Environmental Engineering Research

  • 제21권1호
  • /
  • Pages.99-107
  • /
  • 2016
  • /
  • 1226-1025(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-968X(eISSN)
대한환경공학회 (Korean Society of Environmental Engineers)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effectiveness of gold nanoparticle-coated silica in the removal of inorganic mercury in aqueous systems: Equilibrium and kinetic studies

  • Solis, Kurt Louis (Department of Environmental Engineering, Daegu University) ;
  • Nam, Go-Un (Department of Environmental Engineering, Daegu University) ;
  • Hong, Yongseok (Department of Environmental Engineering, Daegu University)
  • 투고 : 2015.11.07
  • 심사 : 2016.01.15
  • 발행 : 2016.03.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The adsorption of inorganic mercury, Hg (II), in aqueous solution has been investigated to evaluate the effectiveness of synthesized gold (Au) nanoparticle-coated silica as sorbent in comparison with activated carbon and Au-coated sand. The synthesis of the Au-coated silica was confirmed by x-ray diffraction (Bragg reflections at $38.2^{\circ}$, $44.4^{\circ}$, $64.6^{\circ}$, and $77.5^{\circ}$) and the Au loading on silica surface was $6.91{\pm}1.14mg/g$. The synthesized Au-coated silica performed an average Hg adsorption efficiency of ~96 (${\pm}2.61$) % with KD value of 9.96 (${\pm}0.32$) L/g. The adsorption kinetics of Hg(II) on to Au-coated silica closely follows a pseudo-second order reaction where it is found out to have an initial adsorption rate of $4.73g/{\mu}g/min/$ and overall rate constant of $4.73{\times}10^{-4}g/{\mu}g/min/$. Au-coated silica particles are effective in removing Hg (II) in aqueous solutions due to their relatively high KD values, rapid adsorption rate, and high overall efficiency that can even decrease mercury levels below the recommended concentrations in drinking water.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Wang Zheng LL, Baohua Gu. Mercury reduction and oxidation by reduced natural organic matter in anoxic environments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012;46:292-299. https://doi.org/10.1021/es203402p
  2. John H, Pavlish, Everett A, et al. Status review of mercury control options for coal-fired power plants. Fuel Process Technol. 2003;82:89-165 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3820(03)00059-6
  3. UNEP. Global mercury assessment 2013: Sources, emissions, releases and environmental transport. Geneva: United Nations Environment Program; 2013.
  4. Ding F, Zhao Y, Mi L, Li H, Li Y, Zhang J. Removal of gas-phase elemental mercury in flue gas by inorganic chemically promoted natural mineral sorbents. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2012;51:3039-3048. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie202231r
  5. Aposhian HV, Aposhian MM. Elemental, mercuric, and methylmercury: Biological interactions and dilemmas. In: Proceedings of the Air Quality II: Mercury, Trace Elements, and Particulate Matter Conference; 2000 Sept 19-21; McLean. p. A1-3.
  6. Francois MM. Morel AMLK, Marc Amyot. The chemical cycle and bioaccumulation of mercury. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Sys. 1998;29:543-566. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.543
  7. U.S. EPA. Mercury update: Impact on fish advisories (EPA Fact Sheet EPA-823-F-01-001). Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water; 2001.
  8. Huang CP, Blankenship DW. The removal of mercury(II) from dilute aqueous solution by activated carbon. Water Res. 1984;18:37-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(84)90045-9
  9. Walcarius A, Mercier L. Mesoporous organosilica adsorbents: nanoengineered materials for remocal of organic and inorganic pollutants. J. Mater. Chem. 2010;20:4478-4511. https://doi.org/10.1039/b924316j
  10. Fong TS, Johan MR, Ahmad RB. Synthesis and characterization of gold-titanium-mesoporous silica nanomaterials. Int. J. Electro. Sci. 2012;7:4716-4727.
  11. Leopold K, Foulkes M, Worsfold PJ. Gold-coated silica as a preconcentration phase for the determination of total dissolved mercury in natural waters using atomic fluorescence spectrometry. Anal. Chem. 2009;81:3421-3428 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac802685s
  12. Bello OS, Bello IA, Adegoke KA. Adsorption of dyes using different types of sand: A review. S. Afr. J. Chem. 2013;66.
  13. U.S. EPA. Method 1631, Revision E: Mercury in water by oxidation, purge and trap, and cold vapor atomic fluorescence spectrometry (EPA-821-R-02-019). Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water; 2001.
  14. Yazid H, Adnan R, Hamid SA, Farrukh MA. Synthesis and characterization of gold nanoparticles supported on zinc oxide via the deposition-precipitation method. Turk J. Chem. 2009;34:639-650.
  15. Li Y, Yue Q, Gao B. Adsorption kinetics and desorption of Cu(II) and Zn(II) from aqueous solution onto humic acid. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010;178:455-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.01.103
  16. Ho YS, McKay G. Pseudo-second order model for sorption process. Process Biochem. 1998;34:451-465.
  17. Ramadan H, Ghanem A, El-Rassy H. Mercury removal from aqueous solutions using silica, polyacrylamide and hybrid silica- polyacrylamide aerogels. Chem. Eng. J. 2010;159:107-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2010.02.051
  18. Amirbahman A, et al. Kinetics of homogeneous and surface- catalyzed mercury (II) reduction by iron (II). Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013;47:7204-7213. https://doi.org/10.1021/es401459p
  19. Bowman BT. Conversion of freundlich adsorption K values to the mole fraction format and the use of Sy values to express relative adsorption of pesticides. Soil. Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1982;46740-743.
  20. Pierce RH, Olney CE, Felbeck GT. pp'-DDT adsorption to suspended particulate matter in sea water. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1974;28:1061-1073.
  21. King PH, McCARTY PL. A chromatographic model for predicting pesticide migration in soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1968:248-261.
  22. Liu Y, Wang Q, Mei R, Wang H, Weng X, Wu Z. Mercury re-emission in flue gas multipollutants simultaneous absorption system. Environ Sci. Technol. 2014:14025-14030.
  23. Fitzgerald WF, Lamborg CH, Hammerschmidt CR. Marine biogeochemical cycling of mercury. Chem. Rev. 2007;107:641-662. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr050353m
  24. Ong CN. Minerals from drinking water: Bioavailability for various world populations and health implications. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2005. p. 61-74.
  25. Lim J, Kang HM, Kim LH, Ko SO. Removal of heavy metals by sawdust adsorption: Equilibrium and kinetic studies. Environ. Eng. Res. 2008;13:79-85. https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2008.13.2.079
  26. Randtke SJ, Jepsen CP. Effects of salts on activated carbon adsorption of fulvic acids. Am. Water Works Assoc. 1982;74:84-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1551-8833.1982.tb04854.x

피인용 문헌

  1. Simultaneous Removal of Hg(II) and Phenol Using Functionalized Activated Carbon Derived from Areca Nut Waste vol.7, pp.7, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/met7070248
  2. Zero valent cobalt impregnated silica nanoparticles for the sanitation of contaminated water pp.19447442, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.12913
  3. Heavy metal pollution and the role of inorganic nanomaterials in environmental remediation vol.8, pp.10, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201485
  4. Elimination characteristics of sulfonated cobalt phthalocyanine catalyst (Europhtal) from wastewater in natural gas refineries by adsorption using modified natural zeolite vol.27, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2020.506