Removal of Uranium from Effluent Acidic Solution Using Manganese Oxide Coated Modified Talc (MOCMT)

  


    
Ions

    
Mn-coated material

    
Qmax (mg/g)

    
References

  

  


    
As+3

    
Manganese oxide-coated-alumina

    
42.5

    
38

  

  


    
Cd+2

    
Manganese oxide    modified Diatomite

    
26.6

    
39

  

  


    
Cu+2

    
Manganese oxide    modified bentonite

    
105.4

    
40

  

  


    
Pb+2

    
Manganese oxide    coated bentonite

    
58.9

    
41

  

  


    
U+6

    
Manganese oxide    coated zeolite

    
17.6

    
42

  

  


    
U+6

    
Manganese oxide coated sand

    
2.483

    
43

  

  


    
Mn+2

    
Manganese oxide    coated zeolite

    
60

    
44

  

  


    
226Ra

    
Manganese oxide    coated modified bentonite

    
94.28Bq/g

    
45

  

  


    
U+6

    
manganese oxide coated zeolite    (MOCZ) modified with amine

    
99

    
46

  

  


    
U+6

    
Manganese oxide modified    nanofiber

    
398

    
47

  

  


    
U+6

    
Manganese oxide coated modified    talc

    
38

    
Present study

  

Table 1: Ions adsorption capacity by manganese oxide coated adsorbents.

The heat-based technique was used to create talc modified with MnO to form MnO/talc in this study. As a result, nano-flakes of Manganese Oxide Coated Modified Talc (MOCMT), as a novel sorbent for uranium sorption from aqueous solution was investigated in this study. Furthermore the effects of pH, sorbent doge, adsorption time, initial uranium concentration, ions strength, and temperature were examined. The kinetic characteristics and adsorption isotherms were used to assess the adsorption performance.

The goal of the study is to remove the uranium from the barren (effluent) solution after four cycles on the heap pad. Because the barren solution has high concentrations of elements that cause resin poisoning as a result of its repeated passage (4 cycles) on the heap pad, these solutions must be disposed about after removal of uranium contained in them using MOCMT.

Materials and Methods

A talc sample was obtained for the studies from a talc deposit near El-Atshan, Egypt, 60 kilometres southwest of El Qussier City. The raw material was manually ground and sieved at 11.27 μm, where the highest surface area (18.986 m2/g) was obtained at the lowest size (11.27 μm) [48].

All of the chemicals and reagents utilized are of the highest quality. UO₂SO₄ crystals were used to make a uranium stock solution (1000 mg/L). U(VI) was calculated using NH₄VO₃ and an oxidimetric titration [49]. Arsenazo III at = 655 nm validated the results spectroscopically [50].

Modification Methods of Talc

1- Talc powder pretreatment: The talc powder samples were pretreated as follows before being used in the studies. The combinations of different mesh sizes of talc powder were combined with 300 mL distilled water and shaken for 1 hour. After stirring, all combinations were allowed to stand for 1 hour before removing the tiny contaminants suspended in the supernatant with a pipette. This was done again and again until the supernatant was clear. The finished products were then dried at 105°C.

2- Acid modified of talc: the surface modification reactions of talc were carried out by reacting talc powder (10g) with 0.2M HCl, heated to 80°C for 2h. The treated talc was then filtered, washed with deionized water, and dried in a vacuum oven at 105°C for 48 h.

3- 10g of the dried modified talc was added to 300 mL of hot KMnO₄ (0.5 M) solution at a room temperature and pH of 6.5; they were mixed using a mechanical stirrer for 4h. The pulp obtained was washed using deionized water, filtered and dried at 70°C in an electric oven. The aim of this stage was to precipitate MnO onto the modified talc surface to obtain the MnO-coated modified talc (MOCMT).

Sorption and Desorption Studies

Batch Studies (static)

Batch experimental were carried out to investigate the effect of various effective parameters on the removal of U⁺⁶ from liquid waste effluent onto the synthesized adsorbent. At room temperature, the following factors were investigated: working solution pH, adsorbent dosage, interfering elements, and reaction time. In a typical adsorption experiment, 50 mL U(VI) solution (5, 10, 15,20, 25 and 30 mg L^-1) and 0.5 g adsorbent was placed into a 100 mL conical flask at a predetermined pH (2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, and the initial pH=7). The admixture-containing conical flasks were vibrated for 180 min at room temperature in a water-bathing constant temperature vibrator. After that, the mixtures were filtered through proper filter papear. The solutions were then examined by a UV-VIS spectrophotometer. The loaded MOCMT was filtered and the sorbed uranium metal were desorbed by shaking with the appropriate solution of eluting agents and subsequently analyzed spectroscopically.

Column Studies (dynamic)

A glass column with a length of 300 mm and a diameter of 10 mm was loaded with 1.00 g 0.0001 g of MOCMT adsorbent. A peristaltic pump was used for passing the effluent sample through the column after adjusting its pH at (4.5) and flow rate at 1.0ml/2min and the operation was performed by the downstream flow. Recovery experiments were carried out after the sorption procedure. The column was first rinsed with water, and then a certain volume of the eluting agent was allowed to percolate through it. The sorbed metal ions get eluted from MOCMT and subsequently determined by spectrophotometric analysis.

Adsorption % (adsorption percentage of U(VI)) and qe (mg/g) (the adsorption capacity) and distribution coefficient (Kd) were calculated according to the following equations [51].

00Sorption rate=

where Co and Ce stand for the initial uranium concentration and that at equilibrium (mg/L), respectively. V is the volume of aqueous solution (L) and m is the dry composite weight (g).

Gattar Effluent (barren) Sample

The uranium-contaminated solution obtained after 4 cycles of leaching/adsorption on a heap pad came from a uranium-processing milling plant in Egypt's Gattar region. In site of Gattar-II, the presence of uranium minerals near fractures, faults, and joints favours hydrothermal solutions and/or groundwater circulation. This ore material has a high concentration of related elements such as Ca, Mg, Mn, Si, and Fe, with a concentration of about 300 (mg U/Kg). The systematically work is to leach uranium from its mineralization and obtain pregnant uranium leaching solutions to be suitable for uranium recovery by the quaternary ammonium resins. The produced effluent (barren) of our studies is the outlet of adsorption process prior to discharge to environment.

Results and Discussions

Characterization of MnO Coated Natural Talc and Surface Modification

The talc elementary sheet is composed of octahedral magnesium hydroxide structures sandwiched between sheets of silicon–oxygen tetrahedral in which the components are linked by ionic and covalent bonds. The silicate layers of talc sheets are bonded together by weak Van der Waals forces between surface oxygen atoms. Face surfaces present hydrophobic character

by the presence of –Si–O–Si– groups. On the other side, edge surfaces contain hydrophilic groups as –SiOH and –MgOH. It is clearly that confirmation of HCl broke siloxane bonds at the face surfaces, increasing the –OH groups content. In (Figure 1), the FTIR spectra of talc and MOCMT are shown. The FTIR spectra of talc and freshly synthesized MOCMT revealed substantial differences in peaks, including weakening of the bands at 1420 and 3640 cm^-1, which correspond to talc's –OH group. In addition, after MnO₂ impregnation, the bands at 710 and 870 cm-1 in talc, which correspond to Mg–O and Si–O bands, were diminished. The FT-IR bands of MOCMT shift to lower wave numbers, indicating that MnO particles are interacting with the talc surface. This demonstrates that MnO are present in the talc surface. Furthermore, the stretching vibrations of Mn-OH and Mn-O are allocated to the MnO₂ bands at 1370 and 559 cm^-1.

Figure 1: FT-IR chart of the Talc and (MOCMT).

    


    


    Figure 1: FT-IR chart of the Talc and (MOCMT).

    

Close

SEM pictures and EDX spectra for talc and the synthesized MOCMT are shown in (Figure 2) it can be seen that the talc's aky form is coated in MnO nanoparticles. The presence of Mn in the EDX spectrum indicates that a MnO/talc nanocomposite has formed.

Figure 2: SEM image and energy dispersive X-ray spectra for A) Talc and B) MOCMT.

    


    


    Figure 2: SEM image and energy dispersive X-ray spectra for A) Talc and B) MOCMT.

    

Close

Batch Study

Effect of pH

To find the optimum pH value for maximum sorption, series of adsorption measurements were carried out by contacting a fixed weight of the prepared MOCMT (0.5g) with 10 ppm of uranium standard solution at 25 °C for 180 minutes. The investigated pH ranged from 2 to 7. The obtained data were shown in (Figure 3). The results showed that the adsorption of uranium increases from about 10 to 94% with an increase in pH of the solution from 2.0 to 3.5 and then decreases to 70% at pH of 5. The uranium adsorption mechanism was affected by the solution pH through the hydrolysis of uranyl ions in aqueous solution as well as the properties of the active sites on the surface of the sorbent [52]. At low pH value, the uranium is present in the solution mainly in the form of free UO₂²⁺ ions and the availability of free uranium ions are maximum at pH 3.5. Low adsorption of the positively-charged uranyl ions at pH values less than 3.0 may be caused by strong protonated silanol groups of the talc layer with slightly positive charge. As the pH of a uranium solution increases, the uranylions are easily hydrolyzed, and these hydrolysis products are also polymerized.

Figure 3: Influence of pH on the adsorption efficiency of uranium by MOCMT. C₀(U) = 10 mg/l,adsorbent dosage = 0.5 g, T = 298 K, t = 90 min.

    


    


    Figure 3: Influence of pH on the adsorption efficiency of uranium by MOCMT. C0(U) = 10 mg/l,adsorbent dosage = 0.5 g, T = 298 K, t = 90 min.

    

Close

Effect of Adsorbent Dosage

The capacity of an adsorbent for a given initial concentration of the adsorbate is determined by the dosage of the adsorbent. The results reveal that as the adsorbent concentration increases, percentage removal increases, but the amount adsorbed per unit mass of the adsorbent falls significantly. The decrease in unit adsorption as the dose of adsorbent is increased is due to unsaturated adsorption sites remaining during the adsorption reaction. The maximum removal rate of MOCMT reached about 94% when their dosage was 0.5 g/l. (Figure 4) shows the effect of dosage on U(VI) ion elimination.

Figure 4: Influence of adsorbent dosage on the sorption efficiency of uranium by MOCMT. pH = 3.5, C0(U) = 20 mg/l, T = 298 K, t = 90 min.

    


    


    Figure 4: Influence of adsorbent dosage on the sorption efficiency of uranium by MOCMT. pH = 3.5, C0(U) = 20 mg/l, T = 298 K, t = 90 min.

    

Close

Effect of Initial Uranium Concentration

For studying the effect of initial uranium concentration on the adsorption efficiency and quantity of the adsorbed uranium per unit weight of adsorbent of (MOCMT). A series of measurements were carried out by contacting a fixed weight (1.0g) for 90 minutes at room temperature and pH3.5. The studied initial uranium concentrations ranged from 5 up to 70 mg/l. The obtained results were plotted in figure [32]. From the obtained data, it is clearly obvious that uranium adsorption efficiency decreases with increasing its initial concentration. The (experimental) uranium adsorption capacity of the (MOCMT) was determined from (Figure 5) to be about 38.0 mg U/g (MOCMT).

Figure 5: Effect of initial uranium concentrations on uranium adsorption onto MOCMT.

    


    


    Figure 5: Effect of initial uranium concentrations on uranium adsorption onto MOCMT.

    

Close

Sorption Isotherm

Isotherm of adsorption gives information on mechanisms of adsorption, properties of the surface and affinity of an adsorbent towards heavy metal ions. The adsorption data were analyzed using Langmuir and Freundlich adsorption isotherm models. The Langmuir model assumes that the monolayer adsorption which happens at fixed numbers of homogeneous sites on the adsorbent. Thus, the Langmuir model is given by the following equation:

Where: Ce (mg/ L) is the equilibrium concentration of U(VI) in the solution, qe (mg /L) is the amount adsorbed at equilibrium, Qo and b, the Langmuir constants, are the saturated monolayer sorption capacity and the sorption equilibrium constant, respectively. A plot of Ce/qe versus Ce would result in a straight line with a slope of (1/Q_o) and intercept of 1/bQ_o as shown in (Figure 6a).

Figure 6: Fitting lines of Langmuir (a) and Freundlich (b) isotherm models of MOCMT.

    


    


    Figure 6: Fitting lines of Langmuir (a) and Freundlich (b) isotherm models of MOCMT.

    

Close

Freundlich Isotherm

The Freundlich model stipulates that the ratio of solute adsorbed to the solute concentration is a function of the solution. The empirical model was shown to be consistent with exponential distribution of active centers, characteristic of heterogeneous surfaces. The amount of solute adsorbed at equilibrium, q_e, is related to the concentration of solute in the solution, C_e, as in the following equation:

This expression can be linearized as follow:

log

Where: K_F and n are the Freundlich constants, which represent sorption capacity and sorption intensity, respectively. A plot of “logq_e” versus “logC_e” would result in a straight line with a slope of (1/n) and intercept of “log K_F” as shown in (Figure 6b). The Langmuir and Freundlich constants are given in Table (2). The experimental data shows that the adsorption of uranium onto MOCMT fits well with Langmuir than Freundlich isotherm.

Table 2: Langmuir and Freundlich parameters for uranium adsorption onto MOCMT.

  


    
Metal

    
Adsorbent

    
Langmuir model parameters

    
Freundlich model parameters

  

  


    
Q° (mg/g)

    
b(L/mg)

    
R2

    
1/n

    
Kf (mg/g)

    
R2

  

  


    
Uranium

    
MOCMT

    
38

    
0.063

    
0.998

    
0.564

    
1.6

    
0.831

  

Table 2: Langmuir and Freundlich parameters for uranium adsorption onto MOCMT.

Close

Effect of Contact Time and Sorption Kinetics

The effect of contact time on the adsorption efficiency of uranium onto MOCMT was examined. The duration of the study ranged from 15 to 180 minutes. According to the results in (Figure 7), the uranium adsorption effectiveness was around 63% when measured at 45 minutes of contact time. High uranium adsorption efficiencies were obtained when the contact duration was increased from 45 to 90 minutes. The reaction has reached equilibrium because there is no substantial variation in % removal. The initial quick adsorption rate is caused by the abundance of active sites on the nanocomposite's surface.

Figure 7: Pseudo first order and second reaction kinetics for the adsorption of Uranium on MOCMT.

    


    


    Figure 7: Pseudo first order and second reaction kinetics for the adsorption of Uranium on MOCMT.

    

Close

Adsorption kinetic is used to predict the rate at which uranium ions is removed from the barren solutions. The adsorption data of U(VI) at different time intervals are fit for to pseudo-first-order kinetic model and pseudo-second-order kinetic model. Pseudo first order kinetic model describe mechanisms of metal species adsorption by an adsorbent and can be expressed as:

Pseudo-second-order kinetic model

where q_t is the amount of U(VI) adsorbed at time t (mg/ g); q_e is equilibrium solid phase concentration and k₁ and k₂ are first-order and second-order rate constant for adsorption (L min-¹) respectively. The adsorption kinetic studies of U(VI) ions onto nanocomposite are shown in (Figure 7) and summarize in Table 3.

Table 3: Pseudo-first-order and pseudo-second-order model parameters for MOCMT.

  


    
Material 

    
Pseudo-second-order model 

    
Pseudo-first-order model 

  

  


    
MOCMT 

    
R2 

    
K2 

    
qe    (mg/g) 

    
R2 

    
K1 

    
qe    (mg/g) 

  

  


    
0.992 

    
0.00824 

    
38.8 

    
0.988 

    
0.0364 

    
32.9 

  

Table 3: Pseudo-first-order and pseudo-second-order model parameters for MOCMT.

Close

The theoretical adsorption capacity value (38.8 mg/g) for pseudo second-order kinetics is in good agreement with the experimental adsorption capacity value (38 mg/g). The regression coefficient R² of second order is higher than that of the first order and hence the data best fitted to pseudo-second-order than pseudo-first-order and hence confirming chemisorption involving chemical bonding between uranyl ions and the adsorbent active sites [53,54].

As explained previously, the adsorbents can efficiently adsorb uranium from aqueous solutions containing mainly uranium. In the Gattar uranium barren solution, iron is one of the most concentrated elements in the solution as which have a significant impact on the uranium adsorption from acidic uranium effluent. To investigate the impact of iron as a high foreign ion concentration on the adsorption efficiency of uranium onto MOCMT, a series of adsorption experiments were carried out onto a constant sample dose of MOCMT (0.5g each) were contacted with uranium solution (20 mg/L) with different additions of iron ranged from 50 to 2,200 mg/L. The studies were conducted out at room temperature (25oC) with a 90 min contact time and a pH of 3.5. As shown in (Figure 8), increasing the amount of iron additional reduces uranium adsorption (from roughly 94–5%) due to adsorption competition between iron and uranium. The decrease in MOCMT capacity after contact foreign ions could be due to competition between uranium and other ions in the solution, particularly ferric iron, which can form anionic complexes, [Fe(SO₄)n]^3-2n or [Fe(OH)(SO₄)₂]^2- that compete with uranium for MOCMT sites during acid leach liquor recovery. To overcome the high percentage of iron in the solution, it must be precipitated at pH 3.5 with some other impurities before loading onto the adsorbent.

Figure 8: Effect of added iron amounts upon uranium adsorption efficiency onto MOCMT.

    


    


    Figure 8: Effect of added iron amounts upon uranium adsorption efficiency onto MOCMT.

    

Close

Desorption Studies

Desorption is a critical step in sorption research work because it enhances the economic value of the sorption process. Desorption studies will enable in the adsorbent's regeneration, allowing it to be reused. For this objective, three mineral acids (H₂SO₄, HCl, and HNO₃) were examined. 1.0g of loaded adsorbent was eluted for 35 minutes in a 10 mL solution with a var1ied acid content ranging from 0.1 to 0.5 M. The observed data, (Figure 9) demonstrate that increasing acid increased uranium elution efficiency. With 10 mL of 0.4 MH₂SO₄ and 1.0g loaded adsorbent, it reached 91%. The unused fraction of sulphuric acid is maintained on the barren adsorbent during the elution phase, and then it is returned to the leaching system, where it is recycled back into the leaching process, resulting in a reduction in acid consumption.

Figure 9: Elution efficiency using different eluent reagents.

    


    


    Figure 9: Elution efficiency using different eluent reagents.

    

Close

Application

Case Study (Barren Solution from Milling Plant in Gattar Project, Egypt)

The novel sorbent MOCMT was used to separate UO₂²⁺ ions in barren samples obtained from Gattar milling project, Egyptian after 4 cycle leaching/adsorption. For this purpose, 10 L of barren solution (10ppmU) was adjusted to pH 3.5 for precipitation of Fe²⁺ as shown in table 4, before being run through 3. 0 g of MOCMT at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min. (Figure 10), shows the obtained results based on the optimum factors of the experimental adsorption process. From the plotted curve of barren volume versus uranium in barren, the adsorption efficiency reached 82%. The low adsorption efficiency may be due to adsorption of some interfering elements with uranium.

Figure 10: Adsorption of uranium barren solution from Gattar onto MOCMT.

    


    


    Figure 10: Adsorption of uranium barren solution from Gattar onto MOCMT.

    

Close

Table 4: Chemical analysis of elements associated uranium in GII pilot plant barren liquors before and after PPt.

  


    
Element

    
Al

    
Si

    
Fe

    
Mn

    
Na

    
K

    
U

    
Mg

    
Ca

    
Cu

  

  


    
Cons, ppm

    
10

    
60

    
2100

    
380

    
135

    
125

    
10

    
175

    
95

    
16

  

  


    
After ppt

    
9

    
29

    
350

    
210

    
340

    
90

    
9

    
95

    
70

    
15

  

Table 4: Chemical analysis of elements associated uranium in GII pilot plant barren liquors before and after PPt.

Close

Uranium (VI) was eluted from the loaded modified (MOCMT) using 0.4 M H₂SO₄. The purpose of the adsorption-desorption cycle tests was to decide if MOCMT could be reused. The adsorption efficiency dropped as the cycle number increased, as can be shown in Figure 11. The drop was caused by a reduction in the number of effective adsorption sites. First, the uranium adsorbed on MOCMT could not be entirely desorbed by H₂SO₄ solution; second, the chemical adsorption of the inner-sphere surface complex was not totally reversible. Despite this, after five cycles, the adsorption efficiency fallen from 92 to 79%.

Figure 11: Reusability performance of MOCMT during 5 cycle.

    


    


    Figure 11: Reusability performance of MOCMT during 5 cycle.

    

Close

Conclusion

MnO₂ was deposited over the modified talc surface, resulting in a novel manganese dioxide coated modified talc (MOCMT) adsorbent. The (MOCMT) was originally evaluated as an adsorbent for removing uranium from effluent solution. On the adsorption, reusability, and adsorption mechanisms, the effects of pH, ionic strength, and initial uranium concentration and mixing time were shown. When compared to the published values, the theoretical adsorption capacity of (MOCMT) computed as 38.8 mg/g, was competitive. The MOCMT was successfully employed to extract uranium from barren solution produced during the uranium milling plant's after four-cycle leaching/adsorption process.

Author Statements

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

1. Zhu KR, Chen CL, Xu MWC, Chen K, Tan X, Wakeel M, et al. In situ carbothermal reduction synthesis of Fe nanocrystals embedded into N-doped carbon nanospheres for highly efficient U(VI) adsorption and reduction. Chem Eng J. 2018; 331: 395-405.
2. Anirudhan TS, Bringle CD, Rijith S. Removal of uranium (VI) from aqueous solutions and nuclear industry effluents using humic acid-immobilized zirconium-pillared clay. J Environ Radioact. 2010; 101: 267-76.
3. Ma F, Gui Y, Liu P, Xue Y, Song W. Functional fibrous materials-based adsorbents for uranium adsorption and environmental remediation. Chem Eng J. 2020; 390: 124597.
4. Das S, Pandey AK, Athawale A, Kumar V, Bhardwaj YK, Sabharwal S, et al. Chemical aspects of uranium recovery from seawater by amidoximated electron-beam-grafted polypropylene membranes. Desalination. 2008; 232: 243-53.
5. Zhang A, Uchiyama G, Asakura T. pH Effect on the uranium adsorption from seawater by a macroporous fibrous polymeric material containing amidoxime chelating functional group. React Funct Polym. 2005; 63: 143-53.
6. Zhang A, Asakura T, Uchiyama G. The adsorption mechanism of uranium(VI) from seawater on a macroporous fibrous polymeric adsorbent containing amidoxime chelating functional group. React Funct Polym. 2003; 57: 67-76.
7. Mellah A, Chegrouche S, Barkat M. The removal of uranium (VI) from aqueous solutions onto activated carbon: kinetic and thermodynamic investigations. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2006; 296: 434-41.
8. Sakaguchi T, Nakajima A. Recovery of Uranium by Immobilized Polyhydroxyanthraquinone. Sep Sci Technol. 1986; 21: 519-34.
9. Benedict B, Pigford TH, Levi HW. Nuclear chemical engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1981.
10. Yusan SD, Akyil S. Sorption of uranium (VI) from aqueous solutions by akaganeite. J Hazard Mater. 2008; 160: 388-95.
11. Mellah A, Silem A, Boualia A, Kada R. Adsorption of organic matter from a wet phosphoric acid using activated carbon: equilibrium study. Chem Eng Process. 1992; 31: 191-4.
12. Saleem M, Afzal M, Qadeer R, Hanif J. Selective Adsorption of Uranium on Activated Charcoal from Electrolytic Aqueous Solutions. Sep Sci Technol. 1992; 27: 239-53.
13. Morsy AMA, Hussein AEM. Adsorption of uranium from crude phosphoric acid using activated carbon. J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2011; 288: 341-6.
14. Zou W, Zhao L, Han R. Adsorption characteristics of uranyl ions by manganese oxide coated sand in batch mode. J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2011; 288: 239-49.
15. Olmez Aytas S, Akyil S, Eral M. J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2004; 260: 119-25.
16. Donat R, Esen K, Cetisli H, Aytas S. Adsorption of uranium (VI) onto Ulva sp.-sepiolite composite. J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2009; 279: 253-61.
17. Cheira MF, Mira HI, Sakr AK, Mohamed SA. Adsorption of U (VI) from acid solution on a low-cost sorbent: equilibrium, kinetic, and thermodynamic assessments. Nucl Sci Tech. 2019; 30: 156.
18. Merikhy A, Heydari A, Eskandari H, Ghahraman-Rozegar F. Carbonized spent bleaching earth as a low-cost adsorbent: a facile revalorization strategy via response surface methodology. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif. 2020; 158: 108167.
19. Shameli K, Ahmad MB, Zargar M, Wan M, Yunus ZW, Ibrahim NA, et al. Int J Nanomedicine. 2011; 6: 271-84.
20. Luo H-M, Zhang F, Yang PB. Preparation and electrochemical properties of CPAC/Mn3O4 nanocomposite electrode. J Mater Sci Mater Electron. 2013; 24: 601-6.
21. Rhim JW, Hong SI, Park HM, Perry KW PKW. Preparation and characterization of chitosan-based nanocomposite films with antimicrobial activity. J Agric Food Chem. 2006; 54: 5814-22.
22. Krishnan Bama, Mahalingam S. Facile synthesis and antimicrobial activity of manganese oxide/bentonite nanocomposites. Res Chem Intermed. 2017; 43: 2351-65.
23. Michot LJ, Villieras F, François M, Yvon J, le Dred R, Cases JM. The Structural Microscopic Hydrophilicity of Talc. Langmuir. 1994; 10: 3765-73.
24. Wallqvist V, Claesson PM, Swerin A, Schoelkopf J, Gane PAC. Interaction forces between talc and hydrophobic particles probed by AFM. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Aspects. 2006; 277: 183-90.
25. Castillo LA, Barbosa SE, Capiati NJ. Influence of talc genesis and particle surface on the crystallization kinetics of polypropylene/talc composites. J Appl Polym Sci. 2012; 126: 1763-72.
26. Wang Y, Lin H, Lin Z, Yuan Y. Application And Prospect Of Talc As Heavy Metal Passivation Agent. IOP Conf Ser.: Mater Sci Eng. 2018; 392: 032029.
27. Chauhan VS, Bhardwaj NK, Chakrabarti SK. Effect of particle size of magnesium silicate filler on physical properties of paper. Can J Chem Eng. 2013; 91: 855-61.
28. Xu Y. Min Metall. 2015:75-7 + 80.
29. Sprynskyy M, Kowalkowski T, Tutu H, Cukrowska EM, Buszewski B. Adsorption performance of talc for uranium removal from aqueous solution. Chem Eng J. 2011; 171: 1185-93.
30. Xu Y, Ruan T, Zhang J, Li P. Contemporary chemicals; 2014; 1959-61.
31. Sani HA, Ahmad MB, Saleh TA. Synthesis of zinc oxide/talc nanocomposite for enhanced lead adsorption from aqueous solutions. RSC Adv. 2016; 6: 108819-27.
32. Kalantari K, Ahmad MB, Masoumi HR, Shameli K, Basri M, Khandanlou R. Rapid adsorption of heavy metals by Fe3O4/talc nanocomposite and optimization study using response surface methodology. Int J Mol Sci. 2014; 15: 12913-27.
33. Moradihamedani P, Kalantari K, Abdullah AH, Morad NA. High efficient removal of lead(II) and nickel(II) from aqueous solution by novel polysulfone/Fe 3 O 4 –talc nanocomposite mixed matrix membrane. Desalin Water Treat. 2016; 57: 28900-9.
34. Zou W, Han R, Chen Z, Shi J. Hongmin Lb. J Chem Eng Data. 2006; 51: 534-41.
35. Han R, Zou W, Zhang Z, Shi J, Yang J. J Hazard Mater. 2006; B137: 384-95.
36. Zou W, Zhao L, Han R. Sep sci Eng Chin J. Chem Eng. 2009; 17: 585-93.
37. Zou W, Han R, Chen Z, Jinghua Z, Shi J. Kinetic study of adsorption of Cu(II) and Pb(II) from aqueous solutions using manganese oxide coated zeolite in batch mode. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Aspects. 2006; 279: 238-46.
38. Maliyekkal SM, Philip L, Pradeep T. As(III) removal from drinking water using manganese oxide-coated-alumina: performance evaluation and mechanistic details of surface binding. Chem Eng J. 2009; 153: 101-7.
39. Al-degs YS, Tutunju MF, Shawabkeh RA. The Feasibility of Using Diatomite and Mn–Diatomite for Remediation of Pb 2+ , Cu 2+ , and Cd 2+ from Water. Sep Sci Technol. 2000; 35: 2299-310.
40. Eren E. Removal of copper ions by modified Unye clay, Turkey. J Hazard Mater. 2008; 159: 235-44.
41. Eren E, Afsin B, Onal Y. Removal of lead ions by acid activated and manganese oxide-coated bentonite. J Hazard Mater. 2009; 161: 677-85.
42. Han R, Zou W, Wang Y, Zhu L. Removal of uranium(VI) from aqueous solutions by manganese oxide coated zeolite: discussion of adsorption isotherms and pH effect. J Environ Radioact. 2007; 93: 127-43.
43. Zou W, Zhao L, Han R. Adsorption characteristics of uranyl ions by manganese oxide coated sand in batch mode. J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2011; 288: 239-49.
44. Taffarel SR, Rubio J. Removal of Mn2+ from aqueous solution by manganese oxide coated zeolite. Miner Eng. 2010; 23: 1131-8.
45. Nagar MS, Abdou AA, Ghazala RAS. Mediterr J Chem. 2018; 7: 105-14.
46. Yousef LA, Bakry AR, Ahmad AA. Uranium(VI) recovery from acidic leach liquor using manganese oxide coated zeolite (MOCZ) modified with amine. J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2020; 324: 409-21.
47. Tao W, Lv R, Tao Q. Facile Preparation of Novel Manganese Dioxide Modified Nanofiber and Its Uranium Adsorption Performance. J Appl Math Phys. 2021; 09: 1837-52.
48. Zeyni ARSOY, Bahri ERSOY, Atilla EVCIN, Mehmet G, ICDUYGU. Physicochem Probl Miner Process. 2017; 53: 288-306.
49. Mathew KJ, Mason B, Morales ME, Narayann UI. J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2009; 282: 939.
50. Marczenko Z, Balcerzak M. Uranium. Separation, pre-concentration and spectrophotometry in inorganic analysis. Elsevier. 2000; 10: 446-55.
51. Mahdavi M, Ahmad MB, Haron MJ, Gharayebi Y, Shameli K, Nadi B. Fabrication and Characterization of SiO2/(3-Aminopropyl)triethoxysilane-Coated Magnetite Nanoparticles for Lead(II) Removal from Aqueous Solution. J Inorg Organomet Polym Mater. 2013; 23: 599-607.
52. Ferrah N, Abderrahim O, Didi MA, Villemin D. J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2011; 289: 721.
53. Wu FC, Tseng RL, Juang RS. J Hazard Mater. 2001; 3894: 00340-X.
54. Ding L, Deng HP, Wu C, Han X. Affecting factors, equilibrium, kinetics and thermodynamics of bromide removal from aqueous solutions by MIEX resin. Chem Eng. 2012; 181-182: 360-70.

Download PDF

Citation: MS Nagar, KF Mahmoud, WM Yousef, AA Abdou. Removal of Uranium from Effluent Acidic Solution Using Manganese Oxide Coated Modified Talc (MOCMT). Austin Chem Eng. 2023; 10(2): 1101.

Home

Journal Scope

Editorial Board

Instruction for Authors

Submit Your Article

Contact Us