4.7 Review

Xenobiotics removal by adsorption in the context of tertiary treatment: a mini review

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 20, Issue 8, Pages 5085-5095

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-013-1754-2

Keywords

Langmuir parameters; Pharmaceuticals; Pesticides; Batch studies; Maximum adsorption capacity; Wastewater treatment

Funding

  1. French National Agency for Water and Aquatic Ecosystems (ONEMA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Many xenobiotics, including several pharmaceuticals and pesticides, are poorly treated in domestic wastewater treatment plants. Adsorption processes, such as with activated carbons, could be a solution to curb their discharge into the aquatic environment. As adsorbent-like activated carbon is known to be expensive, identifying promising alternative adsorbent materials is a key challenge for efficient yet affordable xenobiotic removal from wastewaters. As part of the effort to address this challenge, we surveyed the literature on pharmaceutical and pesticide xenobiotics and built a database compiling data from 38 scientific publications covering 65 xenobiotics and 58 materials. Special focus was given to the relevance and comparability of the data to the characteristics of the adsorbent materials used and to the operating conditions of the batch tests inventoried. This paper gives an in-depth overview of the adsorption capacities of various adsorbents. The little data on alternative adsorbent materials, especially for the adsorption of pharmaceuticals, makes it difficult to single out any one activated carbon alternative capable of adsorbing pesticides and pharmaceuticals at the tertiary stage of treatment. There is a pressing need for further lab-scale experiments to investigate the tertiary treatment of discharged effluents. We conclude with recommendations on how future data should best be used and interpreted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available