2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.01.046
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Adsorption of sulfamethoxazole on biochar and its impact on reclaimed water irrigation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
69
0
4

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 245 publications
(75 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
2
69
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…As illustrated in Table 3, removal of sulfamethoxazole were in the range of 12% for two types of wood feedstock, while using sugarcane as the feedstock produced a biochar able to achieve removal up to 21% [79]. Using rice husk and rice straw as the feedstock, sulfamethoxazole removal was as low as 11.6% except when using alkali treated rice husk feedstock where almost 30% removal was achieved [67].…”
Section: Adsorption Using Biocharmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As illustrated in Table 3, removal of sulfamethoxazole were in the range of 12% for two types of wood feedstock, while using sugarcane as the feedstock produced a biochar able to achieve removal up to 21% [79]. Using rice husk and rice straw as the feedstock, sulfamethoxazole removal was as low as 11.6% except when using alkali treated rice husk feedstock where almost 30% removal was achieved [67].…”
Section: Adsorption Using Biocharmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using rice husk and rice straw as the feedstock, sulfamethoxazole removal was as low as 11.6% except when using alkali treated rice husk feedstock where almost 30% removal was achieved [67]. The carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus content in the feedstock has been found to create significant differences in the treatment performance of biochar [67,79].…”
Section: Adsorption Using Biocharmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[11][12][13] Several studies have also demonstrated that biochars have strong sorption ability to organic contaminants including pesticides and pharmaceuticals, and their sorption capacities are much higher than that of soils. [11,14,15] Compared with heavy metals and organics, less research effort has been dedicated to investigate the removal of nutrients such as ammonium by biochars derived from agricultural residues. [16] Steiner et al [17] found that biochar produced from pine chips can reduce the ammonium emissions from N-rich composts because the strong sorption ability of the biochar to gaseous NH 3 and aqueous ammonium ions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The addition of biochars to soils has been assessed to be an effective practice in sequestering carbon (Lehmann 2007), increasing soil fertility (Van Zwieten et al 2010) and crop production (Major et al 2010), reducing green house gas emissions (Lehmann et al 2006), and also improving soil microbial activity (Steiner et al 2008). Recently, biochar has been reported to be particularly effective in sorption and sequestration of organic contaminants, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (Chen and Yuan 2011), diuron (Yu et al 2006), atrazine and simazine (Zheng et al 2010), pentachlorophenol (Devi and Saroha 2015), phenanthrene (Zhang et al 2010), oxytetracycline (Jia et al 2013), sulfamethoxazole (Yao et al 2012;Lian et al 2014), and sulfamethazine (Rajapaksha et al 2014;Rajapaksha et al 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%