Removal of arsenic(III) and arsenic(V) on chemically modified low-cost adsorbent: batch and column operations

Abstract

Batch and column operations were performed utilizing thioglycolated sugarcane carbon (TSCC), a lowcost adsorbent, to remove As(III) and As(V) from aqueous systems. Under optimized batch conditions, the TSCC could remove up to 92.7 and 91.4 % for As(III) and As(V), respectively. An artificial neural network model showed the validity of TSCC as a preferable adsorbent for arsenic [As(III) and As(V)] removal in batch studies. In column operations, removal efficiency increases with increase in influent arsenic concentration and adsorbent dose and decreases with increase in flow rate. At an adsorbent dose of 6.0 g, flow rate 3.0 mL min -1 , and initial arsenic concentration 1,500 lg L -1 , the arsenic uptake capacity of TSCC for As(III) and As(V) was found to be 85.01 and 83.82 lg g -1 , respectively. The Thomas model was used to analyze the column experimental data. Results from the column operations indicated that the adsorption behavior of arsenic [As(III) and As(V)] fits exceptionally well with the Thomas model with high correlation coefficient and very low standard error. Examinations of scanning electron microscopy and FTIR spectroscopy reveal that high arsenic adsorption favors surface complexation on the adsorbent surface.

Biosorptive uptake of arsenic(V) by steam activated carbon from mung bean husk: equilibrium, kinetics, thermodynamics and modeling

“…This is due to the adsorption of almost all As(V) onto the adsorbent surface and attaining of equilibrium between the As(V) adsorbed to the adsorbent and those As(V) left in the solution. The results of this study are the following similar type of pattern reported as findings by other researchers (Li et al 2012;Roy et al 2013). The optimum value of adsorbent dosage was 0.75 g L -1 and for the rest of the experiment this value was used.…”

“…Commercial activated carbons are expensive and it is the main drawback of using this adsorbent in all the application sectors (Roy et al 2013). Recently, some of the low cost compounds such as zirconium oxide-coated marine sand, chir pine sawdust, bagasse fly ash, clay and magnetic chitosan-bamboo sawdust composites were employed while some of the biomasses were also used to remove arsenic from water (Khan and Sing 2010;, Khan and Nazir 2015Ali et al 2014).…”

A Comparative Study on Removal of Hazardous Anions from Water by Adsorption: A Review

“…Similarly, a low adsorption capacity for adsorbents with a high surface area was observed by Roy et al [111] on thioglycolated sugarcane carbon (TSCC) as an adsorbent for arsenic removal. TSCC has a surface area of 5690 m 2 /g.…”

“…TSCC has a surface area of 5690 m 2 /g. The maximum reported As(III) and As(V) removal by TSCC was 85.01 and 83.82 g/g, respectively, with an initial arsenic concentration of 1,500 g/L [111].…”

Graphene oxide coated wad as a new sorbent in fixed bed column for the removal of crystal violet from contaminated water

“…the decreasing of the EBCT, is expected as the adsorption capacity is directly proportional to the contact time. Increase of the k th values with increasing the discharge rate of effluent indicate the decrease of mass transport resistance and axial dispersion [33] .…”