Table 2.

Summary of copper removal efficiency based on different treatments.

Techniques	Materials/Reactors	Removal Efficiency of Cu	References
Membrane separation	Hydrophilic polyurethane modified cellulose acetate ultrafiltration membranes	92%	[140]
	Cellulose acetate based biopolymeric mixed matrix membranes	84–88%	[141]
	Chitosan-cellulose acetate-TiO2 based membrane	97%	[142]
Ion exchange	Y zeolite ion exchangers	64%	[143]
	Ion exchange resin	99.14%	[144]
Electrochemical reaction	Bipolar disc reactor	90.1%	[145]
	Continuous electrochemical cell	91%	[146]
	Bioelectrochemical and electrochemical systems	99.9%	[147]
Chemical precipitation	OM in waste distillery slops—precipitation/coagulation	92%	[148]
	Synthetic nesquehonite	99.97%	[149]
	struvite	99.9%	[150]
Adsorption	Hexagonal boron nitride	92%	[151]
	Zeolite, bentonite, and steel slag	98.47–99.98%	[152]
	Agro-industrial waste	89%	[153]
Biotechnology	Stenotrophomonas maltophilia	88%	[154]
	Microalgae	>95%	[155]
	Aspergillus australensis Biomass	79%	[156]