water

Article
Removal of Cu(II) Ions from Aqueous Solutions by
Ferrochrome Ash: Investigation of Mechanism and Kinetics
Erdoğan Uğurlu , Burak Birol *, Metin Gencten and Yahya Bayrak

Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Yildiz Technical University, 34210 Istanbul, Turkey
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +90-212-3834661

Abstract: The release of Cu into water is an immediate concern that negatively affects environmental
health. To eliminate this problem, the adsorption of Cu(II) on varying substances has been studied
widely for two decades. The utilization of low-cost adsorbents obtained from industrial wastes hits
two targets with one arrow. In the present study, ferrochrome ash (FCA) obtained from the baghouse
filters of ferrochrome facilities was utilized to adsorb Cu(II) for the first time in the literature. To
achieve this goal, initially the FCA was characterized by XRD, XRF, SEM, EDS, and BET analyses,
and then washing and grinding pretreatment was conducted to eliminate the Cr dissolution and
increase the surface area of the FCA. Adsorption experiments were conducted in 100–1000 mg/L
Cu(II) solution on 0.4–8 g/L FCA for 0–300 min. As a result, it was concluded that a maximum
adsorption capacity was obtained as 298.75 mg/g, which makes the FCA an applicable adsorbent for
Cu(II) adsorption. Additionally, a pH range of 3–6 is favorable. The Cu(II) adsorption on FCA fits the
pseudo-second order (PSO) kinetics and Freundlich isotherm models well. The Cu(II)-adsorbed FCA
was investigated by SEM, EDS, and FT-IR analyses. According to the results, it can be deduced that
the adsorption mechanism is chemisorption, which involves the valency forces between the metal
and the adsorbent.

Keywords: water treatment; ferrochrome ash; Cu(II) adsorption; adsorption kinetics; adsorptionisotherms

Citation: Uğurlu, E.; Birol, B.;

1. Introduction
Gencten, M.; Bayrak, Y. Removal of
Cu(II) Ions from Aqueous Solutions
Heavy metal release to water resources from different production facilities is an impor-
by Ferrochrome Ash: Investigation of
tant problem. The decrease in the rate of potable water worldwide rises substantially with
Mechanism and Kinetics. Water 2023, the participation of heavy metal pollution [1]. From the Earth’s origin, these heavy metals
15, 1063. https://doi.org/10.3390/ have been naturally occurring in the crust of the planet. Heavy metal use has dramatically
w15061063 increased, which has led to an impending rise in metallic contaminants throughout the
terrestrial ecosystem and the freshwater habitats [2–4]. Contaminations originating from
Academic Editor: Wei Wei
metals, such as lead, antimony, mercury, and copper, have an important place in heavy
Received: 10 February 2023 metal pollution considering the wide application area of the use of these metals [5]. Copper
Revised: 4 March 2023 is one of the most important heavy metals, and is used in different application areas, such
Accepted: 8 March 2023 as metalworking processes, plastics, building constructions, electric and electronic prod-
Published: 10 March 2023 ucts, etc. [6]. The contamination of copper in water can be caused from natural (forest fires,
eruptions, and windblown dust) or man-made (mining, metal production, domestic, etc.)
sources [4,7]. Therefore, the release of copper used in these processes into the environment
through wastewater poses an important risk for the environment, ecosystem, and human
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
health [8]. Since the copper concentration in the wastewater obtained from these processes
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
is generally very high, it is necessary to reduce the copper concentrations by subjecting
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
these waters to a process before they are released into the environment [6,9]. According to
conditions of the Creative Commons
the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and World Health Organiza-
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// tion, the limit for the copper concentration in drinking water should not exceed 1.3 mg/L
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ and 2.0 mg/L, respectively [10,11].
4.0/).

Water 2023, 15, 1063. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15061063 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2023, 15, 1063 2 of 15

Various methods, such as adsorption, membrane filtration, cementation, and elec-

trochemical techniques, can be used to reduce the copper content of wastewater [6]. In
cementation, copper is reduced to a metallic state by using a reductant, such as iron and
zinc ions. Although this method is easy and useful, sacrificial metal consumption is the
main disadvantage of this method [6,12]. Membrane filtration allows for the removal of
copper ions from the wastewater. However, this method cannot be used in turbid water.
Indeed, clogging of the membrane pores and local bacterial formations have the potential
to pose significant obstacles in the removal of copper [6,13,14].
There is still a need for further research to apply electrochemical methods at an in-
dustrial scale. Furthermore, the energy cost of the process describes a problem that must
be overcome [6]. In this regard, the adsorption process, which describes the adsorption of
ions in the solution to the solid phase surface as a result of physical or chemical interac-
tions, comes with important advantages, such as low cost, simple design, high efficiency,
reuse of adsorbent, and low energy consumption [6,15]. In the adsorption process for the
removal of copper from wastewater, the adsorbent plays a key role on the efficiency of the
removal [9]. Modified natural materials, environmental or agricultural wastes, biopolymers
or hydrogels, and industrial by-products can be used to effectively remove copper. In the
first category, modified natural materials, such as zeolite and its composites, have great
performance for copper removal. Although modification of these materials increases the
efficiency of the removal of copper, it increases the cost of the process [16]. Additionally,
magnetic field utilization for metal adsorption is also a new process to increase the removal
efficiency. In this process, the magnetic susceptibility and chemical properties of both the
adsorbent and the adsorbate affect the removal process [17–20].
Modification and/or secondary processes of environmental or agricultural wastes also
increase the cost of copper removal [21]. On this point, industrial by-products have great po-
tential as efficient adsorbents for copper removal from wastewater. Wang et al. (2016) used
quenched blast furnace slag for the removal of copper, zinc, and cadmium ions. Although
they used quenched blast furnace slag, a secondary process in the preparation of the adsor-
bent took a long time, and it was also an energy-required process [22]. Yehia et al. (2008)
used unburned carbon separated from blast furnace flue dust for the removal of copper ions
from the solution [23]. Although the materials used had a relatively low cost, the removal
efficiency of the copper was around 80% in optimal conditions [23]. Buema et al. (2021)
used modified fly ash to improve the efficiency of the removal of the copper ions according
to the unmodified fly ash [24,25]. Although they increased the efficiency of the removal of
the copper ions from the solution, the added steps on the modification process to fly ash
increased the economical and time costs of the process [24]. According to the literature,
there is still a need to search for new materials obtained from industrial by-products to
effectively remove copper from wastewater. On the other hand, various studies have in-
vestigated the removal of heavy metal ion removal from aqueous solutions by magnesium
silicates. Liu et al. (2017) prepared a Fe3 O4 @MgSi composite to remove copper ions and
obtained a Cu(II) adsorption capacity of 2198 mg/g [26]. Huang et al. (2017) synthesized
porous magnesium silicate nanoparticles with a surface area of 650.50 m2 /g, exhibiting
a Cu(II) adsorption capacity of 52.30 mg/g [27]. Liu et al. (2013) removed Cu(II) with an
adsorption capacity of 100 mg/g by using chrysotile (Mg3 (Si2 O5 )(OH)4 ) prepared from
asbestos tailing [28]. Additionally, Choong et al. (2018) claim that increasing the magnesium
silicate amount on the activated carbon increases the adsorption capacity of Cu(II) from
165 to 369 mg/g [29].
Ferrochrome ash (FCA), which is a waste collected at the baghouse filters of the fer-
rochrome production process, is generated at a rate of 0.02–0.03 tons per ton of ferrochrome
production, and is mainly composed of magnesium silicate [30–32]. However, there is no
industrial utilization of this waste and, therefore, an application area is required to prevent
it from accumulating in nature and polluting the environment. Due to the high magnesium
silicate content and fine particle size of the FCA, its utilization as an absorbent will allow
this waste to find a more value-added use. The present study involves the investigation of
Water 2023, 15, 1063 3 of 15

the usability of FCA as a novel adsorbent. To achieve this goal, FCA was used as an adsor-
bent for copper. Initially, the properties of FCA and the effects of washing and grinding as
a pre-treatment on the removal of copper from a Cu(II) aqueous solution were investigated.
Here, SEM/EDS, XRD, and BET analyzes were conducted to characterize FCA, and atomic
absorption spectroscopy (AAS) analysis was carried out to determine the element amount
in the solution. Then, important parameters, such as pH, amount of adsorbent, and the
concentration of copper that affects the performance of the adsorption were studied.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials
The FCA used in this study was obtained from the bag filter of the high carbon
ferrochrome production furnace located in “Eti Krom A.Ş. Elazığ, Turkey”. XRF analysis
of the FCA was carried out by a Panalytical Epsilon4 X-ray fluorescence spectrometer
(Panalytical, Malvern, UK). According to the XRF results, the FCA contains 37.9% MgO,
28.8% SiO2 , 8.5% Al2 O3 , 6.1% Cr2 O3 , 6.0% K2 O, 4.4% ZnO, 2.8% Fe2 O3, with the remainder
made up of other minor elements. An X-ray diffractometer (XRD, Philips PW 3710, Philips,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands) was used to characterize FCA utilizing CuK radiation over
a range of 10–90◦ and a scanning speed of 1◦ /min. The Joint Committee on Powder
Water 2023, 15, x Diffraction
FOR PEER REVIEW
Standards (JCPDS) database was used to categorize the detected patterns. The 4 of 16

peaks obtained from the XRD analysis of the FCA are given in Figure 1a.

Figure 1. (a) XRD spectrum of the FCA; SEM images of (b) FCA, (c) WFCA, (d) WGFCA with ×20k,
Figure 1. (a) XRD spectrum of the FCA; SEM images of (b) FCA, (c) WFCA, (d) WGFCA with ×20 k,
×60k, and ×75k magnifications, and (e) R% values of the untreated and treated samples.
×60 k, and ×75 k magnifications, and (e) R% values of the untreated and treated samples.
2.2. Adsorption Experiments
The batch Cu(II) adsorption experiments were carried out in a beaker containing 250
ml of copper sulfate solution with varying concentrations (100–1000 mg/L), pH values (2–
4.7), and WGFCA amounts (0.1–2 g) for contact periods of 1–300 min. A magnetic stirrer
was used in all experiments with a stirring speed of 500 RPMs. After each experiment
solid–liquid separation was made by filtering and both the initial and final solutions were
Water 2023, 15, 1063 4 of 15

According to Figure 1a, the FCA is mainly composed of MgSiO4 (ICSD: 00-004-0769)
with relatively lesser amounts of MgAl2 O4 (ICSD: 00-002-1084), FeCr2 O4 (ICSD: 01-089-
2618), and ZnO (ICSD: 01-079-0208). To be able to eliminate the Zn, Cr, and Fe contamina-
tion, 20 g of FCA was washed in 500 ml deionized water for 1 h and then filtered. This cycle
was conducted three times, and the final solid residue was dried in an oven at 80 degrees
for 1 h. Additionally, to increase the removal efficiency of the FCA, a grinding process for
5 min with a frequency of 10 Hz by a Retsch Mixer Mill MM 200 (Retsch, Haan, Germany)
was applied to the washed FCA. Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) analysis was conducted to
the FCA, washed FCA (WFCA) and washed and ground (WGFCA) by a Quantachrome
Quadrosorb SI BET device (Quantachrome, Boynton Beach, FL, USA) which uses cold bath
N2 gas (77.3 K). Data acquisition and reduction were performed using QuadraWin software
(version 7.0). Morphological properties of the samples were investigated by a Zeiss EVO
LS 10 SEM/EDS device (Zeiss, Jena, Germany).
The solutions to be used in the adsorption process were formed from copper sulfate
stock solution, which was initially prepared from analytical grade CuSO4 ·5H2 O and deion-
ized water with a concentration of 1000 mg/L. Then, the solutions were diluted by distilled
water to obtain the desired concentrations. Furthermore, for the pH experiments, the pH
was adjusted by using diluted sulfuric acid (H2 SO4 ).

2.2. Adsorption Experiments

The batch Cu(II) adsorption experiments were carried out in a beaker containing
250 mL of copper sulfate solution with varying concentrations (100–1000 mg/L), pH values
(2–4.7), and WGFCA amounts (0.1–2 g) for contact periods of 1–300 min. A magnetic stirrer
was used in all experiments with a stirring speed of 500 RPMs. After each experiment
solid–liquid separation was made by filtering and both the initial and final solutions were
analyzed by atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) (Perkin Elmer AAnalyst 400, , Perkin
Elmer, Waltham, MA, USA). AAS analysis was conducted by using copper standard solu-
tion obtained from Sigma Aldrich (Burlington, MA, USA) with a 1000 ppm concentration.
The experiments were conducted three times, and the average values were calculated as
the final concentration within a max error range of ±0.5%. Copper ion removal ratio (R, %)
and the adsorption capacity (qt , mg/g) at time t were calculated according to the following
Equations (1) and (2) [15], respectively:

C0 − Ct
Cu Removal (R, %) = × 100 (1)
C0

(C0 − Ct ) × V
qt = (2)
m
where C0 (mg/L) represents the initial concentration of copper ions in the solution, Ct
(mg/L) denotes the concentration of copper ions at time t, V (L) refers to the volume of
solution, and m (g) is the mass of FCA.
Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR) analysis was conducted to the Cu(II)-
adsorbed WGFCA using a Bruker VERTEX 70v device (Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA). The
highest wavelength range was specified to be 450–4000 cm−1 , with a resolution of 4 cm−1 ,
and a wavenumber tolerance of 0.01 cm−1 .

2.3. Isotherm and Kinetics Modelling of Adsorption Processes

The quantitative description of the adsorption process of Cu(II) ions on WGFCA
adsorbent was investigated by using Langmuir and Freundlich models. Furthermore,
pseudo-first order (PFO) and pseudo-second order (PSO) models were used for the kinetic
investigation of the batch adsorption process. The linear equations of these models are
given in Table 1 [15].
Water 2023, 15, 1063 5 of 15

Table 1. Isotherm and kinetic models used for the experimental data.

Model Equation
Isotherm models
1 1
Langmuir q = q + q 1×KL × 1
Ce
(3)
e max max
1
Freundlich log qe = log KF + × log Ce n (4)
Kinetics models


Pseudo-first order (PFO) log qe − qt = log qt − K1 × t (5)
Pseudo-second order t 1 t
qt = K2 ×q2e
+ qe (6)
(PSO)
Notes: Abbreviations are as follows: qe , equilibrium adsorption capacity, mg/g; qmax , maximum adsorption
capacity, that is derived from the model, mg/g; KL , Langmuir constant; Ce , equilibrium concentration, mg/L; KF ,
Freundlich constant; n, heterogeneity factor; K1 , PFO rate constant, 1/min; K2 , PSO rate constant, g/mg.min.

The best-fitting models were chosen depending on the correlation R2 values obtained
from the linear fitting of the experimental data.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. The Effect of Pretreatment on FCA
FCA, which is obtained from the bag filters of a high carbon ferrochrome arc furnace,
contains an amount of Cr, Zn, and Fe, generally bound in a complex compound. However,
the presence of these elements may come out with the problem of leaching into water [33].
Therefore, some preliminary experiments were made to investigate the dissolution of these
elements. A total of 1 g of untreated FCA was added to 250 mL of deionized water and
stirred for 300 min. Then, the suspension was filtered and analyzed by AAS. The results
revealed that the dissolution of Cr, Zn, and Fe was 64.53, 0.21, and 0.10 mg/L, respectively.
Although Zn and Fe dissolution amounts can be ignored, Cr had a very high dissolution
ratio. Hence, this problem was eliminated by triple washing pretreatment, and the amount
of these elements was observed to be less than 0.01 mg/L after washing.
Furthermore, to examine the effect of different pretreatments on removal efficiency,
4 g/L of untreated and treated fly ash samples were processed for 300 min in 100 mg/L of
copper-containing solution and the results were analyzed by AAS. The effects of washing,
grinding, and both washing and grinding on Cu removal, calculated by Equation (1),
are given in Figure 1e. Moreover, the SEM images of the raw, washed, and ground FCA
samples with magnifications of 20 k, 60 k and 75 k are given in Figure 1b–d, respectively.
According to Figure 1b, a wide range of particles less than 1 µm in size are observed
throughout the structure of untreated FCA. When the formation of the particles is investi-
gated in detail, the particles seem to be bound together to form bigger particles. This results
in relatively lower surface areas that negatively affect the adsorption properties. On the
other hand, after washing, the bonds between the particles of the WFCA seem to lower due
to the removal of elements that dissolved inside water, as shown in Figure 1c. Furthermore,
Figure 1d illustrates the SEM micrographs of the WFCA particles, and finer particle size
distribution than the former two is recognized. From the BET analysis results the surface
areas of FCA, WFCA, and WGFCA were obtained as 8.401, 8.455, and 10.577 m2 /g, respec-
tively. The copper removal of the samples is shown in Figure 1e. Although a considerable
change in the surface area was not observed, both washing and grinding increase the
surface area as well as the copper removal ratios. Moreover, both these pretreatments play
an important role on the kinetics of the adsorption process. FCA removed Cu from the
solution within 300 min, where the adsorption process ends for WFCA at the 200th min
and WGFCA at the 15th min. It was previously reported that increasing the surface area of
the adsorbent increases the rate of adsorption due to the higher availability of adsorption
sites on adsorbent surface [34,35]. Therefore, WGFCA samples were selected for all the
adsorption experiments.
 Water 2023, 15, 1063 6 of 15

3.2. The Effect of pH

To determine the effect of pH on the Cu adsorption properties, initially, 0.25 g
(1 g/L) of WGFCA was used as an adsorbent in a 250 mL solution containing 100 mg/L Cu.
The stirring period of 1–300 min was selected to obtain equilibrium between the adsorbent
and the solution. pH measurements were made at determined periods, and the pH value
of 4.7 ± 0.1 was determined. Because insoluble Cu(OH)2 precipitates at pH values over
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 16
5 [28,36,37], acidic solution pHs of 2, 3, 4, and 4.7 (without pH adjustment) were investi-
gated by adjusting the pH using dilute sulfuric acid (H2 SO4 ). Calculated Cu removal (R %)
and qt values by Equations (1) and (2), are given in Figures 2a and 2b, respectively.

Figure 2. qt values and copper removal (R%) to investigate the effect of (a,b) Cu concentration; (c,d)
Figure 2. qt values and copper removal (R%) to investigate the effect of (a,b) Cu concentration;
pH; (e,f) adsorbent amount.
(c,d) pH; (e,f) adsorbent amount.

3.3. The Effect of Initial Metal Concentration

The initial metal concentrations of 100–1000 mg/L were studied to investigate the Cu
adsorption properties of the WGFCA. To achieve this goal, 1 g of WGFCA was stirred in
a 250 mL Cu solution with the concentrations of 100, 300, 500, 700, and 1000 mg/L for 1–
300 min at a fixed pH of 4.7. The R and qt values of the 4 g/L adsorbent-containing exper-
Water 2023, 15, 1063 7 of 15

pH plays an important role in the adsorption properties of Cu from aqueous solutions.

As given in Figure 2c,d, the pH value of 2 has the lowest R and equilibrium adsorption
capacity (qe ) values of 46.41% and 46.05 mg/g, respectively. Increasing the pH to 3 ap-
proximately doubles the Cu adsorption capacity. The pH values of 4 and 4.7 demonstrate
almost similar R % values which are higher than 99%, with similar qe values of 97.75 and
99.5 mg/g, respectively. Furthermore, increasing pH also increases the adsorption rate. For
the experiment that was conducted at the pH value of 3, adsorption ended after 120 min,
where at higher pH values 60–90 min was adequate for the adsorption reactions to reach
completion. After that, a slight change was observed. These results are in good agreement
with the literature, regardless of the organic or inorganic adsorbent type [37–41].
Abbar et al. (2017) defined the mechanism of the pH effect on the adsorption Cu(II)
ions. At low pH ranges (0–2), excessive amounts of H+ ions are present in the solution
and the sorption sites of the adsorbent are saturated by H+ ions. Due to the lack of empty
sorption sites, Cu2+ ions would not be adequately adsorbed. When the pH range is between
2 and 4, because of the decreasing amount of H+ ions, the availability of the sorption sites
increases, and, therefore, Cu2+ can be adsorbed at these areas. Within the pH range of 4–6,
the adsorption properties are slightly affected by the pH change. However at higher pH
values, as a result of the increasing OH− ions, Cu(OH)2 precipitation begins to occur, and
adsorption is affected negatively [42].

3.3. The Effect of Initial Metal Concentration

The initial metal concentrations of 100–1000 mg/L were studied to investigate the
Cu adsorption properties of the WGFCA. To achieve this goal, 1 g of WGFCA was stirred
in a 250 mL Cu solution with the concentrations of 100, 300, 500, 700, and 1000 mg/L for
1–300 min at a fixed pH of 4.7. The R and qt values of the 4 g/L adsorbent-containing ex-
periments are represented in Figure 2a,b, respectively. At low concentrations, the adsorbent
immediately depleted the Cu(II) ions with high R values above 99% within 30 min. With
the increasing initial metal concentration up to 700 mg/L, Cu also depletes (R > 99%), but
the completion time of the adsorption increases (500 mg/L in 120 min and 700 mg/L in
240 min). Additionally, qe values obtained from the experiments increase proportionally
with the initial concentrations from 21.4 to 118.3 mg/g. The experiment conducted for
1000 mg/L reaches a maximum R of 92.5% and a qe of 226.5 mg/g in 300 min. An incre-
ment in the Cu(II) concentration stimulates the Cu(II) diffusion to the adsorbent surface,
depending on the increasing propulsion of the concentration gradient which reduces the
mass transfer resistance of Cu(II) between the solution and the adsorbent. [24,28,37–39].
From this result, it can be deduced that 4 g/L of adsorbent is not adequate to adsorb Cu(II)
ions from a 1000 mg/L solution, because the sites that were available for adsorption were
filled with Cu(II) ions. Figure 3 demonstrates the SEM and EDS analysis of the 4 g/L
WGFCA after 300 min of adsorption with 1000 mg/L initial metal concentration.
As given in Figure 3a,c, Cu accumulated on the surface area of the free sites located on
the WGFCA surface which was shown in Figure 1d. The EDS mapping of Cu (Figure 3b)
reveals that a homogenous Cu distribution can be observed throughout the structure.
Furthermore, when the structure is investigated in detail (Figure 3c), the copper is observed
to have accumulated on the surface in an angular structure, and almost no free surface area
is observed.
 this result, it can be deduced that 4 g/L of adsorbent is not adequate to adsorb Cu(II) ions
from a 1000 mg/L solution, because the sites that were available for adsorption were filled
Water 2023, 15, 1063 8 of 15
with Cu(II) ions. Figure 3 demonstrates the SEM and EDS analysis of the 4 g/L WGFCA
after 300 min of adsorption with 1000 mg/L initial metal concentration.

Figure 3. SEM micrograph (a) at 20k magnification, (b) EDS analysis, and (c) SEM micrograph at
Figure
75k 3. SEM micrograph
magnification of 4 g/L (a) at 20k magnification,
WGFCA after 300 min(b)
of EDS analysis,with
adsorption and 1000
(c) SEM micrograph
mg/L at 75 con-
initial metal k
magnification
centration. of 4 g/L WGFCA after 300 min of adsorption with 1000 mg/L initial metal concentration.

3.4. The Effect of Adsorbent Amount

The effect of the adsorbent amount was investigated by using 0.1–2 g (0.4–8 g/L) of
adsorbent in the 100 mg/L Cu(II)-containing solution. Figure 2e,f display the R and qt
Water 2023, 15, 1063 9 of 15

change in the adsorbent amount experiments against time. Copper removal was efficiently
made by the adsorbent amounts higher than 0.4 g/L with an R-value higher than 99%
within 300 min. When the adsorbent amount was 4 and 8 g/L, the adsorption process
wasPEER
Water 2023, 15, x FOR completed
REVIEW in a few minutes. However, lowering the adsorbent amount lowers the 10 of 16
speed of the adsorption and inverse proportionally increases the time required for the
adsorption to complete. Furthermore, the qe values increased proportionally with the
amounts between 1 and
valency forces8 between
g/L. According
the metal to
andFigure 2e,f,[24,43].
adsorbent the R There
and qare
e of the 0.4studies
varying g/L that
Cu(II)-containing experiments
investigate were,
adsorbents respectively,
containing 81.5% and
magnesium 198.1for
silicates mg/g.
the removal of heavy metal
ions, where PSO is offered for Cu(II) adsorption [26–29,44,45]. Liu et. al. (2007) used an
3.5. Kinetic Investigation
adsorbent composed of iron oxide@magnesium silicate for Cu(II) adsorption and ex-
A kineticplained the adsorption
investigation mechanism
was conducted by as
andepending
adsorptiononprocess
the electrostatic
using 0.4attraction between
g/L adsor-
the negatively charged silicate ions and the positively charged Cu(II)
bent in 100–1000 mg/L of Cu(II)-containing solution for 0–240 min. The qt and copper ions [26]. On the
other hand, Huang et. al. (2017) claimed that mechanically activated serpentine adsorbed
removal ratios are given in Figure 4a and 4b, respectively. In all the adsorption experiments,
Cu(II) at very high qe values due to the Mg dissolution and copper precipitation in the
rapid removal was observed within 15 min. Then, the adsorption rate slowed down grad-
form of wroewolfeite [44]. Furthermore, Petronias et al. (2020) confirmed the same ad-
ually until an sorption
equilibrium between
mechanism the
[45]. metal
Either andCu(II)
way, the adsorbent
adsorptionwas obtained.
is generally Although
consistent with the
some fluctuations were observed
PSO kinetic model. after equilibrium was attained, a radical change in the
qt values was not encountered.

Figure 4. (a) qt and (b) Cu removal of 0.4 g/L of WGFCA in 100, 300, 500, 700, and 1000 mg/L
Figure 4. (a) qt and (b) Cu removal of 0.4 g/L of WGFCA in 100, 300, 500, 700, and 1000 mg/L Cu(II)
Cu(II) concentration for 0–240
concentration min; (c)
for 0–240 min;PFO andand
(c) PFO (d)(d)
PSOPSOkinetic
kineticmodel fittings;(e)(e)
model fittings; Langmuir
Langmuir andand
(f) Freun-
(f) Freundlich isotherms.
dlich isotherms.
Water 2023, 15, 1063 10 of 15

Furthermore, pseudo-first order (Equation (5)) and pseudo-second order (Equation (6))
kinetic models were implemented for the kinetic experiments, and the data obtained are
given in Table 2. The plots of both models for the metal concentration are also shown in
Figure 4c,d. According to the results, both PFO and PSO models are able to determine the
kinetics of the Cu(II) adsorption on WGFCA with high coefficient of determination (R2 )
values, which are over 0.93. On the other hand, the PSO model exhibits higher compatibility
than the PFO model due to the R2 values being higher than 0.995.

Table 2. Kinetic and isothermal parameters of the adsorption.

Kinetic Parameters
PFO PSO
Conc. qe, exp k1 qe k2 qe
R2 R2
(mg/L) (mg/g) (1/min) (mg/g) (g/mg.min) (mg/g)
100 191.56 0.000072 150.67 0.9727 0.00023 208.33 0.9996
300 233.81 0.000068 153.71 0.9308 0.00035 240.38 0.9989
500 265.35 0.000074 169.98 0.9721 0.00037 274.73 0.9978
700 281.6 0.000077 192.59 0.9807 0.00033 291.55 0.9964
1000 298.75 0.000057 188.17 0.9429 0.00152 300.3 0.9959
Isotherm Parameters
Langmuir Model Freundlich Model
qmax KL RL R2 1/n Kf R2
299.4 0.017 0.37 0.9236 0.1969 77.14 0.9956

According to the PFO model, the adsorption generally occurs at some specific areas,
whereas, for the PSO, model adsorption is governed by chemisorption that involves the
valency forces between the metal and adsorbent [24,43]. There are varying studies that
investigate adsorbents containing magnesium silicates for the removal of heavy metal
ions, where PSO is offered for Cu(II) adsorption [26–29,44,45]. Liu et al. (2007) used an
adsorbent composed of iron oxide@magnesium silicate for Cu(II) adsorption and explained
the adsorption mechanism as depending on the electrostatic attraction between the neg-
atively charged silicate ions and the positively charged Cu(II) ions [26]. On the other
hand, Huang et al. (2017) claimed that mechanically activated serpentine adsorbed Cu(II)
at very high qe values due to the Mg dissolution and copper precipitation in the form
of wroewolfeite [44]. Furthermore, Petronias et al. (2020) confirmed the same adsorp-
tion mechanism [45]. Either way, Cu(II) adsorption is generally consistent with the PSO
kinetic model.

3.6. Adsorption Isotherms

Adsorption values obtained from Cu(II) solutions with concentrations of 100, 300, 500,
700, and 1000 mg/L were fitted to Langmuir and Freundlich isotherm models to investigate
the behavior between the Cu(II) and adsorbent. Figure 4e,f, respectively, illustrate the
Langmuir and Freundlich isotherm fittings. Fitting and isotherm data given in Table 2
reveals that the Freundlich isotherm is more favorable than the Langmuir isotherm when
relying on the R2 values obtained. The value of RL , which is the separation factor of
Langmuir isotherm, defines the favorability of the model. The value of RL can be irreversible
(RL = 0), favorable (0 < RL < 1), linear (RL = 1), or unfavorable (RL > 1). The irreversibility of
the system and the degree of favorability both contribute to a qualitative assessment of the
interactions between adsorbent particles and heavy metal ions [42,46]. In the present work,
the RL value was determined as 0.37, where the Langmuir isotherm model seems favorable.
The Langmuir isotherm is applicable for monolayer adsorption on homogenous surfaces,
whereas the Freundlich isotherm is used for multilayer adsorption on heterogeneous
surfaces [29,47]. KF (mg/g) and 1/n values, which were obtained from the Freundlich
isotherm, are the property constants that are related to the adsorption strength and the
 irreversibility of the system and the degree of favorability both contribute to a qualitative
assessment of the interactions between adsorbent particles and heavy metal ions [42,46].
In the present work, the RL value was determined as 0.37, where the Langmuir isotherm
model seems favorable. The Langmuir isotherm is applicable for monolayer adsorption
Water 2023, 15, 1063 on homogenous surfaces, whereas the Freundlich isotherm is used for multilayer adsorp- 11 of 15
tion on heterogeneous surfaces [29,47]. KF (mg/g) and 1/n values, which were obtained
from the Freundlich isotherm, are the property constants that are related to the adsorption
strength and the
heterogeneity ofheterogeneity
the adsorbentofsurface.
the adsorbent
When thesurface.
1/n When
constanttheis1/n constant
between 1<is nbetween
< 10, it
1shows
< n < favorable
10, it shows favorable adsorption [47], and the n value obtained in this
adsorption [47], and the n value obtained in this study is 5.08. Therefore, study is
5.08. Therefore, a heterogeneous
a heterogeneous and multilayerand multilayer
adsorption adsorption
mechanism canmechanism
be mentionedcan be
formentioned
the Cu(II)
for the Cu(II) adsorption
adsorption on WGFCA. on WGFCA.
To determine the
To determine the adsorption
adsorption mechanism
mechanism of of Cu(II)
Cu(II) ions
ions on
on WGFCA,
WGFCA, FT-IR
FT-IR analyses
analyses
were
were carried
carried out.
out. Figure
Figure 55 shows
shows thethe FT-IR
FT-IR spectra
spectra ofof WGFCA
WGFCA before
before and
and after
after Cu(II)
Cu(II)
adsorption. The peaks at around 900 and 1200 cm −11 were related with the Si-O-T bonds
−
adsorption. The peaks at around 900 and 1200 cm were related with the Si-O-T bonds
(T:Si
(T:Si or
orAl)
Al)ininthe
thechemical
chemical composition
composition of FCA
of FCA[48,49]. The bending
[48,49]. modemode
The bending of O-Mg-O can
of O-Mg-
be seen at around 490 cm −1 [50]. The
− 1peaks of O-Si-O bonds were
O can be seen at around 490 cm [50]. The peaks of O-Si-O bonds were observed atobserved at 670 cm −1 [50].

Other −1 [50].
670 cmpeaks around
Other 3360
peakscm −1 and 1600 cm−
around 3360 cm −11 were cm−1 were
attributed
and 1600 to –OH and H-O-H
attributed to –OH bonds
and
[51].
H-O-H Asbonds
can be[51].
seenAsincan
Figure 5, the
be seen in transmittance of peak, which
Figure 5, the transmittance was related
of peak, withrelated
which was –OH,
changed
with –OH, after the adsorption
changed of Cu(II) ions.
after the adsorption Indeed,
of Cu(II) ions.the peak of
Indeed, thehydroxyl was divided,
peak of hydroxyl was
caused
divided, bycaused
interactions of Cu(II) ions
by interactions and hydroxyl
of Cu(II) ions andgroups.
hydroxyl Positively
groups. charged Cu(II)
Positively ions
charged
were
Cu(II)adsorbed
ions were onadsorbed
WGFCA on surface
WGFCA over surface
oxygen over
atomsoxygen
in hydroxyl
atomsgroups consisting
in hydroxyl groups of
partial negative charges [52,53]. Furthermore, Figure 6 illustrates the Cu(II)
consisting of partial negative charges [52,53]. Furthermore, Figure 6 illustrates the Cu(II) adsorption
mechanism of WGFCA.of WGFCA.
adsorption mechanism

Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 16

Figure 5.ofFT-IR
Figure 5. FT-IR spectra WGFCAspectra of WGFCA
before before
and after Cuand after Cu adsorption.
adsorption.

Figure 6. Illustration of the copper removal mechanism.

Figure 6. Illustration of the copper removal mechanism.

3.7. Comparison with the Literature

Numerous studies have investigated the adsorption mechanism of Cu(II) on various
adsorbents; low-cost adsorbents obtained from waste attract special attention due to both
economic and environmental concerns.
Table 3 represents the adsorption capacities of Cu(II) on varying adsorbents used in
the literature and this work. It can be deduced that Cu(II) adsorption is generally compat-
ible with the PSO kinetics model, where chemisorption is favorable. On the other hand,
Water 2023, 15, 1063 12 of 15

3.7. Comparison with the Literature

Numerous studies have investigated the adsorption mechanism of Cu(II) on various
adsorbents; low-cost adsorbents obtained from waste attract special attention due to both
economic and environmental concerns.
Table 3 represents the adsorption capacities of Cu(II) on varying adsorbents used
in the literature and this work. It can be deduced that Cu(II) adsorption is generally
compatible with the PSO kinetics model, where chemisorption is favorable. On the other
hand, magnesium silicate-based adsorbents are commonly consistent with both the Lang-
muir and Freundlich isotherm models, while others recommend the Langmuir isotherm
model only. Hence, a multilayer and heterogeneous adsorption mechanism can be spec-
ified where magnesium silicate is involved. When compared with the silicate-based or
carbon-containing adsorbents, magnesium silicate-based adsorbents display higher Cu(II)
adsorption capacities, as encountered in the present study.

Table 3. Cu(II) adsorption capacities of varying adsorbents.

Recommended Recommended Adsorption Capacity

Adsorbent Reference
Kinetic Model Isotherm Model (mg/g)
Silicate-based Adsorbents
Maghnite PSO Langmuir 21.78 [39]
Water-quenched blast furnace slag PSO Langmuir 21.32 [22]
NaOH treated fly ash zeolite PSO - 27.90 [25]
Fly ash PSO Langmuir 69.93 [38]
Fly ash - Langmuir 8.54 [41]
Bentonite Intra-particle diffusion Langmuir 909.0 [54]
GMZ bentonite PSO Langmuir 6.23 [55]
PFO, PSO, Elovich’s Brunauer, Emmett, and
Na-bentonite - [56]
equation Teller (BET)
Carbon-containing Adsorbents
Peat moss PSO - 14.30 [57]
Rice bran - Langmuir 33.58 [36]
Sugar beet pulp PFO, PSO Langmuir 28.5 [37]
Palm shell activated carbon - Langmuir 1.581 [58]
Sawdust PSO Langmuir 263.2 [38]
Activated carbon PSO Langmuir 125.0 [38]
Unburned carbon from blast
- - 10.9 [23]
furnace flue dust
Lignite PSO Freundlich 21.0 [43]
Magnesium Silicate-based Adsorbents
Chrysotile PSO Langmuir 86.85 [28]
Serpentine - - 50.00 [44]
Activated serpentine - - 539.0 [44]
Porous magnesium silicate with a
PSO Langmuir 52.30 [27]
flower-like structure
Magnetic magnesium silicate
PSO Langmuir, Freundlich 2198 [26]
composite (Fe3 O4 @MgSi)
Magnesium silicate impregnated
PSO Freundlich 369.0 [29]
palm shell waste
Washed and ground
PSO Freundlich 298.75 This work
ferrochrome ash
Water 2023, 15, 1063 13 of 15

4. Conclusions
A novel adsorbent, mainly composed of magnesium silicate, namely ferrochrome
ash, was utilized to adsorb Cu(II) in the present study, and the following conclusions
were obtained:
1. A washing pretreatment was applied to the ferrochrome ash to remove hazardous
Cr ions that would dissolve during the adsorption process. Furthermore, a grinding
process was applied to be able to disaggregate the particles and increase the surface
area of FCA.
2. pH levels lower than 3 influence the adsorption negatively due to the excessive H+
ions. On the other hand, when the pH value is higher than 6, precipitation of Cu(OH)2
favors. Therefore, a range between 3 and 6 of pH value is favorable.
3. Up to 500 mg/L initial Cu concentration of the solution significantly increased the
Cu(II) adsorption on 0.4 g/L WGFCA and, at higher concentrations, a slight increase
was observed.
4. Rapid adsorption was observed at the initial 15 min, and then the adsorption rate
slowed down until an equilibrium was reached for all the samples. This behavior
is coherent with the pseudo-second order of the kinetic model, which is explained
with chemisorption.
Both the Langmuir and Freundlich isotherms are in accordance with the present study;
however, the Freundlich isotherm fitting exhibited higher R2 values. From this point of
view, a heterogeneous and multilayer adsorption system is involved in the adsorption of
Cu(II) on WGFCA.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, B.B. and M.G.; methodology, B.B. and M.G.; software,
B.B.; validation, B.B. and M.G.; formal analysis, Y.B.; investigation, E.U.; resources, B.B.; data
curation, Erdoğan Uğurlu, Y.B. and M.G.; writing—original draft preparation, E.U., B.B. and M.G.;
writing—review and editing, B.B. and M.G.; visualization, B.B.; supervision, B.B. and M.G.; project
administration, B.B. and M.G.; funding acquisition, B.B. and M.G. All authors have read and agreed
to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work has been supported by Yildiz Technical University Scientific Research Projects
Coordination Unit under project number “FBA-2022-4987”.
Data Availability Statement: The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current
study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to express their gratitude towards Eti Krom A.Ş. Elazığ,
Turkey, for supplying the ferrochrome ash used in the present work.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or
in the decision to publish the results.

References
1. Chowdhury, S.; Mazumder, M.A.J.; Al-Attas, O.; Husain, T. Heavy Metals in Drinking Water: Occurrences, Implications, and
Future Needs in Developing Countries. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 569–570, 476–488. [CrossRef]
2. Briffa, J.; Sinagra, E.; Blundell, R. Heavy Metal Pollution in the Environment and Their Toxicological Effects on Humans. Heliyon
2020, 6, e04691. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Szatyłowicz, E.; Krasowska, M. Assessment of Heavy Metals Leaching from Fly Ashes as an Indicator of Their Agricultural Use.
Desalin. Water Treat. 2020, 199, 288–296. [CrossRef]
4. Łapińśki, D.; Wiater, J.; Szatyłowicz, E. The Content of Heavy Metals in Waste as an Indicator Determining the Possibilities of
Their Agricultural Use. J. Ecol. Eng. 2019, 20, 225–230. [CrossRef]
5. Vardhan, K.H.; Kumar, P.S.; Panda, R.C. A Review on Heavy Metal Pollution, Toxicity and Remedial Measures: Current Trends
and Future Perspectives. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 290, 111197. [CrossRef]
6. Al-Saydeh, S.A.; El-Naas, M.H.; Zaidi, S.J. Copper Removal from Industrial Wastewater: A Comprehensive Review. J. Ind. Eng.
Chem. 2017, 56, 35–44. [CrossRef]
Water 2023, 15, 1063 14 of 15

7. Ab Hamid, N.H.; bin Mohd Tahir, M.I.H.; Chowdhury, A.; Nordin, A.H.; Alshaikh, A.A.; Suid, M.A.; Nazaruddin, N.H.;
Nozaizeli, N.D.; Sharma, S.; Rushdan, A.I. The Current State-Of-Art of Copper Removal from Wastewater: A Review. Water 2022,
14, 3086. [CrossRef]
8. Karim, N. Copper and Human Health—A Review. J. Bahria Univ. Med. Dent. Coll. 2018, 08, 117–122. [CrossRef]
9. Krstić, V.; Urošević, T.; Pešovski, B. A Review on Adsorbents for Treatment of Water and Wastewaters Containing Copper Ions.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 2018, 192, 273–287. [CrossRef]
10. Pontius, F.W. Defining a Safe Level for Copper in Drinking Water. J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 1998, 90, 18–102. [CrossRef]
11. Gorchev, H.G.; Ozolins, G. WHO Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality. WHO Chron. 1984, 38, 104–108. [PubMed]
12. Demirkıran, N.; Künkül, A. Recovering of Copper with Metallic Aluminum. Trans. Nonferr. Met. Soc. China 2011, 21, 2778–2782.
[CrossRef]
13. Elimelech, M.; Phillip, W.A. The Future of Seawater Desalination: Energy, Technology, and the Environment. Science 2011,
333, 712–717. [CrossRef]
14. Algieri, C.; Chakraborty, S.; Candamano, S. A Way to Membrane-Based Environmental Remediation for Heavy Metal Removal.
Environments 2021, 8, 52. [CrossRef]
15. Lucaci, A.R.; Bulgariu, D.; Popescu, M.-C.; Bulgariu, L. Adsorption of Cu(II) Ions on Adsorbent Materials Obtained from Marine
Red Algae Callithamnion corymbosum sp. Water 2020, 12, 372. [CrossRef]
16. Shi, J.; Yang, Z.; Dai, H.; Lu, X.; Peng, L.; Tan, X.; Shi, L.; Fahim, R. Preparation and Application of Modified Zeolites as Adsorbents
in Wastewater Treatment. Water Sci. Technol. 2018, 2017, 621–635. [CrossRef]
17. González Vázquez, O.F.; del Moreno Virgen, M.R.; Hernández Montoya, V.; Tovar Gómez, R.; Alcántara Flores, J.L.;
Pérez Cruz, M.A.; Montes Morán, M.A. Adsorption of Heavy Metals in the Presence of a Magnetic Field on Adsorbents with
Different Magnetic Properties. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2016, 55, 9323–9331. [CrossRef]
18. Skoczko, I.; Szatylowicz, E. Removal of Heavy Metal Ions by Filtration on Activated Alumina-Assisted Magnetic Field. Desalin.
Water Treat. 2018, 117, 345–352. [CrossRef]
19. Szatyłowicz, E.; Skoczko, I. Magnetic Field Usage Supported Filtration Through Different Filter Materials. Water 2019, 11, 1584.
[CrossRef]
20. Szatyłowicz, E.; Skoczko, I. The Use of Activated Alumina and Magnetic Field for the Removal Heavy Metals from Water. J. Ecol.
Eng. 2018, 19, 61–67. [CrossRef]
21. Zafar, S.; Khan, M.I.; Lashari, M.H.; Khraisheh, M.; Almomani, F.; Mirza, M.L.; Khalid, N. Removal of Copper Ions from Aqueous
Solution Using NaOH-Treated Rice Husk. Emergent Mater. 2020, 3, 857–870. [CrossRef]
22. Wang, Z.; Huang, G.; An, C.; Chen, L.; Liu, J. Removal of Copper, Zinc and Cadmium Ions through Adsorption on Water-
Quenched Blast Furnace Slag. Desalin. Water Treat. 2016, 57, 22493–22506. [CrossRef]
23. Yehia, A.; El-Rahiem, A.F.H.; El-Taweel, R.S. Removal of Heavy Metals from Aqueous Solutions by Unburned Carbon Separated
from Blast Furnace Flue Dust. Miner. Process. Extr. Metall. 2008, 117, 205–208. [CrossRef]
24. Buema, G.; Harja, M.; Lupu, N.; Chiriac, H.; Forminte, L.; Ciobanu, G.; Bucur, D.; Bucur, R. Adsorption Performance of Modified
Fly Ash for Copper Ion Removal from Aqueous Solution. Water 2021, 13, 207. [CrossRef]
25. Harja, M.; Buema, G.; Sutiman, D.-M.; Munteanu, C.; Bucur, D. Low Cost Adsorbents Obtained from Ash for Copper Removal.
Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2012, 29, 1735–1744. [CrossRef]
26. Liu, H.; Mo, Z.; Li, L.; Chen, F.; Wu, Q.; Qi, L. Efficient Removal of Copper(II) and Malachite Green from Aqueous Solution by
Magnetic Magnesium Silicate Composite. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2017, 62, 3036–3042. [CrossRef]
27. Huang, R.; Wu, M.; Zhang, T.; Li, D.; Tang, P.; Feng, Y. Template-Free Synthesis of Large-Pore-Size Porous Magnesium Silicate
Hierarchical Nanostructures for High-Efficiency Removal of Heavy Metal Ions. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 2774–2780.
[CrossRef]
28. Liu, K.; Zhu, B.; Feng, Q.; Wang, Q.; Duan, T.; Ou, L.; Zhang, G.; Lu, Y. Adsorption of Cu(II) Ions from Aqueous Solutions on
Modified Chrysotile: Thermodynamic and Kinetic Studies. Appl. Clay Sci. 2013, 80–81, 38–45. [CrossRef]
29. Choong, C.; Lee, G.; Jang, M.; Park, C.; Ibrahim, S. One Step Hydrothermal Synthesis of Magnesium Silicate Impregnated Palm
Shell Waste Activated Carbon for Copper Ion Removal. Metals 2018, 8, 741. [CrossRef]
30. Acharya, P.K.; Patro, S.K. Utilization of Ferrochrome Wastes Such as Ferrochrome Ash and Ferrochrome Slag in Concrete
Manufacturing. Waste Manag. Res. J. Sustain. Circ. Econ. 2016, 34, 764–774. [CrossRef]
31. Krishna, R.S.; Mishra, J.; Zribi, M.; Adeniyi, F.; Saha, S.; Baklouti, S.; Shaikh, F.U.A.; Gökçe, H.S. A Review on Developments of
Environmentally Friendly Geopolymer Technology. Materialia 2021, 20, 101212. [CrossRef]
32. Omur, T.; Miyan, N.; Kabay, N.; Birol, B.; Oktay, D. Characterization of Ferrochrome Ash and Blast Furnace Slag Based Alkali-
Activated Paste and Mortar. Constr. Build. Mater. 2023, 363, 129805. [CrossRef]
33. Du Preez, S.P.; Beukes, J.P.; Van Dalen, W.P.J.; Van Zyl, P.G.; Paktunc, D.; Loock-Hattingh, M.M. Aqueous Solubility of Cr(VI)
Compounds in Ferrochrome Bag Filter Dust and the Implications Thereof. Water SA 2017, 43, 298. [CrossRef]
34. Lin, L.C.; Thirumavalavan, M.; Wang, Y.T.; Lee, J.F. Surface Area and Pore Size Tailoring of Mesoporous Silica Materials
by Different Hydrothermal Treatments and Adsorption of Heavy Metal Ions. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2010,
369, 223–231. [CrossRef]
35. Prasad, M.; Saxena, S. Sorption Mechanism of Some Divalent Metal Ions Onto Low-Cost Mineral Adsorbent. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
2004, 43, 1512–1522. [CrossRef]
Water 2023, 15, 1063 15 of 15

36. Wang, X.; Qin, Y. Equilibrium Sorption Isotherms for of Cu2+ on Rice Bran. Process Biochem. 2005, 40, 677–680. [CrossRef]
37. Aksu, Z.; İşoğlu, İ.A. Removal of Copper(II) Ions from Aqueous Solution by Biosorption onto Agricultural Waste Sugar Beet Pulp.
Process Biochem. 2005, 40, 3031–3044. [CrossRef]
38. Rafatullah, M.; Sulaiman, O.; Hashim, R.; Ahmad, A. Adsorption of Copper (II) onto Different Adsorbents. J. Dispers. Sci. Technol.
2010, 31, 918–930. [CrossRef]
39. Zenasni, M.A.; Benfarhi, S.; Merlin, A.; Molina, S.; George, B.; Meroufel, B. Adsorption of Cu(II) on Maghnite from Aqueous
Solution: Effects of PH, Initial Concentration, Interaction Time and Temperature. Nat. Sci. 2012, 4, 856–868. [CrossRef]
40. Kleiv, R.; Sandvik, K. Modelling Copper Adsorption on Olivine Process Dust Using a Simple Linear Multivariable Regression
Model. Miner. Eng. 2002, 15, 737–744. [CrossRef]
41. Darmayanti, L.; Notodarmodjo, S.; Damanhuri, E. Removal of Copper (II) Ions in Aqueous Solutions by Sorption onto Fly Ash.
J. Eng. Technol. Sci. 2017, 49, 546–559. [CrossRef]
42. Abbar, B.; Alem, A.; Marcotte, S.; Pantet, A.; Ahfir, N.D.; Bizet, L.; Duriatti, D. Experimental Investigation on Removal of Heavy
Metals (Cu2+ , Pb2+ , and Zn2+ ) from Aqueous Solution by Flax Fibres. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2017, 109, 639–647. [CrossRef]
43. Jellali, S.; Azzaz, A.; Jeguirim, M.; Hamdi, H.; Mlayah, A. Use of Lignite as a Low-Cost Material for Cadmium and Copper
Removal from Aqueous Solutions: Assessment of Adsorption Characteristics and Exploration of Involved Mechanisms. Water
2021, 13, 164. [CrossRef]
44. Huang, P.; Li, Z.; Chen, M.; Hu, H.; Lei, Z.; Zhang, Q.; Yuan, W. Mechanochemical Activation of Serpentine for Recovering Cu (II)
from Wastewater. Appl. Clay Sci. 2017, 149, 1–7. [CrossRef]
45. Petrounias, P.; Rogkala, A.; Giannakopoulou, P.P.; Lampropoulou, P.; Koutsovitis, P.; Koukouzas, N.; Laskaris, N.; Pomonis, P.;
Hatzipanagiotou, K. Removal of Cu (II) from Industrial Wastewater Using Mechanically Activated Serpentinite. Energies 2020,
13, 2228. [CrossRef]
46. Chowdhury, Z.Z.; Sharifuddin, M.Z.; Khan, R.A.; Khalid, K. Linear Regression Analysis for Kinetics and Isotherm Studies of
Sorption of Manganese (II) Ions onto Activated Palm Ash from Waste Water. Orient. J. Chem. 2011, 27, 405–415.
47. Darmayanti, L.; Notodarmojo, S.; Damanhuri, E.; Kadja, G.T.M.; Mukti, R.R. Preparation of Alkali-Activated Fly Ash-Based
Geopolymer and Their Application in the Adsorption of Copper (II) and Zinc (II) Ions. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Advances in Civil and Environmental Engineering (ICAnCEE 2018), Bali, Indonesia, 24–25 October 2018; Olivia, M.,
Marto, A., Yamamoto, K., Wishart, D., Saputra, E., Ketut Sudarsana, I.D., Agus Ariawan, I.M., Infantri Yekti, M., Ridwan, R.,
Wibisono, G., et al., Eds.; MATEC Web of Conferences. EDP Science: Les Ulis, France, 2019; Volume 276, p. 06012.
48. Abdalqader, A.F.; Jin, F.; Al-Tabbaa, A. Development of Greener Alkali-Activated Cement: Utilisation of Sodium Carbonate for
Activating Slag and Fly Ash Mixtures. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 113, 66–75. [CrossRef]
49. Qiu, J.; Zhao, Y.; Xing, J.; Sun, X. Fly Ash/Blast Furnace Slag-Based Geopolymer as a Potential Binder for Mine Backfilling: Effect
of Binder Type and Activator Concentration. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 2019, 2028109. [CrossRef]
50. Choudhary, R.; Koppala, S.; Swamiappan, S. Bioactivity Studies of Calcium Magnesium Silicate Prepared from Eggshell Waste by
Sol–Gel Combustion Synthesis. J. Asian Ceram. Soc. 2015, 3, 173–177. [CrossRef]
51. Fu, H.; Ding, X.; Ren, C.; Li, W.; Wu, H.; Yang, H. Preparation of Magnetic Porous NiFe2 O4 /SiO2 Composite Xerogels for Potential
Application in Adsorption of Ce(IV) Ions from Aqueous Solution. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 16513–16523. [CrossRef]
52. Poorsargol, M.; Razmara, Z.; Amiri, M.M. The Role of Hydroxyl and Carboxyl Functional Groups in Adsorption of Copper by
Carbon Nanotube and Hybrid Graphene–Carbon Nanotube: Insights from Molecular Dynamic Simulation. Adsorption 2020,
26, 397–405. [CrossRef]
53. Chen, J.P.; Wu, S. Simultaneous Adsorption of Copper Ions and Humic Acid onto an Activated Carbon. J. Colloid Interface Sci.
2004, 280, 334–342. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54. Al-Qunaibit, M.H.; Mekhemer, W.K.; Zaghloul, A.A. The Adsorption of Cu(II) Ions on Bentonite—A Kinetic Study. J. Colloid
Interface Sci. 2005, 283, 316–321. [CrossRef]
55. Li, J.; Hu, J.; Sheng, G.; Zhao, G.; Huang, Q. Effect of PH, Ionic Strength, Foreign Ions and Temperature on the Adsorption of
Cu(II) from Aqueous Solution to GMZ Bentonite. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2009, 349, 195–201. [CrossRef]
56. Glatstein, D.A.; Francisca, F.M. Influence of PH and Ionic Strength on Cd, Cu and Pb Removal from Water by Adsorption in
Na-Bentonite. Appl. Clay Sci. 2015, 118, 61–67. [CrossRef]
57. Ho, Y.S.; McKay, G. Sorption of Dyes and Copper Ions onto Biosorbents. Process Biochem. 2003, 38, 1047–1061. [CrossRef]
58. Onundi, Y.B.; Mamun, A.A.; Khatib, M.F.; Ahmed, Y.M. Adsorption of Copper, Nickel and Lead Ions from Synthetic Semiconduc-
tor Industrial Wastewater by Palm Shell Activated Carbon. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 7, 751–758. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.