journal article·2019-06-28

Fe3O4Nanoparticles Dispersed on Douglas Fir Biochar for Phosphate Sorption

Akila G. Karunanayake, Chanaka M. Navarathna, Sameera R. Gunatilake, Morgan Crowley, Renel Anderson, Dinesh Mohan, Felio Perez, Charles U. Pittman, Todd Mlsna

ACS Applied Nano Materials· Volume 2· Issue 6
Publisher page

Abstract

Surface area, particle aggregation, pressure drop in columns, nanotoxicity, and commercialization difficulties limit the use of nanoparticle adsorbents. Magnetic primary nano-Fe3O4 particles (∼16.7 nm diameter) were dispersed on high-surface-area (695 m2/g) Douglas fir biochar (MBC). A cheap, commercial fast pyrolysis biochar, a syngas byproduct, was modified by chemical coprecipitation of Fe3O4 from Fe3+/Fe2+ aqueous NaOH, served as a matrix, aiding magnetite nanoparticle dispersion and reducing the extent of particle aggregation. This MBC removed ∼90.0 mg/g of phosphate from water, approximately 20 times the capacity reported for neat (∼39 nm) magnetite particles (∼5.1 mg/g). MBC was robust in fixed-bed column sorption with 82.5 mg/g (at pH 3) capacity, showing no significant equilibrium or kinetic limitations in flow versus batch sorption. The biochar support serves as an added adsorption phase for heavy metals and organic contaminants, adsorbing poorly on magnetite. MBC enables magnetic separation of exhausted adsorbent from a batch process, an alternative to filtration. The neat and phosphate-laden hybrid sorbents were was characterized by scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, energy-dispersive X-ray, point of zero charge, X-ray diffraction, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), elemental analysis, vibrating sample magnetometry, and Brunauer–Emmett–Teller surface-area and pore-volume measurements. The chemisorption mechanism versus pH, evaluated by XPS and existing literature, characterized the dominant phosphate complexes adsorbed on magnetite. The pH effect on phosphate sorption and the P 2p XPS binding energy shifts at pH from 1 to 13 are reported. A solution pH of 1–3 facilitates the formation of bidentate monoprotonated phosphate complexes [(Fe–O)2-PO2H]− at Fe–OH surface functions. H2PO42– predominates in solution at pH ∼4–6.5, which favors the formation of [Fe–O–PO3H]− at these pH values. At strongly basic pH (10–13) values, PO43– predominates and forms deprotonated chemisorbed monodentate [Fe–O–PO3]2– and bidentate [(Fe–O)2PO2]2–. Multilayer phosphate sorption and precipitation of iron phosphates were considered.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Phosphorus and nutrient management · Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal · Layered Double Hydroxides Synthesis and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Chemistry, Mississippi State University (MSU), Starkville, Mississippi 39762, United States

Biochar Supreme Inc., Everson, Washington 98247, United States

College of Chemical Sciences, Institute of Chemistry Ceylon, Rajagiriya 10107, Sri Lanka

School of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi 110067, India

Material Science Laboratory, Integrated Microscopy Center, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee 38152, United States

Funding

Division of Chemistry

References (75)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2003.10.00210.1016/j.jhazmat.2003.10.002 ↗
2. 10.1080/0743814880935480910.1080/07438148809354809 ↗
3. Collingwood R. W. · 1977
4. 10.1111/j.1747-6593.1991.tb00643.x10.1111/j.1747-6593.1991.tb00643.x ↗
5. Martin A. · Lake Line · 1994 · 14 · 24
6. 10.1111/j.1749-7345.1990.tb00529.x10.1111/j.1749-7345.1990.tb00529.x ↗
7. Eilbeck W. J. · 1987 · 331
8. Harrington-Hughes K. · J. - Water Pollut. Control Fed. · 1978 · 1886
9. 10.1016/S0272-7714(97)80008-X10.1016/S0272-7714(97)80008-X ↗
10. 10.1890/06-0644.110.1890/06-0644.1 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jcis.2005.12.05410.1016/j.jcis.2005.12.054 ↗
12. 10.1021/cm071046v10.1021/cm071046v ↗
13. 10.1116/1.57995410.1116/1.579954 ↗
14. 10.1021/ja038085210.1021/ja0380852 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.seppur.2006.05.02810.1016/j.seppur.2006.05.028 ↗
16. 10.1016/S0045-6535(99)00417-810.1016/S0045-6535(99)00417-8 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.03.08310.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.03.083 ↗
18. 10.1016/0043-1354(93)90090-510.1016/0043-1354(93)90090-5 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.clay.2006.02.00510.1016/j.clay.2006.02.005 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.02.03810.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.02.038 ↗
21. 10.1016/S0045-6535(02)00847-010.1016/S0045-6535(02)00847-0 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.01.06110.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.01.061 ↗
23. 10.1016/S0043-1354(97)00371-010.1016/S0043-1354(97)00371-0 ↗
24. 10.1016/S0022-0248(02)02068-710.1016/S0022-0248(02)02068-7 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.05.00110.1016/j.biortech.2018.05.001 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.01.12010.1016/j.biortech.2014.01.120 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.10.07110.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.10.071 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.cej.2017.08.12410.1016/j.cej.2017.08.124 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.cej.2017.02.11610.1016/j.cej.2017.02.116 ↗
30. 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b0015410.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00154 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.03.05010.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.03.050 ↗
32. 10.1021/ed073p117310.1021/ed073p1173 ↗
33. 10.1007/BF0142259510.1007/BF01422595 ↗
34. 10.1016/0961-9534(93)90032-Y10.1016/0961-9534(93)90032-Y ↗
35. 10.1039/C8RA02909A10.1039/C8RA02909A ↗
36. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.04.04710.1016/j.jenvman.2012.04.047 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.cej.2017.02.11610.1016/j.cej.2017.02.116 ↗
38. Sällsk Ä. · Acta Universitatis Lundensis: Lunds Universitets årsskrift. · 1895 · 31
39. El Ghandoor H. · Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. · 2012 · 7 · 573410.1016/S1452-3981(23)19655-6 ↗
40. 10.2320/matertrans.M201003410.2320/matertrans.M2010034 ↗
41. 10.2136/sssaj1957.03615995002100030005x10.2136/sssaj1957.03615995002100030005x ↗
42. Cornell R. M. · 1996
43. 10.1016/j.cej.2013.09.05710.1016/j.cej.2013.09.057 ↗
44. 10.1007/BF0251974510.1007/BF02519745 ↗
45. 10.1006/jcis.2000.707210.1006/jcis.2000.7072 ↗
46. 10.1016/S0016-7037(03)00237-010.1016/S0016-7037(03)00237-0 ↗
47. 10.1021/es60165a01310.1021/es60165a013 ↗
48. 10.1021/la048744410.1021/la0487444 ↗
49. 10.1021/cm001253u10.1021/cm001253u ↗
50. 10.1016/S0304-8853(99)00189-410.1016/S0304-8853(99)00189-4 ↗
51. 10.1021/es401338210.1021/es4013382 ↗
52. 10.1021/ja02242a00410.1021/ja02242a004 ↗
53. Freundlich H. M. F. · J. Phys. Chem. · 1906 · 57 · 385
54. 10.1063/1.174692210.1063/1.1746922 ↗
55. 10.1021/j150576a61110.1021/j150576a611 ↗
56. Toth J. · Acta Chim. Acad. Sci. Hung. · 1971 · 311
57. Bialkowski, S. E. Use of Acid/Base Distributions in pH Problems. http://ion.chem.usu.edu/~sbialkow/Classes/3600/Alpha/alpha2.htmlhttp://ion.chem.usu.edu/~sbialkow/Classes/3600/Alpha/alpha2.html (accessed 4/2/2019).
58. Geankoplis C. J. · 2003
59. 10.1039/C8RA04600J10.1039/C8RA04600J ↗
60. 10.1016/j.jcis.2014.12.03010.1016/j.jcis.2014.12.030 ↗
61. 10.1016/j.biortech.2015.10.00810.1016/j.biortech.2015.10.008 ↗
62. 10.1016/j.cej.2012.08.05210.1016/j.cej.2012.08.052 ↗
63. 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.03.00610.1016/j.biortech.2011.03.006 ↗
64. 10.1016/j.biortech.2015.09.06810.1016/j.biortech.2015.09.068 ↗
65. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.03.15110.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.03.151 ↗
66. 10.1016/j.biortech.2010.08.06710.1016/j.biortech.2010.08.067 ↗
67. 10.1007/s11814-018-0057-110.1007/s11814-018-0057-1 ↗
68. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.12010.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.120 ↗
69. 10.1016/S0020-1693(00)91150-210.1016/S0020-1693(00)91150-2 ↗
70. 10.1016/j.jcis.2009.11.00110.1016/j.jcis.2009.11.001 ↗
71. 10.1016/j.jcis.2015.10.00310.1016/j.jcis.2015.10.003 ↗
72. 10.1016/j.jcis.2011.07.06210.1016/j.jcis.2011.07.062 ↗
73. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2007.09.06310.1016/j.apsusc.2007.09.063 ↗
74. 10.1016/0009-2614(76)85297-910.1016/0009-2614(76)85297-9 ↗
75. 10.1007/s12665-010-0865-z10.1007/s12665-010-0865-z ↗