2023
DOI: 10.1007/s13762-023-04806-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative chromium adsorption studies on thermally and chemical-thermally modified Ficus carica adsorbents

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…4 , the pHzc value of the BP–CCAC@ZC3 biochar adsorbent in this work was found to be 4.723. Hashem et al [ 66 ] showed that pH values above and below pHzc lead to negatively and positively charged solid surfaces, respectively. The surface of BP–CCAC@ZC3 biochar was positively charged under pH 4.723, and thus its surface adsorbs negatively charged chromate (HCrO4 – ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…4 , the pHzc value of the BP–CCAC@ZC3 biochar adsorbent in this work was found to be 4.723. Hashem et al [ 66 ] showed that pH values above and below pHzc lead to negatively and positively charged solid surfaces, respectively. The surface of BP–CCAC@ZC3 biochar was positively charged under pH 4.723, and thus its surface adsorbs negatively charged chromate (HCrO4 – ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparatively, Cr 3+ was more easily attracted by electrostatic attraction than other chromium species on the heterogeneous surfaces of adsorbents. Furthermore, under acidic conditions, the negatively charged anionic chromate (HCrO4 – ) easily binds to the positively charged BP–CCAC@ZC3 adsorbent through electrostatic attraction [ 66 ]. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%