Advertisement

Nanocomposites for Environmental Pollution Remediation

  • Anjali BajpaiEmail author
  • Maya Sharma
  • Laxmi Gond
Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

Organic and inorganic contaminants polluting global water resources are concerning environmentalists and scientists. Generally, being non-biodegradable synthetic chemicals and/or highly soluble in water, they get easily mobilized in the environment. Their interaction with abiotic environmental components through adsorption onto natural colloids and accumulation by biotic components (bio-magnification) has adverse effects on ecosystems and human health. Consequently, water treatment to remove these contaminants is necessary. In this context, adsorptive decontamination of water has significant advantages over other water treatment methods. Bio-adsorption or sorption techniques, based on the use of materials of biological origin such as a biopolymer, are eco-friendly and best solution for remediation of heavy metals. Nanocomposites are the hybrid organic-inorganic materials which are effective in adsorptive decontamination of water. The property enhancement observed in nanocomposites when compared to the traditional composites is due to the dispersion of some of the components at the nano level. This chapter describes recent advances on nanocomposites based on biopolymers and inorganic clay minerals aimed at water decontamination through remediation of metal ions and synthetic organic chemicals, especially dyes, from wastewater.

Keywords

Nanocomposites Bionanocomposites Adsorption Environmental remediation Water decontamination 

List of abbreviation

BENT

Bentonite

CHT

Chitosan

CNFs

Carbon nanofibers

CR

Congo red

CV

Crystal violet

DB

Disperse blue

DEA

Diethanolamine

FG

Fast green

GL

Gelatine

HAL

Halloysite

LBL

Layer by layer

MB

Methylene blue

MG

Malachite green

MMT

Montmorillonite

MO

Methyl orange

MWCNT

Multiwall carbon nanotubes

NPs

Nanoparticles

OVU

Organovermiculite

PA6

Polyamides 6

PAL

Palygorskite

PFNC

Polymer-functionalized nanocomposites

PLSN

Polymer-layered silicate nanocomposites

POPs

Persistent organic pollutants

RB

Rose Bengal

RhB

Rhodamine B

RR

Remazol red

SEP

Sepiolite

TEA

Triethanolamine

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Vorosmarty CJ et al (2010) Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467:555–561.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fu FL, Wang Q (2011) Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: a review. J Environ Manage 92:407–418.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.11.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shannon MA et al (2008) Science and technology for water purification in the coming decades. Nature 452:301–310.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ngah WSW, Hanafiah M (2008) Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewater by chemically modified plant wastes as adsorbents: a review. Bioresour Technol 99:3935–3948.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.06.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kirpichtchikova TA et al (2006) Speciation and solubility of heavy metals in contaminated soil using X-ray microfluorescence, exafs spectroscopy, chemical extraction, and thermodynamic modeling. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 70:2163–2190.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2006.02.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maslin P, Maier RM (2000) Rhamnolipid-enhanced mineralization of phenanthrene in organic-metal co-contaminated soils. Bioremediat J 4:295–308.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10889860091114266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kabata-Pendias A (2017) Trace elements in soils and plants, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Salt DE et al (1995) Phytoremediation—a novel strategy for the removal of toxic metals from the environment using plants. Bio-Technology 13:468–474.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0595-468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jones KC, de Voogt P (1999) Persistent organic pollutants (pops): state of the science. Environ Poll 100:209–221  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0269-7491(99)00098-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Forgacs E, Cserhati T, Oros G (2004) Removal of synthetic dyes from wastewaters: a review. Environ Int 30:953–971.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2004.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Malik R, Ramteke DS, Wate SR (2007) Adsorption of malachite green on groundnut shell waste based powdered activated carbon. Waste Manage 27:1129–1138.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2006.06.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Salleh MAM et al (2011) Cationic and anionic dye adsorption by agricultural solid wastes: a comprehensive review. Desalination 280:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.07.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ngah WSW, Teong LC, Hanafiah M (2011) Adsorption of dyes and heavy metal ions by chitosan composites: a review. Carbohydr Polym 83:1446–1456.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.11.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Green chemistry for dyes removal from waste water: research trends and applications (2015). Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alsbaiee A et al (2016) Rapid removal of organic micropollutants from water by a porous beta-cyclodextrin polymer. Nature 529:U146–U190.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Crini G (2006) Non-conventional low-cost adsorbents for dye removal: a review. Bioresour Technol 97:1061–1085.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2005.05.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ku Y, Jung IL (2001) Photocatalytic reduction of Cr(VI) in aqueous solutions by uv irradiation with the presence of titanium dioxide. Water Res 35:135–142.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0043-1354(00)00098-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Luo T, Abdu S, Wessling M (2018) Selectivity of ion exchange membranes: a review. J Membrane Sci 555:429–454.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2018.03.051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Missimer TM, Maliva RG (2018) Environmental issues in seawater reverse osmosis desalination: intakes and outfalls. Desalination 434:198–215.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.07.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alkhudhiri A, Darwish N, Hilal N (2012) Membrane distillation: a comprehensive review. Desalination 287:2–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.08.027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Knez Z et al (2014) Industrial applications of supercritical fluids: A review. Energy 77:235–243.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.07.044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Djas M, Henczka M (2018) Reactive extraction of carboxylic acids using organic solvents and supercritical fluids: a review. Sep Purif Technol 201:106–119.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2018.02.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Banat IM et al (1996) Microbial decolorization of textile-dye-containing effluents: a review. Bioresour Technol 58:217–227.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0960-8524(96)00113-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Aksu Z (2005) Application of biosorption for the removal of organic pollutants: a review. Process Biochem 40:997–1026.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2004.04.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Prakash R, Majumder SK, Singh A (2018) Flotation technique: its mechanisms and design parameters. Chem Eng Process 127:249–270.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2018.03.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gundogdu A et al (2009) Biosorption of pb(ii) ions from aqueous solution by pine bark (pinus brutia ten.). Chem Eng J 153:62–69.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2009.06.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Khan S et al (2008) Health risks of heavy metals in contaminated soils and food crops irrigated with wastewater in Beijing, China. Environ Pollut 152:686–692.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Li J et al (2018) Synthesis of highly porous inorganic adsorbents derived from metal-organic frameworks and their application in efficient elimination of mercury(II). J Colloid Interface Sci 517:61–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2018.01.112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gupta VK, Suhas (2009) Application of low-cost adsorbents for dye removal—a review. J Environ Manage 90:2313–2342.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pearson RG (1963) Hard and soft acids and bases. J Am Chem Soc 85:3533.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja00905a001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mercier L, Detellier C (1995) Preparation, characterization and applications as heavy-metals sorbents of covalently grafted thiol functionalities on the interlamellar surface of montmorillonite. Environ Sci Technol 29:1318–1323.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es00005a026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Volesky B, Holan ZR (1995) Biosorption of heavy-metals. Biotechnol Progr 11:235–250.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bp00033a001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wang JL, Chen C (2009) Biosorbents for heavy metals removal and their future. Biotechnol Adv 27:195–226.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2008.11.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Volesky B (2001) Detoxification of metal-bearing effluents: biosorption for the next century. Hydrometallurgy 59:203–216.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-386x(00)00160-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fomina M, Gadd GM (2014) Biosorption: current perspectives on concept, definition and application. Bioresour Technol 160:3–14.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.12.102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vijayaraghavan K, Balasubramanian R (2015) Is biosorption suitable for decontamination of metal-bearing wastewaters? A critical review on the state-of-the-art of biosorption processes and future directions. J Environ Manage 160:283–296.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.06.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Long YC et al (2014) Packed bed column studies on lead(II) removal from industrial wastewater by modified agaricus bisporus. Bioresour Technol 152:457–463.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.11.039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ungureanu G et al (2017) Biosorption of antimony oxyanions by brown seaweeds: batch and column studies. J Environ Chem Eng 5:3463–3471.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2017.07.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhang JP, Wang AQ (2015) Polysaccharide-based composite hydrogels for removal of pollutants from water. In: Dragan ES (ed) Advanced separations by specialized sorbents, vol 108. Chromatographic science series. CRC Press-Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, pp 89–126Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Guilherme MR et al (2015) Superabsorbent hydrogels based on polysaccharides for application in agriculture as soil conditioner and nutrient carrier: a review. Eur Polym J 72:365–385.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2015.04.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Fosso-Kankeu E et al (2010) A comprehensive study of physical and physiological parameters that affect bio-sorption of metal pollutants from aqueous solutions. Phys Chem Earth 35:672–678.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2010.07.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fosso-Kankeu E et al (2017) Thermodynamic properties and adsorption behaviour of hydrogel nanocomposites for cadmium removal from mine effluents. J Ind Eng Chem 48:151–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2016.12.033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sag Y, Aktay Y (2000) Mass transfer and equilibrium studies for the sorption of chromium ions onto chitin. Process Biochem 36:157–173.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0032-9592(00)00200-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhou D et al (2004) Cellulose/chitin beads for adsorption of heavy metals in aqueous solution. Water Res 38:2643–2650.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.03.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dao Z et al (2004) Development of a fixed-bed column with cellulose/chitin beads to remove heavy-metal ions. J Appl Polym Sci 94:684–691.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.20946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Morosanu I et al (2017) Biosorption of lead ions from aqueous effluents by rapeseed biomass. N Biotechnol 39:110–124.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2016.08.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kumar DPJ, Raj V (2017) A review on the modification of polysaccharide through graft copolymerization for various potential applications. Open Med Chem J 11:109–126.  https://doi.org/10.2174/1874104501711010109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ngah WSW, Endud CS, Mayanar R (2002) Removal of copper(ii) ions from aqueous solution onto chitosan and cross-linked chitosan beads. React Funct Polym 50:181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rangsayatorn N et al (2004) Cadmium biosorption by cells of spirulina platensis tistr 8217 immobilized in alginate and silica gel. Environ Int 30:57–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0160-4120(03)00146-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lee ST et al (2001) Equilibrium and kinetic studies of copper(ii) ion uptake by chitosan-tripolyphosphate chelating resin. Polymer 42:1879–1892.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0032-3861(00)00402-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sawatari C, Kondo T (1999) Interchain hydrogen bonds in blend films of poly(vinyl alcohol) and its derivatives with poly(ethylene oxide). Macromolecules 32:1949–1955.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ma980900oCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ollier R, Perez CJ, Alvarez V (2012) Effect of relative humidity on the mechanical properties of micro and nanocomposites of polyvinyl alcohol. In: Armas AF (ed) 11th international congress on metallurgy & materials sam/conamet 2011, vol 1. Procedia materials science. Elsevier Science Bv, Amsterdam, pp 499–505.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mspro.2012.06.067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Gemeiner P et al (1998) Cellulose as a (bio)affinity carrier: properties, design and applications. J Chromatogr B-Anal Technol Biomed Life Sci 715:245–271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-4347(98)00047-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    George J, Sreekala MS, Thomas S (2001) A review on interface modification and characterization of natural fiber reinforced plastic composites. Polym Eng Sci 41:1471–1485.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.10846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Zhang WX (2003) Nanoscale iron particles for environmental remediation: an overview. J Nanopart Res 5:323–332.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1025520116015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bet-moushoul E et al (2016) TiO2 nanocomposite based polymeric membranes: a review on performance improvement for various applications in chemical engineering processes. Chem Eng J 283:29–46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.06.124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Paul DR, Robeson LM (2008) Polymer nanotechnology: nanocomposites. Polymer 49:3187–3204.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2008.04.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sharma M, Bajpai A (2018) Superabsorbent nanocomposite from sugarcane bagasse, chitin and clay: synthesis, characterization and swelling behaviour. Carbohydr Polym 193:281–288.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.04.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Zafar R et al (2016) Polysaccharide based bionanocomposites, properties and applications: a review. Int J Biol Macromol 92:1012–1024.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.07.102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Luo Y, Huang JG (2015) Hierarchical-structured anatase-titania/cellulose composite sheet with high photocatalytic performance and antibacterial activity. Chem Eur J 21:2568–2575.  https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.201405066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Huang JG, Kunitake T (2003) Nano-precision replication of natural cellulosic substances by metal oxides. J Am Chem Soc 125:11834–11835.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja037419kCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Luo Y, Xu JB, Huang JG (2014) Hierarchical nanofibrous anatase-titania-cellulose composite and its photocatalytic property. Cryst Eng Comm 16:464–471.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c3ce41906aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Li H, Fu SY, Peng LC (2013) Surface modification of cellulose fibers by layer-by-layer self-assembly of lignosulfonates and TiO2 nanoparticles: effect on photocatalytic abilities and paper properties. Fiber Polym 14:1794–1802.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12221-013-1794-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ding KL et al (2007) Facile synthesis of high quality TiO2 nanocrystals in ionic liquid via a microwave-assisted process. J Am Chem Soc 129:6362–6363.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja070809cCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Nayak PL et al (2008) Nanocomposites from polycaprolactone (PCL)/soy protein isolate (SPI) blend with organoclay. Polym Plast Technol Eng 47:600–605.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03602550802059402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Uddin MK (2017) A review on the adsorption of heavy metals by clay minerals, with special focus on the past decade. Chem Eng J 308:438–462.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.09.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Matusik J (2016) Chapter 23–halloysite for adsorption and pollution remediation. In: Yuan P, Thill A, Bergaya F (eds) Developments in clay science, vol 7. Elsevier, pp 606–627.  https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-100293-3.00023-6Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zhu RL et al (2016) Adsorbents based on montmorillonite for contaminant removal from water: a review. Appl Clay Sci 123:239–258.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2015.12.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    de Paiva LB, Morales AR, Diaz FRV (2008) Organoclays: properties, preparation and applications. Appl Clay Sci 42:8–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2008.02.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Zhao Q et al (2017) Review of the fundamental geochemical and physical behaviors of organoclays in barrier applications. Appl Clay Sci 142:2–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2016.11.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Rajeshwar K, Chanmanee W (2012) Bioinspired photocatalyst assemblies for environmental remediation. Electrochim Acta 84:96–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2012.04.072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Pavlidou S, Papaspyrides CD (2008) A review on polymer-layered silicate nanocomposites. Prog Polym Sci 33:1119–1198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2008.07.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Manias E et al (2001) Polypropylene/montmorillonite nanocomposites. Review of the synthetic routes and materials properties. Chem Mater 13:3516–3523.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cm0110627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Teh PL et al (2004) On the potential of organoclay with respect to conventional fillers (carbon black, silica) for epoxidized natural rubber compatibilized natural rubber vulcanizates. J Appl Polym Sci 94:2438–2445.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.21188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Alexandre M, Dubois P (2000) Polymer-layered silicate nanocomposites: preparation, properties and uses of a new class of materials. Mater Sci Eng R-Reports 28:1–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0927-796x(00)00012-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Lofrano G et al (2016) Polymer functionalized nanocomposites for metals removal from water and wastewater: an overview. Water Res 92:22–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.01.033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Miranda-Trevino JC, Coles CA (2003) Kaolinite properties, structure and influence of metal retention on ph. Appl Clay Sci 23:133–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-1317(03)00095-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Leroux F, Besse JP (2001) Polymer interleaved layered double hydroxide: a new emerging class of nanocomposites. Chem Mater 13:3507–3515.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cm0110268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Mousa A, Karger-Kocsis J (2001) Rheological and thermodynamical behavior of styrene/butadiene rubber-organoclay nanocomposites. Macromol Mater Eng 286:260–266.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1439-2054(20010401)286:4%3c260:aid-mame260%3e3.0.co;2-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Kiliaris P, Papaspyrides CD (2010) Polymer/layered silicate (clay) nanocomposites: an overview of flame retardancy. Prog Polym Sci 35:902–958.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2010.03.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gao FG (2004) Clay/polymer composites: the story. Mater Today 7:50–55.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s1369-7021(04)00509-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Deka BK, Maji TK (2011) Effect of TiO2 and nanoclay on the properties of wood polymer nanocomposite. Compos A 42:2117–2125.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.09.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Pandey JK et al (2005) An overview on the degradability of polymer nanocomposites. Polym Degrad Stab 88:234–250.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2004.09.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Ray SS, Okamoto M (2003) Polymer/layered silicate nanocomposites: a review from preparation to processing. Prog Polym Sci 28:1539–1641.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2003.08.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Ray SS, Bousmina M (2005) Biodegradable polymers and their layered silicate nano composites: in greening the 21st century materials world. Prog Mater Sci 50:962–1079.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2005.05.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Ataeefard M, Moradian S (2012) Investigation the effect of various loads of organically modified montmorillonite on dyeing properties of polypropylene nanocomposites. J Appl Polym Sci 125:E214–E223.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.34812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Choudalakis G, Gotsis AD (2009) Permeability of polymer/clay nanocomposites: a review. Eur Polym J 45:967–984.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2009.01.027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Chen L et al (2016) Functional magnetic nanoparticle/clay mineral nanocomposites: preparation, magnetism and versatile applications. Appl Clay Sci 127:143–163.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2016.04.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Maisanaba S et al (2015) Toxicological evaluation of clay minerals and derived nanocomposites: a review. Environ Res 138:233–254.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2014.12.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Shaikh SMR et al (2017) Influence of polyelectrolytes and other polymer complexes on the flocculation and rheological behaviors of clay minerals: a comprehensive review. Sep Purif Technol 187:137–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2017.06.050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Liu AD, Berglund LA (2012) Clay nanopaper composites of nacre-like structure based on montmorrilonite and cellulose nanofibers-improvements due to chitosan addition. Carbohydr Polym 87:53–60.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.07.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Paranhos CM et al (2007) Microstructure and free volume evaluation of poly(vinyl alcohol) nanocomposite hydrogels. Eur Polym J 43:4882–4890.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2007.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Ruiz-Hitzky E et al (2013) Fibrous clays based bionanocomposites. Prog Polym Sci 38:1392–1414.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2013.05.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Neeraj G et al (2016) Adsorptive potential of dispersible chitosan coated iron-oxide nanocomposites toward the elimination of arsenic from aqueous solution. Process Saf Environ Prot 104:185–195.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2016.09.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Djerahov L et al (2016) Chitosan film loaded with silver nanoparticles-sorbent for solid phase extraction of Al(III), Cd(II), Cu(II), Co(II), Fe(III), Ni(II), Pb(II) and Zn(II). Carbohydr Polym 147:45–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.03.080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Tu H et al (2017) Chitosan-rectorite nanospheres immobilized on polystyrene fibrous mats via alternate electrospinning/electrospraying techniques for copper ions adsorption. Appl Surf Sci 426:545–553.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.07.159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Salam MA, Makki MSI, Abdelaal MYA (2011) Preparation and characterization of multi-walled carbon nanotubes/chitosan nanocomposite and its application for the removal of heavy metals from aqueous solution. J Alloys Compd 509:2582–2587.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2010.11.094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Padilla-Ortega E et al (2016) Ultrasound assisted preparation of chitosan-vermiculite bionanocomposite foams for cadmium uptake. Appl Clay Sci 130:40–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2015.11.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Salam MA (2017) Preparation and characterization of chitin/magnetite/multiwalled carbon nanotubes magnetic nanocomposite for toxic hexavalent chromium removal from solution. J Mol Liq 233:197–202.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2017.03.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Khare P et al (2016) Microchannel-embedded metal-carbon-polymer nanocomposite as a novel support for chitosan for efficient removal of hexavalent chromium from water under dynamic conditions. Chem Eng J 293:44–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.02.049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Wu SJ, Liou TH, Mi FL (2009) Synthesis of zero-valent copper-chitosan nanocomposites and their application for treatment of hexavalent chromium. Bioresour Technol 100:4348–4353.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.04.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Choudhury PR et al (2017) Removal of Cr (VI) by synthesized titania embedded dead yeast nanocomposite: optimization and modeling by response surface methodology. J Environ Chem Eng 5:214–221.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2016.11.041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Ballav N et al (2014) Synthesis, characterization of Fe3O4@glycine doped polypyrrole magnetic nanocomposites and their potential performance to remove toxic Cr(VI). J Ind Eng Chem 20:4085–4093.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2014.01.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Gokila S et al (2017) Removal of the heavy metal ion chromium(VI) using chitosan and alginate nanocomposites. Int J Biol Macromol 104:1459–1468.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.05.117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Li CJ et al (2014) Preparation of polyamides 6 (PA6)/chitosan@fexoy composite nanofibers by electrospinning and pyrolysis and their Cr(VI)-removal performance. Catal Today 224:94–103.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2013.11.034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Luo XG et al (2016) Adsorptive removal of lead from water by the effective and reusable magnetic cellulose nanocomposite beads entrapping activated bentonite. Carbohydr Polym 151:640–648.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.06.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Mallakpour S, Madani M (2016) Functionalized-MnO2/chitosan nanocomposites: a promising adsorbent for the removal of lead ions. Carbohydr Polym 147:53–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.03.076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Ghorai S et al (2012) Novel biodegradable nanocomposite based on XG-g-PAM/SiO2: application of an efficient adsorbent for Pb2+ ions from aqueous solution. Bioresour Technol 119:181–190.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.05.063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Sharma G, Pathania D, Naushad M (2014) Preparation, characterization and antimicrobial activity of biopolymer based nanocomposite ion exchanger pectin zirconium(IV) selenotungstophosphate: application for removal of toxic metals. J Ind Eng Chem 20:4482–4490.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2014.02.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Naushad M et al (2016) Synthesis and characterization of a new starch/SnO2 nanocomposite for efficient adsorption of toxic Hg2+ metal ion. Chem Eng J 300:306–316.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.04.084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Markandeya et al (2017) Statistical optimization of process parameters for removal of dyes from wastewater on chitosan cenospheres nanocomposite using response surface methodology. J Clean Prod 149:597–606.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Ali F et al (2017) Bactericidal and catalytic performance of green nanocomposite based on chitosan/carbon black fiber supported monometallic and bimetallic nanoparticles. Chemosphere 188:588–598.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.08.118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Nithya A et al (2017) A potential photocatalytic, antimicrobial and anticancer activity of chitosan-copper nanocomposite. Int J Biol Macromol 104:1774–1782.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.03.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Pathania D et al (2016) Photocatalytic degradation of highly toxic dyes using chitosan-g-poly (acrylamide)/ZnS in presence of solar irradiation. J Photochem Photobiol, A 329:61–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotochem.2016.06.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Simsek EB et al (2017) Carbon fiber embedded chitosan/PVA composites for decontamination of endocrine disruptor bisphenol-A from water. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 70:291–301.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2016.11.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Gupta VK et al (2017) Degradation of azo dyes under different wavelengths of uv light with chitosan-SnO2 nanocomposites. J Mol Liq 232:423–430.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2017.02.095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Karthikeyan KT, Nithya A, Jothivenkatachalam K (2017) Photocatalytic and antimicrobial activities of chitosan-TiO2 nanocomposite. Int J Biol Macromol 104:1762–1773.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.03.121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Tahir N et al (2017) Biopolymers composites with peanut hull waste biomass and application for crystal violet adsorption. Int J Biol Macromol 4:210–220.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.10.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Mittal H et al (2014) Fe3O4 mnps and gum xanthan based hydrogels nanocomposites for the efficient capture of malachite green from aqueous solution. Chem Eng J 255:471–482.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2014.04.098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Thakur M et al (2017) Efficient photocatalytic degradation of toxic dyes from aqueous environment using gelatin-Zr(IV) phosphate nanocomposite and its antimicrobial activity. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 157:456–463.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2017.06.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Pathania D et al (2016) Novel guar gum/Al2O3 nanocomposite as an effective photocatalyst for the degradation of malachite green dye. Int J Biol Macromol 87:366–374.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.02.073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Gupta VK et al (2014) Adsorptional removal of methylene blue by guar gum-cerium (iv) tungstate hybrid cationic exchanger. Carbohydr Polym 101:684–691.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2013.09.092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Mittal H, Maity A, Ray SS (2015) Effective removal of cationic dyes from aqueous solution using gum ghatti-based biodegradable hydrogel. Int J Biol Macromol 79:8–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2015.04.045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Virkutyte J, Jegatheesan V, Varma RS (2012) Visible light activated TiO2/microcrystalline cellulose nanocatalyst to destroy organic contaminants in water. Bioresour Technol 113:288–293.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.12.090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Salam MA, El-Shishtawy RM, Obaid AY (2014) Synthesis of magnetic multi-walled carbon nanotubes/magnetite/chitin magnetic nanocomposite for the removal of rose bengal from real and model solution. J Ind Eng Chem 20:3559–3567.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2013.12.049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Mittal H, Ray SS (2016) A study on the adsorption of methylene blue onto gum ghatti/tio2 nanoparticles-based hydrogel nanocomposite. Int J Biol Macromol 88:66–80.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.03.032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Essawy AA, Sayyah SM, El-Nggar AM (2017) Wastewater remediation by TiO2-impregnated chitosan nano-grafts exhibited dual functionality: high adsorptivity and solar-assisted self cleaning. J Photochem Photobiol B: Biol 173:170–180.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotobio1.2017.05.044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Thomas M et al (2017) Self-organized graphene oxide and TiO2 nanoparticles incorporated alginate/carboxymethyl cellulose nanocomposites with efficient photocatalytic activity under direct sunlight. J Photochem Photobiol, A 346:113–125.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotochem.2017.05.037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Liu P et al (2015) Synthesis of covalently crosslinked attapulgite/poly (acrylic acid-co-acrylamide) nanocomposite hydrogels and their evaluation as adsorbent for heavy metal ions. J Ind Eng Chem 23:188–193.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2014.08.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Wu LS et al (2013) Organo-bentonite-Fe3O4 poly(sodium acrylate) magnetic superabsorbent nanocomposite: synthesis, characterization, and thorium(IV) adsorption. Appl Clay Sci 83–84:405–414.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2013.07.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Chiew CSC et al (2016) Halloysite/alginate nanocomposite beads: kinetics, equilibrium and mechanism for lead adsorption. Appl Clay Sci 119:301–310.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2015.10.032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Matusik J, Wscislo A (2014) Enhanced heavy metal adsorption on functionalized nanotubular halloysite interlayer grafted with aminoalcohols. Appl Clay Sci 100:50–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2014.06.034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Ballav N et al (2014) Polypyrrole-coated halloysite nanotube clay nanocomposite: synthesis, characterization and Cr(VI) adsorption behaviour. Appl Clay Sci 102:60–70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2014.10.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Shi LN et al (2014) Functional kaolinite supported fe/ni nanoparticles for simultaneous catalytic remediation of mixed contaminants (lead and nitrate) from wastewater. J Colloid Interface Sci 428:302–307.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2014.04.059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Koteja A, Matusik J (2015) Di-and triethanolamine grafted kaolinites of different structural order as adsorbents of heavy metals. J Colloid Interface Sci 455:83–92.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2015.05.027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Setshedi KZ et al (2013) Exfoliated polypyrrole-organically modified montmorillonite clay nanocomposite as a potential adsorbent for Cr(VI) removal. Chem Eng J 222:186–197.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2013.02.061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Setshedi KZ et al (2014) Breakthrough studies for Cr(VI) sorption from aqueous solution using exfoliated polypyrrole-organically modified montmorillonite clay nanocomposite. J Ind Eng Chem 20:2208–2216.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2013.09.052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Kadu BS et al (2011) Efficiency and recycling capability of montmorillonite supported Fe-Ni bimetallic nanocomposites towards hexavalent chromium remediation. Appl Catal B 104:407–414.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2011.02.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Kalantari K et al (2015) Rapid and high capacity adsorption of heavy metals by Fe3O4/montmorillonite nanocomposite using response surface methodology: preparation, characterization, optimization, equilibrium isotherms, and adsorption kinetics study. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 49:192–198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2014.10.025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Zheng XM et al (2017) Ammonium-pillared montmorillonite-co-Fe2O4 composite caged in calcium alginate beads for the removal of Cs+ from wastewater. Carbohydr Polym 167:306–316.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.03.059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Chikate RC, Kadu BS (2014) Improved photocatalytic activity of cdse-nanocomposites: effect of montmorillonite support towards efficient removal of indigo carmine. Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc 124:138–147.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2013.12.099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Pandey S, Mishra SB (2011) Organic-inorganic hybrid of chitosan/organoclay bionanocomposites for hexavalent chromium uptake. J Colloid Interface Sci 361:509–520.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2011.05.031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Kahraman HT (2017) Development of an adsorbent via chitosan nano-organoclay assembly to remove hexavalent chromium from wastewater. Int J Biol Macromol 94:202–209.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.09.111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Rusmin R et al (2015) Structural evolution of chitosan-palygorskite composites and removal of aqueous lead by composite beads. Appl Surf Sci 353:363–375.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2015.06.124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Alcantara ACS et al (2014) Polysaccharide-fibrous clay bionanocomposites. Appl Clay Sci 96:2–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2014.02.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Lv XS et al (2013) Fe-0-Fe3O4 nanocomposites embedded polyvinyl alcohol/sodium alginate beads for chromium (vi) removal. J Hazard Mat 262:748–758.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.09.036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Chen HH et al (2017) Feasible preparation and characterization of tunable novel montmorillonite/block-copolymers based composites as potential dual adsorbent candidates. Appl Clay Sci 137:192–202.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2016.12.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Ahmad R, Mirza A (2017) Green synthesis of xanthan gum/methionine-bentonite nanocomposite for sequestering toxic anionic dye. Surf Interfaces 8:65–72.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2017.05.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Ma JF et al (2016) Nanocomposite of exfoliated bentonite/g-C3N4/Ag3PO4 for enhanced visible-light photocatalytic decomposition of rhodamine B. Chemosphere 162:269–276.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.07.089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Ai LH, Li LL (2013) Efficient removal of organic dyes from aqueous solution with ecofriendly biomass-derived carbon@montmorillonite nanocomposites by one-step hydrothermal process. Chem Eng J 223:688–695.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2013.03.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Sarkar B et al (2011) Structural characterisation of arquad (R) 2HT-75 organobentonites: surface charge characteristics and environmental application. J Hazard Mat 195:155–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.08.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Motshekga SC, Ray SS (2017) Highly efficient inactivation of bacteria found in drinking water using chitosan-bentonite composites: modelling and breakthrough curve analysis. Water Res 111:213–223.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.01.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Liu EM et al (2016) Copper-complexed clay/poly-acrylic acid composites: extremely efficient adsorbents of ammonia gas. Appl Clay Sci 121:154–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2015.12.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    El-Dib FI et al (2016) Remediation of distilleries wastewater using chitosan immobilized bentonite and bentonite based organoclays. Int J Biol Macromol 86:750–755.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.01.108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Tan DYP (2016) Surface modifications of halloysite. In: Yuan P (ed) Developments in clay science. Elsevier, pp 167–201Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Szczepanik B et al (2017) Synthesis, characterization and photocatalytic activity of TiO2-halloysite and Fe2O3-halloysite nanocomposites for photodegradation of chloroanilines in water. Appl Clay Sci 149:118–126.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2017.08.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Sahithya K, Das D, Das N (2016) Adsorptive removal of monocrotophos from aqueous solution using biopolymer modified montmorillonite-CuO composites: equilibrium, kinetic and thermodynamic studies. Process Saf Environ Prot 99:43–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2015.10.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Jiang JQ, Cooper C, Ouki S (2002) Comparison of modified montmorillonite adsorbents—part i: preparation, characterization and phenol adsorption. Chemosphere 47:711–716.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0045-6535(02)00011-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Liu S et al (2017) Preparation and characterization of organo-vermiculite based on phosphatidylcholine and adsorption of two typical antibiotics. Appl Clay Sci 137:160–167.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2016.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Swearingen C, Macha S, Fitch A (2003) Leashed ferrocenes at clay surfaces: potential applications for environmental catalysis. J Mol Catal A: Chem 199:149–160.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s1381-1169(03)00031-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Karamanis D et al (2011) Water vapor adsorption and photocatalytic pollutant degradation with TiO2-sepiolite nanocomposites. Appl Clay Sci 53:181–187.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2010.12.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemistry, Government Science CollegeA Centre for Excellence in Science EducationPachpedi, JabalpurIndia

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options