Comparative adsorption of methylene blue on GO- and rGO-modified natural clinoptilolite: role of carbon oxidation state and pore blocking
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Building on our earlier work on graphene oxide (GO)-impregnated clinoptilolite for methylene blue (MB) removal, this study directly compares GO-modified zeolite (GOZ) with an ascorbic-acid-reduced analogue (rGOZ) prepared on the same clinoptilolite matrix by liquid-phase impregnation and evaluated under identical batch conditions. Spectroscopic/microscopic, elemental (CHNS) and textural analyses (UV–Vis, FT-IR, SEM/EDS, N 2 sorptiometry and thermogravimetry) confirm successful attachment of the carbon phases (~ 9% graphene loading) and reveal distinct surface chemistries: GOZ retains abundant oxygenated groups, whereas rGOZ is more graphitic and both composites exhibit partial pore blocking. Relative to pristine clinoptilolite (q ~ 35 mg g −1 at 298 K), the maximum MB uptake (Langmuir) increases to ~ 157 mg g −1 for GOZ and ~ 123 mg g −1 for rGOZ, demonstrating a substantial enhancement upon carbon-phase incorporation. Adsorption is favored near neutral pH, follows pseudo-second-order kinetics for both composites, and shows endothermic, entropy-driven, spontaneous behavior over 298–333 K. Equilibrium data indicate more heterogeneous/pore-filling contributions for GOZ and a more monolayer-like, π–π-assisted uptake for rGOZ, consistent with their different functional-group densities. Regeneration by 0.1 N HCl washing over five cycles shows higher durability of GOZ, with MB removal decreasing from ~ 98% (cycle 1) to ~ 84% (cycle 5), compared with rGOZ decreasing from ~ 93 to ~ 71%. Overall, these results quantify how the oxidation state of the graphene phase governs MB uptake and reuse performance in clinoptilolite-based hybrid adsorbents. Graphical abstract
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal · Graphene research and applications · Graphene and Nanomaterials Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (96)
Show source-provided references
1. Bailey K, Basu A, Sharma S (2022) The environmental impacts of fast fashion on water quality: a systematic review. Water 14:1073. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14071073/span/span10.3390/w14071073/span/span ↗
2. Tufail MK, Ifrahim M, Rashid M et al (2025) Chemistry of zeolites and zeolite based composite membranes as a cutting-edge candidate for removal of organic dyes & heavy metal ions: progress and future directions. Sep Purif Technol 354:128739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2024.12873910.1016/j.seppur.2024.128739 ↗
3. Bhatia D, Sharma NR, Singh J, Kanwar RS (2017) Biological methods for textile dye removal from wastewater: a review. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 47:1836–1876. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2017.139326310.1080/10643389.2017.1393263 ↗
4. Fito J, Abewaa M, Mengistu A et al (2023) Adsorption of methylene blue from textile industrial wastewater using activated carbon developed from Rumex abyssinicus plant. Sci Rep 13:5427. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32341-w10.1038/s41598-023-32341-w ↗
5. Al-Asadi ST, Al-Qaim FF, Al-Saedi HFS et al (2023) Adsorption of methylene blue dye from aqueous solution using low-cost adsorbent: kinetic, isotherm adsorption, and thermodynamic studies. Environ Monit Assess 195:676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11334-210.1007/s10661-023-11334-2 ↗
6. Wang C, Li J, Wang L et al (2009) Adsorption of dye from wastewater by zeolites synthesized from fly ash: kinetic and equilibrium studies. Chin J Chem Eng 17:513–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1004-9541(08)60239-610.1016/S1004-9541(08)60239-6 ↗
7. Parastar S, Asl FB, Poureshgh Y et al (2025) Assessment of the efficiency of methylene blue removal from aqueous solutions using iron magnetic nanoparticles immobilized on clinoptilolite zeolite. Int J Environ Res 19:35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-024-00702-610.1007/s41742-024-00702-6 ↗
8. Kazempour A, Bagheri-Mohagheghi MM (2023) Activated carbon/zeolite hybrid nanocomposite for drinking water treatment applications: structural, optical, and surface adsorption properties. Water Air Soil Pollut 234:669. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-023-06676-z10.1007/s11270-023-06676-z ↗
9. Arias Arias F, Guevara M, Tene T et al (2020) The adsorption of methylene blue on eco-friendly reduced graphene oxide. Nanomaterials 10:681. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano1004068110.3390/nano10040681 ↗
10. Li D, Hua T, Yuan J, Xu F (2021) Methylene blue adsorption from an aqueous solution by a magnetic graphene oxide/humic acid composite. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 627:127171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2021.12717110.1016/j.colsurfa.2021.127171 ↗
11. Rahmi I, Mustafa I (2019) Methylene blue removal from water using H2SO4 crosslinked magnetic chitosan nanocomposite beads. Microchem J 144:397–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2018.09.03210.1016/j.microc.2018.09.032 ↗
12. Sodha V, Shahabuddin S, Gaur R et al (2022) Comprehensive review on zeolite-based nanocomposites for treatment of effluents from wastewater. Nanomaterials 12:3199. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano1218319910.3390/nano12183199 ↗
13. Salehi MM, Nezhad SM, Choopani L et al (2024) Magnetic carrageenan gum-grafted-polyacrylamide nanocomposite for uptake of cationic dyes from the aquatic systems. Int J Biol Macromol 283:137796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.13779610.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.137796 ↗
14. Mushtaq N, Munir R, Zia-ur-Rehman M et al (2024) Construction and utilization of innovative zeolite/perovskite/graphene oxide, zeolite/chitosan/graphene oxide, and zeolite/biochar/graphene oxide nanohybrid composites for adsorptive remediation of cationic dye from wastewater. Water Conserv Sci Eng 9:33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41101-024-00264-w10.1007/s41101-024-00264-w ↗
15. Wang C, Yu J, Feng K et al (2022) Alkali treatment to transform natural clinoptilolite into zeolite Na–P: influence of NaOH concentration. J Phys Chem Solids 168:110827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpcs.2022.11082710.1016/j.jpcs.2022.110827 ↗
16. Farghali MA, Abo-Aly MM, Salaheldin TA (2021) Modified mesoporous zeolite-A/reduced graphene oxide nanocomposite for dual removal of methylene blue and Pb2+ ions from wastewater. Inorg Chem Commun 126:108487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inoche.2021.10848710.1016/j.inoche.2021.108487 ↗
17. Akyalcin S, Akyalcin L, Ertugrul E (2024) Modification of natural clinoptilolite zeolite to enhance its hydrogen adsorption capacity. Res Chem Intermed 50:1455–1473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11164-023-05212-210.1007/s11164-023-05212-2 ↗
18. Hummers WS Jr, Offeman RE (1958) Preparation of graphitic oxide. J Am Chem Soc 80:1339–1339. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja01539a01710.1021/ja01539a017 ↗
19. Jahan N, Roy H, Reaz AH et al (2022) A comparative study on sorption behavior of graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide towards methylene blue. Case Stud Chem Env Eng 6:100239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2022.10023910.1016/j.cscee.2022.100239 ↗
20. Thakur K, Kandasubramanian B (2019) Graphene and graphene oxide-based composites for removal of organic pollutants: a review. J Chem Eng Data 64:833–867. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jced.8b0105710.1021/acs.jced.8b01057 ↗
21. Fatiatun BSA, Mohamed A et al (2025) High methylene blue adsorption efficiency of cellulose acetate-based electrospun nanofiber membranes modified with graphene oxide and zeolite. Int J Env Res 19:18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-024-00683-610.1007/s41742-024-00683-6 ↗
22. Gonçalves dos Santos M, Destefani Paquini L, Leite Quintela PH et al (2025) Insights into kinetics and thermodynamics for adsorption methylene blue using ecofriendly zeolites materials. ACS Omega 10:20326–20340. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.4c1171810.1021/acsomega.4c11718 ↗
23. Hor KY, Chee JMC, Chong MN et al (2016) Evaluation of physicochemical methods in enhancing the adsorption performance of natural zeolite as low-cost adsorbent of methylene blue dye from wastewater. J Clean Prod 118:197–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.05610.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.056 ↗
24. Pham XN, Nguyen HT (2022) Green synthesis of ZSM-5@rGO composite for adsorption of methylene blue from aqueous solution. Pollution 8:1308–1324. https://doi.org/10.22059/poll.2022.342339.145810.22059/poll.2022.342339.1458 ↗
25. Huang T, Yan M, He K et al (2019) Efficient removal of methylene blue from aqueous solutions using magnetic graphene oxide modified zeolite. J Colloid Interface Sci 543:43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2019.02.03010.1016/j.jcis.2019.02.030 ↗
26. Zubair M, Daud M, McKay G et al (2017) Recent progress in layered double hydroxides (LDH)-containing hybrids as adsorbents for water remediation. Appl Clay Sci 143:279–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2017.04.00210.1016/j.clay.2017.04.002 ↗
27. Tubon-Usca G, Centeno C, Pomasqui S et al (2025) Enhanced adsorption of methylene blue in wastewater using natural zeolite impregnated with graphene oxide. Appl Sci 15:2824. https://doi.org/10.3390/app1505282410.3390/app15052824 ↗
28. Hassanzadeh-Afruzi F, Forouzandeh-Malati M, Ganjali F et al (2023) Carrageenan-grafted-poly(acrylamide) magnetic nanocomposite modified with graphene oxide for ciprofloxacin removal from polluted water. Alex Eng J 82:503–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2023.10.01110.1016/j.aej.2023.10.011 ↗
29. Tene T, Tubon Usca G, Guevara M et al (2020) Toward large-scale production of oxidized graphene. Nanomaterials 10:279. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano1002027910.3390/nano10020279 ↗
30. De Silva KKH, Huang H-H, Joshi RK, Yoshimura M (2017) Chemical reduction of graphene oxide using green reductants. Carbon 119:190–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2017.04.02510.1016/j.carbon.2017.04.025 ↗
31. Kumar N, Setshedi K, Masukume M, Ray SS (2022) Facile scalable synthesis of graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide: comparative investigation of different reduction methods. Carbon Lett 32:1031–1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42823-022-00335-910.1007/s42823-022-00335-9 ↗
32. Abulizi A, Okitsu K, Zhu J-J (2014) Ultrasound assisted reduction of graphene oxide to graphene in l-ascorbic acid aqueous solutions: kinetics and effects of various factors on the rate of graphene formation. Ultrason Sonochem 21:1174–1181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2013.10.01910.1016/j.ultsonch.2013.10.019 ↗
33. Xiao J, Lv W, Xie Z et al (2016) Environmentally friendly reduced graphene oxide as a broad-spectrum adsorbent for anionic and cationic dyes via π–π interactions. J Mater Chem A 4:12126–12135. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6TA04119A10.1039/C6TA04119A ↗
34. Riva L, Pastori N, Panozzo A et al (2020) Nanostructured cellulose-based sorbent materials for water decontamination from organic dyes. Nanomaterials 10:1570. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano1008157010.3390/nano10081570 ↗
35. Arias Arias FE, Beneduci A, Chidichimo F et al (2017) Study of the adsorption of mercury (II) on lignocellulosic materials under static and dynamic conditions. Chemosphere 180:11–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.03.13710.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.03.137 ↗
36. Tene T, Arias Arias F, Guevara M et al (2022) Removal of mercury(II) from aqueous solution by partially reduced graphene oxide. Sci Rep 12:6326. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10259-z10.1038/s41598-022-10259-z ↗
37. Yang R.T, Adsorbents: fundamentals and applications. (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, 2003), pp 17–53.
38. Giles CH, Smith D, Huitson A (1974) A general treatment and classification of the solute adsorption isotherm. I. Theoretical. J Colloid Interface Sci 47:755–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(74)90252-510.1016/0021-9797(74)90252-5 ↗
39. Chu KH (2021) Revisiting the Temkin isotherm: dimensional inconsistency and approximate forms. Ind Eng Chem Res 60:13140–13147. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.1c0178810.1021/acs.iecr.1c01788 ↗
40. Hu Q, Zhang Z (2019) Application of Dubinin-Radushkevich isotherm model at the solid/solution interface: a theoretical analysis. J Mol Liq 277:646–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.01.00510.1016/j.molliq.2019.01.005 ↗
41. Algieri V, Tursi A, Costanzo P et al (2024) Thiol-functionalized cellulose for mercury polluted water remediation: synthesis and study of the adsorption properties. Chemosphere 355:141891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.14189110.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.141891 ↗
42. Lima EC, Hosseini-Bandegharaei A, Moreno-Piraján JC, Anastopoulos I (2019) A critical review of the estimation of the thermodynamic parameters on adsorption equilibria. Wrong use of equilibrium constant in the Van’t Hoof equation for calculation of thermodynamic parameters of adsorption. J Mol Liq 273:425–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2018.10.04810.1016/j.molliq.2018.10.048 ↗
43. Ghosal PS, Gupta AK (2017) Determination of thermodynamic parameters from Langmuir isotherm constant-revisited. J Mol Liq 225:137–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2016.11.05810.1016/j.molliq.2016.11.058 ↗
44. Akaike H (1998) A new look at the statistical model identification. In: Parzen E, Tanabe K, Kitagawa G (eds) Selected papers of Hirotugu Akaike. Springer, New York, pp 215–222
45. Eljamal O, Shubair T, Tahara A et al (2019) Iron based nanoparticles-zeolite composites for the removal of cesium from aqueous solutions. J Mol Liq 277:613–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2018.12.11510.1016/j.molliq.2018.12.115 ↗
46. Pei S, Cheng H-M (2012) The reduction of graphene oxide. Carbon 50:3210–3228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.01010.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.010 ↗
47. Marcano DC, Kosynkin DV, Berlin JM et al (2010) Improved synthesis of graphene oxide. ACS Nano 4:4806–4814. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn100636810.1021/nn1006368 ↗
48. Yau XH, Khe CS, Saheed MSM et al (2020) Magnetically recoverable magnetite-reduced graphene oxide as a demulsifier for surfactant stabilized crude oil-in-water emulsion. PLoS ONE 15:e0232490. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.023249010.1371/journal.pone.0232490 ↗
49. Hidayah NMS, Liu W-W, Lai C-W et al (2017) Comparison on graphite, graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide: synthesis and characterization. AIP Conf Proc 1892:150002. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.500576410.1063/1.5005764 ↗
50. Favvas EP, Tsanaktsidis CG, Sapalidis AA et al (2016) Clinoptilolite, a natural zeolite material: structural characterization and performance evaluation on its dehydration properties of hydrocarbon-based fuels. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 225:385–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2016.01.02110.1016/j.micromeso.2016.01.021 ↗
51. Zendelska A, Golomeova M, Jakupi Š et al (2018) Characterization and application of clinoptilolite for removal of heavy metal ions from water resources. Geologica Macedonica 32:21–32
52. Król M, Dechnik J, Szymczak P et al (2024) Thermal behavior of clinoptilolite. Crystals 14:646. https://doi.org/10.3390/cryst1407064610.3390/cryst14070646 ↗
53. Ortiz-Anaya I, Nishina Y (2023) Unveiling the reduction process of graphene oxide by ascorbic acid: grafting and reduction sequences for high surface area graphene materials. ChemPlusChem 88:e202300328. https://doi.org/10.1002/cplu.20230032810.1002/cplu.202300328 ↗
54. Farivar F, Lay Yap P, Karunagaran RU, Losic D (2021) Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) of graphene materials: effect of particle size of graphene, graphene oxide and graphite on thermal parameters. C 7:41. https://doi.org/10.3390/c702004110.3390/c7020041 ↗
55. Inglezakis VJ, Stylianou M, Loizidou M (2010) Ion exchange and adsorption equilibrium studies on clinoptilolite, bentonite and vermiculite. J Phys Chem Solids 71:279–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpcs.2009.12.07710.1016/j.jpcs.2009.12.077 ↗
56. Uddin MdT, Rahman MdA, Rukanuzzaman Md, Islam MdA (2017) A potential low cost adsorbent for the removal of cationic dyes from aqueous solutions. Appl Water Sci 7:2831–2842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-017-0542-410.1007/s13201-017-0542-4 ↗
57. Słota E, Vasylechko V, Patsay I et al (2022) The use of H-form clinoptilolite to preconcentrate trace amounts of Nd(III) from aqueous solution under dynamic conditions. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 333:111739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2022.11173910.1016/j.micromeso.2022.111739 ↗
58. Rida K, Bouraoui S, Hadnine S (2013) Adsorption of methylene blue from aqueous solution by kaolin and zeolite. Appl Clay Sci 83–84:99–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2013.08.01510.1016/j.clay.2013.08.015 ↗
59. Ho YS, McKay G (1999) Pseudo-second order model for sorption processes. Process Biochem 34:451–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-9592(98)00112-510.1016/S0032-9592(98)00112-5 ↗
60. Beryani A, Bianco C, Casasso A et al (2022) Exploring the potential of graphene oxide nanosheets for porous media decontamination from cationic dyes. J Hazard Mater 424:127468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.12746810.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127468 ↗
61. Luong HVT, Le TP, Le TLT et al (2024) A graphene oxide based composite granule for methylene blue separation from aqueous solution: adsorption, kinetics and thermodynamic studies. Heliyon 10:e28648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e2864810.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28648 ↗
62. Wijaya R, Andersan G, Permatasari Santoso S, Irawaty W (2020) Green reduction of graphene oxide using Kaffir lime peel extract (Citrus hystrix) and its application as adsorbent for methylene blue. Sci Rep 10:667. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57433-910.1038/s41598-020-57433-9 ↗
63. Yang Y, Xie Y, Pang L et al (2013) Preparation of reduced graphene oxide/poly(acrylamide) nanocomposite and its adsorption of Pb(II) and methylene blue. Langmuir 29:10727–10736. https://doi.org/10.1021/la401940z10.1021/la401940z ↗
64. Soudagar S, Akash S, SreeVenkat M et al (2022) Adsorption of methylene blue dye on nano graphene oxide-thermodynamics and kinetic studies. Mate Today: Proc 59:667–672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.12.19910.1016/j.matpr.2021.12.199 ↗
65. Xu W, Li Y, Wang H et al (2021) Study on the adsorption performance of casein/graphene oxide aerogel for methylene blue. ACS Omega 6:29243–29253. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c0493810.1021/acsomega.1c04938 ↗
66. Aya HH, Djamel N, Samira A et al (2024) Optimizing methylene blue adsorption conditions on hydrothermally synthesized NaX zeolite through a full two-level factorial design. RSC Adv 14:23816–23827. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4RA04483E10.1039/D4RA04483E ↗
67. Bradder P, Ling SK, Wang S, Liu S (2011) Dye adsorption on layered graphite oxide. J Chem Eng Data 56:138–141. https://doi.org/10.1021/je101049g10.1021/je101049g ↗
68. Wu F-C, Tseng R-L, Juang R-S (2009) Initial behavior of intraparticle diffusion model used in the description of adsorption kinetics. Chem Eng J 153:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2009.04.04210.1016/j.cej.2009.04.042 ↗
69. Chu KH, Hashim MA, Hayder G, Bollinger J-C (2024) Comparative evaluation of the Dubinin-Radushkevich isotherm and its variants. Ind Eng Chem Res 63:15002–15011. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.4c0189510.1021/acs.iecr.4c01895 ↗
70. Chabani M, Amrane A, Bensmaili A (2006) Kinetic modelling of the adsorption of nitrates by ion exchange resin. Chem Eng J 125:111–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2006.08.01410.1016/j.cej.2006.08.014 ↗
71. Khuamlo S, Bakare B, Rathilal S (2024) Single and multicomponent adsorption of amoxicillin, ciprofloxacin, and sulfamethoxazole on chitosan-carbon nanotubes hydrogel beads from aqueous solutions: kinetics, isotherms, and thermodynamic parameters. J Hazard Mater Adv 13:100404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hazadv.2024.10040410.1016/j.hazadv.2024.100404 ↗
72. Obayomi KS, Lau SY, Danquah MK et al. (2023) Green synthesis of graphene-oxide based nanocomposites for efficient removal of methylene blue dye from wastewater. Desalination 564:116749.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2023.11674910.1016/j.desal.2023.116749 ↗
73. Salvestrini S, Ambrosone L, Kopinke F-D (2022) Some mistakes and misinterpretations in the analysis of thermodynamic adsorption data. J Mol Liq 352:118762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2022.11876210.1016/j.molliq.2022.118762 ↗
74. Simonescu CM, Lavric V, Musina A et al (2020) Experimental and modeling of cadmium ions removal by chelating resins. J Mol Liq 307:112973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2020.11297310.1016/j.molliq.2020.112973 ↗
75. Mancini F, Graziano G (2025) On enthalpy-entropy compensation characterizing processes in aqueous solution. Entropy 27:716. https://doi.org/10.3390/e2707071610.3390/e27070716 ↗
76. Freed KF (2011) Entropy−enthalpy compensation in chemical reactions and adsorption: an exactly solvable model. J Phys Chem B 115:1689–1692. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp110569610.1021/jp1105696 ↗
77. Garvín A, Ibarz R, Ibarz A (2017) Kinetic and thermodynamic compensation. A current and practical review for foods. Food Res Int 96:132–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2017.03.00410.1016/j.foodres.2017.03.004 ↗
78. Li Y, Du Q, Liu T et al (2013) Methylene blue adsorption on graphene oxide/calcium alginate composites. Carbohydr Polym 95:501–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2013.01.09410.1016/j.carbpol.2013.01.094 ↗
79. Tran HV, Hoang LT, Huynh CD (2020) An investigation on kinetic and thermodynamic parameters of methylene blue adsorption onto graphene-based nanocomposite. Chem Phys 535:110793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemphys.2020.11079310.1016/j.chemphys.2020.110793 ↗
80. Ai L, Zhang C, Liao F et al (2011) Removal of methylene blue from aqueous solution with magnetite loaded multi-wall carbon nanotube: kinetic, isotherm and mechanism analysis. J Hazard Mater 198:282–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.10.04110.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.10.041 ↗
81. Patel H (2021) Review on solvent desorption study from exhausted adsorbent. J Saudi Chem Soc 25:101302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jscs.2021.10130210.1016/j.jscs.2021.101302 ↗
82. Sukmana H, Radojčin M, Gyulavári T et al (2025) Utilization of rice husks as effective bioadsorbents for methylene blue removal from wastewater: characterization, adsorption performance, and regeneration studies. Appl Water Sci 15:148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-025-02511-410.1007/s13201-025-02511-4 ↗
83. Khalid K, Hanafiah MAK, Al-Amrani WA et al (2022) Comparative adsorption of methylene blue dye on hexane-washed and xanthated spent grated coconut (Cocos nucifera L.): isotherms, thermodynamics and mechanisms. J Ecol Eng 23:1–11. https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/14567510.12911/22998993/145675 ↗
84. Fadeel B, Bussy C, Merino S et al (2018) Safety assessment of graphene-based materials: focus on human health and the environment. ACS Nano 12:10582–10620. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.8b0475810.1021/acsnano.8b04758 ↗
85. Akhavan O, Ghaderi E, Akhavan A (2012) Size-dependent genotoxicity of graphene nanoplatelets in human stem cells. Biomaterials 33:8017–8025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.07.04010.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.07.040 ↗
86. Lu P, Zehtab Yazdi A, Han XX et al (2020) Mechanistic insights into the cytotoxicity of graphene oxide derivatives in mammalian cells. Chem Res Toxicol 33:2247–2260. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.9b0039110.1021/acs.chemrestox.9b00391 ↗
87. Mehdi Salehi M, Hassanzadeh-Afruzi F, Esmailzadeh F et al (2024) Chlorpyrifos and diazinon elimination through pAAm-g-XG/HKUST-1@Fe3O4 biopolymer nanoadsorbent hydrogel from wastewater: preparation, characterization, kinetics and isotherm. Sep Purif Technol 334:126097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2023.12609710.1016/j.seppur.2023.126097 ↗
88. Tursi A, Gallizzi V, Olivito F et al (2022) Selective and efficient mercury(II) removal from water by adsorption with a cellulose citrate biopolymer. J Hazard Mater Lett 3:100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hazl.2022.10006010.1016/j.hazl.2022.100060 ↗
89. U.S. Geological Survey, 2024. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2024. U.S. Geological Survey, pp. 1-212. https://doi.org/10.3133/mcs202410.3133/mcs2024 ↗
90. León M, Silva J, Carrasco S, Barrientos N (2020) Design, cost estimation and sensitivity analysis for a production process of activated carbon from waste nutshells by physical activation. Processes 8:945. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr808094510.3390/pr8080945 ↗
91. Saleem J, Khalid Baig Moghal Z, Tahir F et al (2025) Life cycle assessment of high value activated carbon production based on mass and functional performance metrics. Sci Rep 15:32797. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-16300-110.1038/s41598-025-16300-1 ↗
92. Kim MH, Jeong IT, Park SB, Kim JW (2018) Analysis of environmental impact of activated carbon production from wood waste. Environ Eng Res 24:117–126. https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2018.10410.4491/eer.2018.104 ↗
93. Arvidsson R, Kushnir D, Sandén BA, Molander S (2014) Prospective life cycle assessment of graphene production by ultrasonication and chemical reduction. Environ Sci Technol 48:4529–4536. https://doi.org/10.1021/es405338k10.1021/es405338k ↗
94. Serrano-Luján L, Víctor-Román S, Toledo C et al (2019) Environmental impact of the production of graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide. SN Appl Sci 1:179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0193-110.1007/s42452-019-0193-1 ↗
95. Fernández-Merino MJ, Guardia L, Paredes JI et al (2010) Vitamin C is an ideal substitute for hydrazine in the reduction of graphene oxide suspensions. J Phys Chem C 114:6426–6432. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp100603h10.1021/jp100603h ↗
96. Zhang J, Yang H, Shen G et al (2010) Reduction of graphene oxide via l-ascorbic acid. Chem Commun 46:1112–1114. https://doi.org/10.1039/B917705A10.1039/B917705A ↗