The efficient removal of low concentration hexavalent chromium via combining charged microporous membrane and micellar adsorption filtration

Wu-Shang Yang; Peng Zhang; Shu-Yang Shen; Qian-Wei Su; Ya-Ni Jiang; Jian-Li Wang; Ming-Yong Zhou; Ze-Lin Qiu; Bao-Ku Zhu

doi:10.1515/polyeng-2023-0052

Article

The efficient removal of low concentration hexavalent chromium via combining charged microporous membrane and micellar adsorption filtration

Wu-Shang Yang , Peng Zhang , Shu-Yang Shen , Qian-Wei Su , Ya-Ni Jiang , Jian-Li Wang , Ming-Yong Zhou , Ze-Lin Qiu and Bao-Ku Zhu

Published/Copyright: June 16, 2023

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information

From the journal Journal of Polymer Engineering Volume 43 Issue 6

Abstract

It is challenging to effectively purge wastewater containing heavy metal ions at low concentration. In order to remove trace Cr (VI) from wastewater efficiently, a positively charged microporous membrane was prepared by firstly non-solvent induced phase separation (NIPS) of amphiphilic polymer and secondly surface quaternization modification. The morphologies, surface roughness, surface charge, hydrophilicity, and pore size of membranes were characterized. Based on the dual action of micellar adsorption and charge repulsion, when surfactant is 4 mM and Cr (VI) is 60 ppm, the surface quaternization membrane (Q-MPVD) achieves 99.8 % Cr (VI) rejection simultaneously accompanied by a permeability of 100 LMH/bar. Meanwhile, the effects of STAC concentration, Cr (VI) concentration, pH as well as inorganic salt concentration on the composite micellar size, and Cr (VI) rejection performance were investigated, respectively. Moreover, the Q-MPVD membrane shows an excellent separation stability over a wide pH range, indicating its application perspective in engineering process. In summary, this work provided a positively charged membrane with high-efficiency performance for treating practical trace Cr (VI)-containing industrial wastewater.

Keywords: hexavalent chromium removal; micellar enhanced filtration; pH stability; positively charged membrane

Corresponding authors: Ze-Lin Qiu, Department of Polymer Science and Engineering, ERC of Membrane and Water Treatment (MOE), Key Laboratory of Macromolecular Synthesis and Functionalization, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China; and International Joint Innovation Center, International Research Center for Functional Polymers, Zhejiang University, Haining 314400, China, E-mail: qiuzelin@zju.edu.cn; and Bao-Ku Zhu, Department of Polymer Science and Engineering, ERC of Membrane and Water Treatment (MOE), Key Laboratory of Macromolecular Synthesis and Functionalization, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China, E-mail: zhubk@zju.edu.cn

Funding source: National Key R&D program of China

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2017YFC0403701

Funding source: Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province, China

Award Identifier / Grant number: LD22E030006

Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: The authors gratefully thank for the financial support from Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province, China (no. LD22E030006) and National Key R&D program of China (no. 2017YFC0403701).
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this article.

References

1. Zayed, A. M., Terry, N. Chromium in the environment: factors affecting biological remediation. Plant Soil 2003, 249, 139–156; https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022504826342.10.1023/A:1022504826342Search in Google Scholar

2. Mohan, D., Pittman, C. U. Activated carbons and low cost adsorbents for remediation of tri- and hexavalent chromium from water. J. Hazard. Mater. 2006, 137, 762–811; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.06.060.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Huang, S.-H., Peng, B., Yang, Z.-H., Chai, L.-Y., Zhou, L.-C. Chromium accumulation, microorganism population and enzyme activities in soils around chromium-containing slag heap of steel alloy factory. Trans. Nonferrous Metals Soc. China 2009, 19, 241–248; https://doi.org/10.1016/s1003-6326(08)60259-9.Search in Google Scholar

4. Rahman, M. S., Molla, A. H., Saha, N., Rahman, A. Study on heavy metals levels and its risk assessment in some edible fishes from Bangshi River, Savar, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Food Chem. 2012, 134, 1847–1854; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.03.099.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Ahemad, M. Enhancing phytoremediation of chromium-stressed soils through plant-growth-promoting bacteria. J. Genet. Eng. Biotechnol. 2015, 13, 51–58; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgeb.2015.02.001.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

6. Engwa, G. A., Ferdinand, P. U., Nwalo, F. N., Unachukwu, M. N. Mechanism and health effects of heavy metal toxicity in humans. In Poisoning in the Modern World: New Tricks for an Old Dog; IntechOpen: London, 2019; p. 10.Search in Google Scholar

7. Shekhawat, K., Chatterjee, S., Joshi, B. Chromium toxicity and its health hazards. Int. J. Adv. Res 2015, 3, 167–172.Search in Google Scholar

8. Ukhurebor, K. E., Aigbe, U. O., Onyancha, R. B., Nwankwo, W., Osibote, O. A., Paumo, H. K., Ama, O. M., Adetunji, C. O., Siloko, I. U. Effect of hexavalent chromium on the environment and removal techniques: a review. J. Environ. Manage. 2021, 280, 111809; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111809.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Patterson, J. W. Waste-water treatment technology. Ann. Arbor. Sc. Pub. Inc. Ann. Arbor, Mich 1975, 40, 257.Search in Google Scholar

10. Rengaraj, S., Joo, C. K., Kim, Y., Yi, J. Kinetics of removal of chromium from water and electronic process wastewater by ion exchange resins: 1200H, 1500H and IRN97H. J. Hazard. Mater. 2003, 102, 257–275; https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3894(03)00209-7.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

11. Rengaraj, S., Yeon, K.-H., Moon, S.-H. Removal of chromium from water and wastewater by ion exchange resins. J. Hazard. Mater. 2001, 87, 273–287; https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3894(01)00291-6.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

12. Mohammadi, T., Moheb, A., Sadrzadeh, M., Razmi, A. Modeling of metal ion removal from wastewater by electrodialysis. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2005, 41, 73–82; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2004.04.007.Search in Google Scholar

13. Mohan, D., Singh, K. P., Singh, V. K. Removal of hexavalent chromium from aqueous solution using low-cost activated carbons derived from agricultural waste materials and activated carbon fabric cloth. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2005, 44, 1027–1042; https://doi.org/10.1021/ie0400898.Search in Google Scholar

14. Kabay, N., Arda, M., Saha, B., Streat, M. Removal of Cr (VI) by solvent impregnated resins (SIR) containing aliquat 336. React. Funct. Polym. 2003, 54, 103–115; https://doi.org/10.1016/s1381-5148(02)00186-4.Search in Google Scholar

15. Shi, L., Huang, J., Zeng, G., Zhu, L., Gu, Y., Shi, Y., Yi, K., Li, X. Roles of surfactants in pressure-driven membrane separation processes: a review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 30731–30754; https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06345-x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Zularisam, A., Ismail, A., Salim, R. Behaviours of natural organic matter in membrane filtration for surface water treatment: a review. Desalination 2006, 194, 211–231; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.10.030.Search in Google Scholar

17. Yao, Z., Li, Y., Cui, Y., Zheng, K., Zhu, B., Xu, H., Zhu, L. Tertiary amine block copolymer containing ultrafiltration membrane with pH-dependent macromolecule sieving and Cr(VI) removal properties. Desalination 2015, 355, 91–98; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.10.030.Search in Google Scholar

18. Zhou, M.-Y., Zhang, P., Fang, L.-F., Zhu, B.-K., Wang, J.-L., Chen, J.-H., Abdallah, H. A positively charged tight UF membrane and its properties for removing trace metal cations via electrostatic repulsion mechanism. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 373, 168–175; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.03.088.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Chen, M., Jafvert, C. T., Wu, Y., Cao, X., Hankins, N. P. Inorganic anion removal using micellar enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF), modeling anion distribution and suggested improvements of MEUF: a review. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 398, 125413; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.125413.Search in Google Scholar

20. Moreno, M., Mazur, L. P., Weschenfelder, S. E., Regis, R. J., de Souza, R. A., Marinho, B. A., da Silva, A., de Souza, S. M. G. U., de Souza, A. A. U. Water and wastewater treatment by micellar enhanced ultrafiltration: a critical review. J. Water Process Eng. 2022, 46, 102574; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2022.102574.Search in Google Scholar

21. Sarkar, B. Micellar enhanced ultrafiltration in the treatment of dye wastewater: fundamentals, state-of-the-art and future perspectives. Groundwater Sustain. Dev. 2022, 100730.10.1016/j.gsd.2022.100730Search in Google Scholar

22. Schwarze, M. Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF)–state of the art. Environ. Sci.: Water Res. Technol. 2017, 3, 598–624; https://doi.org/10.1039/c6ew00324a.Search in Google Scholar

23. Acero, J. L., Benitez, F. J., Real, F. J., Teva, F. Removal of emerging contaminants from secondary effluents by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2017, 181, 123–131; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2017.03.021.Search in Google Scholar

24. Baek, K., Yang, J.-W. Cross-flow micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration for removal of nitrate and chromate: competitive binding. J. Hazard. Mater. 2004, 108, 119–123; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2004.02.001.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

25. Baek, K., Yang, J.-W. Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration of chromate and nitrate: binding competition between chromate and nitrate. Desalination 2004, 167, 111–118; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.06.118.Search in Google Scholar

26. Christian, S., Bhat, S., Tucker, E., Scamehorn, J., El‐Sayed, D. Micellar‐enhanced ultrafiltration of chromate anion from aqueous streams. AIChE J. 1988, 34, 189–194; https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690340203.Search in Google Scholar

27. Ghosh, G., Bhattacharya, P. K. Hexavalent chromium ion removal through micellar enhanced ultrafiltration. Chem. Eng. J. 2006, 119, 45–53; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2006.02.014.Search in Google Scholar

28. Gzara, L., Dhahbi, M. Removal of chromate anions by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration using cationic surfactants. Desalination 2001, 137, 241–250; https://doi.org/10.1016/s0011-9164(01)00225-9.Search in Google Scholar

29. Kamble, S. B., Marathe, K. V. Membrane characteristics and fouling study in MEUF for the removal of chromate anions from aqueous streams. Sep. Sci. Technol. 2005, 40, 3051–3070; https://doi.org/10.1080/01496390500385061.Search in Google Scholar

30. Keskinler, B., Danis, U., Cakici, A., Akay, G. Chromate removal from water using surfactant-enhanced crossflow filtration. Sep. Sci. Technol. 1997, 32, 1899–1920; https://doi.org/10.1080/01496399708000744.Search in Google Scholar

31. Singh, S., Matsuura, T., Ramamurthy, P. Treatment of coating plant effluent with an ultrafiltration membrane. Tappi J. 1999, 82, 146–156.Search in Google Scholar

32. Ulbricht, M., Richau, K., Kamusewitz, H. Chemically and morphologically defined ultrafiltration membrane surfaces prepared by heterogeneous photo-initiated graft polymerization. Colloids Surf. A 1998, 138, 353–366; https://doi.org/10.1016/s0927-7757(98)00236-2.Search in Google Scholar

33. Tang, B., Xu, T., Gong, M., Yang, W. A novel positively charged asymmetry membranes from poly (2, 6-dimethyl-1, 4-phenylene oxide) by benzyl bromination and in situ amination: membrane preparation and characterization. J. Membr. Sci. 2005, 248, 119–125; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.09.027.Search in Google Scholar

34. Knoell, T., Safarik, J., Cormack, T., Riley, R., Lin, S., Ridgway, H. Biofouling potentials of microporous polysulfone membranes containing a sulfonated polyether-ethersulfone/polyethersulfone block copolymer: correlation of membrane surface properties with bacterial attachment. J. Membr. Sci. 1999, 157, 117–138; https://doi.org/10.1016/s0376-7388(98)00365-2.Search in Google Scholar

35. Bowen, W. R., Doneva, T. A., Yin, H.-B. Separation of humic acid from a model surface water with PSU/SPEEK blend UF/NF membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2002, 206, 417–429; https://doi.org/10.1016/s0376-7388(01)00786-4.Search in Google Scholar

36. Hu, W., Chen, Y., Dong, X., Meng, Q.-W., Ge, Q. Positively charged membranes constructed via complexation for chromium removal through micellar-enhanced forward osmosis. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 420, 129837; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2021.129837.Search in Google Scholar

37. Yang, Q., Xie, Y., Zhu, B., Zeng, Y., Zhou, H., Ai, P., Chen, G. Positively charged PVC ultrafiltration membrane via micellar enhanced ultrafiltration for removing trace heavy metal cations. J. Water Process Eng. 2022, 46, 102552; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102552.Search in Google Scholar

38. Xie, Y., Yang, Q., Chen, Y., Chen, G., Zhu, B., Zhang, P. Preparation of novel positively charged PVC microfiltration membrane and its performance for removing Cr(Ⅵ). Mater. Rep. 2021, 35, 16184–16189.Search in Google Scholar

39. Nakao, S.-I. Determination of pore size and pore size distribution: 3. Filtration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1994, 96, 131–165; https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-7388(94)00128-6.Search in Google Scholar

40. Guo, Y.-S., Ji, Y.-L., Wu, B., Wang, N.-X., Yin, M.-J., An, Q.-F., Gao, C.-J. High-flux zwitterionic nanofiltration membrane constructed by in-situ introduction method for monovalent salt/antibiotics separation. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 593, 117441; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117441.Search in Google Scholar

41. Bade, R., Lee, S. H. A review of studies on micellar enhanced ultrafiltration for heavy metals removal from wastewater. J. Water Sustain. 2011, 1, 85–102.Search in Google Scholar

42. Gecol, H., Ergican, E., Fuchs, A. Molecular level separation of arsenic (V) from water using cationic surfactant micelles and ultrafiltration membrane. J. Membr. Sci. 2004, 241, 105–119; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.04.026.Search in Google Scholar

43. Javadian, S., Kakemam, J. Intermicellar interaction in surfactant solutions; a review study. J. Mol. Liq. 2017, 242, 115–128; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2017.06.117.Search in Google Scholar

44. Hartland, G. V., Grieser, F., White, L. R. Surface potential measurements in pentanol–sodium dodecyl sulphate micelles. J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans. I 1987, 83, 591–613; https://doi.org/10.1039/f19878300591.Search in Google Scholar

45. Fernández, M. S., González-Martínez, M. T., Calderón, E. The effect of pH on the phase transition temperature of dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine-palmitic acid liposomes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Biomembr. 1986, 863, 156–164; https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2736(86)90255-5.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2023-03-14

Accepted: 2023-05-05

Published Online: 2023-06-16

Published in Print: 2023-07-26

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/polyeng-2023-0052

Keywords for this article

hexavalent chromium removal; micellar enhanced filtration; pH stability; positively charged membrane