Abstract
Mesoporous carbons were synthesized via both soft and hard template methods and compared to a commercial powder activated carbon (PAC) for the adsorption ability of bisphenol-A (BPA) from an aqueous solution. The commercial PAC had a BET-surface of 1027 m2/g with fine pores of 3 nm and less. The hard templated carbon (CMK-3) material had an even higher BET-surface of 1420 m2/g with an average pore size of 4 nm. The soft templated carbon (SMC) reached a BET-surface of 476 m2/g and a pore size of 7 nm. The maximum observed adsorption capacity (qmax) of CMK-3 was the highest with 474 mg/g, compared to 290 mg/g for PAC and 154 mg/g for SMC. The difference in adsorption capacities was attributed to the specific surface area and hydrophobicity of the adsorbent. The microporous PAC showed the slowest adsorption, while the ordered mesopores of SMC and CMK-3 enhanced the BPA diffusion into the adsorbent. This difference in adsorption kinetics is caused by the increase in pore diameter. However, CMK-3 with an open geometry consisting of interlinked nanorods allows for even faster intraparticle diffusion.
Highlights
Porous carbon materials are important in many areas of modern science and technology, with a wide variety of applications, such as catalyst support, electrode material and adsorbents for gas and liquid purification [1]
The observed maximum adsorption capacity increased with the specific surface area of the material, CMK-3 showed a very high adsorption capacity of 474 mg/g, and outperforms powder activated carbon (PAC) with an adsorption capacity of
This difference was attributed to the more hydrophobic nature of soft templated carbon (SMC) and CMK-3 compared to PAC
Summary
Porous carbon materials are important in many areas of modern science and technology, with a wide variety of applications, such as catalyst support, electrode material and adsorbents for gas and liquid purification [1]. The popularity of these materials can be attributed to their high specific area, large pore volume, chemical inertness and good mechanical stability [2,3]. Major disadvantages are the disordered structure, limitation of pore size to micropores (
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
