review regarding treatment of river water using...

International Journal of Scientific Research in Knowledge, 4(WSC’16), pp. 021-027, 2016

Available online at http://www.ijsrpub.com/ijsrk

ISSN: 2322-4541; ©2016; Conference organizer retains the copyright of this article

21

Review Paper

A Review Regarding Treatment of Water Using Composite Adsorbent

Nurul Aini Zainol Abidin1, Puganeshwary Palaniandy1*, Mohd Suffian Yusoff1, Mohd Nordin Adlan1

School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Pulau Pinang, MALAYSIA

*Corresponding Author: [email protected]

Received 18 April 2016; Accepted 20 May 2016

Abstract. Water contamination has been a serious problem to the environment and human health. It can adversely affect the

human body if contaminated water is consumed regularly. Thus, alternative water treatment process using composite

adsorbents is endeavored to improve the conventional treatment system. In this article, adsorption process has been recognized

as one of the most excellent treatment methods for removal of organic and inorganic contaminants in water. Adsorption

process has been employed extensively in water treatment for hundreds of years ago till this century. In recent years, the quests

for low-cost adsorbents that have pollutant–binding capacities have been studied to a broader extent by the researchers.

Materials locally available such as natural raw materials, agricultural wastes and industrial wastes in many instances are

relatively inexpensive, abundant in supply, have good mechanical properties and eventually enhance of their adsorption

capabilities. Literature reviews on some new composite adsorbents have been investigated that discusses about their structures,

characteristics, function, modification and performance shown during the water treatment process. This paper also presents a

review on recent developments of water treatment by adsorption process. Crucial discussions with regards to water

characteristics, contaminant properties and natural raw materials as low-cost adsorbent are discussed in this review.

Keywords: Adsorption, composite adsorbent, water treatment, low-cost adsorbent.

1. INTRODUCTION

Water is a vital part of our existence and important for

environment and human health. The rapid growth of

population leads to the growing demand of water

usage for drinking, irrigation, municipal and industrial

development (Afroz et al., 2014). Moreover, the

majority of countries in the world are facing a similar

problem of securing a sufficient amount of safe

drinking water available.

Rapid changes in agricultural and industrial

activities have undermined the quality of river water.

One of the major sources of water pollution is

industrial wastewater that brings harm to human

health as well as aquatic organism i.e. fishes are

exposed to danger in the polluted river (Ali et al.,

2011). When pollution load increases, pH and osmotic

pressure also increases whereas oxygen content

decreases (Chaurasia and Tiwari, 2011). Tiwari and

Chaurasia (2011) reported that the effluents of sugar

factory and distillery are discharged in Gorrah river

and Baisy Nallah causing a damaging effect on

agricultural areas and aquatic ecosystems.

Currently, in the developed countries, drinking

water is treated mainly via flocculation and

chlorination disinfection processes. Unfortunately,

these processes do not effectively treat natural organic

matter. After chlorination, disinfection by-products

are formed when attacked by chlorine radicals

disinfection and form carcinogenics which are very

dangerous to the human body (Howe et al., 2012a).

1.1. River water and its contaminants

Water from rainfall that flows over impervious

surface in upland areas is drained into the rivers and

streams. As water runs on the ground, various

contaminants are disposed more rapidly than standing

water. This situation has emerged as a serious

problem as it can pose a negative impact on water

sustainability other than the environment and human

life. Urbanization is one of the reasons that contribute

to water pollution due to high population and human

activities. It alters the quality of river catchments

which deteriorates the quality of receiving waters

distributed to domestic and industrial areas (Afroz et

al., 2014). The runoff over the ground surface collects

various contaminants including organic compounds,

animal wastes and soil particles together (Howe et al.,

2012a). These include biological contaminants such as

Zainol Abidin et al.


22

viruses or bacteria, organic chemical such as

herbicides, fertilizers, pesticides, fuel and inorganic

chemicals such as lead, sulphate or nitrate. A report

by Ibrahim et al., (2015) stated that the As and Fe

concentrations were detected in the water sample from

Kerian River and a pumping well that exceeded the

standard values in accordance with the Ministry of

Health, Malaysia.

The quality of river water is always low compared

to groundwater because of the higher possibility of

pathogenic bacteria and microorganisms in river water

(Howe et al., 2012a). These harmful bacteria and

microorganisms must be removed to achieve drinking

water compliance under the standard values set by the

World Health Organization (WHO) (Schubert, 2006;

Howe et al., 2012a). Moreover, a large amount of

water from rivers is used as cooling water in

machinery from some factories. The river water

temperature rises because of its used for cooling and

subsequently lowers the level of dissolved oxygen

(Aenab, 2013; Ramjeawon, 2000). Most people also

do not practice good hygiene and unaware about river

pollution, polluting the rivers by throwing the rubbish

into the drains which at last connected with rivers

(Chou, 1998). Water characteristics of various river

waters are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Water characteristics of river water Source pH COD

(mg/L)

DO

(mg/L)

Fe (mg/L) Mn (mg/L) Total Coliform

(MPN/100mL)

Reference

Kerian

River

5.43 - 5.22 3.179 0.004 - (Nurazim Ibrahim,

Hamidi Abdul Aziz,

2015)

Nile

River

7.65 - - 0.05 0.08 - (Shamrukh &

Abdel-Wahab,

2008)

Rhine

River

- - - - 1.5 - (De Vet, Van

Genuchten, Van

Loosdrecht, & Van

Dijk, 2010)

Pandu

River

6.9-9.3 12.6-

543.6/mg

0-8.2/mg - - - (Waziri, Ogugbuaja,

& Abba, 2010)

Yamuna

River

7.7-8.2 - 5.14-

7.17

- - 23 × 102-15 × 105 (Singh, Kumar,

Mehrotra, &

Grischek, 2010)

Souka

River

- - 1.05-

1.98

- - - (Hs & Rj, 2015)

Table 2: Properties exploited by unit processes and the constituents in the water for which each is commonly used (Howe,

Hand, Crittenden, Trussell, & Tchobanoglous, 2012b) Process Properties Exploited Most Common Target Constituents

Adsorption Polarity, hydrophobicity Dissolved organics

Air stripping Volatility Dissolved organics

Disinfection Chemical reactivity Microorganisms

Granular filtration Adhesive molecular forces Particles

Ion exchange Charge Dissolved inorganics

Membrane filtration Size Particles

Oxidation Chemical reactivity Dissolved organics and inorganics

Precipitation Solubility Dissolved inorganics

Reverse osmosis Size, charge, polarity Dissolved inorganics

Sedimentation Density, size Particles

2. Adsorption process in river water treatment

In recent years, numerous techniques for the removal

of organic and inorganic contaminants from water

have drawn significant interest. The selection of

appropriate treatment system is dependent on the

properties of the specific constituents in the particular

source water of interest and the ability of a unit

process to capitalize on the differences in the

properties of constituents. Every unit process has their


23

advantages and disadvantages. For instance, the

uniqueness of ion exchange and reverse osmosis is the

pollutant values can be regained with the removal of

the waste product. However, ion exchange, reverse

osmosis and advanced oxidation processes are

economically unfeasible because of their high

operating utility and cost (Rashed, 2013).

The process selection of a suitable treatment

system is based on the constituents’ properties in

water and the ability of the process to exploit the

differences of the constituents’ properties. For

example, adsorption depends on the difference in

polarity and hydrophobicity between a constituent and

water. The more nonpolar a compound is, the

stronger it adsorbs onto a nonpolar adsorbent like

activated carbon (AC) (Howe et al., 2012a). The

properties exploited by unit processes are shown in

Table 2. Various methods of water treatment such as

membrane filtration, ion exchange, reverse osmosis,

coagulation/flocculation and advanced oxidation

processes do not seem to be economically feasible.

For instance, membrane filtration tends to increase the

cost of its operation due to the membrane fouling

(Mohammed et al., 2014).

Adsorption is one of the physicochemical

treatment processes and found to be the most ideal

technique in water treatment as it is simple to operate

and there is a vast selection of adsorbents available

(Kamaruddin et al., 2013; Mohammed et al., 2014). In

addition, adsorption is widely applied for the removal

of organic, inorganic and microorganisms’

contaminants. Fundamentally, adsorption is a process

in which solutes (adsorbates) from water come into

contact to the surface of a solid (adsorbent). The use

of adsorbent can be applied once and dispose

immediately, or it can be regenerated and used several

times based on each study (Asghar et al., 2012). When

the desorption process takes place, it determines how

economical the process is (Sharma et al., 2009). The

adsorption process that occurs may involve physical

or chemical reactions.

Activated carbons are common adsorbents that can

effectively remove organic pollutants in aqueous or

gaseous phase owing to the fact that their high porous

structure corresponds to large surface area (Rashed,

2013) and increases the kinetic adsorption (Bhatnagar

and Minocha, 2006). According to Howe et al. (2012),

the porosity (ratio of pore volume to total volume) of

50 percent can increase 0.1 to 0.8 mL/g of pore

volume and its internal surface area is between 400 to

1500 m2/g. Thus, it leads to high adsorption capacity

where the adsorbate’s weight of about 0.2 g can be

adsorbed by 1 g of adsorbent and yet this depends on

the type and concentration of adsorbate. However, AC

can only be obtained at high prices because of its

complex production step. Whereas, the powdered

activated carbon (PAC) has difficulty during its

separation from the water (Bhatnagar and Minocha,

2006; Jiuhui, 2008). Therefore, a variety of materials

have been explored for the preparation of alternative

adsorbents and low cost adsorbents such as limestone,

clay minerals, industrial waste products and

agricultural wastes to substitute the use of AC

(Bhatnagar and Minocha, 2006).

Table 3: Summary of composite materials adsorbent Composite adsorbent Method Contaminant Adsorption capacity Reference

Fe3+ impregnated

granular

activated

carbon (GAC-Fe)

Impregnation of

Fe3+ onto GAC

surface

As, Fe and Mn - (Mondal,

Balomajumder, &

Mohanty, 2007)

Magnetic mesoporous

silica composite

microspheres (MS-PEI)

Solvothermal

reaction /sol gel

reaction

Humic Acid (HA) 128.64 mg/g (Tang et al.,

2012)

Activated carbon-

containing alginate bead

(AC-AB)

Dropping alginate

solution containing

AC into CaCL2

solution

Pb2+, Mn2+, Cd2+,

Cu2+, Zn2+, Fe2+, Al3+

and Hg2+

- (Park, Kim, Chae,

& Yoo, 2007)

Carbon coated diatomite

earth (DE)

Mixing cellulose

and DE in various

ratios

Ni (II)

Pb (II)

80 mg/g

380 mg/g

(Dobor, Perényi,

Varga, & Varga,

2015)

Iron oxide/activated

carbon (FeO/AC)

Impregnation of

FeO into modified

AC

Arsenic (As) - (Q. L. Zhang, Lin,

Chen, & Gao,

2007)

Ligand functionalized

organic–inorganic based

Direct

immobilization of

N,N’-DI (3-

carboxysalicyliden

e) -3,4-diamino-5-

hydroxypyrazole

onto the

mesoporous silica

monolith

Selenium (Se) 111.12 mg/g (Awual, Yaita,

Suzuki, &

Shiwaku, 2015)



24

Manganese Dioxide-

Coated Sand (MDCS)

Oxidation of

manganous ion by

permanganate in

the presence of

sand

Arsenic (As) - (Bajpai &

Chaudhuri, 1999)

Magnetic graphene oxide

composite

Sol-gel reaction Polybrominated

Diphenyl Ether

(BDE)

- (Gan et al., 2014)

Silica aerogel-activated

carbon

Sol-gel reaction Cadmium (Cd) 0.384 mg/g

*Based on 3 mg/L

solution of cadmium

(Givianrad,

Rabani, Saber-

Tehrani,

Aberoomand-

Azar, & Hosseini

Sabzevari, 2013)

Nanohydroxyapatite–

alginate (nHAp-alginate)

Embedding of

sodium alginate

into nHAp

Lead (Pb2+) 270.3 mg/g (Googerdchian,

Moheb, & Emadi,

2012)

Algerian silica

(kieselguhr)-charcoal

Charcoal was

mixed with natural

Kieselguhr

Lead (Pb2+) 114.94 mg/g (Hadjar et al.,

2004)

ZnCl2/ Elutrilithe Elutrilithe was

impregnated with a

solution of ZnCl2

Organic compounds - (Hu & Vansant,

1995)

Phosphine-functionalized

electrospun poly (vinyl

alcohol) / silica nanofibers

(PVA/SiO2)

Facile

electrospinning

technique.

Mn2+

Ni2+

234.7 mg/g

229.9 mg/g

(Islam, Rahaman,

& Hyun, 2015)

Chitosan–zinc oxide

nanoparticles (CS–

ZnONPs)

Polymer-based

method

Permethrin pesticide - (Moradi Dehaghi,

Rahmanifar,

Moradi, & Azar,

2014)

Chitosan and granulated

activated charcoal

Commercially

prepared

Nickel (Ni(II))

Lead (Pb(II))

9.99 mg/g

9.99 mg/g

(Odoemelam,

Onwu, & Ngwu,

2015)

Magnetic Fe3O4/Fe-Ti

bimetallic oxide nano-

adsorbent

Co-precipitation Fluoride (F) 57.22 mg/g (C. Zhang, Chen,

Wang, Su, & Jin,

2014)

Graphene sand composite

(GSC)

Graphenic

materials were

immobilized into

sand

Rhodamine-6G

Chloropyrifos (CP)

55 mg/g

48 mg/g

(Gupta,

Sreeprasad,

Maliyekkal, Das,

& Pradeep, 2012)

Immobilized graphene-

based composite

Graphene

immobilized on

sand using asphalt

Rhodamine-6G

Pesticide

(chlorpyrifos)

75.4 mg/g (Sreeprasad,

Gupta,

Maliyekkal, &

Pradeep, 2013)

Lanthanum oxides-

granular activated carbon

(TLAC)

Impregnating Ti

and La oxides on

GAC and

synchroton-based

technique (study

the elemental

distribution)

Arsenic (As)

Fluoride (F)

30.3 mg/g

27.8 mg/g

(Jing, Cui, Huang,

& Li, 2012)

Inorganic Composite

Materials (ICM)

Impregnation of

Kieselguhr and

charcoal

Lead (Pb2+) 114.94 mg/g (Hadjar et al.,

2004)

2.1. Development of composite adsorbent

Improvement of the heat and mass transfer

performance of the original adsorbents has been made

in a wide range of contaminant removal in water by

means of the combination of a single adsorbent with

other adsorbent such as clay minerals, rice husk,

carbonaceous adsorbent, polymeric adsorbents, oxidic

adsorbents and zeolite molecular sieves. According to

Hadjar et al. (2004), developed composite materials

were improved on their adsorptive properties and

subsequently resulted in fast adsorption kinetic of

metallic ions such as lead.

A recent study about an organic ligand based

composite adsorbent was reported by Awual et al.

(2015). The direct immobilization of N,N’-di(3-

carboxysalicylidene)-3,4-diamino-5-hydroxypyrazole

onto the mesoporous silica monolith were conducted


25

to prepare composite adsorbent. His group research

found that adsorption of selenium (Se (IV)) followed

the Langmuir isotherm model, meanwhile the

adsorption capacity was 111.12 mg/g. Dobor et al.

(2015) investigated the properties of cellulose and

diatomite earth (DE) by scanning electron microscopy

(SEM) and electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) and

claimed the result obtained from SEM-EPMA showed

that there were C-O bonds bonded to lead (Pb) on the

composite’s surface.

In other study, Zhang et al. (2014) developed a

magnetic Fe3O4/Fe -Ti bimetallic oxide nano-

adsorbent by chemical precipitation. After they tested

the adsorption capabilities of the prepared adsorbent

towards fluoride in aqueous solution, they found that

the maximum adsorption capacity was 57.22 mg/g.

The adsorption isotherms were in accordance with the

Langmuir model and took only 2 minutes for

adsorption to reach equilibrium. Gupta et al. (2012)

synthesized graphene-sand composite (GSC) from

cane sugar. From the batch experiment, it showed that

the adsorption capacity was 50−55 mg/g for

rhodamine 6G (R6G). The best capacity obtained for

R6G for AC under optimized conditions was 44.7

mg/g. In contrast, when Sreeprasad et al. (2013)

employed GSC from asphalt, the removal of R6G

from aqueous solution was 75.4 mg/g. The strength

and adsorption capacity of GSC demonstrated its

superiority in water purification.

Odoemelam et al. (2015) conducted an experiment

to compare the adsorption ability to remove Ni2+ and

Pb2+ in aqueous solution between chitosan, activated

charcoal and chitosan-activated charcoal as composite

adsorbents. They concluded that the chitosan-

activated charcoal is the highest adsorbent affinity for

the metal ions followed by charcoal and chitosan. Jing

et al. (2012) worked on an experiment of the

lanthanum oxides and granular activated carbon

(TLAC) for simultaneous arsenic and fluoride

removal from groundwater samples. They concluded

that TLAC has the highest adsorption capacity of As

(V) and F compared to E33p and aluminium oxide

(Al2O3) media. TLAC was further proven a more

effective adsorbent since GAC can remove dissolved

organic matter. Overall, this review emphasizes the

current development of composite-based materials

towards the adsorption of various contaminants in

aquatic system. Properties exploited by unit processes

and the constituents in the water for which each is

commonly used is given in Table 2.

2.2. Natural raw materials used as low-cost

adsorbent

The enhancement of adsorptive properties and

production of low cost adsorbents (LCAs) has been

achieved by developing composite materials (Hadjar

et al., 2004). Nowadays, LCAs have received high

demand in their production from agricultural waste

and industrial by-products (Lim and Aris, 2014).

Natural adsorbents which comprise of clay minerals,

zeolite, oxides and biopolymers also have been

utilised as LCAs in water treatment. However, the

natural and other low-cost adsorbents are low in

adsorption capacities and are not involve in the

selection of targeted contaminants in water or

aqueous solutions (Mohammed et al., 2014; Worch,

2012).

Sreeprasad et al. (2013) investigated to make

graphenic materials from asphalt which is cheaper and

possess interesting physical and chemical properties

such as antibacterial and high surface area. Gupta et

al. (2012) synthesised graphenic material from cane

sugar and found that the material has high adsorption

capacity to decolourize the coloured soft drinks.

Chitosan and granulated activated charcoal has been

used in order to remove Ni(II) and Pb(II) ions from

aqueous solutions. In spite of their advantage due to

their low cost, they still lack in information which

limits them for a final evaluation (Worch, 2012).

Moreover, natural adsorbents have smaller surface

areas compared to engineered adsorbents that have

high porosity.

Table 3 summarizes the development of composite

adsorbent for the removal of contaminants from water.

3. CONCLUSION

From this article, an evaluation was made revealing

the breakthrough of composite adsorbents as

economical and easy-operation adsorbents in water

treatment technology. The capability of composite

adsorbents is to remove various contaminants

especially heavy metals. It has been observed that the

adsorption capacity ranging from 80 to 270.3 mg/g.

Numerous studies also reported that the adsorption in

batch study showed good results, but there are only a

few studies that perform it in a pilot or industrial

scale. Hence, the utilization of composite adsorbents

should be applied in large scales and in actual aquatic

systems to improve water pollution in this world.

REFERENCES

Aenab AM (2013). Evaluating Water Quality of

Ganga River Within Uttar Pradesh State by

Water Quality Index Analysis Using C ++

Program, 3(1).

Afroz R, Masud MM, Akhtar R, Duasa JB (2014).

Water Pollution: Challenges and Future



26

Direction for Water Resource Management

Policies in Malaysia. Environment and

Urbanization Asia, 5(1): 63–81.

Ali SM, Sabae SZ, Fayez M, Monib M, Hegazi NA

(2011). The influence of agro-industrial effluents

on River Nile pollution. Journal of Advanced

Research, 2(1): 85–95.

Asghar HM, Hussain SN, Roberts EPL, Brown NW,

Sattar H (2012). Development of Composite

Adsorbent for Waste Water Treatment Using

Adsorption & Electrochemical Regeneration,

6(12): 1196–1199.

Awual MR, Yaita T, Suzuki S, Shiwaku H (2015).

Ultimate selenium (IV) monitoring and removal

from water using a new class of organic ligand

based composite adsorbent. Journal of

Hazardous Materials, 291: 111–9.

Bajpai S, Chaudhuri M (1999). Removal of As From

Ground Water By Manganese Dioxide-Coated

Sand. Journal of Environmental Engineering,

125(June): 243–250.

Bhatnagar A, Minocha K (2006). Conventional and

non-conventional adsorbents for removal of

pollutants from water - A review. Indian Journal

of Chemical Technology, 13(3): 203–217.

Chaurasia NK, Tiwari RK (2011). Effect of industrial

effluents and wastes on physico-chemical

parameters of river Rapti. Advances in Applied

Science Research, 2(5): 207–211.

Chou LM (1998). The cleaning of Singapore River

and the Kallang Basin: Approaches, methods,

investments and benefits. Ocean and Coastal

Management, 38(2): 133–145.

De Vet WWJM, Van Genuchten CC, Van Loosdrecht

MCM, Van Dijk JC (2010). Water quality and

treatment of river bank filtrate. Drinking Water

Engineering and Science, 3(1): 79–90.

Dobor J, Perényi K, Varga I, Varga M (2015). A new

carbon–diatomite earth composite adsorbent for

removal of heavy metals from aqueous solutions

and a novel application idea. Microporous and

Mesoporous Materials, 217: 63–70.

Gan N, Zhang J, Lin S, Long N, Li T, Cao Y (2014).

A Novel Magnetic Graphene Oxide Composite

Absorbent for Removing Trace Residues of

Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers in Water,

6028–6044.

Givianrad, M. H., Rabani, M., Saber-Tehrani, M.,

Aberoomand-Azar, P., & Hosseini Sabzevari, M.

(2013). Preparation and characterization of

nanocomposite, silica aerogel, activated carbon

and its adsorption properties for Cd (II) ions

from aqueous solution. Journal of Saudi

Chemical Society, 17(3): 329–335.

Googerdchian F, Moheb A, Emadi R (2012). Lead

sorption properties of nanohydroxyapatite-

alginate composite adsorbents. Chemical

Engineering Journal, 200-202: 471–479.

Gupta S, Sen, Sreeprasad TS, Maliyekkal SM, Das

SK, Pradeep T (2012). Graphene from sugar and

its application in water purification. ACS

Applied Materials and Interfaces, 4(8): 4156–

4163.

Hadjar H, Hamdi B, Kessasia Z (2004). Adsorption of

heavy metal ions on composite materials

prepared by modification of natural silica.

Desalination, 167: 165–174.

Howe KJ, Hand DW, Crittenden JC, Trussell RR,

Tchobanoglous G (2012a). Principles of Water

Treatment. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Howe KJ, Hand DW, Crittenden JC, Trussell RR,

Tchobanoglous G (2012b). Principles of Water

Treatment (Vol. 1). New Jersey: John Wiley &

Sons, Inc.

Hs E, Rj S (2015). The Physio-Chemical Parameters

of Souka River, in the Fct, Abuja, 4036–4049.

Hu Z, Vansant EF (1995). A New Composite

Adsorbent Produced by Chemical Activation of

Elutrilithe with Zinc Chloride. Journal of Colloid

and Interface Science, 176(2): 422–431.

Islam S, Rahaman S, Hyun J (2015). Phosphine-

functionalized electrospun poly ( vinyl alcohol )/

silica nanofibers as highly effective adsorbent

for removal of aqueous manganese and nickel

ions. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical

and Engineering Aspects, 484: 9–18.

Jing C, Cui J, Huang Y, Li A (2012). Fabrication,

characterization, and application of a composite

adsorbent for simultaneous removal of arsenic

and fluoride. ACS Applied Materials &

Interfaces, 4(2): 714–20. 2

Jiuhui, Q. U. (2008). Research progress of novel

adsorption processes in water purification: a

review. Journal of Environmental Sciences

(China), 20(1): 1–13.

Kamaruddin MA, Yusoff MS, Aziz HA, Akinbile CO

(2013). Review Paper Recent Developments of

Textile Waste Water Treatment by Adsorption

Process : A Review, 1(4): 60–73.

Lim AP, Aris AZ (2014). A review on economically

adsorbents on heavy metals removal in water

and wastewater. Reviews in Environmental

Science and Biotechnology, 13(2): 163–181.

Mohammed M, Shitu A, Ibrahim A (2014). Removal

of Methylene Blue Using Low Cost Adsorbent :

A Review. Research Journal of Chemical

Sciences, 4(1): 91–102.

Mondal P, Balomajumder C, Mohanty B (2007). A


27

laboratory study for the treatment of arsenic,

iron, and manganese bearing ground water using

Fe3+ impregnated activated carbon: Effects of

shaking time, pH and temperature. Journal of

Hazardous Materials, 144(1-2): 420–426.

Moradi Dehaghi S, Rahmanifar B, Moradi AM, Azar

PA (2014). Removal of permethrin pesticide

from water by chitosan-zinc oxide nanoparticles

composite as an adsorbent. Journal of Saudi

Chemical Society, 18(4): 348–355.

Nurazim Ibrahim, Hamidi Abdul Aziz (2015). Heavy

Metals Concentration In River And Pumping

Well Water For River Bank Filtration (Rbf)

System: Case Study In Sungai Kerian. Jurnal

Teknologi, 11: 59–67.

Odoemelam SA, Onwu FK, Ngwu CM (2015).

Synergistic studies on the Sorption of Ni 2 + and

Pb 2 + from aqueous solutions using chitosan

and granulated activated charcoal : Kinetic

Analysis. Journal of Environmental Science ,

Computer Science and Engineering &

Technology, 4(2): 396–408.

Park HG, Kim TW, Chae MY, Yoo IK (2007).

Activated carbon-containing alginate adsorbent

for the simultaneous removal of heavy metals

and toxic organics. Process Biochemistry,

42(10): 1371–1377.

Ramjeawon T (2000). Cleaner production in

Mauritian cane-sugar factories. Journal of

Cleaner Production, 8(6): 503–510.

Rashed MN (2013). Adsorption Technique for the

Removal of Organic Pollutants from Water and

Wastewater. Organic Pollutants - Monitoring,

Risk and Treatment, 167–194.

Schubert J (2006). Significant of hydrologic aspects

on RBF performance. Riverbank Filtration

Hydrology, 1–20.

Shamrukh M, Abdel-Wahab A (2008). Riverbank

filtration for sustainable water supply:

Application to a large-scale facility on the Nile

River. Clean Technologies and Environmental

Policy, 10(4): 351–358.

SharmanYC, Upadhyay UMASN, Gode F (2009).

Adsorptive Removal of a Basic Dye From Water

and Wastewater By Activated Carbon. Journal of

Applied Sciences in Environmental Sanitation,

4(1): 21–28.

Singh P, Kumar P, Mehrotra I, Grischek T (2010).

Impact of riverbank filtration on treatment of

polluted river water. Journal of Environmental

Management, 91(5): 1055–1062.

Sreeprasad TS, Gupta S, Sen, Maliyekkal SM,

Pradeep T (2013). Immobilized graphene-based

composite from asphalt: Facile synthesis and

application in water purification. Journal of

Hazardous Materials, 246-247: 213–220.

Tang Y, Liang S, Yu S, Gao N, Zhang J, Guo H,

Wang Y (2012). Enhanced adsorption of humic

acid on amine functionalized magnetic

mesoporous composite microspheres. Colloids

and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and

Engineering Aspects, 406: 61–67.

Waziri M, Ogugbuaja VO, Abba B (2010).

Interrelationships between physicochemical

water pollution indicators : A case study of River

Yobe-Nigeria. American Jouran of Scientific and

Industrial Research, 1(1): 76–80.

Worch E (2012). Adsorption Technology in Water

Treatment.

http://doi.org/10.1515/9783110240238

Zhang C, Chen L, Wang T, Su C, Jin Y (2014).

Synthesis and properties of a magnetic core–

shell composite nano-adsorbent for fluoride

removal from drinking water. Applied Surface

Science, 317: 552–559.

Zhang QL, Lin YC, Chen X, Gao NY (2007). A

method for preparing ferric activated carbon

composites adsorbents to remove arsenic from

drinking water. Journal of Hazardous Materials,

148(3): 671–678.

review regarding treatment of river water using...

Documents