Advertisement

Removal of As(III) from Synthetic Groundwater Using Fe-Mn Bimetal Modified Kaolin Clay: Adsorption Kinetics, Isotherm and Thermodynamics Studies

  • R. MudzielwanaEmail author
  • W. M. Gitari
  • P. Ndungu
Original Article
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

The removal efficiency of As(III) by kaolin clay modified by Fe-Mn bimetal oxides was successfully evaluated. Modification of kaolin clay by Fe-Mn oxides increased the surface area of the kaolin clay from 19.2 to 29.8 m2/g and further decreased the pore diameter from 9.54 to 8.5 nm. As(III) removal efficiency was optimum at pH < 8 and was inhibited at pH >8. The adsorption isotherm data fitted well to Langmuir adsorption isotherm model with a maximum adsorption capacity of 2.93 mg/g at initial As(III) concentration range of 1 to 30 mg/L. The adsorption kinetics data was described better by pseudo-second order of reaction kinetics indicating that As(III) sorption occurred via chemisorption. Thermodynamics studies revealed that As(III) adsorption occurs spontaneously and the reaction is exothermic in nature. Compared to other reported adsorbents, Fe-Mn bimetal kaolin showed higher adsorption capacity making it a suitable candidate for As(III) removal from groundwater.

Keywords

Adsorption Arsenic Kaolin clay Kinetics Isotherms Thermodynamics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

An initial version of the paper has been presented in the “International Conference on Protection and Restoration of the Environment XIV”, July 3rd to 6th, 2018, Thessaloniki, Greece. Authors would like to acknowledge the financial assistance from NRF-South Africa, Sasol Inzalo Foundation and University of Venda RPC.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bhattacharyya KG, Gupta SS (2008) Adsorption of a few heavy metals on natural and modified kaolinite and montmorillonite: a review. Adv Colloid Interf 140:114–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bretzler A, Lalanne F, Nikiema J, Podgorski J, Pfenniger N, Berg M, Schirmer M (2017) Groundwater arsenic contamination in Burkina Faso, West Africa: predicting and verifying regions at risk. Sci Total Environ 584-585:970–984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chakraborti D, Rahman MM, Mukherjee A, Aluauddin M, Hassan M, Dutta RN, Pati S, Mukherjee SC, Roy S, Quamruzzman Q, Rahman M, Morshed S, Islam T, Hossain MM (2015) Groundwater arsenic contamination in Bangladesh—21 years of research. J Trace Elem Med Biol 31:237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cui HJ, Cai JK, Zhao H, Yuan B, Ai CL, Fu ML (2014) Fabrication of magnetic porous Fe–Mn binary oxide nanowires with superior capability for removal of As(III) from water. J Hazard Mater 279:26–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) (1996) South African water quality guidelines for domestic use, 1st edn. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria Available from: www.dwaf.gov.za. Accessed 08 August 2019
  6. Ding W, Wang Y, Yu Y, Zhang X, Li J, Wu F (2015) Photooxidation of arsenic(III) to arsenic(V) on the surface of kaolinite clay. J Environ Sci 36:29–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Favero JS, Peterle JP, Angeli VW, Brandalise RN, Gomes LB, Bergmann CP, Santos V (2016) Physical and chemical characterization and method for the decontamination of clays for application in cosmetics. Appl Clay Sci 124-125:252–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gupta SS, Bhattachryya KG (2011) Kinetics of adsorption of metal ions on inorganic materials: a review. Adv Colloid Interf 162:39–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hou J, Luo J, Song S, Li Y, Li Q (2017) The remarkable effect of the coexisting arsenite and arsenate species ratios on arsenic removal by manganese oxide. Chem Eng J 315:159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hu X, Ding Z, Zimmerman AR, Wang S, Gao B (2015) Batch and column sorption of arsenic onto iron-impregnated biochar synthesized through hydrolysis. Water Res 68:206–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kong S, Wang Y, Hu Q, Olusegun AK (2014) Magnetic nanoscale Fe–Mn binary oxides loaded zeolite for arsenic removal from synthetic groundwater. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 457:220–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kouras A, Katsoyiannis I, Voutsa D (2007) Distribution of arsenic in groundwater in the area of Chalkidiki, northern Greece. J Hazard Mater 147:890–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lee SM, Lalhalmunsiama, Thanjamingliana, Tiwari D (2015) Porous hybrid materials in the remediation of water contaminated with As(III) and As(V). Chem Eng J 270:496–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li X, He K, Pan B, Zhang S, Lu L, Zhang W (2012) Efficient as(III) removal by macroporous anion exchanger-supported Fe-Mn binary oxide: behavior and mechanism. Chem Eng J 193-194:131–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maji S, Ghosh A, Gupta K, Ghosh A, Ghorai P, Santra A, Sasikumar P, Ghosh UC (2018) Efficiency evaluation of arsenic(III) adsorption of novel graphene oxide@ iron-aluminium oxide composite for the contaminated water purification. Sep Purif Technol 197:388–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mudzielwana R, Gitari WM, Ndungu P (2018a) Evaluation of the adsorptive properties of locally available alumino-silicate clay in As(III) and As(V) remediation from groundwater. Phys Chem Earth. Article in Press.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2018.11.008
  17. Mudzielwana R, Gitari WM, Ndungu P (2018b) Performance evaluation of Fe-Mn bimetal modified kaolin clay mineral in As(III) removal from groundwater. In Proceedings of the international conference in protection and restoration of the environment XIV. Editors: N. Theodossiou, C. Chirstodoulatos, A Koutsospyros, D Karpouzos and Z Mallios, pp 1172-1183. ISBN: 978-960-99922-4-4Google Scholar
  18. Navoni JA, De Pietri D, Olmos V, Gimenez C, Mitre GB, de Totto E, Lepori ECV (2014) Human health risk assessment with spatial analysis: study of a population chronically exposed to arsenic through drinking water from Argentina. Sci Total Environ 499:166–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Qi J, Zhang G, Li H (2016) Efficient removal of arsenic from water using a granular adsorbent: Fe-Mn binary oxide impregnated chitosan bead. Bioresour Technol 193:24–249Google Scholar
  20. Ryu SR, Jeon EK, Yang JS, Baek K (2017) Adsorption of As(III) and As(V) in groundwater by Fe–Mn binary oxide-impregnated granular activated carbon (IMIGAC). J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 72:62–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Saleh TA, Sari A, Tuzen M (2016) Chitosan-modified vermiculite for As(III) adsorption from aqueous solution: equilibrium, thermodynamic and kinetic studies. J Mol Liq 219:937–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sarkar A, Paul B (2016) The global menace of arsenic and its conventional remediation – a critical review. Chemosphere 158:37–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sharma VK, Sohn M (2009) Aquatic arsenic: toxicity, speciation, transformations, and remediation. Environ Int 35:743–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sherlala AIA, Raman AAA, Bello MM, Buthiyappan A (2019) Adsorption of arsenic by chitosan magnetic graphen oxide nanocomposite. J Hazard Mater 246:547–556Google Scholar
  25. Singh R, Singh S, Parihar P, Singh VP, Prasad SM (2015) Arsenic contamination, consequences and remediation techniques: a review. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 112:247–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Singh CK, Kumar A, Bindal S (2018) Arsenic contamination in Rapti River basin, Terai region of India. J Geochem Explor 192:120–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smedley PL, Kinniburgh DG (2002) A review of the source, behaviour and distribution of arsenic in natural waters. Appl Geochem 17:517–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Su J, Huang HG, Jin XY, Lu XQ, Chen ZL (2011) Synthesis, characterization and kinetic of a surfactant-modified bentonite used to remove As(III) and As(V) from aqueous solution. J Hazard Mater 185:63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tran HN, You SJ, Chao HP (2016) Thermodynamic parameters of cadmium adsorption onto orange peel calculated from various methods: a comparison study. J Environ Chem Eng 4:2671–2682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tran HN, You SJ, Bandegharaei AH, Chao HP (2017) Mistakes and inconsistencies regarding adsorption of contaminants from aqueous solutions: a critical review. Water Res 120:88–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wen D, Zhang F, Zhang E, Wang C, Han S, Zheng Y (2013) Arsenic, fluoride and iodine in groundwater of China. J Geochem Explor 135:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. World Health Organization (2017) Guidelines for drinking-water quality: fourth edition incorporating the first addendum. Geneva: Switzerland. License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGOGoogle Scholar
  33. Yazdani MR, Tuutijarvi T, Bhatnagar A, Vahala R (2016) Adsorptive removal of arsenic(V) from aqueous phase by feldspars: kinetics, mechanism, and thermodynamic aspects of adsorption. J Mol Liq 214:149–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhang GS, Qu JH, Liu HJ, Liu RP, Li GT (2007) Removal mechanism of As (III)mby a novel Fe–Mn binary oxide adsorbent: oxidation and sorption. Environ Sci Technol 41:4613–4619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang G, Liu H, Qu J, Jefferson W (2012) Arsenate uptake and arsenite simultaneous sorption and oxidation by Fe–Mn binary oxides: influence of Mn/Fe ratio, pH, Ca2+, and humic acid. J Colloid Interface Sci 366:141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhang L, Qin X, Tang J, Liu W, Yang H (2017) Review of arsenic geochemical characteristics and its significance on arsenic pollution studies in karst groundwater, Southwest China. Appl Geochem 77:80–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Remediation and Nanoscience Research Group, Department of Ecology and Resource Management, School of Environmental SciencesUniversity of VendaThohoyandouSouth Africa
  2. 2.Department of Applied ChemistryUniversity of JohannesburgJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations