TABLE 7.
Comparison of the adsorption capacity obtained for the Pumice-Remazol Red RB system with the adsorption capacities reported for some other similar adsorption systems in the literature.
| Adsorbent | Adsorbate | qmax (mg/g) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nanocrystalline FeNi alloy powder | Remazol Red | 80.97 | El Boraei et al. (2022) |
| Ni–Co oxide nano-powder | Remazol Red RB-133 | 45.25 | El Boraei and Ibrahim (2019) |
| MgO nanomaterials | Remazol Red RB-133 | 27.3–77.2 | Mahmoud et al. (2016) |
| Fly ash | Remazol Red 133 | 47.26 | Dizge et al. (2008) |
| Polyaniline/Cerium oxide | Remazol Red RB-133 | 13.9–18.6 | Khairy et al. (2016) |
| Sludge-based activated carbon | Reactive Red 24 | 30.49 | Li et al. (2011) |
| Pumice powder | Methylene blue | ∼3.1 | Akbal (2005) |
| Crystal violet | ∼2.1 | ||
| Pumice stone | Malachite Green | 22.57 | Shayesteh et al. (2016) |
| Crystal Violet | 6.99 | ||
| Modified pumice stone | Methylene blue | 15.87 | Derakhshan et al. (2013) |
| Pumice powder | Remazol Red RB | 38.90 | This study |
| Polypyrrole-polyethyleneimine (PPy-PEI) nano-adsorbent | Methylene blue | 183.3 | Birniwa et al. (2022) |
| Bentonite clay | Methylene blue | 256 | Jawad et al. (2023) |
| Sugar beet-based activated carbon | Methylene blue | 185.2 | Zayed et al. (2023) |
| Methyl orange | 140.8 | ||
| Pumice modified with H2SO4 | Remazol Black B | 10.0 | Soleimani et al. (2023) |
| Raw pumice | 5.26 |