| Literature DB >> 35955327 |
Fouad Damiri1, Swetha Andra2, Nagavendra Kommineni3, Satheesh Kumar Balu4, Raviteja Bulusu5, Amira A Boseila6,7, Damilola O Akamo8, Zubair Ahmad9,10, Farhat S Khan10, Md Habibur Rahman11, Mohammed Berrada1, Simona Cavalu12.
Abstract
Water contamination is one of the most urgent concerns confronting the world today. Heavy metal poisoning of aquatic systems has piqued the interest of various researchers due to the high toxicity and carcinogenic consequences it has on living organisms. Due to their exceptional attributes such as strong reactivity, huge surface area, and outstanding mechanical properties, nanomaterials are being produced and employed in water treatment. In this review, recent advances in the use of nanomaterials in nanoadsorptive membrane systems for wastewater treatment and heavy metal removal are extensively discussed. These materials include carbon-based nanostructures, metal nanoparticles, metal oxide nanoparticles, nanocomposites, and layered double hydroxide-based compounds. Furthermore, the relevant properties of the nanostructures and the implications on their performance for water treatment and contamination removal are highlighted. The hydrophilicity, pore size, skin thickness, porosity, and surface roughness of these nanostructures can help the water permeability of the nanoadsorptive membrane. Other properties such as surface charge modification and mechanical strength can improve the metal adsorption effectiveness of nanoadsorptive membranes during wastewater treatment. Various nanocomposite membrane fabrication techniques are also reviewed. This study is important because it gives important information on the roles of nanomaterials and nanostructures in heavy metal removal and wastewater treatment.Entities:
Keywords: adsorption; heavy metals removal; nanocomposite membranes; nanomaterials; water treatment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35955327 PMCID: PMC9369589 DOI: 10.3390/ma15155392
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
Summary of nanoparticles used as adsorbents for water treatment.
| Nanomaterial | Example | Particle Size | Absorption Capacity | Pollutants | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (A) Carbon-Based Nanomaterials | |||||
| Graphene-based nanomaterials (GNMs): | Graphene oxide (GO) and TiO2@rGO nanohybrids | 25 nm | Organic solvent | [ | |
| Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) | Microwave-heated MWCNTs | 10–23 nm | 104.2 mg/g | Pb (II) | |
| (B) Metal and Metal Oxide-Based Nanoparticles | |||||
| Nanosized iron oxide | Fe3O4, α-Fe2O3, μ-Fe2O3 | 15.69–85.84 nm | 6.33–200 mg/g | Cr(VI) and As(V) | [ |
| Nanosized titanium dioxide | TiO2 | 18 nm | 333.33 mg/g | Pb(II) | [ |
| Noble metal-based nanoparticles | Au, TiO2 NBsa/Au NPs | 5–15 | - | Tetrabromobisphenol A | [ |
| (C) Hydrogels | |||||
| Magnetite in polystyrene-co-polymethacrylic acid (PS-co-PMAA) | Fe3O4, PS-co-PMAA | ~100 nm | 8.49 to 53.37, 11.17–80.69, and 10.75–65.35 mg/g | Cs+, Co2+, and Sr2+ | [ |
| (D) Nano-sponges | |||||
| Zeolite nanosponges | Ni | 3–5 nm | - | Nitrate in contaminated water | [ |
| Cyclodextrin-based nanosponges | EDTA-cross-linked β-cyclodextrin | - | 1.241 and 1.106 mmol.g–1 | Cu(II) and Cd(II) | [ |
| β-cyclodextrin covalently cross-linked tannic acid | Reduced graphene oxide (RGO), beta-cyclodextrin (βCD), and epichlorohydrin | - | 1321.01 mg/g | Cr(VI) | [ |
| (E) Nanocomposites | |||||
| Magnetic nanocomposites | - | <10 nm | 29 to 641 mg/g | Co(II), Ni(II), Cu(II), and Pb(II) | [ |
| Mineral-based nanocomposites | Nickel ferrite nanocomposite functionalized with | 10–15 nm | 122 mg/g, 135 mg/g, and 150 mg/g | Remove the fluoroquinolone class of antibiotics | [ |
| (F) Layered Double Hydroxide (LDH)-Based Materials | |||||
| Mg/Fe-LDO hollow nanospheres | Flower-like Mg/Fe-layered double oxide | 17.1 nm | 1250 mg/g and 2000 mg/g | Organic dyes: Congo red and methylene blue | [ |
| Fe3O4/graphene oxide/LDH | - | 20 nm | - | Pd (II) and 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic | [ |
Figure 1Dye removal using graphene oxide (GO) mixed matrix membranes [87].
Figure 2The mechanism of heavy metal ion absorption by 6O-MWCNTs@Fe3O4 in wastewater [91].
Nanomaterials for heavy metal removal.
| Type of Adsorbent | Shape and Size | Specific | Heavy Metals | Removal Rate/Adsorption Capacity | Isotherm Model | pH | Dosage | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgNPs | Spherical, 46.2 nm | - | Pb2+, | 72.6% | Freundlich | 8.68 | 0.75 g | [ |
| AgNPs/banana leaf powder composite | Semi-spherical | - | Zn2+, | 79% | Langmuir | 5 and 6 | 0.05 to 0.25 g | [ |
| AgNPs | Spherical | 250 m2/g | Ni2+, | 88% | Langmuir | 9 and 7 | 40 and 50 mg | [ |
| AuNPs/ZnO-ZrO2 composite | Granular particles | 115.03 m2/g | As5+ | 88% | Gunary model | 10 | 0.01 g | [ |
| CuO nanoparticles | 21.6 nm | - | Pb2+ | 84.2% | Freundlich | 2–6 | 0.1–1.0 g/L | [ |
| Polyaniline/itaconic acid/copper oxide nanocomposite | Oval shape, 20 nm | - | Cr6+ | 75–96% | Langmuir and Freundlich | 2–6 | 0.2–1.0 g | [ |
| CuO nanoparticles | Spherical, 150 nm | 20 m2/g | Pb2+, | 18% | Freundlich | 6 | 0.33 g/L | [ |
| Diethylene glycol-functionalized Cu2O NPs | Quasi-spherical, 57.4 nm | 5.35 m2/g | Cd2+ | 98% | Langmuir model | 6.3 | 1.0 g/L | [ |
| Fe2O3 nanoparticles | Spherical, 23 nm | - | Cr6+, | 92.26% | Thomas, Yoon–Nelson and BDST kinetic models | 6 | - | [ |
| Superparamagnetic Fe2O3/activate carbon | Spherical, 23–35 nm | - | Cr6+ | 99.7% | Freundlich isotherm model | 3 | 10 g/L | [ |
| Chitosan/Fe2O3/PVDF composite membrane | - | - | Cr6+ | 90.45% | Langmuir model | 4 | - | [ |
| PVDF/PVP/TiO2 | - | - | Cu2+ | 96.36% | Freundlich isotherm model | 10 | 1 wt.% TiO2 | [ |
| Acid-activated kaolinite clay/titanium oxide nanocomposite | - | 32.98 m2/g | Mn2+, | 89.37% | Langmuir model | 10 | 0.5 g | [ |
| Cellulose nanocrystals/Ag or ZnO | - | - | Pb2+ | 94% | Langmuir model | 2–8 | 0.05 g | [ |
| Al doped ZnO nanoparticles | - | 20.76 m2/g | F– | 98% | Temkin isotherm model | 7 | 0.005 g | [ |
| ZnO hollow fiber membrane | 35–85 nm | - | Cu2+ | 92% | Langmuir model | 8 | 2 wt.% | [ |
| MgO/WO3 nanocomposites | Spherical | 104.2 m2/g | Cu2+ | 98.1% | Langmuir model | - | - | [ |
| MgO nanoparticles | Rod shape | - | Cr6+, | 94.2%, | - | - | 100 mg | [ |
| MgO nanoparticles | Cubic shape, 25–39 nm | - | PO43- | 72% | Freundlich isotherm models | 12 | 0.01 g | [ |
| Cerium oxide/corncob nanocomposite | - | - | Cd2+ | 95% | Intra-particle diffusion model | 9 | 20 mg | [ |
| CeO2 nanoparticles | Spherical, 10 nm | - | UO22+ | 96% | Langmuir and Freundlich models | 4 | 0.003 mg | [ |
| Ce2O3/SiO2/and Ce2O3/ZnO | Spherical shape | 84.62 m2/g and 46.12 m2/g | Cr6+ | 55% and 50% | Langmuir isotherm model | 7 | 0.02 g | [ |
Figure 3Important properties in the development of different nanocomposite membranes.
Figure 4Nanocomposite polymer-matrix membranes for water purification [179].
Figure 5Fabrication processes for electrospun nanofiber composites [201].