4.7 Article

Adsorption and photodegradation of reactive red 120 with nickel-iron-layered double hydroxide/biochar composites

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 443, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130300

关键词

Anionic dyes; Kinetic; LDH-based photocatalyst; Synergistic adsorption and photodegradation; Wastewater treatment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A series of NiFe-LDH/biochar (NiFe/BC) composites were fabricated for the removal of anionic dyes from wastewater. The addition of biochar improved the adsorption capacity and photocatalytic ability of NiFe-LDH, with the optimized NiFe/BC2 composite achieving a removal rate of 88.5% under visible light. The photodegradation kinetic constant of NiFe/BC2 was significantly higher than that of NiFe-LDH and biochar.
Layered double hydroxide (LDH) materials were widely applied for adsorption and photodegradation of pol-lutants for wastewater treatment. New efficient LDH materials with adsorption and photodegradation abilities will be promising candidates for pollutants removal. Hence, a series of NiFe-LDH/biochar (NiFe/BC) were fabricated by the coprecipitation method for synergistic adsorption and photodegradation anionic dyes of reactive red 120 (RR120). The removal experiment showed that the addition of an appropriate amount of biochar into NiFe-LDH enhanced the adsorption capacity and its photocatalytic ability. The optimized NiFe/BC2 com-posite can remove 88.5 % of RR120 under visible light by adsorption and photocatalysis, which was much better than NiFe-LDH (63.3 %) and biochar (2.6 %). The photodegradation kinetic constant of the NiFe/BC2 composite was 3.1 and 104.8 times that of NiFe-LDH and BC. In addition, active species capture experiments and electron spin resonance (ESR) tests revealed the removal mechanisms of NiFe/BC composites for RR120 removal. This work affords a feasible strategy for preparing LDH-based photocatalyst with excellent adsorption and photo -catalytic performance for wastewater treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据