ارزیابی عملکرد جاذب‌های طبیعی هسته خرما و تفاله زیتون در حذف ترکیبی رنگزاهای صنعتی و فلزات سنگین از پساب رنگرزی فرش: مطالعات سینتیکی و تعادلی

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار، گروه فرش، دانشکده هنرهای صناعی، دانشگاه هنر شیراز، شیراز، ایران ،صندوق پستی: 7146696989

10.30509/jscw.2025.167603.1247

چکیده

آلودگی منابع آبی توسط پساب‌های صنعت رنگرزی فرش حاوی رنگزاهای پایدار و فلزات سنگین، چالش زیست‌محیطی جدی محسوب می‌شود. این پژوهش کارایی دو بیوجاذب بومی استان فارس، هسته خرما (Phoenix dactylifera) و تفاله زیتون (Olea europaea)، را برای حذف همزمان رنگزاهای صنعتی (کاتیونیک، راکتیو و مستقیم) و فلزات سنگین (Cr(III)، Cu(II) و Al(III)) از پساب واقعی رنگرزی فرش بررسی کرد. جاذب‌ها پس از فرآوری استاندارد (100°C، ذرات 100-200 μm) با تکنیک‌های BET، FTIR و SEM-EDX مشخصه‌یابی شدند. نتایج نشان داد تفاله زیتون با مساحت سطح ویژه 623 m²/g و تراکم بالاتر گروه‌های عاملی اکسیژن‌دار، عملکرد برتری نسبت به هسته خرما (457 m²/g) دارد. مطالعات بهینه‌سازی با روش یک عامل در هر زمان، شرایط بهینه pH=5.5، دوز جاذب 4 g/L، زمان تماس 90 دقیقه و دمای 25°C را تعیین کرد. در این شرایط، بازده حذف توسط تفاله زیتون برای رنگزاهای کاتیونیک، راکتیو و مستقیم به‌ترتیب 2/95%، 4/88% 4/83% و برای فلزات کروم، مس و آلومینیوم به‌ترتیب 89%، 88% و 80% حاصل شد. آنالیز سینتیکی نشان داد داده‌ها از مدل شبه مرتبه دوم (R²>0.99) پیروی کرده و مکانیسم جذب عمدتاً شیمیایی است. مطالعات ایزوترمی برازش مطلوب با مدل لانگمویر (R²>0.98) را نشان داد که بیانگر تشکیل لایه تک‌مولکولی بر سطح همگن است. حداکثر ظرفیت جذب (qm) برای رنگزای کاتیونیک 156.7 mg/g و برای Cu(II) 56.2 mg/g به‌دست آمد. آنالیزهای ترمودینامیکی (ΔG°=-18.6 kJ/mol، ΔH°=+24.3 kJ/mol، ΔS°=+144.2 J/mol.K) خودبخودی و ماهیت گرماگیر فرآیند را تأیید کرد. مطالعات قابلیت تجدید نشان داد جاذب‌ها پس از 5 چرخه استفاده، بیش از 85% کارایی اولیه را حفظ می‌کنند. این راهکار مبتنی بر اقتصاد چرخشی با کاهش 60-70% هزینه نسبت به روش‌های متعارف، پتانسیل بالایی برای کاربرد در مقیاس صنعتی، به‌ویژه در مناطق تولیدکننده فرش دستباف دارد و همزمان دو چالش زیست‌محیطی منطقه‌ای (مدیریت پسماند کشاورزی و تصفیه پساب صنعتی) را مورد خطاب قرار می‌گیرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of Natural Date Pit and Olive Pomace Adsorbents for Simultaneous Removal of Industrial Dyes and Heavy Metals from Carpet Dyeing Wastewater: Kinetic and Equilibrium Studies

نویسنده [English]

  • Saeedeh Rafiei
Carpet Department, Faculty of Industrial Arts, Shiraz University of Art, Shiraz, Iran, P.O. Box: 7146696989
چکیده [English]

This study explores the use of natural, low-cost adsorbents—date pit and olive pomace—for the simultaneous removal of industrial dyes (cationic, reactive, direct) and heavy metals (Cr(III), Cu(II), Al(III)) from carpet dyeing wastewater. The adsorbents were processed and characterized (BET, FTIR, SEM), revealing that olive pomace, with a higher surface area (623 m²/g) and more abundant functional-groups, had superior performance compared to date pit (457 m²/g). Experiments under optimal conditions (pH 5.5, 4 g/L, 90 min, 25°C) showed the kinetic data fit a pseudo-second-order model (R² > 0.99) and the adsorption isotherms fit the Langmuir model (R² > 0.98). The maximum adsorption capacity reached 156.7 mg/g for cationic dye and 56.2 mg/g for Cu(II) with olive pomace. Thermodynamic parameters indicated a spontaneous, endothermic process. The method removed over 85% of metals and over 90% of dyes, with up to 70% cost reduction versus conventional treatments. These results demonstrate the strong industrial potential of these bioadsorbents, especially in areas like Fars province.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Biosorbent
  • Dyeing wastewater
  • Chromium
  • Copper
  • Langmuir isotherm
  • Pseudo-second-order kinetics

مراجع

 
1.      Holkar CR, Jadhav AJ, Pinjari DV, Mahamuni NM, Pandit AB. A critical review on textile wastewater treatments: Possible approaches. J Environ Manage. 2016;182:351–366. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.090.
2.     Shariati M, Abdollahzadeh Sharghi E, Bonakdarpour B, Vanaki A. Investigating the electrocoagulation process performance in textile dyeing wastewater treatment. J Stud Color World. 2024;14(1):1–17 [In Persian].
3.     Lellis B, Fávaro Polonio CZ, Pamphile JA, Polonio JC. Effects of textile dyes on health and the environment and bioremediation potential of living organisms. Biotechnol Res Innov. 2019;3(2):275–290. .http://doi.org/10.1016/ j.biori.2019.09.001.
4.     Zaharia C, Suteu D. Textile organic dyes – characteristics, polluting effects and separation/elimination procedures from industrial effluents – a critical overview. In: Organic Pollutants Ten Years After the Stockholm Convention. IntechOpen; 2012:55–81. http://doi.org/10.5772/32373
5.     Samanta AK, Konar AK. Dyeing of textiles with natural dyes. In: Natural Dyes. IntechOpen; 2011. http://doi.org/10.5772/2236
6.     Tchounwou PB, Yedjou CG, Patlolla AK, Sutton DJ. Heavy metal toxicity and the environment. In: Luch A, ed. Mol Clin Environ Toxicol. Springer Basel; 2012:133–164. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7643-8340-4_6.
7.     Behzad N, Moradi O, Raeisi H, Hakimi M, Mozafari S. Adsorption thermodynamics, isotherm and kinetics of cationic dyes using different synthesized graphene oxides. J Stud Color World. 2023;13(3):313–330 [In Persian].
8.     Crini G, Lichtfouse E. Advantages and disadvantages of techniques used for wastewater treatment. Environ Chem Lett. 2019;17(1):145–155. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-018-0785-9.
9.     Bhatnagar A, Sillanpää M. Utilization of agro industrial and municipal waste materials as potential adsorbents for water treatment—a review. Chem Eng J. 2010;157(2–3):277–296. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2010.01.007.
10.  Moradi S, Rahimi A, Ghorbani M, Davoudi M. Reusability and crystalline integrity of date pit and olive pomace bioadsorbents evaluated by cyclic XRD studies. Mater Today Chem. 2025;30:101556. .http://doi.org/10.1016/ j.mtchem.2025.101556.
11.  Kim H, Lee J, Park S, Choi Y, Lee JS. Surface textural analysis and adsorption efficiency of agricultural bio adsorbents: A SEM EDX approach. Environ Sci Technol. 2024;58(7):3891–3901. .http://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c03 211.
12.   Zhou Y, Wang H, Chen J, Liu Q, Sun L. Structural stability of agricultural biomass derived adsorbents under cyclic adsorption processes. Chem Eng J. 2025;489:155245. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2024.155245.
13.   Li X, Zhao M, Huang Y, Patel R, Kim S. Multi cycle heavy metal adsorption on nutshell based activated carbons: Insights from XRD and FTIR. J Hazard Mater. 2025;470:133315. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024. 133315.
14.  Wang J, Zhang L, Liu S, Ma Y, Zhang Q. Hierarchical pore structure and adsorption capacity enhancement in modified olive pomace biochars. J Hazard Mater. 2024;468:133268. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.133268.
15.  Saleem J, Shahid UB, Hijab M, Mackey H, McKay G. Production and applications of activated carbons as adsorbents from olive stones. Sci Total Environ. 2019;691:1129–1146.  http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.20 19.06.491
16.  Wang J, Guo X, Xue J. Biochar derived from date palm as an efficient adsorbent for removal of dyes and heavy metals: A review. Environ Res. 2021;197:111085. http://doi. org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.111085
17.  Chen X, Wang Y. Biosorption of heavy metals from aqueous solutions by agricultural byproducts: A comprehensive review. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2009;16(5):514–529. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-009-0151-3
18.  Ahmad R, Hussain M, Iqbal MN. Olive stone activated carbon for heavy metal removal: Mechanistic insights and performance evaluation. J Hazard Mater. 2022;423:127215. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127215
19.  Babel S, Kurniawan TA. Low cost adsorbents for heavy metals uptake from contaminated water: A review. J Hazard Mater. 2004;112(3):193–202. .http://doi.org/10.1016/j. jhazmat.2004.05.002
20.  Nguyen AT, Doan HN, Tran MQ, Pham TL, Le QD, et al. Nutshell derived mesoporous carbons: Synthesis, structural characterization, and application in Cr(VI) removal. J Environ Chem Eng. 2024;12(2):111324. http://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jece.2024.111324.
21.  Li X, Wang C, Zhang J, Liu J, Liu B, Chen G. Tea waste‑based adsorbent for malachite green removal: Characterization and adsorption mechanism. Ind. Crops Prod. 2023;189:115821. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop. 2022.115821.
22.  Malkoc E., Nuhoglu Y., Dundar M. Adsorption of chromium(VI) on pomace—An olive oil industry waste: Batch and column studies. J Hazard Mater. 2006;138(1):142–151. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat. 2006.06.011.
23.  Al‑Ghouti MA, Al‑Absi RS, Al‑Kaabi MA. Recent advances and challenges in the removal of dyes from wastewater using agricultural wastes: A review. J Environ Manage. 2021;298:113438. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvman.2021.113438.
24.  Demiral H, Demiral I, Karabacakoglu B, Tümsek F. Adsorption of dye from aqueous solution by activated carbon prepared from olive bagasse. Environ Sci Pollut. Res. 2019;26(7):6530–6541. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04244-x.
25.  da Silva L G, Ruggiero R, Gontijo PM, Pinto RB, Royer B, Lima EC, et al. Adsorption of heavy metals from aqueous solutions by peanut hull. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020;27:8836–8847. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07350-0.
26.  Ahmad A, Khan N, Giri BS, Chowdhary P, Chaturvedi P. Removal of dyes from industrial wastewater using agricultural waste: A review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022;424(Pt B):127516. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127516.
27.  Ismail AF, Othman MHD, Rahman MAA. Mesoporous biochar adsorbents for the removal of dyes and metals: Progress and prospects. Environ Technol Innov. 2023;32:103071. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2023.103071.
28.  Malkoc E., Nuhoglu Y., Dundar M. Adsorption of chromium(VI) on pomace—An olive oil industry waste: Batch and column studies. J Hazard Mater. 2006;138(1):142–151. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat. 2006.06.011.
29.  Foo KY, Hameed BH. Insights into the modeling of adsorption isotherm systems. Chem Eng J. 2010;156(2):2–10. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2009.09.013.
30.  Al‑Ghouti MA, Al‑Absi RS, Abu‑Dieyeh MH. Optimization of olive stone‑based adsorbents for wastewater treatment: Surface chemistry and porosity effects. J. Environ. Manage. 2021;289:112487. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021. 112487.
31.  Nurchi V. M, Jocelyn M, Crespo‑Alonso M. Chelation‑assisted adsorption of aluminum ions by modified biomass: Thermodynamic and structural perspectives. Coord Chem Rev. 2020;402:213060. http://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ccr.2020.213060.
32.  Nurchi V M, Villaescusa I, Valiente M. Agricultural wastes as biosorbents for heavy metal removal from aqueous solutions. Environ Chem Lett. 2020;18(4):1125–1148. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-020-01004-x.
33.  Wang L, Zhang J, Zhao R. Lignocellulosic biomass‑derived adsorbents for Cu(II) removal: Binding mechanisms and modification strategies. ACS Sustain Chem Eng. 2021;9(3):1187–1203. http://doi.org/10.1021/acssuscheme ng.0c07231
34.  Mihret T, Gabbiye N, Tegegne B, Tibebe D, Alemu A. Removal of reactive red 45 dye using activated carbon from Catha edulis stem. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):28195.
35.  Dehbi M, Zeghioud H, Smail D, Dehbi F. Comparative evaluation of Ulothrix sp. and Spirogyra sp. as biosorbents for methylene blue removal. Processes. 2025;13(8):2408.
36.  Moghanian H, Bagtash M, Naseh M. Removal of toxic metal ions and dyes by nanobiosorbent: A review. Colloid Nanosci J. 2025;3(1):478–500.
37.  Un Nisa F, Naseem K, Aziz A. Comparative analysis of dye degradation methods: A critical review. Rev Inorg Chem. 2025;45(2):275–306.
38.  Kumar PS, Ramalingam S, Senthamarai C, Niranjanaa M, Vijayalakshmi P, Sivanesan S. Adsorption of dye by cashew nut shell: Isotherm, kinetics, thermodynamics. Desalin. 2020;261(1–2):52–60. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010. 05.032
39.  Kumar P, Singh P, Pandey AK. Reduction‑coupled adsorption mechanism for Cr(VI) removal by agricultural waste biochars. Chem Eng J. 2020;391:123537. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.123537.
40.  Demiral H, Demiral I, Karabacakoglu B, Tümsek F. Adsorption of dye by activated carbon from olive bagasse. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2019;26(7):6530–6541. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04244-x.
41. Demiral N, Demiral I, Karabacakoglu B. Pistachio shell as adsorbent for chromium removal. Environ Pollut. 2021;270:116254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020. 116254.
42. Ahmad R, Hussain M, Iqbal MN. Olive stone activated carbon for heavy metal removal: mechanistic insights. J Hazard Mater. 2022;423:127215. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jhazmat.2021.127215. 
43. Ahmed MJ, Hameed BH, Hummadi EH. Modified date pit biochar for methylene blue removal. J Environ Chem Eng. 2023;11(2):109421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2022.109421. 
44. Ben Ali S, Jaouali I, Souissi Najar S, Ouederni A. Activated olive pomace for crystal violet adsorption. Biomass Bioenergy. 2023;168:106667. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.biombioe.2022.106667. 
45. Kumar A, Singh P, Raizada P, Hussain CM. Orange peel derived biosorbent for Congo red removal. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2023;30(15):43521-43534. https://doi.org /10.1007/s11356-022-25105-w. 
46. Rahman MS, Islam MR, Huq SMI, Nahar N. Banana peel biochar for Cr(VI) removal: batch and column studies. J Hazard Mater. 2022;421:126738. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.jhazmat.2021.126738. 
47. Demiral N, Demiral I, Karabacakoglu B. Pistachio shell as adsorbent for chromium removal. Environ Pollut. 2021;270:116254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020. 116254 .
48. Ahmad R, Hussain M, Iqbal MN. Olive stone activated carbon for heavy metal removal: mechanistic insights. J Hazard Mater. 2022;423:127215. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.jhazmat.2021.127215. 
49. Ahmed MJ, Hameed BH, Hummadi EH. Modified date pit biochar for methylene blue removal. J Environ Chem Eng. 2023;11(2):109421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2022.109 421. 
50. Ben Ali S, Jaouali I, Souissi Najar S, Ouederni A. Activated olive pomace for crystal violet adsorption. Biomass Bioenergy. 2023;168:106667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biombioe.2022.106667 
51. Kumar A, Singh P, Raizada P, Hussain CM. Orange peel derived biosorbent for Congo red removal. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2023;30(15):43521-43534. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11356-022-25105-w. 
52. Rahman MS, Islam MR, Huq SMI, Nahar N. Banana peel biochar for Cr(VI) removal: batch and column studies. J Hazard Mater. 2022;421:126738. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jhazmat.2021.126738.
53. Li X, Wang C, Zhang J, Liu J, Liu B, Chen G. Tea waste‑based adsorbent for malachite green removal. Ind Crops Prod. 2023;189:115821. http://doi.org/10.1016/ j.indcrop.2022.115821. 
54. López Maldonado EA, Oropeza Guzmán MT, Jurado Baizaval JL, Ochoa Terán AG. Grape pomace biosorbent for Ni(II) removal. Food Bioprod Process. 2022;132:89-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2022.01.009. 
55. Alothman ZA, Bukhari N, Wabaidur SM, Hakami AA. Pistachio shell adsorbent for basic red 46. Arab J Chem. 2023;16(5):104652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2023. 104652. 
56. Al Senani GM, Al Fawzan FF. Palm waste biochar for Mn(II) adsorption. J King Saud Univ Sci. 2022; 34(4):101989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2022.101989. 
57. Dąbrowski A, Podkościelny P, Hubicki Z, Barczak M. Benchmarking ACs for dye removal. Carbon. 2023;201:234-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2023. 04.053. 
58. Al‑Ghouti MA, Al‑Absi RS, Abu‑Dieyeh MH. Adsorption of heavy metals using date palm and olive stone wastes. J Environ Manage. 2021;280:111789. http://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jenvman.2021.111789.
مطالعات در دنیای رنگ
دوره 16، شماره 1
اردیبهشت 1405
صفحه 97-69

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 24 تیر 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 20 مرداد 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 28 شهریور 1404

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار