Physicochemical properties and sorption capacities of sawdust-based biochars and commercial activated carbons towards ethoxylated alkylphenols and their phenolic metabolites in effluent wastewater from a textile district

Three biochars were produced using sawdust from waste biomass, via a simple pyrolysis thermal conversion at 450, 650, and 850 °C (BC450, BC650, and BC850), without any activation process. These materials, together with vegetal and mineral commercial activated carbons (VAC and MAC), were characterized for their elemental composition, Brunauer–Emmett–Teller surface area, t-plot microporosity and Barrett-Joyner-Halenda mesoporosity. Moreover, iodine, phenol and methylene blue porosity indexes were measured. The materials were also evaluated for their pH of the point of zero charge, as well as near-surface chemical composition and surface functionality by means of X-ray photoelectron and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy. Ash content, water-extractable metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were also determined. BC650 showed a much higher surface area (319 m2 g−1) compared to BC450 (102 m2 g−1), as well as an increase in aromatization and the residual presence of functional polar groups. BC850 exhibited a loss of polar and aromatic groups, with the dominance of graphitic carbon and the highest value of surface area (419 m2 g−1). Biochars comply with the EN 12915-1/2009 limits for metal and PAH release in water treatment. Biochars and MAC were tested using Langmuir and Freundlich isotherms for the sorption in real effluent wastewater of a mixture of 14 branched ethoxylated 4-t-octyl and 4-nonylphenols, as well as 4-t-octyl and 4-nonylphenol, the latter representing persistent, endocrine disrupting contaminants, widespread in the effluents from wastewater treatment plants and listed as priority/priority hazardous substances in the Directive 2013/39/EU. Biochars showed a lower sorption efficiency compared to MAC. The best performance was found for BC650 towards the alkylphenols (9–13 times less efficient than the MAC). Considering the lower market price of biochar compared to MAC (estimated as at least 16 times less expensive by a small market survey), the former can be considered more competitive than the latter.