Fe<sub>3</sub>O<sub>4</sub>@MIL‐101 – A Selective and Regenerable Adsorbent for the Removal of As Species from Water

Folens, Karel; Leus, Karen; Nicomel, Nina Ricci; Meledina, Maria; Turner, Stuart; Tendeloo, Gustaaf Van; Laing, Gijs Du; Voort, Pascal Van Der

doi:10.1002/ejic.201600160

Cited by 75 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 60 publications

(38 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Chromium-based metal-organic framework hosted Fe3O4 nanoparticle (MIL-101-Cr-Fe3O4) also can be identified as Fe based adsorptive material with modifications (Folens et al, 2016). The chromium-based metal-organic framework hosted Fe3O4 nanoparticle (MIL-101-Cr-Fe3O4) shows a high affinity towards both As(III) and As(V) in water.…”

Section: Selective Arsenic Removal By Adsorptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, the chromium-based metal-organic framework has less selectivity towards As(III) but the integration could increase the selectivity for both As(III) and As(V) while avoiding the aggregation of the nanoparticles (Folens et al, 2016). Most importantly, the presence of Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ and phosphate has not created any impact on As(III) and As(V)…”

Section: Selective Arsenic Removal By Adsorptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Selective removal of arsenic in water: A critical review

Weerasundara

Bundschuh

2021

Environmental Pollution

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selective removal of arsenic (As) is the key challenge as this not only increases the efficiency of removal of the main As species (neutral As(III) and As(V) hydroxyl-anions) but also allows the reduction of waste significantly as it does not co-remove other solutes. It increase the capacity and lifetime of units, while lowering the cost of the process. A sustainable selective mitigation method should be considered in relation to the economic resources available, the ability of infrastructure to sustain water treatment and the options for reuse and/or safe disposal of treatment residuals. Several methods of selective As removal have been developed, such as precipitation, adsorption and modified iron and ligand exchange. There are two types of mechanisms involved with As removal: Coulombic or ion exchange; and Lewis acid-base interaction. Solution pH is one of the major controlling factors limiting removal efficiency since most of the above-mentioned methods depend on complexation through electrostatic effects. The different features of two different As species make the selective removal process more difficult, especially under natural conditions. Most of the selective As removal methods involve hydrated Fe(III) oxides through Lewis acid-base interaction. Microbiological methods have been studied recently for selective removal of As although there have been only a small number of studies; however, the method shows remarkable results and indicates positive prospects for the future. The biggest challenges in selective removal of As is the presence of phosphate in water which is chemically comparable with As(V).

show abstract

Section: Selective Arsenic Removal By Adsorptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Selective Arsenic Removal By Adsorptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective removal of arsenic in water: A critical review

Weerasundara

Bundschuh

2021

Environmental Pollution

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…have been shown to have little or no effect on As adsorption (Asere et al, 2017;Guo and Chen, 2005;Gupta et al, 2009). Common aqueous groundwater ions can compete for the available active surface sites on GR SO4 (Folens et al, 2016;Leus et al, 2018). We tested the effect of relevant dissolved potentially interfering ions in the water matrix through competitive adsorption experiments with Ca 2+ (100 mg L −1 ), Mg 2+ (50 mg L −1 ) or PO 4 3− (10 mg L −1 ) and As (10 mg L −1 ) to the GR SO4 suspension at pH 8.…”

Section: Influence Of Environmental Parameters On As Removalmentioning

confidence: 99%

The interfacial reactivity of arsenic species with green rust sulfate (GRSO4)

Perez

Freeman

Schuessler

et al. 2019

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

GR SO4 is among the best performing Febearing minerals for As removal.• Both pH and the presence of competing aqueous ions affect As removal efficiency. • Long term experiments showed that GR SO4 with As adsorbed onto its surface is stable for up to 90 days. • High-resolution electron microscopy revealed that As is preferentially adsorbed at the GR particle edges.Editor: José Virgílio Cruz Arsenic (As) contamination in groundwater is a significant health and environmental concern worldwide because of its wide distribution and toxicity. The fate and mobility of As is greatly influenced by its interaction with redox-active mineral phases, among which green rust (GR), an Fe II -Fe III layered double hydroxide mineral, plays a crucial role. However, the controlling parameters of As uptake by GR are not yet fully understood. To fill this gap, we determined the interfacial reactions between GR sulfate (GR SO4 ) and aqueous inorganic As(III) and As(V) through batch adsorption experiments, under environmentally-relevant groundwater conditions. Our data showed that, under anoxic conditions, GR SO4 is a stable and effective mineral adsorbent for the removal of As(III) and As(V). At an initial concentration of 10 mg L −1 , As(III) removal was higher at alkaline pH conditions (~95% removal at pH 9) while As(V) was more efficiently removed at near-neutral conditions (N99% at pH 7). The calculated maximum As adsorption capacities on GR SO4 were 160 mg g −1 (pH 8-9) for As(III) and 105 mg g −1 (pH 7) for As(V). The presence of other common groundwater ions such as Mg 2+ and PO 4 3− reduces the efficiency of As removal, especially at high ionic strengths. Long-term batch adsorption experiments (up to 90 days) revealed that As-interacted GR SO4 remained stable, with no mineral transformation or release of adsorbed As species. Overall, our work shows that GR SO4 is one of the most effective As adsorbents among iron (oxyhydr)oxide phases.

show abstract

“…Two kinds of magnetic MOF composites, including Fe 3 O 4 @MIL-101 [ 53 ] and CoFe 2 O 4 @MIL-100(Fe) [ 54 ], have been recently studied for the simultaneous removal of As(III) and As(V). The As(III) and As(V) adsorption capacities of Fe 3 O 4 @MIL-101 were reported to be 121.5 and 80.0 mg g −1 at a pH of 7, respectively [ 53 ]. Furthermore, the removal efficiency and the selectivity were not affected by the presence of Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ , phosphate ions and natural organic matter.…”

Section: Recent Studies On Mofs For the Removal Of Heavy Metal Ionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the adsorption of AsO 4 3− destroyed the long-range order of uniform mesoporous channels in the framework, while it recovered immediately upon AsO 4 3− desorption.This study provided valuable information that advanced our understanding of the long-range order in MOFs and promoted further investigation into MOFs. Two kinds of magnetic MOF composites, including Fe 3 O 4 @MIL-101[53] and CoFe 2 O 4 @MIL-100(Fe)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent Progress in Heavy Metal Ion Decontamination Based on Metal–Organic Frameworks

Chen

Bai

2020

Nanomaterials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heavy metals are inorganic pollutants which pose a serious threat to human and environmental safety, and their effective removal is becoming an increasingly urgent issue. Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) are a novel group of crystalline porous materials, which have proven to be promising adsorbents because of their extremely high surface areas, optimizable pore volumes and pore size distributions. This study is a systematic review of the recent research on the removal of several major heavy metal ions by MOFs. Based on the different structures of MOFs, varying adsorption capacity can be achieved, ranging from tens to thousands of milligrams per gram. Many MOFs have shown a high selectivity for their target metal ions. The corresponding mechanisms involved in capturing metal ions are outlined and finally, the challenges and prospects for their practical application are discussed.

show abstract

Fe₃O₄@MIL‐101 – A Selective and Regenerable Adsorbent for the Removal of As Species from Water

Cited by 75 publications

References 60 publications

Selective removal of arsenic in water: A critical review

Selective removal of arsenic in water: A critical review

The interfacial reactivity of arsenic species with green rust sulfate (GRSO4)

Recent Progress in Heavy Metal Ion Decontamination Based on Metal–Organic Frameworks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Fe3O4@MIL‐101 – A Selective and Regenerable Adsorbent for the Removal of As Species from Water

Cited by 75 publications

References 60 publications

Selective removal of arsenic in water: A critical review

Selective removal of arsenic in water: A critical review

The interfacial reactivity of arsenic species with green rust sulfate (GRSO4)

Recent Progress in Heavy Metal Ion Decontamination Based on Metal–Organic Frameworks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Fe₃O₄@MIL‐101 – A Selective and Regenerable Adsorbent for the Removal of As Species from Water