379
various fields of advanced technology in many industries. These are also used in
tracing the ground water by the determining the surface area of sewage and activated sludge (Yagub et al. 2014). Dye is found very hazardous as it is very toxic,
carcinogenic, and mutagenic, which increases the level of biochemical oxygen
demand and chemical oxygen demand of aquatic sources and causes a critical warning for human health (Ruan et al. 2019; Fernández et al. 2010). Even 1.0 mg/L of
dye concentration in drinking water could disseminate significant color and cautious for human consumption (Garg et al. 2004). Therefore, it is essential for dye
removal from the effluent prior to their discharge to the environment. As the dyes
are very harmful organic compounds to the surrounding and human health, the
effective removal of dyes from the enormous amount of industrial colored wastewater become a great challenge to the chemical engineer and environmental scientists
(Demirbas 2009; Mondal 2008).
To control the obstructive impacts of dye from the industrial effluent, several
types of physical, chemical, and biological treatment methods such as coagulation
and flocculation, biodegradation, oxidation, membrane filtration, and adsorption
have been developed (Gimbert et al. 2008; Crini 2006; Ahmad et al. 2015). Many of
these are very high budget and require significant start-up costs (Eletta et al. 2018).
For the treatment of wide ranges of synthetic dyes like azoic, reactive, acidic, and
basic dyes, alum coagulation method is not found so effective (Garg et al. 2004).
Because of the low removal efficiency of reactive and anionic soluble dyes, aerobic
biodegradation is also found very ineffective. So, the convectional biological treatment method are not so efficient in dye removing due to its low biodegradation, but
it is efficient in basic dye removal (Saad et al. 2010; Garg et al. 2004). In the oxidation process ozone, hydrogen peroxide is often used for the removal of dyes and that
could be a little bit expensive. Membrane filtration is found very effective method
for the separation of dyes, but the barrier of this method is membrane fouling
(Mondal 2008). Among all types of dye treatment processes adsorption has been
found to be highly effective for dyes removal regarding its simplicity, cost, and ease
of the separation process (Garg et al. 2004; Demirbas 2009). Due to the excellent
adsorption capacity, activated carbon is highly preferable, but it is limited for its
high cost, and also 10–15% loss of adsorbents are found in regeneration process by
refractory technique (Garg et al. 2004; Ruan et al. 2019). Thus, there is a need for
great efforts to exploit an innovative and cheap new promising low-cost adsorbent
for dye removal.
Presently, the replacement of synthetic adsorbents with non-conventional and
cost effective materials has become the hot topic in research and development
(Eletta et al. 2018). Therefore, several researches are done on numerous approaches
in developing the low-cost and potential adsorbents obtained from biosorbents,
natural materials, agricultural waste, and industrial wastes for dye removal from
industrial effluent that can be a feasible alternative to activated carbon (Demirbas
2009; Yagub et al. 2014; Gimbert et al. 2008). Various numbers of adsorbents have
been reported as cheap adsorbents such as wheat straw, rice husk, banana and orange
peels, spent tea leaves, mango peels, coconut shell, eucalyptus bark, chitosan, fly
ash, silica, natural zeolites, and peat. For the removal of methyl red from the
15 Remediation of Dyes from Industrial Wastewater Using Low-Cost Adsorbents
various fields of advanced technology in many industries. These are also used in
tracing the ground water by the determining the surface area of sewage and activated sludge (Yagub et al. 2014). Dye is found very hazardous as it is very toxic,
carcinogenic, and mutagenic, which increases the level of biochemical oxygen
demand and chemical oxygen demand of aquatic sources and causes a critical warning for human health (Ruan et al. 2019; Fernández et al. 2010). Even 1.0 mg/L of
dye concentration in drinking water could disseminate significant color and cautious for human consumption (Garg et al. 2004). Therefore, it is essential for dye
removal from the effluent prior to their discharge to the environment. As the dyes
are very harmful organic compounds to the surrounding and human health, the
effective removal of dyes from the enormous amount of industrial colored wastewater become a great challenge to the chemical engineer and environmental scientists
(Demirbas 2009; Mondal 2008).
To control the obstructive impacts of dye from the industrial effluent, several
types of physical, chemical, and biological treatment methods such as coagulation
and flocculation, biodegradation, oxidation, membrane filtration, and adsorption
have been developed (Gimbert et al. 2008; Crini 2006; Ahmad et al. 2015). Many of
these are very high budget and require significant start-up costs (Eletta et al. 2018).
For the treatment of wide ranges of synthetic dyes like azoic, reactive, acidic, and
basic dyes, alum coagulation method is not found so effective (Garg et al. 2004).
Because of the low removal efficiency of reactive and anionic soluble dyes, aerobic
biodegradation is also found very ineffective. So, the convectional biological treatment method are not so efficient in dye removing due to its low biodegradation, but
it is efficient in basic dye removal (Saad et al. 2010; Garg et al. 2004). In the oxidation process ozone, hydrogen peroxide is often used for the removal of dyes and that
could be a little bit expensive. Membrane filtration is found very effective method
for the separation of dyes, but the barrier of this method is membrane fouling
(Mondal 2008). Among all types of dye treatment processes adsorption has been
found to be highly effective for dyes removal regarding its simplicity, cost, and ease
of the separation process (Garg et al. 2004; Demirbas 2009). Due to the excellent
adsorption capacity, activated carbon is highly preferable, but it is limited for its
high cost, and also 10–15% loss of adsorbents are found in regeneration process by
refractory technique (Garg et al. 2004; Ruan et al. 2019). Thus, there is a need for
great efforts to exploit an innovative and cheap new promising low-cost adsorbent
for dye removal.
Presently, the replacement of synthetic adsorbents with non-conventional and
cost effective materials has become the hot topic in research and development
(Eletta et al. 2018). Therefore, several researches are done on numerous approaches
in developing the low-cost and potential adsorbents obtained from biosorbents,
natural materials, agricultural waste, and industrial wastes for dye removal from
industrial effluent that can be a feasible alternative to activated carbon (Demirbas
2009; Yagub et al. 2014; Gimbert et al. 2008). Various numbers of adsorbents have
been reported as cheap adsorbents such as wheat straw, rice husk, banana and orange
peels, spent tea leaves, mango peels, coconut shell, eucalyptus bark, chitosan, fly
ash, silica, natural zeolites, and peat. For the removal of methyl red from the
15 Remediation of Dyes from Industrial Wastewater Using Low-Cost Adsorbents