Table 3 The composite membranes’ relative effectiveness in removing metal ions.
No. | Membrane | Metals removed | Metal removal (%) | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Grapheneoxide–polyethersulphone (GO–PES) | Cu2+ Zn2+ Cd2+ | About 65%–80% for all the metal ions | |
2 | membranes of mesoporous silica nanocomposite functionalized with Polysulphone surfaces | Cd2+ Zn2+ | 91% 94% | |
3 | Polyamide titanium dioxide (PA-TiO2) | Cu2+ Hg2+ Pb2+ | 86.89 ± 2% 77.01 ± 2% 83.42 ± 1.5% | |
4 | Graphene oxide-manganese oxide (GO MnO2) nanohybrid sulphonated polyethersulphone (SPES) ultrafiltration (UF) membranes | Cu2+ Zn2+ Ni2+ | 81.1% 64.0% 67.4% | |
5 | GO–PES (Grapheneoxide/polyethersulfone) | Mn2+ Fe2+ | 94% 93.6% | |
6 | PVA/GO–PVDF | Mn2+ Fe2+ | 95.5% 94.6% | Present study |
