Table 5 Comparison of the maximum removal percentage of Cr(VI) by different adsorbents.
Contaminant | sorbent | Results (Maximum removal percentages) | Optimum pH | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cr(VI) | Silver impregnated groundnut husk carbon | ≈ 97% of hexavalent chromium was removed within 5 h | 3 | |
MGO-Trp | 77.2%, 82.2% and 84.0% from tap, sea and waste water | 2 | ||
Cd–TIPA (Photocatalyst) | high catalytic efficiency 93% | – | ||
GO-CS@MOF [Zn(BDC)(DMF)] | ≈ 92% | 3 | ||
ZrPO4-PPY nanocomposite | ≈ 98.8% occurred in 80 min | 2 | ||
ZIF-8 Uio-66 | ≈ 85% ≈ 80 | 3 | ||
ZIF-8@ABs UiO-66@Abs | ≈ 60% ≈ 98% | 6 | ||
Fe3O4/ SiO2/CS-TETA | 96.4% | 2.5 | ||
V2O5@Ch/Cu-TMA nanobiosorbent | 96.61%, 96.95% and 95.72% from tap, sea and wastewater | 3 | ||
Fe0.75Cu0.25-BDC@Alg-MoO3-GO | > 98% from tap, sea and wastewater | 3 | This study |
