Katherine Herrera1, Luisa F Morales1, Natalia A Tarazona2, Roberto Aguado3, Juan F Saldarriaga1. 1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universidad de Los Andes, 1Este #19A-40, 111711 Bogotá, Colombia. 2. Institute of Active Polymers, Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon, Kantstraße 55, 14513 Teltow, Germany. 3. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of the Basque Country, Barrio Sarriena s/n, 48080 Bilbao, Spain.
Abstract
One of the main products of pyrolysis is char. For the better performance and improvement of its physicochemical properties, it is necessary to make temperature changes. In this study, different temperatures have been tested for the pyrolysis of rice husk, and the biochar obtained from the process went through an evaluation to test its yield in the removal of emerging compounds such as azithromycin (AZT) and erythromycin (ERY). For this, pyrolysis of rice husk has been carried out at temperatures of 450, 500, 550, and 600 °C, and the biochars have been characterized by ultimate analysis and proximate analysis, as well as specific surface area tests. Then, different adsorption tests have been carried out with a 200 mg L-1 drug (AZT and ERY) solution prepared in the laboratory. All biochars have been found to present removal percentages higher than 95%. Therefore, obtaining biochar from rice husk at any temperature and using it in the removal of high-molecular-weight compounds are quite suitable.
One of the main products of pyrolysis is char. For the better performance and improvement of its physicochemical properties, it is necessary to make temperature changes. In this study, different temperatures have been tested for the pyrolysis of rice husk, and the biochar obtained from the process went through an evaluation to test its yield in the removal of emerging compounds such as azithromycin (AZT) and erythromycin (ERY). For this, pyrolysis of rice husk has been carried out at temperatures of 450, 500, 550, and 600 °C, and the biochars have been characterized by ultimate analysis and proximate analysis, as well as specific surface area tests. Then, different adsorption tests have been carried out with a 200 mg L-1 drug (AZT and ERY) solution prepared in the laboratory. All biochars have been found to present removal percentages higher than 95%. Therefore, obtaining biochar from rice husk at any temperature and using it in the removal of high-molecular-weight compounds are quite suitable.
The annual rice production
worldwide is almost 740 million tons.
The major producers are China, India, Vietnam, Thailand, the United
States, and Pakistan.[1,2] It is estimated that the amount
of rice husk can reach 23% of the total mass production, which represents
almost 150 million tons per year generated worldwide in rice processing.[3] The use of this biomass as animal food is complex
due to its low nutritional content, and on the other hand, its natural
degradation is complex because of its silicon content and the abrasive
surface.[1] This situation makes it possible
to consider the biomass as a new element in the development and use
of renewable energy resources and due to its favorable characteristics,
specially its low carbon emission and damage to the environment.[1,4] Rice husk has been widely used as a biomass for power energy due
to its position as a staple food for more than half of the world’s
population. The harvest of this grain creates an inexhaustible source
of rice husk.[1]Rice husk can be converted
into energy through different processes
such as combustion, pyrolysis, or gasification. Of these, pyrolysis
is the most promising for rice husks because it has been shown to
have high yields in the production of liquids
fuel (called bio-oil),[5−9] gases, and solid (biochar).[5,10,11] The bio-oil obtained from pyrolysis has been widely investigated
due to its potential use as a second-generation biofuel (after the
upgrading process) or as a starting material for chemical compounds.[5,12] The biochar produced comprises typically about 15 wt % of the products,
and it is used mainly as a product for the heat treatment process
by combustion or it can be separated. It has also received attention
in environmental restoration due to its ability to fix carbon and
improve soil fertility.[13,14] At present, the biochar
that comes mainly from wood chips, crop stalks, animal carcasses,
manure, sludge, and leaves[14−17] is characterized by its high carbon content.Biochar has been found to have advantageous characteristics, such
as a unique pore structure, large specific surface area, complex surface-active
functional groups, and stable chemical properties.[14,18] Likewise, it has a high potential for adsorption and removal of
pollutants such as heavy metals, immobilization, passivation, and
improvement of environmental quality.[14] Biochar has been widely used in studies related to the adsorption
of heavy metals in different valence states in water bodies.[14] Compared with traditional activated carbon,
the main advantage of biochar is that the raw materials for its production
are abundant and low-cost, which can be obtained from agricultural
biomass and solid waste, resulting in carbon sequestration and the
generation of renewable energy.[15,19] The biochar yields
applied in various fields have been reported to be equivalent to or
even higher than those of commercial activated carbon and other much
more expensive materials such as CNTs and graphene.[15,20−23] Biochar has brought more attention in the field of wastewater treatment
as an effective adsorbent of aqueous pollutants, including dyes, organic
and phenolic compounds, heavy metals, and active pharmaceutical compounds
as anti-inflammatory and antibiotic drugs known for their complex
and long-lasting structures.[24−26]Antibiotics are one of
the most used drugs on a daily basis for
the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of diseases in humans and
animals.[27] In recent years, antibiotics
have attracted increasing interest as an important class of potent
pollutants in the environment.[28] After
being ingested, a large amount of these and their metabolites are
found in the aquatic environment; their complex structures, toxicity,
and insufficient treatment in wastewater treatment systems create
disturbances in the ecosystems and are potential risks to human health
and aquatic life.[24,29] Antibiotic-resistant microorganisms
have been recognized as ubiquitous in environments, even those that
have never been exposed to antimicrobial agents, and that the environment
is an important reservoir of emerging antibiotic-resistant genes.[30] Some authors have reported that low concentrations
of drugs in water can affect aquatic organisms and produce oxidative
stress, histopathological lesions, as well as genotoxic and immunosuppressive
effects, among others.[31]Among these
drugs is azithromycin, which is a macrolide[32] antibiotic and has been reported in treated
wastewater from antibiotic-producing companies from 30 μg·L–1 up to 10.5 mg·L–1 in the receiving
river. A high frequency of bacteria resistant to azithromycin (up
to 83%) has also been found in the effluents.[31,33] Managaki et al.[34] found azithromycin
in concentrations between 4 and 448 ng·L–1 in
the urban river of Tamagawa, Japan. In addition, erythromycin, which
is also a macrolide,[32] has been found in
rivers in concentrations ranging from 50 ng·L–1 to 67.7 μg·L–1 in sediments.[33−36] Therefore, the appearance of this class of active pharmaceutical
compounds in the aquatic environment has been recognized as one of
the emerging issues of environmental chemistry.[37]Therefore, the use of biochar in the adsorption process
of this
type of compound is promising for the removal of drugs such as azithromycin
and erythromycin from water sources. Biochar has been used in recent
years as an adsorbent material for pollutants, but to date, there
have been no reports on the study of the obtaining and use of biochar
from different temperatures as an adsorbent for emerging pollutants
in water. For this reason, the aim of this study is to carry out pyrolysis
tests at different temperatures and use the biochar obtained as an
adsorbent in the removal of these drugs. This study also aims to determine
the working temperature at which a better biochar product can be obtained
for the removal of this type of drugs.
Results
and Discussion
Biochar Characterization
The elemental
composition of biochar mainly depends on the physicochemical characteristics
of the raw material. In Table , it is observed that the composition of the four biochars
used in this study is very similar and this varies according to the
pyrolysis temperatures and that the changes between these temperatures
are minimal. The TGA results shown in Figure show that the thermal decomposition of the
organic matrix of the biochar samples at low temperatures is higher,
and therefore, this is indicative of adequate volatile matter content
(Table ), which is
associated with the pyrolysis temperature during the carbonization
process. Therefore, the partial depolymerization of cellulose and
lignin from biomass produces low-molecular-weight organic compounds
on the surface of the coal, as has been demonstrated by other authors.[38]Figure shows the deconvolution of the three polymeric materials,
which shows a good fit despite their degrees of degradation. In the
same way, the TGA curves reflect a higher concentration of the inorganic
material, with a large mass fraction that remains at 800 °C,
which is also due to the characteristics of the rice husk with reported
ash contents of up to 24.63%,[39] and this
coincides with the results of this work (Table ). This concentration is also related to
the results of the polymer content on the three main components of
the rice husk, and their low content is observed in Table . From the results of the polymer
content, it is then observed that lignin is much more recalcitrant
than hemicellulose and cellulose.[40]
Table 4
Physical–Chemical Characteristics
of the Biochar Used
biochar
parameter
rice husk
450
500
550
600
Ultimate Analysis
nitrogen (wt % d.b.)
0.70
0.59
0.62
0.50
0.48
carbon (wt % d.b.)
31.60
63.90
64.20
65.60
69.3
sulfur (wt % d.b.)
0.01
0.28
0.31
0.20
0.27
hydrogen (wt % d.b.)
4.35
1.52
1.25
1.30
1.28
oxygen (wt % d.b.)
47.37
9.71
8.62
7.40
6.67
Proximate Analysis
moisture (wt % w.b.)
8.40
0.54
0.32
0.24
0.23
volatile matter (wt % d.b.)
65.33
22.06
24.09
24.84
27.00
fixed carbon (wt % d.b.)
10.04
54.59
52.45
51.57
48.65
ash (wt % d.b.)
24.63
22.81
23.14
23.35
24.12
HHV (MJ/kg)
13.76
11.95
10.27
14.03
15.12
Proposed Polymer
Source
hemicellulose (wt % d.b.)
15.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
cellulose (wt % d.b.)
30.80
4.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
lignin (wt % d.b.)
26.40
25.32
15.56
9.64
3.23
Figure 1
TGA curves
for the biochar samples.
Figure 2
DTG deconvolution for
biochar at 500 °C.
TGA curves
for the biochar samples.DTG deconvolution for
biochar at 500 °C.Some studies have reported
that rising temperature increases the
surface and porosity of a biochar due to the higher degree of carbonization.[19,41] The chemical composition of the surface plays an important role
in the adsorption properties of a biochar.[42]Table shows the specific surface areas of the four samples,
showing that there are no significant changes in their area, and these
are closely related to volatile substances (Table ) such as cellulose and hemicellulose, and
the formation of channel structures during pyrolysis, because there
are no significant changes between these samples.[19,43−45] Therefore, it is argued that the release of volatile
components during the pyrolysis process facilitates the formation
of the vascular bundle structure in the biochar and consequently improves
the specific surface area and the pore structure, as observed in Table (46) Some authors have observed a decrease in pore size, the
formation of internal pore structures, and an increase in porosity
as a result of the release of volatiles during carbonization.[19,44] Similarly, it is evidenced that all of the samples have two types
of pores, most of which are micropores with a size of 2 nm; among
the samples, it is evidenced that the biochar at 500 °C presents
the most abundant pore volume at 2 nm, 0.354 cm3 g–1, which may introduce different properties in applications.[47]
Table 1
Specific Surface
Area of the Biochar
Studied
biochar
Smb (m2·g–1)
mean pore size (nm)
micropore volume (cm3 g–1)
450
667.84 ± 0.18
2.583
0.325
500
774.83 ± 0.34
2.645
0.354
550
704.19 ± 0.04
2.723
0.345
600
647.89 ± 0.45
2.837
0.214
Low-specific-surface-area contents of biochar
from rice husk have
been reported in the literature, mainly due to the technique used
to determine the said area.[17] With the
methylene blue technique, the values ranged from 6.96, 71.52 and up
to 255.78 m2·g–1, and the results
of this study demonstrate once again that this technique is suitable
for measuring the BET area, showing up to 3 times more area than that
reported in the literature in the case of the biochar tested.[48−50]
Adsorption Isotherms
Adsorption isotherms
are essential to optimize the use of adsorbents, especially biochar,
which is an emerging material, low-cost, and easy to acquire. Biochar
has proven in recent years to be an alternative to commercial activated
carbons, which have high cost and similar removal efficiencies. The
use of adsorption isotherms is important because it describes how
adsorbates interact with adsorbents.[51] Several
empirical models have been used in the literature to analyze experimental
data and describe the equilibrium of the adsorption of heavy metals
in biochar.[19] Among the most popular and
widely used models are the Langmuir, Freundlich, Langmuir–Freundlich,
and Temkin equations. It has been found that in the case of char from
biomass, the models that best fit are those of Langmuir and Freundlich.[16,17,19] The results vary widely depending
on the properties of the biochar and the compound of interest to be
removed.The behavior observed in this study is similar to those
found in other studies.[52] For example,
in the literature, zeolites were used for the removal of AZT, reaching
high removal levels in the first few minutes of the test and becoming
constant over time.[52] The behavior observed
with the biochars tested in this study is good and had high qm values compared to those found with zeolites
in which average values of 8.50 mg·g–1 were
found in removal tests of 10 mg·L–1 antibiotic.[52]In Figure , the
parity graphs are shown, in which the good fit of the data to the
Langmuir isotherm is evidenced, demonstrating in this way that the
removal follows the behavior of a monolayer. Likewise, it is the same
behavior observed in other studies in which it is shown that the compound
has a high affinity to solids.[53]
Figure 3
Parity charts
of the adsorption models tested for AZT. (a) Langmuir
isotherm for 450, (b) Freundlich isotherm for 450, (c) Langmuir isotherm
for 500, (d) Freundlich isotherm for 500, (e) Langmuir isotherm for
550, (f) Freundlich isotherm for 550, (g) Langmuir isotherm for 600,
and (h) Freundlich isotherm for 600.
Parity charts
of the adsorption models tested for AZT. (a) Langmuir
isotherm for 450, (b) Freundlich isotherm for 450, (c) Langmuir isotherm
for 500, (d) Freundlich isotherm for 500, (e) Langmuir isotherm for
550, (f) Freundlich isotherm for 550, (g) Langmuir isotherm for 600,
and (h) Freundlich isotherm for 600.It is observed that the behavior of ERY is like the behavior of
AZT (Figure ), and
these fit better on the Langmuir model than on the Freundlich model.
This can be observed in the case of AZT (Figure ) in which the data is stratified and shows
that the behavior of the biochars in the removal of both antibiotics
is the Langmuir isotherm. This similar behavior may be due to the
high molecular weight of both compounds (Table ). Removal percentages of up to 75% with
wood and 66% with coal have been found in other studies, while in
this study, removal of more than 95% has been achieved.[54]
Figure 4
Parity charts of the adsorption models tested for ERY.
(a) Langmuir
isotherm for 450, (b) Freundlich isotherm for 450, (c) Langmuir isotherm
for 500, (d) Freundlich isotherm for 500, (e) Langmuir isotherm for
550, (f) Freundlich isotherm for 550, (g) Langmuir isotherm for 600,
and (h) Freundlich isotherm for 600.
Table 5
Characteristics of the Investigated
Antibioticsa,b,c
www.chemspider.com/.
www.pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.
H2O, 25 °C.
Parity charts of the adsorption models tested for ERY.
(a) Langmuir
isotherm for 450, (b) Freundlich isotherm for 450, (c) Langmuir isotherm
for 500, (d) Freundlich isotherm for 500, (e) Langmuir isotherm for
550, (f) Freundlich isotherm for 550, (g) Langmuir isotherm for 600,
and (h) Freundlich isotherm for 600.ERY adsorption tests with magnetic activated carbon have also been
carried out, and the removal process conforms to a Freundlich-type
model. Possibly, this behavior is due to the magnetization of the
biochar particles that can influence the affinity to the molecular
structure of the compound because in the present study the best model
has been achieved with the Langmuir isotherm with qm of up to 599.72.[55] Another
important factor to consider in the previous differences is the raw
material for obtaining the char and its chemical properties.Figure shows the
high removals that can occur with biochar for both antibiotics according
to the applied model. These results are interesting because both compounds
are macrolide antibiotics with comparable structures and high molecular
weights (Table ).
Also, it has been found in other studies that the Langmuir model is
the one that best adjusts to the experimental data. It has been observed
that in the case of ERY, it is the one that shows the best performance
when adjusted.[55] The results show that
the Langmuir model correlates satisfactorily with the experimental
data, coinciding with other studies for other types of adsorbents
used.[56]
Figure 5
AZT and ERY removals by biochar adsorbents
for different precipitated
masses. Operating conditions: 23 °C, 240 min. (a) AZT-450, (b)
AZT-500, (c) AZT-550, (d) AZT-600, (e) ERY-450, (f) ERY-500, (g) ERY-550,
and (h) ERY-600.
AZT and ERY removals by biochar adsorbents
for different precipitated
masses. Operating conditions: 23 °C, 240 min. (a) AZT-450, (b)
AZT-500, (c) AZT-550, (d) AZT-600, (e) ERY-450, (f) ERY-500, (g) ERY-550,
and (h) ERY-600.These results concord
with the kinetic evaluation. Tables and 3 show
the balance of the parameters and the mass transfer coefficients calculated
for both models evaluated. It is unmistakable that both antibiotics
conform to the Langmuir model and that the qm is high for both. In the case of AZT, the best qm value is obtained with the biochar at 500 °C, while
for ERY, this is reached with the biochar at 600 °C. Although
the adsorption models fit better for the Langmuir model, it is shown
in Table that for
the Freundlich case a favorable adsorption occurs at values of n between
1 and 10, and in the case of this study, all of the values of n are
below the favorable range. Values of 1/n above 1
are said to be indicative of cooperative adsorption.[57] From the results shown in Table , it can be seen that the Langmuir isotherm
model can satisfactorily correlate the isotherms of the adsorption
mechanisms for ERY with the experimental data.[56] It is observed in Table that the qm for the four
biochars used is quite high, even for the biochar at 600 °C,
which reached a value of 599, perhaps as a result of the improvement
of the structures and the surface area of the char as the pyrolysis
temperature increases.
Table 2
Balance Parameters
and Mass Transfer
Coefficient Calculated for the Models Evaluated for AZT
biochar
model
parameter
450
500
550
600
Langmuir
klaρb (min–1)
0.830
0.806
0.839
0.866
OF
0.991
0.998
0.997
0.993
kL (L·m–2min–1)
0.0163
0.0171
0.0161
0.0182
qm (mg·g–1)
494.67
612.22
603.63
499.24
Freundlich
KF
0.825
0.847
0.925
0.989
n
0.686
0.645
0.728
0.842
OF
0.993
0.998
0.897
0.928
Table 3
Balance Parameters and Mass Transfer
Coefficient Calculated for the Models Evaluated for ERY
biochar
model
parameter
450
500
550
600
Langmuir
klaρb (min–1)
0.631
0.563
0.485
0.577
OF
0.993
0.987
0.991
0.994
kL (L·m–2 min–1)
0.0161
0.0160
0.0175
0.0075
qm (mg·g–1)
502.84
496.73
525.04
599.72
Freundlich
KF
0.724
0.786
0.795
0.939
n
0.570
0.772
0.777
0.790
OF
0.962
0.968
0.975
0.986
Determination of Functional Groups
In Figure , two FTIRs
are shown as examples for both the 600 °C biochar and the 2 g
biochar test at 600 °C after the adsorption process. It is evident
that the biochar at 600 °C (Figure a) presents two peaks in different ranges:
between 1000 and 1100 cm–1 and between 700 and 800
cm–1. Both peaks can be attributed to the presence
of Si–O–Si structures with stretching and curvature
vibrations.[58−60] Therefore, these peaks are related to the mineral
composition of Si present in the rice husk. However, in Figure b, the biochar is observed
after the adsorption process. It is evidenced that there is indeed
adsorption of the antibiotic, with peaks between the bands 900 and
1700 cm–1 (C–O–C asymmetric stretching)
that describe the ERY molecule.[61] Peaks
at 1387 are especially observed for C–O groups in ERY, and
the peak between 2919 and 3400 cm–1 is assigned
to the vibration bonds of OH in ERY.[62]
Figure 6
Fourier
transform infrared (FTIR) spectra. (a) Biochar 600 °C
without adsorption, (b) biochar 600 °C with 2 g after adsorption.
Fourier
transform infrared (FTIR) spectra. (a) Biochar 600 °C
without adsorption, (b) biochar 600 °C with 2 g after adsorption.
Experimental Section
Experimental Equipment
The pyrolysis
plant used has been described in a previous work (Figure ).[16] It consists of the following elements: (1) a gas feed system, (2)
a flow meter, (3) a temperature controller, (4) a pyrolysis reactor,
(5) a cyclone, (6) a gas cooling system, and (7) a liquid collection
device. The feeding system was batch.
Figure 7
Schematic diagram of the pyrolysis plant.
Schematic diagram of the pyrolysis plant.Nitrogen was used as a fluidizing agent, and its
flow rate was
controlled by means of a flow meter that allows a feed of 20 L·min–1. Before the gas entered the reactor, it was heated
in a preheater. The plant was a fixed-bed reactor with dimensions
40 cm wide, 20 cm high, and 63 cm long. To study the composition of
the char and its effect on adsorption processes, runs at 450, 500,
550, and 600 °C were carried out. Each experiment was performed
on a batch and a feeding of 200 g·h–1 of rice
husk. This process was repeated several times until a suitable sample
was obtained to follow out the adsorption experiments. The samples
were then sieved, washed several times to eliminate any color interference
that the biochar could throw up, and dried.
Biochar
Characterization
To study
the different types of biochars obtained, and based on previous experience,[8,9,17,39] rice husk was used because of its physicochemical properties. The
moisture contents of the four biochars were measured (according to
the ISO 589 standard and by means of a halogen moisture analyzer HR83,
Mettler Toledo), and the following analyses were done: proximate analysis
(in a TA Instruments Discovery 5500 TGA according to the ASTM D5142
standard), ultimate analysis (Vario–Macro of Elementar, according
to the ASTM D5373 and ISO 19579 standards), and HHV (Parr 6200 isoperibolic
bomb calorimeter following the ASTM D5865 standard). The contents
of the three natural polymers that make up the biomass were determined
according to the methodology proposed by different authors,[6,7,39] by means of a deconvolution of
the DTG curves obtained in the same equipment used for proximate analysis
(TGA Discovery 5500 TA Instruments). For the determination of the
three components, an algorithm was developed in Scilab 6.0.1 that
solves the ordinary differential equations of a kinetic model that
considers the three independent parallel reactions corresponding to
the degradation of each component.[6,7,11,39] Similarly, the algorithm
uses a direct search optimization established by Nelder–Mead
to find the values of the best fit for the kinetic model (frequency
factors and activation energies) and for the contents of two of the
three polymers. The objective function to be minimized is the sum
of the squared differences between the experimental TGA values and
those calculated by the model. All of the physicochemical characteristics
of the biochar used in this study are shown in Table , where wt % d.b. represents the weight percent on a dry basis
and wt % w.b. represents the weight percent on a wet basis.It is observed that the moisture content of the four
biochars is
quite low. The fixed carbon in all biochars ranged between 48.65%
and 54.59%. High volatile matter content and low ash content indicate
significant conversion to pyrogenic vapor during heat treatment and
low biochar yield.[63,64] Higher volatile biomass is undesirable
for bio-oil production together with biochar.[63]Table shows the
carbon, hydrogen, sulfur, hydrogen and nitrogen composition of both
the raw material and all the biochars obtained, noting that the carbon
content increases considerably with respect to the raw material. The
contents of C, H, N, S, and O of the biochar were studied, and it
was possible to observe that the C content was high and the contents
of N and S were quite low. Similarly, it can be seen that at a temperature
of 450 °C there is a small amount of cellulose on the polymer
content and a large amount of lignin, but all of the hemicellulose
had already been consumed. For temperatures of 500, 550, and 600 °C,
only lignin was observed in its content, and this is in accordance
with research in which it is argued that after 500 °C hemicellulose
and cellulose completely degraded.[6,7,11,39]Likewise, the
surface area of each of the biochars obtained was
evaluated with methylene blue dye, which is widely used for mineral
clay. In recent years, it has been used for biochar because its amorphous
and asymmetric compositions do not show good results, as seen from
BET isotherms.[65] Therefore, methylene blue
adsorption measurements are used for a more accurate determination
of the surface area for liquid adsorption applications.[38,65] In the same way, and to evaluate the pore size, a BET area analysis
was carried out on an AutoChem II 2920 equipment (Micromeritics).To determine functional groups, FTIR analysis was performed using
an infrared spectrometer (PerkinElmer, model spectrum Two V10.4.2)
equipped with an attenuated total reflection (ATR) accessory (PerkinElmer),
operating in the spectral range of 4000–400 cm–1 with a resolution of 4 cm–1.
Drug Adsorption Capacity Procedure
Two pharmaceutical
compounds (AZT and ERY) were chosen for the adsorption
process due to their wide use and sale without prescription. For this
study, the water to be treated was contaminated and brought to a maximum
concentration of 100 mg L–1 for both AZT and ERY[66] (Table ) through a sonication process
for 1 h. The adsorption tests were carried out for all of the temperatures
at which the rice husk biochars were obtained. The above tests were
performed to observe which of the four biochars have a better behavior
in the process of removal of these types of compounds in contaminated
water.www.chemspider.com/.www.pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.H2O, 25 °C.For the adsorption tests, eight
groups of carbon samples were prepared,
each with ten different weights in the range of 0–20 g, for
a total of 80 samples deposited in amber bottles with a volume of
100 mL of contaminated water in each. The flasks were then placed
in the Model SIF 3000 Shaker (MAX QTM, Chandler) at room temperature
and 120 rpm.For the removal reading, 5 mL was taken from each
bottle in test
tubes, and they were subjected to a rapid centrifugation process (1200
rpm) for 1 min. After this, the content of each tube was filtered
through qualitative paper to separate the liquid phase from any remaining
solid carbon particles. The absorbance was measured in the spectrophotometer,
and with each value obtained, the concentration removal was calculated.The calibration of the tests was performed according to ASTM D3860-98.[66] A Genesys UV Thermo spectrophotometer (Thermo
Fisher Scientific) was used to measure different wavelengths to the
test solutions at a concentration of 200 mg·L–1. For AZT, the wavelength was 222 nm, and for ERY, it was 200 nm.For calibration, 10 drug solutions were prepared with water at
concentrations of 5–400 mg·L–1 of AZT
and ERY, measuring the value of absorbance and keeping the calculated
wavelength value constant. A curve was made where each of the concentrations
and their absorbances were related. For AZT, a slope of 0.0053, an
intercept of −0.0159, and an R2 of 0.99943 were obtained. In the case of ERY, a slope of 0.0035,
an intercept of −0.0019, and an R2 of 0.9979 were obtained.
Adsorption Model
Previous studies
of the investigation group evaluated the adsorption of different emerging
pollutants, and these followed the Langmuir model (eq and the Freundlich model (eq ) that have been widely
accepted in the literature[67]where Qmax0 (mg·g–1) is the maximum saturated
monolayer adsorption capacity of an adsorbent, qe (mg·g–1) is the amount of adsorbate
uptake at equilibrium, KL (L·mg–1) is the constant related to the affinity between
an adsorbent and adsorbate, Ce (mg·L–1) is the adsorbate concentration at equilibrium, KF (mg·g–1)/(mg·L–1) is the Freundlich constant, and n is the Freundlich intensity parameter, which indicates the magnitude
of the adsorption driving.[67−69]According to different
authors, on the one hand, the Langmuir model assumes that there is
a fixed number of accessible sites available on the surface of the
adsorbent and that once the adsorbate occupies a site, no more adsorptions
can occur at that site. On the other hand, the Freundlich model cannot
describe the linearity relationship at very low concentrations or
the saturation effect at very high concentrations.[16,17,67,70]Similarly,
the adsorption kinetics, which represents the dynamics
of the adsorption process, has been analyzed by the mass balance of
the adsorbate between the liquid and the solid and is described as
followswhere qe and qt are the amounts of
adsorbate uptake per mass
of adsorbent at equilibrium and at any time t (min),
respectively; k1 (min–1) is the rate constant of the pseudo-first-order kinetic equation
(PFO); kL (L·m–2min–1) is the mass transfer coefficient; a (m2·g–1) is the external surface area
of the adsorbent; L is the volume of the drug solution,
and ρb (kg·m–3) is the adsorbent
bed density. klaρb represents the rate constant of the pseudo-first-order kinetic
model.For the calculation of the equilibrium parameters of
the Freundlich
and Langmuir models eqs and 2, previous procedures published by the
research group have been followed.[16,17,70] To obtain the data, these were optimized by minimizing
an objective function, OF, defined as the sum of squares of the differences
between the values of the adsorbate concentration in the liquid phase
measured experimentally, c, and the values calculated by the model, ccal. For this, a calculation algorithm was implemented
in MATLAB, which uses the ode subroutine to solve
the mass balance equations, eqs and 2, and the fminsearch subroutine, which calculates the unrestricted minimum of the objective
function, based on the Nelder–Mead algorithm.
Conclusions
With the results of this study, progress
is made in obtaining materials
that can be used as adsorbents for the removal of emerging pollutants,
such as macrolide antibiotics, characterized by their high molecular
weight and difficulty to remove from sources of waters. It has been
found that the biochars obtained from the pyrolysis process all present
high removal efficiencies for both pollutants. As has been shown with
the applied isotherm models and the FTIR analysis, the drugs have
been removed in a large proportion, completely changing the structure
of the biochar. With this, it is verified that the rice husk biochar
is suitable to be used as an adsorbent for emerging compounds such
as AZT and ERY, antibiotics widely used commercially and freely available
in countries such as Colombia. For the two antibiotics, the biochars
obtained at 450 and 500 °C present better removal conditions
and are therefore the most economically appropriate within the pyrolysis
process because it is not necessary to use high energies to obtain
them due to the high temperatures that would be necessary for the
other biochar. It is observed that in the case of AZT the best removal
option is with a biochar obtained at 500 °C, while in the case
of ERY the biochar obtained at 600 °C is the best. The four biochars
present removals above 95% for both antibiotics, and their reported qm values are all very high, with the biochars
obtained at 450 and 500 °C being the ones that present the best
removals. However, it is important to point out that the costs of
the pyrolysis process will rise as the temperatures get higher due
to the energy consumption that is implicit.