We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Removal of Microplastics and Performance of a Developed Ceramic Filter
Summary
Researchers developed a ceramic filter from clay and waste glass with varying porogenic agent content and firing temperatures, then evaluated water permeability, element leaching, and microplastic removal efficiency. The formulation without a porogenic agent achieved the highest microplastic removal rate of nearly 99.8%, demonstrating that optimizing porosity and filtration pressure is key to effective and affordable microplastic filtration.
The consumption of microplastics can have harmful effects. To effectively remove microplastics from water using an affordable device, this study developed a ceramic filter based on clay and waste glass. The research evaluated the addition of a porogenic agent and the effects of firing temperature. In the formulations, clay was substituted by a porogenic agent with 10 and 20 by weight, maintaining 10 by weight of waste glass. Ceramic filters were produced by molding press, and evaluated for their physical properties. Its performance was assessed by water permeability at different pressures, leaching of elements, and removal of microplastics. As a result, formulations with a higher porogenic agent content and lower firing temperature present superior permeability, however, permeability increases after higher pressure tests, when structure fracture may occur. Moreover, the formulation with the lowest porosity (without adding a porogenic agent) achieved an impressive removal rate of nearly 99.8%. It was concluded that a ceramic filter could retain microplastics well, as long as the filtration pressure and porosity were optimized to obtain the best results – higher filtration without fracture.
Sign in to start a discussion.
More Papers Like This
Ubiquitous microplastics, sources, impacts, and treatment: Importance of cost-effective ceramic membranes for MPs removal
This review examines the sources, environmental impacts, and treatment methods for microplastic contamination, with a focus on ceramic membrane filtration. Researchers found that while conventional treatment methods have limitations, ceramic membranes offer cost-effective and durable performance for removing microplastics from water. The study highlights the widespread presence of microplastics across environmental compartments and the urgent need for scalable removal technologies.
Performance of intermittent sand and coke filters for the removal of size-ranged microplastics
Researchers tested sand and coke filters at a laboratory scale to remove microplastics from water and found that coke-based filters achieved up to 92.79% removal efficiency, outperforming sand alone. These low-cost filtration systems could be added to wastewater treatment plants to significantly reduce the number of microplastics reaching rivers and oceans.
Application of Hybrid Ceramic Membranes for Microplastic and Nanoplastic Separation and Improved Wastewater Treatment
This study evaluated hybrid ceramic membrane filtration combined with anaerobic digestion for removing micro- and nanoplastics from wastewater. The system achieved high removal efficiencies and showed that membrane filtration is a promising technology for reducing plastic particles before effluent discharge.
Fabrication of low-cost ceramic microfiltration membranes with controllable pore size distribution using nanometer attapulgite for gravity-driven filtration of microplastic-contaminated roofing rainwater
Low-cost ceramic microfiltration membranes were fabricated for water purification, demonstrating effective removal of suspended particles including microplastics from contaminated water. Affordable membrane materials are important for making microplastic removal accessible in low-resource settings.
Are Water Filters Effective Against Microplastics?
Comparing microplastic concentrations in water from purifiers, tap water, and ceramic filters found ceramic filters had significantly lower MP levels (0.49 MPs/L) compared to purifiers (1.41 MPs/L) and tap water (1.13 MPs/L) across 9,262 identified microplastic items.