroform, an organic solvent, was used as
an oil substitute by dyeing with oil red O. Then, the dyed chloroform
was added to the prepared DW, and the prepared HOA was added to confirm
that only chloroform was selectively adsorbed.
Mass
Adsorption Capacity and Reusability
The oil adsorption of
the prepared HOA was calculated according
to eq . In addition,
to check the reusability, the above process was repeated and calculated
according to eq QM: adsorption
capacity; AW: HOA weight after adsorption; AD: HOA weight in dry condition; QR: adsorption capacity when reused; and AS: HOA weight after squeeze.
Continuous
Oil Removal Test Using HOA
This experiment was conducted
to test the continuous oil separation
capacity of the fabricated HOA. Scheme shows the schematic of the experimental device. The
experiment was performed under the following conditions. The prepared
HOA (height 50 mm/thickness 20 mm) was wrapped in the device (diameter
12 mm). Also, the volume of the solvent was filled to 1.8 L. HOA was
prepared in a state completely immersed in the solvent. Finally, all
tube diameters were different, but the air pressure was kept constant.
Authors: Elizabeth B Kujawinski; Melissa C Kido Soule; David L Valentine; Angela K Boysen; Krista Longnecker; Molly C Redmond Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2011-01-26 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Alyona Sukhanova; Svetlana Bozrova; Pavel Sokolov; Mikhail Berestovoy; Alexander Karaulov; Igor Nabiev Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett Date: 2018-02-07 Impact factor: 4.703