Next Article in Journal
Using the Cyclotide Scaffold for Targeting Biomolecular Interactions in Drug Development
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Substrates Performance on the Microstructure and Properties of Phosphate Chemical Conversion Coatings on Metal Surfaces
Previous Article in Special Issue
Porous BiVO4/Boron-Doped Diamond Heterojunction Photoanode with Enhanced Photoelectrochemical Activity
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Molecules
Volume 27
Issue 19
10.3390/molecules27196433
molecules-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Synthesis of Graphene-Based Nanocomposites for Environmental Remediation Applications: A Review

by
Rohit Goyat
1,
Yajvinder Saharan
1,
Joginder Singh
1,*,
Ahmad Umar
2,3,*,† and
Sheikh Akbar
3
1
Department of Chemistry, Maharishi Markandeshwar (Deemed to Be University), Mullana, Ambala 133203, Haryana, India
2
Department of Chemistry, College of Science and Arts, and Promising Centre for Sensors and Electronic Devices (PCSED), Najran University, Najran 11001, Saudi Arabia
3
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
Visiting Professor at the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Molecules 2022, 27(19), 6433; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27196433
Submission received: 25 August 2022 / Revised: 13 September 2022 / Accepted: 23 September 2022 / Published: 29 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fabrication of Graphene and Other 2D-Materials-Based Nanocomposites for Hydrogen Production)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The term graphene was coined using the prefix “graph” taken from graphite and the suffix “-ene” for the C=C bond, by Boehm et al. in 1986. The synthesis of graphene can be done using various methods. The synthesized graphene was further oxidized to graphene oxide (GO) using different methods, to enhance its multitude of applications. Graphene oxide (GO) is the oxidized analogy of graphene, familiar as the only intermediate or precursor for obtaining the latter at a large scale. Graphene oxide has recently obtained enormous popularity in the energy, environment, sensor, and biomedical fields and has been handsomely exploited for water purification membranes. GO is a unique class of mechanically robust, ultrathin, high flux, high-selectivity, and fouling-resistant separation membranes that provide opportunities to advance water desalination technologies. The facile synthesis of GO membranes opens the doors for ideal next-generation membranes as cost-effective and sustainable alternative to long existing thin-film composite membranes for water purification applications. Many types of GO–metal oxide nanocomposites have been used to eradicate the problem of metal ions, halomethanes, other organic pollutants, and different colors from water bodies, making water fit for further use. Furthermore, to enhance the applications of GO/metal oxide nanocomposites, they were deposited on polymeric membranes for water purification due to their relatively low-cost, clear pore-forming mechanism and higher flexibility compared to inorganic membranes. Along with other applications, using these nanocomposites in the preparation of membranes not only resulted in excellent fouling resistance but also could be a possible solution to overcome the trade-off between water permeability and solute selectivity. Hence, a GO/metal oxide nanocomposite could improve overall performance, including antibacterial properties, strength, roughness, pore size, and the surface hydrophilicity of the membrane. In this review, we highlight the structure and synthesis of graphene, as well as graphene oxide, and its decoration with a polymeric membrane for further applications.

1. Introduction

Graphene is a purified form of graphite that recently gained enormous popularity in the energy [1,2,3], environment [4,5,6,7,8], membranes [1,7], sensor [9,10,11,12], and biomedical fields [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26]. It is a sp2 hybridized, hexagonally arranged, chain of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon with a honeycomb crystal lattice [27]. It is the most recent element of carbon allotropes and is actually the basic building block of other important carbon allotropes, including 3D graphite, 1D carbon nanotubes (CNTs), and 0D fullerene (C60), as shown in Figure 1.
The name graphene was coined by Boehm in 1986 [1], taking the prefix “graph” from graphite and the suffix “-ene” for sp2 hybridized carbon, and was finally accepted by the International Union for Pure and Applied Chemistry in 1997 [29,30,31,32,33]. Furthermore, it became famous worldwide in 2004 when Geim and Novoselov obtained a single sheet of graphene on solid support, for which they were honored with the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2010 [34]. The main achievements of graphene in a timeline of history from 1840 to 2018 are shown in Figure 2.

2. General Methods of Graphene Synthesis

Generally, graphene can be synthesized using two different routes, viz, bottom-up and top-down [33,35,36], as depicted in Figure 3.

2.1. Top-Down Method

In this method, graphite is exfoliated or converted into graphene [35,37] via mechanical, electrochemical exfoliation, laser ablation, and chemical/electrochemical fabrication.

2.1.1. Mechanical Exfoliation

This method involves the stripping/peeling of layers of graphite using adhesive tape onto a SiO2 substrate. It was first invented by K. Novoselov and Andre Geim in 2004, and they were honored with a Nobel Prize for this invention [38]. Similarly, in 2017, Dasari et al. showed a micromechanical exfoliation of graphene sheets with adhesive Scotch tape [32]. Graphite was repeatedly peeled using adhesive tape until a single sheet of graphene was obtained, as depicted in Figure 4. Although this method is straightforward and is commonly used in laboratories, the obtained graphene has quite a low yield with few structural defects [38].

2.1.2. Electrochemical Exfoliation

Electrochemical exfoliation is a technique in which the graphite as an electrode is exfoliated in an electrochemical cell under the effect of different electrolytes to give pure graphene. When a current is applied to the electrochemical cell, up to three layer of graphene sheets are exfoliated from the graphite, along with the formation of graphene intercalation compounds [40,41]. Many researchers tried different electrolytes for the exfoliation of graphite, resulting in improvements in size, thickness, and the chemical and electronic properties of graphene.
In other attempts by Parvez et al. in 2013, an electrolytic cell was prepared using graphite as an anode and platinum or other metal as cathode. The electrodes were immersed in an electrolyte solution of sulfuric acid with potential of +10 V for 10 min. The yield of this process was more than 60%, and the obtained graphene had multiple layers [42]. Similarly, Liu et al., 2013 used pencil graphite for both electrodes with 1.0 M H3PO4 as an electrolyte, and the obtained graphene was not homogeneous, with defects in thickness and size distribution [43]. Hence, the electrochemical exfoliation of graphite has gained concern as an easy and eco-friendly method to synthesize good-quality graphene.

2.1.3. Liquid Phase Exfoliation

Liquid phase exfoliation (LPE) is another top-down method in which sonication is performed for the exfoliation of the graphite into graphene layers, as depicted in Figure 5. In 2008, Hernandez et al. and Lotya et al. in 2009, used LPE sonication with different solvents, viz, acetic acid, sulfuric acid, and hydrogen peroxide, resulting in graphite converted to graphene [44,45,46]. The time of sonication was typically 50–55 min with a power supply of 280–500 W. In 2008, Li et al. confirmed that nanoribbons of graphene were produced using an LPE method wherein the width was less than 10 nm.
Further in 2009, Green and Hersam used sodium cholate as a surfactant for the exfoliation of graphite [47]. The advantage of LPE is that it is a reliable, scalable method for the synthesis of graphene, but high energy consumption and low yield are the main challenges that need to be addressed.
Molecules 27 06433 g005 550
Figure 5. Schematic representation of the liquid phase exfoliation method [Reprinted with permission from ref. [48] Gürünlü, B.; Taşdelen-Yücedağ, Ç.; Bayramoğlu, M. Graphene Synthesis by Ultrasound Energy-Assisted Exfoliation of Graphite in Various Solvents. Crystals 2020, 10, 1037. https://doi.org/10.3390/cryst10111037, Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 5. Schematic representation of the liquid phase exfoliation method [Reprinted with permission from ref. [48] Gürünlü, B.; Taşdelen-Yücedağ, Ç.; Bayramoğlu, M. Graphene Synthesis by Ultrasound Energy-Assisted Exfoliation of Graphite in Various Solvents. Crystals 2020, 10, 1037. https://doi.org/10.3390/cryst10111037, Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g005

2.1.4. Laser Ablation

In this technique, the laser erodes the carbon surface and produces graphene of the required quality. Several parameters, viz., laser beam repetition rate, wavelength, and pulse duration, must be checked during the synthesis process [49]. Secondly, the pressure of the gas in the background, the substrate distance, and the process temperature should also be in proper control [49,50,51]. Cappeli et al. opted for this technique in 2015 using silicon (Si) as a substrate [52]. He used a neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet laser at different temperatures to obtain a high-quality graphene as shown in Figure 6. Further, in 2010 Koh et al. used ultra-short pulse laser technology with different substrates such as nickel, copper, cobalt, and iron for graphene synthesis [53]. The obtained graphene was of high quality with minimal size defects. Moreover, this process was quite eco-friendly with the ease of the experimental settings resulting in long-lasting graphene stability [54,55]. The noticeable disadvantages of this process were high energy inputs and the requirement for a much less laser-irradiating region for evaporating the target material.

2.2. Bottom-Up Method

This method is generally a self deposition or self-assembling process of nanoparticles carried out using four subtechniques, such as: arc discharge, chemical vapor deposition, pyrolysis, and plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition. In these subtechniques, the deposition of the graphite is carried out under controlled parameters like pressure, temperature, and flow rate [57]. The obtained graphene is of superior quality, having zero structural defects and possessing good electronic properties. However, the yield of the obtained graphene was rather low and could be used for limited applications.

2.2.1. Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD)

In CVD, general equipment consists of tube furnace, gas flow, substrates, and tail gas treatment, as depicted in Figure 7. The commonly used substrates are from group B elements, which allow a low-energy pathway by forming intermediate compounds for the synthesis of graphene. The first row of d-block metals, viz, copper, cobalt, iron, and nickel, attracts huge interest due to their high availability and cost effectiveness [58]. The difference in the solubility of carbon with transition metals influences the growth quality of graphene [59]. Iron shows the highest carbon solubility, while copper has the lowest. For this reason, copper is a perfect metal to synthesize mono layer graphene, whereas, when both nickel and cobalt are used, multiple layers of graphene are often obtained. Graphene with a large surface area can be synthesized by exposing the precursors at extreme heat, wherein a copper or nickel substrate is placed at temperatures of 1000 °C in a reactor [60]. Furthermore, several scientists discussed the use of group B metals for the synthesis of graphene at large scale [60,61,62,63,64,65]. The quality of the substrate, temperature, and pressure provided on the surface of the substrate also regulates the synthesis of graphene in this process [66]. Due to the large number of interdependent parameters, the optimization process of the quality of graphene is typically very difficult in this process.

2.2.2. Arc Discharge

Krastchmer and Hoffman were the first to use the arc discharge method. In this method, an electric arc oven comprises two graphite electrodes with a steel chamber cooled with water, and further direct current arc voltage is applied across these two graphite electrodes immersed in an inert gas, as shown in Figure 8. Wu et al. in 2010 proposed the arc discharge method to synthesize graphene under the gaseous atmospheric conditions. He used a combination of hydrogen and nitrogen gases, to generate a graphene with good quality [68]. In comparison to chemical methods, the graphene produced had fewer structural defects and was easily dispersible in organic solvents, which enhanced its further applications. Other combination of gases, such as helium and carbon dioxide, were also tried, resulting in high-quality graphene production. Using the same process, the good quality bi- and tri-layers of graphene were reported in 2016 by Kim et al. [69]. In addition to this, in 2018, Cheng et al. combined vacuum arc discharge by using the CVD method for graphene synthesis [70]. Hence, arc discharge is an eco-friendly, cost-effective method that yields high-purity graphene.

2.2.3. Plasma-Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition Synthesis (PECVD)

The PECVD process is commonly designed to produce graphene from a hydrogen/methane gas mixture on copper and nickel samples. It is an additional method for the production of graphene that is similar to the thermal CVD process [71,72,73,74,75,76]. The process depends on the number of plasma sources, such as microwave (MW) [77], radio frequency [78], and direct current (dc) arc discharge [79]. Both copper and nickel are generally taken as the core substrates for PECVD graphene synthesis; yet, some other substrates have also been used [80,81]. The typical conditions for PECVD graphene synthesis on the metal substrate are methane in hydrogen (5–100%), with a substrate temperature in the range of 500 to 800 °C [81,82] and 900 W plasma power. The main advantage of this method is the low temperature and short time duration (<5 min) in comparison to thermal CVD.

2.2.4. Pyrolysis

The pyrolysis or devolatilization process is the thermal decomposition of materials at high temperature in the atmosphere of inert gases. A change occurs in the chemical onfiguration of the starting material. To fabricate few-layer graphene, carbon atoms were synthesized on a metal surface. One of the familiar techniques to synthesize graphene is the thermal decomposition of silicon carbide (SiC) [83]. At elevated temperature, Si is desorbed, leaving behind carbon. The obtained graphene sheets have thickness up to 10 μm. The major advantages of this scheme are that it is cost-effective, providing for the simple fabrication of graphene.
The advantages and disadvantages of the above-mentioned methods used for graphene synthesis are mentioned in Table 1 given below.

3. Graphene Oxide (GO)

In comparison to graphene, graphene oxide is considered a more versatile and advanced material. GO has a broad range of oxygen containing functional groups such as carboxyl, hydroxyl, epoxy, carbonyl, and keto groups on its surface, as shown in Figure 9 [84,85,86,87].
GO has shown great potential in a variety of fields by virtue of its high surface area [88], unique mechanical strength [89], and excellent optical and magnetic properties [90]. In comparison to other carbon-based nanomaterials, GO is considered a green oxidant, as it is enriched with oxygen-containing functional groups [91,92]. Further, GO has an aromatic scaffold, which acts as a template to anchor active species behaving as an organo-catalyst [93,94]. Hence, GO can replace conventional materials in a variety of applications in different fields as shown in Figure 10.

3.1. Synthesis of GO

In 1840, German scientist Schafhacutl was given the first report on the synthesis of graphene oxide and graphite intercalated compounds [95]. For the very first time, he attempted to exfoliate graphite and tried to purify impure graphite “kish” from iron smelters [27]. To date, several methods, as shown in Table 2, have been proposed.
The most preferred methods are Brodie [96], Staudenmaier [97], and Hummers [98], as shown in Figure 11. From these familiar methods, a number of variations have been derived to improve the overall yield and quality of the GO. In 1859, Brodie used graphite as the starting material for the synthesis of graphene oxide (GO). In his experimental work, he used KclO4 (strong oxidizing agent) along with nitric acid and heated the content at 60 °C for 3–4 days [96]. The GO obtained was soluble in pure or basic water. The chemical composition showed mainly carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen with the general formula C11H4O5. After nearly four decades, in 1898, Staudenmaier and Hoffmann modified Brodie’s method and trimmed down the reaction time of graphene oxide synthesis from 4 days to 2 days [97]. The nitric acid used in Brodie method was also replaced with sulfuric acid, which further reduced the liberation of toxic gases such as NO2 or N2O4.
In 1958, Hummer reduced the reaction time from 2 days to 12 h by using KmnO4 as the oxidizing agent instead of KclO4, followed by the addition of sodium nitrate, but the problem of toxic gases still remains a challenge [98]. Further, in 2010, at Rice University, Tour’s group [102] replaced sodium nitrate with phosphoric acid and increased the amount of KmnO4. This improvement made the process eco-friendly, as it completely stops the release of toxic gases such as NO2, N2O4 or ClO2, along with easy temperature control and better yield [102]. In addition to this, the GO suspension obtained was treated with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) to eliminate all impurities due to permanganate and manganese dioxide.
Furthermore, the final color of the product GO varies from army green to light yellow, depending on the carbon-to-oxygen ratios [113], as depicted in Table 3.

3.1.1. Post-Synthesis Treatment of GO

The post-synthesis treatment or workup of GO is a must, as the synthesized GO contains a noticeable amount of impurities, viz, the starting material (graphite), oxidizing agents, and the acids [114]. The workup of the graphene oxide could be performed via filtration and centrifugation techniques [114,115,116]. The common soluble contaminants, viz, ions of metal, sulfate, nitrate, phosphate, and manganese (IV) were removed by washing with a dilute HCL solution a number of times [114,115,116]. After each wash, GO was recuperated either by vacuum filtration or by centrifugation. Finally, the residues of HCl trapped inside GO were removed by washing with a sufficient quantity of de-ionized water [116,117,118,119,120]. Chen et al. carried out the final washing of GO with a HCl solution (5–10%) through filter paper supported on the funnel [117]. The key features of the process were that it offers high-quality GO totally free from sulfate, phosphate, manganese, and metal ions. Hirata et al. further improved the finishing washing step after centrifugation by giving the final wash with H2SO4 and H2O2 solutions [121].

3.1.2. Effect of Various Temperatures on the Oxidation Level of GO

Various properties of GO, viz, electrical conductivity, band gap energy, transparency, optical properties, and surface charge are deeply influenced by the content of oxygen in carbonyl moieties present in GO after the oxidation of graphene [122,123,124]. These oxygen-containing functional groups act as excellent nucleation sites for the growth of inorganic materials over the surface of GO [125,126,127]. Therefore, to enhance the properties of GO sheets for various applications, it is required to control the oxidation of graphite to tune the amount of oxygen functional groups. This oxygen content on graphene can be controlled by the temperature maintained during the oxidation process of graphene [128,129,130]. This has been proven by the research carried out by Shin and co-worker in 2012 and Bannov et al. in 2014 [131,132,133]. Shin and co-worker prepared the GO sheets using the modified Hummers method, performed at different oxidation temperatures, as shown in Table 4. According to their procedure, the addition of cold concentrated sulfuric acid and potassium permanganate in a pre-oxidized graphite powder reaction mixture was stirred at 35 °C for two hours. This temperature was changed to 20 °C and 27 °C, respectively, for other samples [132,134]. From the elemental analysis, it was observed that more functional groups were formed during the oxidation process at higher oxidation temperatures. Further, these functional groups act as first-class nucleation sites for the expansion of inorganic materials like zinc oxide (ZnO), silica (SiO2), and titania (TiO2). In conclusion, it can be said that, to further enhance the properties of GO sheets for various applications, it is necessary to control the oxidation of graphite to tune the amount of oxygen functional groups [122,123,124,125,126,127,128].

3.2. Structural Aspects of GO

Various structural models of GO, as shown in Figure 12, have been proposed and were refined over the years by the advancement of characterization techniques and technologies. The structural history of GO started in 1936, when Hofmann and Rudolf [135] proposed the first structure of GO in which epoxy groups were unsystematically spotted over the graphene sheets, and then in 1946, Ruess [136] restructured the Hofmann model by introducing hydroxyl moieties and the alternation of the basal plane structure from an sp2 to an sp3 hybridized carbon system.
Scholz and Boehm in 1969 [137] proposed a GO structure that was less ordered, having C=C and periodically cleaved C-C bonds within the channeled carbon layers labeled with carbonyl and hydroxyl groups. Further, in 1994, Nakajima and Matsuo [138] presented a graphite intercalation compound (GIC) to look like a lattice framework. Adding to the history, in 1998, Lerf and Klinowski et al. (L–K model) [139,140] proposed a uniform carbon lattice framework GO structure with randomly distributed benzene rings having attached epoxides, carboxyl, and hydroxyl groups. Thereafter, in 2006, Szabó and coworkers [141] put forward a carboxylic-acid-free model comprising two distinct domains: a trans-linked cyclohexyl species interspersed with tertiary alcohols, 1,3-ethers, and a keto/quinoidal species corrugated network. Even closer to the present time, in 2018, Liu et al. [142] experimentally noticed oxygen bonding and evidenced the C=O bonds on the edge and plane of GO, confirming parts of earlier proposed models, especially the L–K model.
Among the above-discussed models from 1936 to 2018, the L–K model has been accepted the most, due to good interpretability over the majority of experimental observations and the ease of further adaption and modification.

3.3. Characterization of GO

In order to authenticate the synthesis of GO and to analyze its chemical configuration, a range of characterization techniques have been employed by numerous research groups. For example, in order to achieve the information of size and surface morphology of graphene oxide, SEM, TEM, and AFM were used abroad [143,144,145,146,147]. With respect to the elemental analysis of graphene oxide, quantitative XPS, EDX, and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) were utilized generally [148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156]. Additionally, Raman spectra, XRD, and FTIR spectra are widely used to point out the graphene oxide chemical structure [156,157,158,159,160]. To get additional details about the properties of graphene oxide, TGA, and Zeta potential were also engaged by various research groups to evaluate its thermal stability and electrochemical property. More detailed explanations about these above-mentioned techniques are summarized in Table 5 and Figure 13.
Table
Table 5. Various techniques for the characterization of GO.
Table 5. Various techniques for the characterization of GO.
Technique Used to Characterize Graphene OxideInformation ObtainedProperties of Compound ObservedReferences
SEMLateral size distribution of GO sheets, showing the structural morphology of GOMicromorphology and size of graphene oxide[146]
TEMMorphology of GO (wrinkles) and single-layered GO sheets.[147]
AFMLateral size and thickness of GO sheets[148]
TGAThermal stability of GOThermal stability[149,150]
XPSQuantitatively analyze the chemical composition of elements present in GOChemical structure of GO[151,152,153,154,155,156]
[157,158]
FTIRCharacteristic bands corresponding to carbonyl functional groups, confirmed the successful synthesis of GO
XRDCrystalline structures of the GO nanosheets and the inter-sheet distance of GO[159,160]
Raman spectroscopyAnalyzing the chemical structure of GO combined with XPS, FTIR, XRD, ICP-MS.[161,162]
UV spectroscopyHelp in structure identifyPresence of conjugated and non-bonding electrons[163]
Abbreviations: SEM: scanning electron microscopy, TEM: transmission electron microscopy, XRD: X-ray crystallography, AFM: atomic force microscopy, TGA: thermogravimetric analysis, XPS: X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, FTIR: Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, UV: ultraviolet.
Molecules 27 06433 g013 550
Figure 13. Schematic representation of the various characterizations of graphene oxide. (A) UV–visible spectrum, (B) FTIR spectrum, (C) X-ray diffraction images, (D) dynamic light-scattering analysis, (E) scanning electron microscopy, (F) transmission electron microscopy, (G) Raman spectrum [Reprinted with permission from ref. [164], Gurunathan, S.; Arsalan Iqbal, M.; Qasim, M.; Park, C.H.; Yoo, H.; Hwang, J.H.; Uhm, S.J.; Song, H.; Park, C.; Do, J.T.; Choi, Y.; Kim, J.-H.; Hong, K. Evaluation of Graphene Oxide Induced Cellular Toxicity and Transcriptome Analysis in Human Embryonic Kidney Cells. Nanomaterials 2019, 9, 969. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano9070969] Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 13. Schematic representation of the various characterizations of graphene oxide. (A) UV–visible spectrum, (B) FTIR spectrum, (C) X-ray diffraction images, (D) dynamic light-scattering analysis, (E) scanning electron microscopy, (F) transmission electron microscopy, (G) Raman spectrum [Reprinted with permission from ref. [164], Gurunathan, S.; Arsalan Iqbal, M.; Qasim, M.; Park, C.H.; Yoo, H.; Hwang, J.H.; Uhm, S.J.; Song, H.; Park, C.; Do, J.T.; Choi, Y.; Kim, J.-H.; Hong, K. Evaluation of Graphene Oxide Induced Cellular Toxicity and Transcriptome Analysis in Human Embryonic Kidney Cells. Nanomaterials 2019, 9, 969. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano9070969] Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g013

4. GO–Metal Oxide Nanocomposite Tailoring for Enhanced Water Purification Applications

Graphene oxide (GO) is no doubt a rising star material for nano-building and has shown great potential in membrane technology for water purification [164,165,166]. The properties of GO can be extra enhanced by modifications with adding a little sum of divalent alkaline earth metal ions bonded to the functional groups of GO layers [167]. These divalent metal ions act as a cross-linking building block between two adjacent carboxyl moieties of the GO layers and increase their solidity as well as stability. GO can also form composites when blended with carbon nanotubes, metal and their oxides, polymers, and some organic molecules, which work as spacers to prevent GOs restacking and helps in making the graphene material more porous [168,169,170,171,172,173].
The purification ability of an adsorption process depends on the properties of the adsorbent used. Some functional groups, viz, -C=O, -COOH, -OH, -C-O-C on the graphene oxide surface make GO an excellent adsorbent. Further, due to the huge surface area, a large number of active binding sites and the electron-rich environment of GO nanocomposites have been successfully employed for the adsorption of various pollutants, including pesticides, heavy metals ions, different types of organic dyes, and other organic pollutants [167,168,169]. Figure 14 highlights the different interactions between active sites and the pollutant molecules [169].
In the present time, the fast development of industries even in the countryside causes the contamination of natural water reservoirs through the ejection of poisonous industrial by-products [164,165,166]. Therefore, the photocatalytic decomposition of industrial organic by-products is another encouraging technique to eradicate this problem. The word ‘photocatalytic decomposition’ is referred towards the complete conversion of harmful and less-likely-degradable contaminants into harmless compounds. Heterogeneous photocatalysis involves organic synthesis, water-splitting, photo-reduction, hydrogen transfer, disinfection, water detoxification, gaseous pollutant eradication, etc. The different metal oxide nanoparticles utilized along with GO in the last two to three decades are of silver oxide, titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, copper oxide, aluminum oxide, iron oxide, and zirconium dioxide have also been reported [174,175]. We have reviewed some features of GO as an adsorbent for dyes, metal ions, antibacterial activities, and environmental applications as shown in Table 6. In gas detection activities, graphene-based nanomaterials have been extensively investigated because of their high sensitivity toward various gaseous species. Few-layered hydrophilic sheets of graphene oxide manifest amazing adsorption behavior towards miscellaneous harmful gases such as CO2, CO, NO2, and NH3 [176].
The combination of silver–graphene oxide (Ag/GO) nanocomposites has been reported as an excellent antibacterial agent for water disinfection. According to Sun. et al., the Ag/GO nanocomposite has been further developed for an antibacterial water purification membrane [177]. The graphene oxide sheets were used as an adsorbent for the rapid uptake of four various pesticides from water samples and might be used as a good antioxidant and an antibacterial agent [178]. In addition to this, the SiO2/GO nanocomposite showed a major improvement in terms of water flux, pollutant rejection, and antifouling tendency in membranes [179]. Moreover, the combination of TiO2/GO also shows a vast performance in different aspects such as hydrophilicity, water permeability, and fouling resistance [180]. Besides, the synthesis of the ZnO–GO combination has been shown to have enhanced photocatalytic and antimicrobial activity. ZnO nanoparticles can also be used as a water-body restoration material, and it can diminish up to 97% of MB dye under ultraviolet radiation conditions.
Table
Table 6. Some recently published studies on GO–metal oxide nanocomposites and major pollutant trapped for environmental remediation.
Table 6. Some recently published studies on GO–metal oxide nanocomposites and major pollutant trapped for environmental remediation.
GO/Metal Oxide NanocompositesMain Pollutant TrappedAchievementsReference
GO–silver oxideCyclohexaneBy using GO–Ag composities as photocatalysts, 37.0% conversion and 94.0% selectivity of cyclohexane to cyclohexanol was achieved.[181]
Graphene-supported
Fe–Mg oxide
composite		Arsenic heavy metal ionsThe prepared
composite exhibited
the significant fast
adsorption of arsenic with
exceptional durability
and recyclability.		[182]
GO/Fe3O4Methylene blue and
rhodamine B dyes		 The dye removal rate for methylene blue was nearly 100%, while for rhodamine B, it was about 90%.[183]
GO–MnFe2O4Pb(II), As(III), and As(V) heavy metal ionsThe exceptional adsorption property was due to a combination of the
unique layered nature
(allowing the maximum
surface area) of the
hybrid system and the
good adsorption
capabilities of nanoparticles.		[184]
GO–ZrO(OH)2As(III) and As(V) heavy metal ionsThe GO–ZrO(OH)2
nanocomposite
showed a high adsorption capacity in a wide pH range, and the monolayer
adsorption amounts
were 95.15 and 84.89 mg/g for As(III) and As(V).		[185]
GO–iron
oxides		Pb(II) heavy metal ionThe GO–iron oxide nanocomposite acts as a good adsorbent for Pb(II).[186]
GO–TiO2Zn2+, Cd2+, and Pb2+ heavy metal ionsThe various and dense
oxygenated moieties on
the GO surface enhanced its capacity to absorb heavy metal ions.		[187]
Graphene–ZnO Methyl orange dyeThe maximum photocatalytic
degradation efficiency of methyl orange was 97.1% and 98.6% under UV and sunlight, respectively.		[188]
ZnO–GO/nanocelluloseCiprofloxacin organic pollutantThe synthesized nanocomposite exhibited enhanced adsorption and photocatalytic performance against ciprofloxacin.[189]
GO/goethiteTylosin organic pollutantThe degradation efficiency of the antibiotic by the synthesized composite was 84% after 120 min.[190]
CuO–CeO2/GOMethyl orange dyeThe nanocomposite showed better catalytic activity than pure CuO and CuO/GO in the presence of H2O2 under visible light irradiation.[191]

Inclusion of GO–Metal Oxide Nanocomposites into Polymeric Membranes for Enhanced Performance and Application in Different Fields

Over the last few decades, enormous efforts were made to synthesize different types of membranes that could be further employed for a number of applications, viz, drinking-water filtration, use in food [192], the beverage and textile industries [193], petroleum refining [194], paint, and adhesive and solvent recovery stations [195], as shown in Figure 15.
Despite the good success in the membrane filtration technology, some difficulties and drawbacks [197,198,199,200,201] still need to be studied and discussed. The main drawbacks that limit their application at large scale are membrane fouling [200], membrane choking, and, finally, membrane crumbling. Among these, membrane fouling is the real beginning of the problem [200]. The invasion of bacteria and, further, their colonization on the membrane surface leads to the formation of a microbial biofilm [198], clogging the membrane pores and blocking and restricting the water flow through it [199]. Furthermore, once the microbial biofilm is formed, it becomes quite difficult to remove it. As a result, a large amount of cleaning agents are used, which increase the operation and maintenance costs [198,199,200]. Numerous research groups have tried different technologies to fabricate the membrane, viz; interfacial polymerization, track-etching, coating, stretching, phase inversion, and electro-spinning for the modification and improvement of the membrane surfaces, but it still requires a lots of improvement [202,203,204,205]. Some common techniques used to fabricate the membranes were shown in Figure 16.
Further, various types of polymers are tried as a core material, along with organic solvents and inorganic metal oxides, as shown in Table 7, to remove the above-mentioned limitations. Polymers, such as polyvinylidine fluoride, polysulfone, polyethersulfone, polyacrylonitrile, polypropylene, and polytetrafluoroethylene, offer a great design with high flexibility and stability to the membrane [206,207,208,209,210]. Furthermore, to improve the porosity, antibacterial, and anti-fungal activity, other additives such as metal oxide/graphene oxide nanocomposites and organic solvents were incooperated in membrane synthesis by numerous research groups [209,210,211,212].
Nanoparticles may be either coated onto the membrane surface or dispersed in the polymer solution before membrane casting, as shown in Figure 16. Dispersing the GO–metal oxide nanocomposites into the polymer generally forms these composite membranes that are a suitable tool to improve the performance, such as permeability and selectivity, of polymeric membranes, due to changes in the surface properties of membranes, influencing the separation performance, excellent rejection of pollutants, and better antifouling behavior, as shown in Figure 17 [208,209,210,211,212,213,214,215,216].
Table
Table 7. Different polymeric membranes decorated with metal oxide nanocomposites.
Table 7. Different polymeric membranes decorated with metal oxide nanocomposites.
Nanoparticle Used in MembraneMembrane TypeApplicationPolymer Used for MembraneReference
ZnOMFTreatment of synthetic wastewaterPVDF[217]
Removal of copper ions from water[218]
Removal of COD from wastewater[219]
UFRemoval of HAPES, PSF[220,221]
Removal of saltsPA[222]
Evaluation of antifouling properties in composite membranes for water treatment. Mixture model: BSAPVDF[223]
Removal of pollutants sodium alginate, BSA, and humic acid (HA)PES[224]
Evaluation of antifouling properties in composite membranes for water treatment. Mixture model: BSAPES[225]
Evaluation of antifouling properties in composite membranes for water treatment. Mixture model: BSAPVA[226]
NFRemoval of HAPES[227]
Water filterationPVP[228]
Removal of inorganic salts and HAPVDF[229]
RORemoval of salt, bivalent ions (Ca2+ SO42- and Mg2+), monovalent ions (Cl- and Na+), and bacterial retentionPA[230,231,232]
FORemoval of salts, desalinationPVDF[230,231]
GOMFTreatment of effluents with high-dye content and water filtrationPSF, PVDF[233,234]
UFTreatment of distillery effluentPES[235]
Natural organic matter removalPA, PVDF[236]
NFEvaluation of dye-removal capacity for water treatmentPES[237]
RODesalination: Salt removal (NaCl, CaCl2, and Na2SO4)PSF[238,239]
FOPossible prospect for the desalination of sea waterPA[240]
GrapheneUFWastewater treatmentPSF[241]
NFWater purificationPVDF[242]
AgNO3UFReduction of the microbial load of raw milk during the concentration process by the UF processPES[243]
Evaluation of antifouling properties in composite membranes for water treatment. Mixture model: BSAPSF[244]
AgNPsUFEvaluation of antifouling and antibacterial properties in composite membranes for water treatment. Model bacteria: E. coliPES, PSF, CA[244,245]
AgNO3ROEvaluation of antibacterial properties and the removal of salt (NaCl). Model bacteria: E. coli and Bacillus subtilisPA/PSF/PET[246,247]
CuNPsUFTreatment of wastewater (sludge filtration) and the evaluation of antifouling properties in composite membranes for water treatment. Mixture model: BSAPES[248]
ROEvaluation of antibacterial properties in composite membranes for water treatment and the removal of salt (NaCl). Model bacteria: E. coli, P. aeruginosa, and S. aureus.PA[248]
TiO2-NPsNFWastewater treatment applicationPES[249]
UFEvaluation of antifouling properties in composite membranes for water treatment. Mixture model: BSA, PEG, and MgSO4PVDF[250]
Evaluation of UV-cleaning properties and antifouling properties. Mixture model:
red dye and BSA		PA[251]
Abbreviations: BSA—bovine serum albumin, CA—cellulose acetate, HA—hummic acid, PA—polyamide, PAA—poly(acrylic acid), PAI—poly(amide-imide), PAN—polyacrylonitrile, PEI—polyethyleneimine, PE—polyethylene, PEG—polyethylene glycol, PSF—polysulfone, PES—polyethersulfone, PVA—polyvinyl alcohol, PVDF—polyvinylidine fluoride, PVP—polyvinylpyrrolidone, PVC—polyvinyl chloride, PP—polypropylene, NF—nanofiltration, RO—reverse osmosis, UF—ultrafiltration, ZnO—zinc oxide, GO—graphene oxide, MF—microfiltration.

5. Challenges and Futuristic Aspects

The graphene-oxide-based nanomaterial, along with metal oxide nanocomposites, deposited on polymeric membranes have achieved excellent appreciation as a water purifier, but there are still few drawbacks and challenges that confine their use at a large scale.
Various routes of GO synthesis have been discussed in the research, and each route has given GO that is good quality-wise, but the overall yield is low. An improvement in the overall yield is a major concern. It needs to be addressed sooner, if we want to use GO in large-scale applications.
The second challenge is the aggregation of the GO–metal oxide nanomaterials on the membrane surfaces, which diminishes the active surface area, the porosity, and the overall performance of the membrane. Over the last two decade or so, many research [197,198,199,200,201,202] groups have made attempts to remove this challenge by making alterations in the synthesis of graphene oxide–metal oxide nanomaterial and decorated it on the polymeric membranes with different methods [201,202,203,204,205].
The third and the most important challenge is related to membrane strength, membrane-wetting, and membrane-fouling due to colloids and particles present in the feed flow, which tends to significantly reduce membrane performance, increase operating costs, and shorten membrane life.

6. Conclusions

In recent years, many research groups are paying attention towards graphene because of its sole physicochemical properties, viz, high tensile strength, better electrical and thermal conductivity, fast carrier mobility, elasticity, and about 97% optical transparency. In this review article, a brief account on the structure, properties, synthesis, characterizations, and applications of graphene, graphene oxide, and GO–metal oxide-decorated polymeric membranes are discussed. Since its discovery in 2004, graphene has resulted in a wide range of applications in various fields such as solar cells, supercapacitors, sensors, batteries, and water-purification technologies. In addition, the presence of an abundance of oxygenated moieties on the GO nanoparticles imparts a high negative charge density over the GO surface and improves the adsorption quality. The addition of the graphene-based materials in the polymeric membrane-based water-purification processes enhanced the positive impact on the hydrophilicity and the antifouling and antibacterial properties of the membranes. Furthermore, GO–metal oxide nanocomposites with increased antibacterial effects and low toxicity can be employed efficiently as disinfection agents in the surface coatings on numerous membranes to effectively suppress bacterial growth.
The aim of this review was to study the development of a novel high-tech membrane using a polymer decorated with a GO–metal nanocomposite to improve the overall membrane performance, including antibacterial properties, antifouling, porosity, and the surface hydrophilicity of the membrane.

Funding

Ahmad Umar and A. A. Ibrahim would like to thank the Deanship of Scientific Research at Najran University, Najran, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for funds under the Research Collaboration funding program grant no. NU/RG/SERC/11/1.

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to Head of Chemistry Department, Maharishi Markandeshwar (Deemed to be University), Mullana Ambala, India, for providing research facilities.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Xu, S.; Che, J.; An, Y.; Zhu, T.; Pang, L.; Liu, X.; Li, X.; Lv, M. Research and Preparation of Graphene Foam Based on Passive Ultra-Low Energy Consumption Building New Ultra-Thin External Wall Insulation Material. J. Nanoelectron. Optoelectron. 2021, 16, 1467–1474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Banciu, C.A.; Nastase, F.; Istrate, A.-I.; Veca, L.M. 3D Graphene Foam by Chemical Vapor Deposition: Synthesis, Properties, and Energy-Related Applications. Molecules 2022, 27, 3634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Umar, A.; Kumar, S.A.; Inbanathan, S.S.R.; Modarres, M.; Kumar, R.; Algadi, H.; Baskoutas, S. Enhanced sunlight-driven photocatalytic, supercapacitor and antibacterial applications based on graphene oxide and magnetite-graphene oxide nanocomposites. Ceram. Int. 2022, 48, 29349–29358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Isaeva, V.I.; Vedenyapina, M.D.; Kurmysheva, A.Y.; Weichgrebe, D.; Nair, R.R.; Nguyen, N.P.T.; Kustov, L.M. Modern Carbon–Based Materials for Adsorptive Removal of Organic and Inorganic Pollutants from Water and Wastewater. Molecules 2021, 26, 6628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Pelosato, R.; Bolognino, I.; Fontana, F.; Sora, I.N. Applications of Heterogeneous Photocatalysis to the Degradation of Oxytetracycline in Water: A Review. Molecules 2022, 27, 2743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Huang, H.-H.; Joshi, R.K.; de Silva, K.K.H.; Badam, R.; Yoshimura, M.J. Fabrication of reduced graphene oxide membranes for water desalination. Membr. Sci. 2019, 572, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Franco, P.; Cardea, S.; Tabernero, A.; De Marco, I. Porous Aerogels and Adsorption of Pollutants from Water and Air: A Review. Molecules 2021, 26, 4440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Santoso, E.; Ediati, R.; Kusumawati, Y.; Bahruji, H.; Sulistiono, D.O.; Prasetyoko, D. Mater. Today Chem. 2020, 16, 100233. [Google Scholar]
  9. Xiao, C.; Li, C.; Hu, J.; Zhu, L. The Application of Carbon Nanomaterials in Sensing, Imaging, Drug Delivery and Therapy for Gynecologic Cancers: An Overview. Molecules 2022, 27, 4465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Guo, W.; Umar, A.; Alsaiari, M.A.; Wang, L.; Pei, M. Ultrasensitive and selective label-free aptasensor for the detection of penicillin based on nanoporousPtTi/graphene oxide-Fe3O4/MWCNT-Fe3O4 nanocomposite. Microchem. J. 2020, 158, 105270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Pandey, R.R.; Chusuei, C.C. Carbon Nanotubes, Graphene, and Carbon Dots as Electrochemical Biosensing Composites. Molecules 2021, 26, 6674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Hu, H.; Liang, H.; Fan, J.; Guo, L.; Li, H.; de Rooij, N.F.; Umar, A.; Algarni, H.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, G. Assembling Hollow Cactus-Like ZnO Nanorods with Dipole-Modified Graphene Nanosheets for Practical Room-Temperature Formaldehyde Sensing. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2022, 14, 13186–13195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Al Fatease, A.; Guo, W.; Umar, A.; Zhao, C.; Alhamhoom, Y.; Muhsinah, A.B.; Mahnashi, M.H.; Ansari, Z.A. A dual-mode electrochemical aptasensor for the detection of Mucin-1 based on AuNPs-magnetic graphene composite. Microchem. J. 2022, 180, 107559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Treerattrakoon, K.; Jiemsakul, T.; Tansarawiput, C.; Pinpradup, P.; Iempridee, T.; Luksirikul, P.; Khoothiam, K.; Dharakul, T.; Japrung, D. Rolling circle amplification and graphene-based sensor-on-a-chip for sensitive detection of serum circulating miRNAs. Anal. Biochem. 2019, 577, 89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Cosma, D.; Urda, A.; Radu, T.; Rosu, M.C.; Mihet, M.; Socaci, C. Evaluation of the Photocatalytic Properties of Copper Oxides/Graphene/TiO2 Nanoparticles Composites. Molecules 2022, 27, 5803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wang, H.-L.; Wang, Z.-G.; Liu, S.-L. Lipid Nanoparticles for mRNA Delivery to Enhance Cancer Immunotherapy. Molecules 2022, 27, 5607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gong, Y.; Li, H.; Pei, W.; Fan, J.; Umar, A.; Al-Assiri, M.S.; Wang, Y.; de Rooij, N.; Zhou, G. Assembly with copper(II) ions and D–π–A molecules on a graphene surface for ultra-fast acetic acid sensing at room temperature. RSC Adv. 2019, 9, 30432–30438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gong, P.; Zhang, L.; Yuan, X.; Liu, X.; Diao, X.; Zhao, Q.; Tian, Z.; Sun, J.; Liu, Z.; You, J. Multifunctional fluorescent PEGylated fluorinated graphene for targeted drug delivery: An experiment and DFT study. Dye. Pigment. 2019, 162, 573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Xu, L.; Gai, L.; Yang, F.; Wu, S. Preparation of Nanographene and Its Effect on the Correlation Between N-Terminal Pro Brain-Type Natriuretic Peptide, Peripheral Blood Copeptin Level and Cardiac Function Grading of Patients with Heart Failure. Sci. Adv. Mater. 2021, 13, 1937–1944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Patil, T.V.; Patel, D.K.; Dutta, S.D.; Ganguly, K.; Lim, K.-T. Graphene Oxide-Based Stimuli-Responsive Platforms for Biomedical Applications. Molecules 2021, 26, 2797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Cirillo, G.; Pantuso, E.; Curcio, M.; Vittorio, O.; Leggio, A.; Iemma, F.; De Filpo, G.; Nicoletta, F.P. Alginate Bioconjugate and Graphene Oxide in Multifunctional Hydrogels for Versatile Biomedical Applications. Molecules 2021, 26, 1355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bahrami, S.; Solouk, A.; Mirzadeh, H.; Seifalian, A.M. Electroconductive polyurethane/graphene nanocomposite for biomedical applications. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 168, 421–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wang, W.; Junior, J.R.P.; Nalesso, P.R.L.; Musson, D.; Cornish, J.; Mendonça, F.; Caetano, G.F.; Bártolo, P. Engineered 3D printed poly (ɛ-caprolactone)/graphene scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2019, 100, 759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Zhang, S.; Zhuang, Y.; Jin, S.; Wang, K. Preparation of Nanoscale Graphene Oxide and Its Application on β-Catenin Expression in Pediatric Osteosarcoma Cells Combine with Probiotics. Sci. Adv. Mater. 2021, 13, 2131–2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bai, H.; Guo, H.; Wang, J.; Dong, Y.; Liu, B.; Xie, Z.; Guo, F.; Chen, D.; Zhang, R.; Zheng, Y. A room-temperature NO2 gas sensor based on CuO nanoflakes modified with rGO nanosheets. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2021, 337, 129783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hussein-Al-Ali, S.H.; Hussein Alali, S.H.; Al-Ani, R.; Alkrad, J.A.; Abudoleh, S.M.; Abdallah Abualassal, Q.I.; Ayoub, R.; Hussein, M.Z.; Bullo, S.; Palanisamy, A. Betulinic Acid-Graphene Oxide Nanocomposites for Cancer Treatment. Sci. Adv. Mater. 2021, 13, 2138–2148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Singh, J.; Goyat, R. Graphene oxide: Synthesis, characterization and its applications. Res. J. Chem. Environ. 2022, 26, 150–156. [Google Scholar]
  28. Wan, X.; Huang, Y.; Chen, Y. Focusing on energy and optoelectronic applications: A journey for graphene and graphene oxide at large scale. Acc. Chem. Res. 2012, 45, 598–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ramu, A.G.; Umar, A.; Ibrahim, A.A.; Algadi, H.; Ibrahim, Y.S.A.; Choi, Y.W.D. Synthesis of porous 2D layered nickel oxide-reduced graphene oxide (NiO-rGO) hybrid composite for the efficient electrochemical detection of epinephrine in biological fluid. Environ. Res. 2021, 200, 111366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Santosh, K.; Sahoo, S.; Wang, N.; Huczko, A. Graphene research and their outputs: Status and prospect. J. Sci. Adv. Mater. Devices 2020, 5, 10–29, ISSN 2468-2179. [Google Scholar]
  31. Aliofkhazraei, M.; Ali, N.; Milne, W.I.; Ozkan, C.S.; Mitura, S.; Gervasoni, J.L. Graphene Science Handbook: Fabrication Methods; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2016; p. 587. [Google Scholar]
  32. Dasari, B.L.; Nouri, J.M.; Brabazon, D.; Naher, S. Graphene and derivatives–Synthesis techniques, properties and their energy applications. Energy 2017, 140, 766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Toh, S.Y.; Loh, K.S.; Kamarudin, S.K.; Daud, W.R.W. Graphene production via electrochemical reduction of graphene oxide: Synthesis and characterization. Chem. Eng. J. 2014, 251, 422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Novoselov, K.S.; Geim, A.K.; Morozov, S.V.; Jiang, D.; Zhang, Y.; Dubonos, S.V.; Grigorieva, I.V.; Firsov, A.A. Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films. Science 2004, 306, 666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Ma, J.; Syed, J.A.; Su, D. Hybrid Supercapacitors Based on Self-Assembled Electrochemical Deposition of Reduced Graphene Oxide/Polypyrrole Composite Electrodes. J. Nanoelectron. Optoelectron. 2021, 16, 949–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Taghioskoui, M. Trends in graphene research. Mater. Today 2009, 12, 34–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Bhuyan, M.S.A.; Uddin, M.N.; Islam, M.M.; Bipasha, F.A.; Hossain, S.S. Synthesis of graphene. Int. Nano Lett. 2016, 6, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Novoselov, K.S.; Fal′ko, V.I.; Colombo, L.; Gellert, P.R.; Schwab, M.G.; Kim, K. A roadmap for graphene. Nature 2012, 490, 192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ibrahim, A.; Klopocinska, A.; Horvat, K.; Abdel Hamid, Z. Graphene-Based Nanocomposites: Synthesis, Mechanical Properties, and Characterizations. Polymers 2021, 13, 2869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yu, P.; Lowe, S.E.; Simon, G.P.; Zhong, Y.L. Electrochemical exfoliation of graphite and production of functional graphene. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 2015, 20, 329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Öztürk, A.; Alanyalıoğlu, M. Electrochemical fabrication and amperometric sensor application of graphene sheets. Superlattices Microstruct. 2016, 95, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Parvez, K.; Li, R.; Puniredd, S.R.; Hernandez, Y.; Hinkel, F.; Wang, S.; Feng, X.; Müllen, K. Electrochemically exfoliated graphene as solution-processable, highly conductive electrodes for organic electronics. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 3598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Liu, J.; Yang, H.; Zhen, S.G.; Poh, C.K.; Chaurasia, A.; Luo, J.; Wu, X.; Yeow, E.K.L.; Sahoo, N.G.; Lin, J.; et al. A green approach to the synthesis of high-quality graphene oxide flakes via electrochemical exfoliation of pencil core. Rsc Adv. 2013, 3, 11745–11750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Madurani, K.A.; Suprapto, S.; Machrita, N.I.; Bahar, S.L.; Illiya, W.; Kurniawan, F. Progress in Graphene Synthesis and its Application: History, Challenge and the Future Outlook for Research and Industry. ECS J. Solid State Sci. Technol. 2020, 9, 093013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lotya, M.; Hernandez, Y.; King, P.J.; Smith, R.J.; Nicolosi, V.; Karlsson, L.S.; Blighe, F.M.; De, S.; Wang, Z.; McGowern, I.T.; et al. Liquid phase production of graphene by exfoliation of graphite in surfactant/water solutions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 3611–3620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Ma, J. A Method for Solving the Minimum Vertex Covering Problem Based on Graphene. J. Nanoelectron. Optoelectron. 2021, 16, 460–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Green, A.A.; Hersam, M.C. Solution phase production of graphene with controlled thickness via density differentiation. Nano Lett. 2009, 9, 4031–4036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Gürünlü, B.; Taşdelen-Yücedağ, Ç.; Bayramoğlu, M. Graphene Synthesis by Ultrasound Energy-Assisted Exfoliation of Graphite in Various Solvents. Crystals 2020, 10, 1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Lee, C.-W.; Jeong, S.-Y.; Kwon, Y.-W.; Lee, J.-U.; Cho, S.-C.; Shin, B.-S. Fabrication of laser-induced graphene-based multifunctional sensing platform for sweat ion and human motion monitoring. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2022, 334, 113320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, Z.; Tang, C.; Zhang, K.; Li, H.; Cao, J.; Shao, Z.; Gong, J. Synthesis of Mn(OH)2 Nanosheets on Carbon Cloth for High-Performance Aqueous Zinc-Ion Battery. J. Nanoelectron. Optoelectron. 2021, 16, 1698–1704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Hemani, G.K.; Vandenberghe, W.G.; Brennan, B.; Chabal, Y.J.; Walker, A.V.; Wallace, R.M.; Quevedo-Lopez, M.; Fischetti, M.V. Interfacial graphene growth in the Ni/SiO2 system using pulsed laser deposition. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013, 103, 134102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Cappelli, E.; Orlando, S.; Servidori, M.; Scilletta, C. Nano-graphene structures deposited by N-IR pulsed laser ablation of graphite on Si. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2007, 254, 1273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Koh, A.T.; Foong, Y.M.; Chua, D.H. Comparison of the mechanism of low defect few-layer graphene fabricated on different metals by pulsed laser deposition. Diam. Relat. Mater. 2012, 25, 98–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Barcikowski, S.; Devesa, F.; Moldenhauer, K. Impact and structure of literature on nanoparticle generation by laser ablation in liquids. J. Nanoparticle Res. 2009, 11, 1883–1893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Barcikowski, S.; Compagnini, G. Advanced nanoparticle generation and excitation by lasers in liquids. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2013, 15, 3022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Nancy, P.; Jose, J.; Joy, N.; Valluvadasan, S.; Philip, R.; Antoine, R.; Thomas, S.; Kalarikkal, N. Fabrication of Silver-Decorated Graphene Oxide Nano-hybrids via Pulsed Laser Ablation with Excellent Antimicrobial and Optical Limiting Performance. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lim, J.Y.; Mubarak, N.M.; Abdullah, E.C.; Nizamuddin, S.; Khalid, M.; Inamuddin, I.J. Recent trends in the synthesis of graphene and graphene oxide based nanomaterials for removal of heavy metals—A review. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2018, 66, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Li, X.; Cai, W.; An, J.; Kim, S.; Nah, J.; Yang, D.; Piner, R.; Velamakanni, A.; Jung, I.; Tutuc, E.; et al. Large-area synthesis of high-quality and uniform graphene films on copper foils. Science 2009, 324, 1312–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Lavin-Lopez, M.P.; Valverde, J.L.; Ordoñez-Lozoya, S.; Paton-Carrero, A.; Romero, A. Role of inert gas in the Cvd-graphene synthesis over polycrystalline nickel foils. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2019, 222, 173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Liu, W.; Li, H.; Xu, C.; Khatami, Y.; Banerjee, K. Synthesis of high-quality monolayer and bilayer graphene on copper using chemical vapor deposition. Carbon 2011, 49, 4122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Reina, A.; Jia, X.; Ho, J.; Nezich, D.; Son, H.; Bulovic, V.; Dresselhaus, M.S.; Kong, J. Large area, few-layer graphene films on arbitrary substrates by chemical vapor deposition. Nano Lett. 2008, 9, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Chae, S.J.; GüneŞ, F.; Kim, K.K.; Kim, E.S.; Han, G.H.; Kim, S.M.; Shin, H.J.; Yoon, S.M.; Choi, J.Y.; Park, M.H.; et al. Synthesis of large-area graphene layers on poly-nickel substrate by chemical vapor deposition: Wrinkle formation. Adv. Mater. Weinh. 2009, 21, 2328–2333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kim, M.; Safron, N.S.; Han, E.; Arnold, M.S.; Gopalan, P. Fabrication and characterization of large-area, semiconducting nanoperforated graphene materials. Nano Lett. 2010, 10, 1125–1131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Guermoune, A.; Chari, T.; Popescu, F.; Sabri, S.S.; Guillemette, J.; Skulason, H.S.; Szkopek, T.; Siaj, M. Chemical vapor deposition synthesis of graphene on copper with methanol, ethanol, and propanol precursors. Carbon 2011, 49, 4204–4210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Suk, J.W.; Kitt, A.; Magnuson, C.W.; Hao, Y.; Ahmed, S.; An, J.; Swan, A.K.; Goldberg, B.B.; Ruoff, R.S. Transfer of CVD-grown monolayer graphene onto arbitrary substrates. ACS Nano 2011, 5, 6916–6924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Chaitoglou, S.; Bertran, E. Effect of temperature on graphene grown by chemical vapor deposition. J. Mater. Sci. 2017, 52, 8348–8356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Saeed, M.; Alshammari, Y.; Majeed, S.A.; Al-Nasrallah, E. Chemical Vapour Deposition of Graphene—Synthesis, Characterisation, and Applications: A Review. Molecules 2020, 25, 3856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wu, X.; Liu, Y.; Yang, H.; Shi, Z. Large-scale synthesis of high-quality graphene sheets by an improved alternating current arc-discharge method. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 93119–93124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kim, S.; Song, Y.; Wright, J.; Heller, M.J. Graphene bi-and trilayers produced by a novel aqueous arc discharge process. Carbon 2016, 102, 339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Cheng, G.-W.; Chu, K.; Chen, J.S.; Tsai, J.T.H. Fabrication of graphene from graphite by a thermal assisted vacuum arc discharge system. Superlattices Microstruct. 2017, 104, 258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Tan, H.; Wang, D.; Guo, Y. A Strategy to Synthesize Multilayer Graphene in Arc-Discharge Plasma in a Semi-Opened Environment. Materials 2019, 12, 2279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Subrahmanyam, K.S.; Panchakarla, L.S.; Govindaraj, A.; Rao, C.N.R. Simple method of preparing graphene flakes by an arc-discharge method. J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 4257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Kim, S.; Song, Y.; Takahashi, T.; Oh, T.; Heller, M.J. An aqueous single reactor arc discharge process for the synthesis of graphene nanospheres. Small 2015, 11, 5041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Zhu, M.; Wang, J.; Holloway, B.C.; Outlaw, R.A.; Zhao, X.; Hou, K.; Shutthanandan, V.; Manos, D.M. A mechanism for carbon nanosheet formation. Carbon N. Y. 2007, 45, 2229–2234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Yuan, G.D.; Zhang, W.J.; Yang, Y.; Tang, Y.B.; Li, Y.Q.; Wang, J.X.; Meng, X.M.; He, Z.B.; Wu, C.M.L.; Bello, I.; et al. Graphene sheets via microwave chemical vapor deposition. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2009, 467, 361–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Kim, J.; Ishihara, M.; Koga, Y.; Tsugawa, K.; Hasegawa, M.; Iijima, S. Low-temperature synthesis of large-area graphene-based transparent conductive films using surface wave plasma chemical vapor deposition. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2011, 98, 091502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Malesevic, A.; Vitchev, R.; Schouteden, K.; Volodin, A.; Zhang, L.; Tendeloo, G.V.; Vanhulsel, A.; Haesendonck, C.V. Synthesis of few-layer graphene via microwave plas-ma-enhanced chemical vapour deposition. Nanotechnology 2008, 19, 305604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Wang, J.; Zhu, M.; Outlaw, R.A.; Zhao, X.; Manos, D.M.; Holloway, B.C. Synthesis of carbon nanosheets by inductively coupled radio-frequency plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition. Carbon N. Y. 2004, 42, 2867–2872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Krivchenko, V.A.; Dvorkin, V.V.; Dzbanovsky, N.N.; Timofeyev, M.A.; Stepanov, A.S.; Rakhimov, A.T.; Suetin, N.V.; Vilkov, O.Y.; Yashina, L.V. Evolution of carbon film structure during its catalyst-free growth in the plasma of direct current glow discharge. Carbon N. Y. 2012, 50, 1477–1487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Stefanos Chaitoglou, Roger Amade, Enric Bertran, Insights into the inherent properties of vertical graphene flakes towards hydrogen evolution reaction. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2022, 592, 153327, ISSN 0169-4332. [CrossRef]
  81. Bo, Z.; Yang, Y.; Chen, J.; Yu, K.; Yan, J.; Cen, K. Plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition synthesis of vertically oriented graphene nanosheets. Nanoscale 2013, 5, 5180–5204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Singh, V.; Joung, D.; Zhai, L.; Das, S.; Khondaker, S.I.; Seal, S. Graphene based materials: Past, present and future. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2011, 56, 1178–1271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yannopoulos, S.N.; Siokou, A.; Nasikas, N.K.; Dracopoulos, V.; Ravani, F.; Papatheodorou, G.N. CO2-Laser-induced growth of epitaxial graphene on 6H-SiC(0001). Adv. Funct. Mater. 2012, 22, 113–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Akhtar, M.S.; Umar, A.; Ameen, S.; Imran, M.; Kumar, R.; Wang, Y.; Albargi, H.; Jalalah, M.; Alsaiari, M.A.; Ibrahim, A.A.; et al. Colloidal Synthesis of NiMn2O4nanodisks decorated reduced graphene oxide for electrochemical applications. Microchem. J. 2021, 160, 105630. [Google Scholar]
  85. Zhu, Y.; Murali, S.; Cai, W.; Li, X.; Suk, J.W.; Potts, J.R.; Ruoff, R.S. Graphene and graphene oxide: Synthesis, properties, and applications. Adv. Mater. 2010, 22, 3906–3924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Liu, W.; Zeng, J.; Gao, Y.; Li, H.; de Rooij, N.; Umar, A.; Algarni, H.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, G. Charge transfer driven by redox dye molecules on graphene nanosheets for room-temperature gas sensing. Nanoscale 2021, 13, 18596–18607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Olean-Oliveira, A.; Oliveira Brito, G.A.; Cardoso, C.X.; Teixeira, M.F.S. Nanocomposite Materials Based on Electrochemically Synthesized Graphene Polymers: Molecular Architecture Strategies for Sensor Applications. Chemosensors 2021, 9, 149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Chen, Z.; Wang, J.; Cao, N.; Wang, Y.; Li, H.; de Rooij, N.F.; Umar, A.; Feng, Y.; French, P.J.; Zhou, G. Three-Dimensional Graphene-Based Foams with “Greater Electron Transferring Areas” Deriving High Gas Sensitivity. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2021, 4, 13234–13245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Wang, C.; Peng, Q.; Wu, J.; He, X.; Tong, L.; Luo, Q.; Li, J.; Moody, S.; Liu, H.; Wang, R.; et al. Mechanical characteristics of individual multi-layer graphene-oxide sheets under direct tensile loading. Carbon 2014, 80, 279–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Pei, W.; Zhang, T.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Umar, A.; Li, H.; Guo, W. Enhancement of Charge Transfer between Graphene and Donor-π-Acceptor Molecule for Ultrahigh Sensing Performance. Nanoscale 2017, 9, 16273–16280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Zhang, J.; Li, P.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, X.; Tang, J.; Liu, H.; Shao, Q.; Ding, T.; Umar, A.; Guo, Z. Solvent-free graphene liquids: Promising candidates for lubricants without the base oil. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2019, 542, 159–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Chen, Z.; Wang, Y.; Shang, Y.; Umar, A.; Xie, P.; Qi, Q.; Zhou, G. One-Step Fabrication of Pyranine Modified- Reduced Graphene Oxide with Ultrafast and Ultrahigh Humidity Response. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 2713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Erickson, K.; Erni, R.; Lee, Z.; Alem, N.; Gannett, W.; Zettl, A. Determination of the local chemical structure of graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide. Adv. Mater. 2010, 22, 4467–4472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Su, C.; Acik, M.; Takai, K.; Lu, J.; Hao, S.-J.; Zheng, Y.; Wu, P.; Bao, Q.; Enoki, T.; Chabal, Y.J. Probing the catalytic activity of porous graphene oxide and the origin of this behaviour. Nat. Comm. 2012, 3, 1298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Schafhaeutl, C. Ueber die Verbindungen des Kohlenstoffes Mit Silicium, Eisen und Andern Metallen, Welche die Verschiedenen Arten von Gusseisen, Stahl und Schmiedeeisen Bilden. J. Prakt. Chem. 1840, 19, 159–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Brodie, B.C. On the atomic weight of graphite. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London 1859, 149, 249–259. [Google Scholar]
  97. Staudenmaier, L. Verfahrenzurdarstellung der graphits äure. Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. 1898, 31, 1481–1487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Hummers Jr, W.S.; Offeman, R.E. Preparation of graphitic oxide. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1958, 80, 1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Fu, L.; Liu, H.B.; Zou, Y.; Li, B. Technology research on oxidative degree of graphite oxide prepared by Hummers method. Carbon 2005, 124, 10–14. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  100. Jeong, T.K.; Choi, M.K.; Sim, Y.; Lim, J.T.; Kim, G.S.; Seong, M.J.; Hyung, J.H.; Kim, K.S.; Umar, A.; Lee, S.K. Effect of graphene oxide ratio on the cell adhesion and growth behavior on a graphene oxide-coated silicon substrate. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 33835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Su, C.Y.; Xu, Y.; Zhang, W.; Zhao, J.; Tang, X.; Tsai, C.H.; Li, L.J. Electrical and spectroscopic characterizations of ultra-large reduced graphene oxide monolayers. Chem. Mater. 2009, 21, 5674–5680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Marcano, D.C.; Kosynkin, D.V.; Berlin, J.M.; Sinitskii, A.; Sun, Z.; Slesarev, A.; Alemany, L.B.; Lu, W.; Tour, J.M. Improved synthesis of graphene oxide. ACS Nano 2010, 4, 4806–4814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Sun, L.; Fugetsu, B. Mass production of graphene oxide from expanded graphite. Mater. Lett. 2013, 109, 207–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Eigler, S.; Enzelberger-Heim, M.; Grimm, S.; Hofmann, P.; Kroener, W.; Geworski, A.; Dotzer, C.; Röckert, M.; Xiao, J.; Papp, C.; et al. Wet chemical synthesis of graphene. Adv. Mater. 2013, 25, 3583–3587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Chen, J.; Li, Y.; Huang, L.; Li, C.; Shi, G. High-yield preparation of graphene oxide from small graphite flakes via an improved Hummers method with a simple purification process. Carbon 2015, 81, 826–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Panwar, V.; Chattree, A.; Pal, K. A new facile route for synthesizing of graphene oxide using mixture of sulfuric–nitric–phosphoric acids as intercalating agent. Phys. E Low-Dimens. Syst. Nanostruct. 2015, 73, 235–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Peng, L.; Xu, Z.; Liu, Z.; Wei, Y.; Sun, H.; Li, Z.; Zhao, X.; Gao, C. An iron-based green approach to 1-hproduction of single-layer graphene oxide. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 5716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  108. Rosillo-Lopez, M.; Salzmann, C.G. A simple and mild chemical oxidation route to high-purity nano-graphene oxide. Carbon 2016, 106, 56–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Yu, H.; Zhang, B.; Bulin, C.; Li, R.; Xing, R. High-efficient synthesis of graphene oxide based on improved Hummers method. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 36143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Dimiev, A.M.; Ceriotti, G.; Metzger, A.; Kim, N.D.; Tour, J.M. Chemical mass production of graphene nanoplatelets in ~100% yield. ACS Nano 2016, 10, 274–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Pei, S.; Wei, Q.; Huang, K.; Cheng, H.M.; Ren, W. Green synthesis of graphene oxide by seconds timescale water electrolytic oxidation. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Ranjan, P.; Agrawal, S.; Sinha, A.; Rajagopala Rao, T.; Balakrishnan, J.; Thakur, A.D. A low-costnon-explosive synthesis of graphene oxide for scalable applications. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 12007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Hummers, J.W.S. Preparation of Graphitic Acid. U.S. Patent 2,798,878, 9 July 1957. [Google Scholar]
  114. Becerril, H.A.; Mao, J.; Liu, Z.; Stoltenberg, R.M.; Bao, Z.; Chen, Y. Evaluation of solution-processed reduced GO films as transparent conductors. ACS Nano 2008, 2, 463–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Li, D.; Mueller, M.B.; Gilje, S.; Kaner, R.B.; Wallace, G.G. Processable aqueous dispersions of graphene nanosheets. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2008, 3, 101–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Abdolhosseinzadeh, S.; Asgharzadeh, H.; Kim, H.S. Fast and fully-scalable synthesis of reduced graphene oxide. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 10160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Chen, T.; Zeng, B.; Liu, J.; Dong, J.; Liu, X.; Wu, Z.; Yang, X.; Li, Z. High throughput exfoliation of graphene oxide from expanded graphite with assistance of strong oxidant in modified Hummers method. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2009; p. 012051. [Google Scholar]
  118. Hasani, A.; Dehsari, H.S.; Zarandi, A.A.; Salehi, A.; Taromi, F.A.; Kazeroni, H. Visible light-assisted photoreduction of graphene oxide using CdS nanoparticles and gas sensing properties. J. Nanomater. 2015, 2015, 71–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Pan, X.; Ji, J.; Zhang, N.; Xing, M. Research progress of graphene-based nanomaterials for the environmental remediation. Chin. Chem. Lett. 2020, 31, 1462–1473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Zhang, M.; Okazaki, T.; Iizumi, Y.; Miyako, E.; Yuge, R.; Bandow, S.; Iijima, S.; Yudasaka, M. Preparation of small-sized graphene oxide sheets and their biological applications. J. Mater. Chem. B 2016, 4, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Hirata, M.; Gotou, T.; Horiuchi, S.; Fujiwara, M.; Ohba, M. Thin-film particles of graphite oxide 1: High-yield synthesis and flexibility of the particles. Carbon 2004, 42, 2929–2937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Kumar, P.V.; Bardhan, N.M.; Tongay, S.; Wu, J.; Belcher, A.M.; Grossman, J.C. Scalable enhancement of GO properties by thermally driven phase transformation. Nat. Chem. 2014, 6, 151–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Chien, C.T.; Li, S.S.; Lai, W.J.; Yeh, Y.C.; Chen, H.A.; Chen, I.; Chen, L.C.; Chen, K.H.; Nemoto, T.; Isoda, S. Tunable photoluminescence from graphene oxide. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2012, 51, 6662–6666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Luo, Z.; Vora, P.M.; Mele, E.J.; Johnson, A.C.; Kikkawa, J.M. Photoluminescence and band gap modulation in GO. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 94, 111909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Liang, Y.; Wang, H.; Casalongue, H.S.; Chen, Z.; Dai, H. TiO2 nanocrystals grown on graphene as advanced photocatalytic hybrid materials. Nano Res. 2010, 3, 701–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Wang, H.; Robinson, J.T.; Diankov, G.; Dai, H. Nanocrystal growth on graphene with various degrees of oxidation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 3270–3271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Chen, Z.; Wang, J.; Pan, D.; Wang, Y.; Noetzel, R.; Li, H.; Xie, P.; Pei, W.; Umar, A.; Jiang, L.; et al. Mimicking a Dog’s Nose: Scrolling Graphene Nanosheets. ACS Nano 2018, 12, 2521–2530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Pitkethly, M.J. Nanomaterials-the driving force. Mater. Today 2004, 7, 20–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Wu, Z.-S.; Ren, W.; Gao, L.; Liu, B.; Jiang, C.; Cheng, H.-M. Synthesis of high-quality graphene with a pre-determined number of layers. Carbon 2009, 47, 493–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Johari, P.; Shenoy, V.B. Modulating optical properties of graphene oxide: Role of prominent functional groups. ACS Nano 2011, 5, 7640–7647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Kang, D.; Shin, H.S. Control of size and physical properties of graphene oxide by changing the oxidation temperature. Carbon Lett. 2012, 13, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Krishnamoorthy, K.; Veerapandian, M.; Yun, K.; Kim, S.-J. The chemical and structural analysis of GO with different degrees of oxidation. Carbon 2013, 53, 38–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Bannov, A.; Timofeeva, A.; Shinkarev, V.; Dyukova, K.; Ukhina, A.; Maksimovskii, E.; Yusin, S. Synthesis and studies of properties of graphite oxide and thermally expanded graphite. Prot. Metals. Phys. Chem. Surf. 2014, 50, 183–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Broughton, D.; Wentworth, R. Mechanism of decomposition of hydrogen peroxide solutions with manganese dioxide, I.J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1947, 69, 741–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Hofmann, U.; Holst, R. Über die Säurenatur und die Methylierung von Graphitoxyd. Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. A B 1939, 72, 754–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Ruess, G. Ber das Graphitoxyhydroxyd (Graphitoxyd). Mon. Fr. Chem. 1947, 76, 381–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Scholz, W.; Boehm, H.P. Untersuchungen am Graphitoxid. VI. Betrachtungen zur Struktur des Graphitoxids. Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. 1969, 369, 327–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Nakajima, T.; Matsuo, Y. Formation process and structure of graphite oxide. Carbon 1994, 32, 469–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Lerf, A.; He, H.; Forster, M.; Klinowski, J. Structure of graphite oxide revisited II. J. Phys. Chem. B 1998, 102, 4477–4482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Savazzi, F.; Risplendi, F.; Mallia, G.; Harrison, N.M.; Cicero, G. Unravelling some of the structure–property relationships in graphene oxide at low degree of oxidation. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2018, 9, 1746–1749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Szabó, T.; Berkesi, O.; Forgó, P.; Josepovits, K.; Sanakis, Y.; Petridis, D.; Dékány, I. Evolution of surface functional groups in a series of progressively oxidized graphite oxides. Chem. Mater. 2006, 18, 2740–2749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Liu, Z.; Nørgaard, K.; Overgaard, M.H.; Ceccato, M.; Mackenzie, D.M.A.; Stenger, N.; Stipp, S.L.S.; Hassenkam, T. Direct observation of oxygen configuration on individual graphene oxide sheets. Carbon 2018, 127, 141–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Chen, L.; Yu, H.; Zhong, J.; Song, L.; Wu, J.; Su, W. Graphene field emitters: A review of fabrication, characterization and properties. Mater. Sci. Eng. B 2017, 220, 44–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Chen, X.; Fan, K.; Liu, Y.; Li, Y.; Liu, X.; Feng, W.; Wang, X. Recent advances in fluorinated graphene from synthesis to applications: Critical review on functional chemistry and structure engineering. Adv. Mater. 2022, 34, 2101665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Yin, P.T.; Shah, S.; Chhowalla, M.; Lee, K.B. Design, synthesis, and characterization of graphene–nanoparticle hybrid materials for bioapplications. Chem. Rev. 2015, 115, 2483–2531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Steinert, B.W.; Dean, D.R. Magnetic field alignment and electrical properties of solution cast PET–carbon nanotube composite films. Polymer 2009, 50, 898–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Jia, R.; Xie, P.; Feng, Y.; Chen, Z.; Umar, A.; Wang, Y. Dipole-Modified Graphene with Ultrahigh Gas Sensibility. Appl. Surface Sci. 2018, 440, 409–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Sun, Z.; Yan, Z.; Yao, J.; Beitler, E.; Zhu, Y.; Tour, J.M. Growth of graphene from solid carbon sources. Nature 2010, 468, 549–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Shen, J.; Hu, Y.; Shi, M.; Lu, X.; Qin, C.; Li, C.; Ye, M. Fast and Facile Preparation of Graphene Oxide and Reduced Graphene Oxide Nanoplatelets. Chem. Mater. 2009, 21, 3514–3520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Stankovich, S.; Dikin, D.A.; Piner, R.D.; Kohlhaas, K.A.; Kleinhammes, A.; Jia, Y.; Wu, Y.; Nguyen, S.B.T.; Ruoff, R.S. Synthesis of Graphene-Based Nanosheets via Chemical Reduction of Exfoliated Graphite Oxide. Carbon 2007, 45, 1558–1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Zhao, J.; Liu, L.; Li, F. Structural Characterization. In Graphene Oxide: Physics and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 15–29, Chapter 2. [Google Scholar]
  152. Ganguly, A.; Sharma, S.; Papakonstantinou, P.; Hamilton, J. Probing the Thermal Deoxygenation of Graphene Oxide using High-Resolution in Situ X-ray-based Spectroscopies. J. Phys. Chem. C 2011, 115, 17009–17019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Hintermueller, D.; Prakash, R. Comprehensive Characterization of Solution-Cast Pristine and Reduced Graphene Oxide Composite Polyvinylidene Fluoride Films for Sensory Applications. Polymers 2022, 14, 2546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Ahmed, A.; Ibrahim, A.A.; Algadi, H.; Albargi, H.; Alsairi, M.A.; Wang, Y.; Akbar, S. Supramolecularly assembled isonicotinamide/ reduced graphene oxide nanocomposite for room-temperature NO2 gas sensor. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2022, 25, 102066. [Google Scholar]
  155. Bagri, A.; Mattevi, C.; Acik, M.; Chabal, Y.J.; Chhowalla, M.; Shenoy, V.B. Structural Evolution during the Reduction of Chemically Derived Graphene Oxide. Nat. Chem. 2010, 2, 581–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  156. Schniepp, H.C.; Li, J.-L.; McAllister, M.J.; Sai, H.; Herrera-Alonso, M.; Adamson, D.H.; Prud’homme, R.K.; Car, R.; Saville, D.A.; Aksay, I.A. Functionalized Single Graphene Sheets derived from Splitting Graphite Oxide. J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 8535–8539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  157. Shahriary, L.; Athawale, A.A. Graphene Oxide Synthesized by using Modified Hummers Approach. Int. J. Renew. Energy Environ. Eng. 2014, 2, 58–63. [Google Scholar]
  158. Wei, N.; Peng, X.; Xu, Z. Understanding Water Permeation in Graphene Oxide Membranes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2014, 6, 5877–5883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Zhang, H.-B.; Zheng, W.G.; Yan, Q.; Yang, Y.; Wang, J.W.; Lu, Z.H.; Ji, G.Y.; Yu, Z.Z. Electrically conductive polyethylene terephthalate/graphene nanocomposites prepared by melt compounding. Polymer 2010, 51, 1191–1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Seekaew, Y.; Lokavee, S.; Phokharatkul, D.; Wisitsoraat, A.; Kerdcharoen, T.; Wongchoosuk, C. Low-cost and flexible printed graphene–PEDOT: PSS gas sensor for ammonia detection. Org. Electron. 2014, 15, 2971–2981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Daoudi, K.; Gaidi, M.; Columbus, S.; Shameer, M.; Alawadhi, H. Hierarchically assembled silver nanoprism-graphene oxide-silicon nanowire arrays for ultrasensitive surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy sensing of atrazine. Mater. Sci. Semicond. Processing 2022, 138, 106288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Vandenabeele, P. ; Practical Raman Spectroscopy: An introduction; Wiley Online Library: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  163. Liu, W.-W.; Chai, S.P.; Mohamed, A.R.; Hashim, U. Synthesis and characterization of graphene and carbon nanotubes: A review on the past and recent developments. Eng. Chem. 2014, 20, 1171–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Gurunathan, S.; Arsalan Iqbal, M.; Qasim, M.; Park, C.H.; Yoo, H.; Hwang, J.H.; Uhm, S.J.; Song, H.; Park, C.; Do, J.T.; et al. Evaluation of Graphene Oxide Induced Cellular Toxicity and Transcriptome Analysis in Human Embryonic Kidney Cells. Nanomaterials 2019, 9, 969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Mantovani, S.; Khaliha, S.; Marforio, T.D.; Kovtun, A.; Favaretto, L.; Tunioli, F.; Bianchi, A.; Petrone, G.; Liscio, A.; Palermo, V.; et al. Facile high-yield synthesis and purification of lysine-modified graphene oxide for enhanced drinking water purification. Chem. Commun. 2022, 58, 9766–9769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Lan, Q.; Liu, L.; Wu, Y.; Feng, C.; Ou, K.; Wang, Z.; Huang, Y.; Lv, Y.; Miao, Y.E.; Liu, T. Porous reduced graphene oxide/phenolic nanomesh membranes with ternary channels for ultrafast water purification. Compos. Commun. 2022, 33, 101216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Park, S.; Lee, K.S.; Bozoklu, G.; Cai, W.; Nguyen, S.T.; Ruoff, R.S. Graphene oxide papers modified by divalent ions—Enhancing mechanical properties via chemical cross-linking. ACS Nano 2008, 2, 572–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Chen, D.; Feng, H.; Li, J. Graphene oxide: Preparation, functionalization, and electrochemical applications. Chem. Rev. 2012, 112, 6027–6053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  169. Hamad, H.N.; Idrus, S. Recent Developments in the Application of Bio-Waste-Derived Adsorbents for the Removal of Methylene Blue from Wastewater: A Review. Polymers 2022, 14, 783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  170. Dreyer, D.R.; Todd, A.D.; Bielawski, C.W. Harnessing the chemistry of graphene oxide. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 5288–5301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Gao, Y.; Wang, J.; Feng, Y.; Cao, N.; Li, H.; de Rooij, N.; Umar, A.; French, P.J.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, G. Carbon-Iron Electron Transport Channels in Porphyrin–Graphene Complex for ppb-Level Room-Temperature NO Gas Sensing. Small 2022, 18, 2103259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Singh, R.K.; Kumar, R.; Singh, D.P. Graphene oxide: Strategies for synthesis, reduction and frontier applications. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 64993–65011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Wang, Y.; Wu, Y.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, F.; Yang, X.; Ma, Y.; Chen, Y. Preventing graphene sheets from restacking for high-capacitance performance. J. Phys. Chem. C 2011, 115, 23192–23197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Chen, Z.; Wang, J.; Umar, A.; Wang, Y.; Li, H.; Zhou, G. Three-Dimensional Crumpled Graphene-Based Nanosheets with Ultrahigh NO2 Gas Sensibility. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 11819–11827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Bao, Q.; Zhang, D.; Qi, P. Synthesis and characterization of silver nanoparticle and graphene oxide nanosheet composites as a bactericidal agent for water disinfection. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2011, 360, 463–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Chaitoglou, S.; Zisis, G.; Spachis, L.; Raptis, I.; Papanikolaou, N.; Vavouliotis, A.; Penedo, R.; Fernandes, N.; Dimoulas, A. Layer-by-layer assembled graphene coatings on polyurethane films as He permeation barrier. Prog. Org. Coat. 2021, 150, 105984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Sun, X.-F.; Qin, J.; Xia, P.-F.; Guo, B.-B.; Yang, C.-M.; Song, C.; Wang, S.G. Graphene oxide–silver nanoparticle membrane for biofouling control and water purification. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 281, 53–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Goyat, R.; Singh, J.; Umar, A.; Saharan, Y.; Kumar, V.; Algadi, H.; Akbar, S.; Baskoutas, S. Modified low-temperature synthesis of graphene oxide nanosheets: Enhanced adsorption, antibacterial and antioxidant properties. Environ. Res. 2022, 215, 114245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  179. Wu, H.; Tang, B.; Wu, P. Development of novel SiO2-GO nanohybrid/polysulfone membrane with enhanced performance. J. Memb. Sci. 2014, 451, 94–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Safarpour, M.; Vatanpour, V.; Khataee, A. Preparation and characterization of graphene oxide/TiO2 blended PES nanofiltration membrane with improved antifouling and separation performance. Desalination 2015, 393, 65–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Xiao, Y.; Liu, J.; Lin, Y.; Lin, W.; Fang, Y. Novel graphene oxide-silver nanorod composites with enhanced photocatalytic performance under visible light irradiation. J. Alloys Compd. 2017, 698, 170–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. La, D.D.; Patwari, J.M.; Jones, L.A.; Antolasic, F.; Bhosale, S.V. Fabrication of a GNP/Fe–Mg binary oxide composite for effective removal of arsenic from aqueous solution. ACS Omega 2017, 2, 218–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Jiao, T.; Liu, Y.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Yan, X.; Gao, F.; Bauer, A.J.P.; Liu, J.; Zeng, T.; Li, B. Facile and scalable preparation of graphene oxide-based magnetic hybrids for fast and highly efficient removal of organic dyes. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 12451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  184. Kumar, S.; Nair, R.R.; Pillai, P.B.; Gupta, S.N.; Iyengar, M.A.R.; Sood, A.K. Graphene oxide–MnFe2O4 magnetic nanohybrids for efficient removal of lead and arsenic from water. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2014, 6, 17426–17436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Luo, X.; Wang, C.; Wang, L.; Deng, F.; Luo, S.; Tu, X.; Au, C. Nanocomposites of graphene oxide-hydrated zirconium oxide for simultaneous removal of As(III) and As(V) from water. Chem. Eng. J. 2013, 220, 98–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Yang, X.; Chen, C.; Li, J.; Zhao, G.; Ren, X.; Wang, X. Graphene oxide-iron oxide and reduced graphene oxide iron oxide hybrid materials for the removal of organic and inorganic pollutants. RSC Adv. 2012, 2, 8821–8826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Lee, Y.-C.; Yang, J.-W. Self-assembled flower-like TiO2 on exfoliated graphite oxide for heavy metal removal. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2012, 18, 1178–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Beura, R.; Thangadurai, P. Structural, optical and photocatalytic properties of graphene-ZnO nanocomposites for varied compositions. J. Phys. Chem. Solids 2017, 102, 168–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Anirudhan, T.S.; Deepa, J.R. Nano-zinc oxide incorporated graphene oxide/nanocellulose composite for the adsorption and photo catalytic degradation of ciprofloxacin hydrochloride from aqueous solutions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2017, 490, 343–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Shan, X.; Guo, X.; Yin, Y.; Miao, Y.; Dong, H. Surface modification of graphene oxide by goethite with enhanced tylosin photocatalytic activity under visible light irradiation. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2017, 520, 420–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Huang, T.; Wu, J.; Zhao, Z.; Zeng, T.; Zhang, J.; Xu, A.; Zhou, X.; Qi, Y.; Ren, J.; Zhou, R.; et al. Synthesis and photocatalytic performance of CuO-CeO2/graphene oxide. Mater. Lett. 2016, 185, 503–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Castro-Muñoz, R.; Yáñez-Fernández, J.; Fíla, V. Phenolic compounds recovered from agro-food by-products using membrane technologies: An overview. Food Chem. 2016, 213, 753–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Van der Bruggen, B.; Curcio, E.; Drioli, E. Process intensification in the textile industry: The role of membrane technology. J. Environ. Manag. 2004, 73, 267–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Saharan, Y.; Singh, J.; Goyat, R.; Umar, A.; Algadi, H.; Ibrahim, A.A.; Kumar, R.; Baskoutas, S. Nanoporous and hydrophobic new Chitosan-Silica blend aerogels for enhanced oil adsorption capacity. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 351, 131247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Castro-Muñoz, R.; Barragán-Huerta, B.E.; Fíla, V.; Denis, P.C.; Ruby-Figueroa, R. Current Role of Membrane Technology: From the Treatment of Agro-Industrial by-Products up to the Valorization of Valuable Compounds. Waste Biomass Valorization 2018, 9, 513–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Roy, S.; Singha, N.R. Polymeric Nanocomposite Membranes for Next Generation Pervaporation Process: Strategies, Challenges and Future Prospects. Membranes 2017, 7, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  197. Zhong, D.; Zhang, J.; Lv, L.; Lv, Y.; Jiang, Y. Magnetically Ultrastabilized Graphene Oxide-Based Membrane Filter for Point-of-Use Water Treatment. ACS EST Eng. 2022, 2, 769–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Al-Gamal, A.Q.; Saleh, T.A. Design and manufacturing of a novel thin-film composite membrane based on polyamidoamine-grafted graphene nanosheets for water treatment. J. Water Process Eng. 2022, 47, 102770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Jia, F.; Xiao, X.; Nashalian, A.; Shen, S.; Yang, L.; Han, Z.; Qu, H.; Wang, T.; Ye, Z.; Zhu, Z.; et al. Advances in graphene oxide membranes for water treatment. Nano Res. 2022, 15, 6636–6654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Raza, A.; Hassan, J.Z.; Mahmood, A.; Nabgan, W.; Ikram, M. Recent advances in membrane-enabled water desalination by 2D frameworks: Graphene and beyond. Desalination 2022, 531, 115684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Kumar, M.; Sreedhar, N.; Thomas, N.; Mavukkandy, M.; Ismail, R.A.; Aminabhavi, T.M.; Arafat, H.A. Polydopamine-coated graphene oxide nanosheets embedded in sulfonated poly (ether sulfone) hybrid UF membranes with superior antifouling properties for water treatment. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 433, 133526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Lalia, B.S.; Kochkodan, V.; Hashaikeh, R.; Hilal, N. A review on membrane fabrication: Structure, properties and performance relationship. Desalination 2013, 326, 77–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Kim, J.; van der Bruggen, B. The use of nanoparticles in polymeric and ceramic membrane structures: Review of manufacturing procedures and performance improvement for water treatment. Environ. Pollut. 2010, 158, 2335–2349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Ng, L.Y.; Mohammad, A.W.; Leo, C.P.; Hilal, N. Polymeric membranes incorporated with metal/metal oxide nanoparticles: A comprehensive review. Desalination 2013, 308, 15–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  205. Kim, E.B.; Imran, M.; Umar, A.; Akhtar, M.S.; Ameen, S. Indandione oligomer @graphene oxide functionalized nanocomposites for enhanced and selective detection of trace Cr2+ and Cu2+ ions. Adv. Compos. Hybrid Mater. 2022, 5, 1582–1594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  206. Al Aani, S.; Wright, C.J.; Atieh, M.A.; Hilal, N. Engineering nanocomposite membranes: Addressing current challenges and future opportunities. Desalination 2017, 401, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Mueller, N.C.; van der Bruggen, B.; Keuter, V.; Luis, P.; Melin, T.; Pronk, W.; Reisewitz, R.; Rickerby, D.; Rios, G.M.; Wennekes, W.; et al. Nanofiltration and nanostructured membranes-Should they be considered nanotechnology or not? J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 211–212, 275–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  208. Marino, A.F.T.; Boerrigter, M.; Faccini, M.; Chaumette, C.; Arockiasamy, L.; Bundschuh, J. Photocatalytic activity and synthesis procedures of TiO2 nanoparticles for potential applications in membranes. In Application of Nanotechnology in Membranes for Water Treatment; Figoli, J.B.A., Hoinkis, J., Altinkaya, S.A., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Abingdon, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  209. Cheng, M.; Yao, C.; Su, Y.; Liu, J.; Xu, L.; Bu, J.; Wang, H.; Hou, S. Cyclodextrin modified graphene membrane for highly selective adsorption of organic dyes and copper (II) ions. Eng. Sci. 2022, 18, 299–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Meshhal, M.; Kühn, O. Diffusion of Water Confined between Graphene Oxide Layers: Implications for Membrane Filtration. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2022, 5, 11119–11128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Liu, T.; Lyv, J.; Xu, Y.; Zheng, C.; Liu, Y.; Fu, R.; Liang, L.; Wu, J.; Zhang, Z. Graphene-based woven filter membrane with excellent strength and efficiency for water desalination. Desalination 2022, 533, 115775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Kumar, M.; Mukherjee, T.K.; Sharma, I.; Upadhyay, S.K.; Singh, R. Role of Bacteria in Bioremediation of Chromium from Wastewaters: An Overview. Bio Sci. Res. Bull. 2021, 37, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. Xu, K.; Ding, P.; Li, Y.; Chen, L.; Xu, J.; Duan, X.; Zeng, F. Graphene Directly Growth on Non-Metal Substrate from Amorphous Carbon Nano Films Without Transfer and Its Application in Photodetector. Sci. Adv. Mater. 2021, 13, 574–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Celik, E.; Park, H.; Choi, H.; Choi, H. Carbon nanotube blended polyethersulfone membranes for fouling control in water treatment. Water Res. 2011, 45, 274–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Xia, S.; Ni, M. Preparation of poly (vinylidene fl uoride) membranes with graphene oxide addition for natural organic matter removal. J. Membr. Sci. 2015, 473, 54–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Arsuaga, J.M.; Sotto, A.; del Rosario, G.; Martínez, A.; Molina, S.; Teli, S.B.; de Abajo, J. Influence of the type, size, and distribution of metal oxide particles on the properties of nanocomposite ultrafiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2013, 428, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Liang, S.; Xiao, K.; Mo, Y.; Huang, X. A novel ZnO nanoparticle blended polyvinylidene fluoride membrane for anti-irreversible fouling. J. Membr. Sci. 2012, 394–395, 184–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Zhang, X.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Xu, J.; Han, Y.; Xu, X. Preparation, performances of PVDF/ZnO hybrid membranes and their applications in the removal of copper ions. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2014, 316, 333–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Hong, J.; He, Y. Effects of nano sized zinc oxide on the performance of PVDF micro filtration membranes. Desalination 2012, 302, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Ahmad, A.L.; Abdulkarim, A.A.; Ismail, S.; Seng, O.B. Optimization of PES/ZnO mixed matrix membrane preparation using response surface methodology for humic acid removal. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2016, 33, 997–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Chung, Y.T.; Ba-abbad, M.M.; Mohammad, A.W. Functionalization of zinc oxide (ZnO) nanoparticles and its effects on polysulfone-ZnO membranes. Desalin. Water Treat. 2017, 57, 7801–7811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Ghoul, J.E.L.; Ghiloufi, I.; Mir, L.E.L.; Arabia, S. Efficiency of polyamide thin-film nanocomposite membrane containing ZnO nanoparticles. J. Ovonic Res. 2017, 13, 83–90. [Google Scholar]
  223. Engineering, M.; Jia, H.; Wu, Z.; Liu, N. Effect of nano-ZnO with different particle size on the performance of PVDF composite membrane. Plast. Rubber Compos. 2016, 46, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  224. Dipheko, T.D.; Matabola, K.P.; Kotlhao, K.; Moutloali, R.M.; Klink, M. Fabrication and Assessment of ZnO Modified Polyethersulfone Membranes for Fouling Reduction of Bovine Serum Albumin. Int. J. Polym. Sci. 2017, 2017, 3587019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  225. Jo, Y.J.; Choi, E.Y.; Choi, N.W.; Kim, C.K. Antibacterial and Hydrophilic Characteristics of Poly (ether sulfone) Composite Membranes Containing Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles Grafted with Hydrophilic Polymers. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2016, 55, 7801–7809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Zhao, S.; Yan, W.; Shi, M.; Wang, Z.; Wang, J. Improving permeability and antifouling performance of polyethersulfone ultra fi ltration membrane by incorporation of ZnO-DMF dispersion containing nano-ZnO and polyvinylpyrrolidone. J. Membr. Sci. 2015, 478, 105–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Bai, H.; Liu, Z.; Sun, D.D. A hierarchically structured and multifunctional membrane for water treatment. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2012, 111–112, 571–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Bahadar, S.; Alamry, K.A.; Bifari, E.N.; Asiri, A.M.; Yasir, M.; Gzara, L.; Zulfiqar, R. Assessment of antibacterial cellulose nanocomposites for water permeability and salt rejection. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2015, 24, 266–275. [Google Scholar]
  229. Akin, I.; Ersoz, M. Preparation and characterization of CTA/m-ZnO composite membrane for transport of Rhodamine B. Desalin. Water Treat. 2016, 57, 3037–3047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Li, H.; Shi, W.; Zhu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Du, Q.; Qin, X. Effects of Zinc Oxide Nanospheres on the Separation Performance of Hollow Fiber Poly (piperazine-amide) Composite Nanofiltration Membranes. Fibers Polym. 2016, 17, 836–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Zhao, X.; Li, J.; Liu, C. Improving the separation performance of the forward osmosis membrane based on the etched microstructure of the supporting layer. Desalination 2017, 408, 102–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  232. Isawi, H.; El-sayed, M.H.; Feng, X.; Shawky, H.; Abdel, M.S. Applied Surface Science Surface nanostructuring of thin film composite membranes via grafting polymerization and incorporation of ZnO nanoparticles. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2016, 385, 268–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Badrinezhad, L.; Ghasemi, S. Preparation and characterization of polysulfone/graphene oxide nanocomposite membranes for the separation of methylene blue from water. Polym. Bull. 2017, 75, 469–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Zhao, C.; Xu, X.; Chen, J.; Yang, F. Optimization of preparation conditions of poly (vinylidene fluoride)/graphene oxide micro fi ltration membranes by the Taguchi experimental design. Desalination 2014, 334, 17–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Morales-Torres, S.; Pastrana-Martı, L.M.; Figueiredo, L.; Faria, J.L.; Silva, A.M.T. Graphene oxide based ultrafiltration membranes for photocatalytic degradation of organic pollutants in salty water. Water Res. 2015, 7, 179–190. [Google Scholar]
  236. Kiran, S.A.; Thuyavan, Y.L.; Arthanareeswaran, G.; Matsuura, T.; Ismail, A.F. Impact of graphene oxide embedded polyethersulfone membranes for the effective treatment of distillery effluent. Chem. Eng. J. 2016, 286, 528–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Zinadini, S.; Akbar, A.; Rahimi, M.; Vatanpour, V. Preparation of a novel antifouling mixed matrix PES membrane by embedding graphene oxide nanoplates. J. Membr. Sci. 2014, 453, 292–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Chae, H.; Lee, J.; Lee, C.; Kim, I.; Park, P. Graphene oxide-embedded thin-film composite reverse osmosis membrane with high flux, anti-biofouling, and chlorine resistance. J. Membr. Sci. 2015, 483, 128–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Ali, M.E.A.; Wang, L.; Wang, X.; Feng, X. Thin film composite membranes embedded with graphene oxide for water desalination. Desalination 2016, 386, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Shen, L.; Xiong, S.; Wang, Y. Graphene oxide incorporated thin- fi lm composite membranes for forward osmosis applications. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2016, 143, 194–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Crock, C.A.; Rogensues, A.R.; Shan, W.; Tarabara, V.V. Polymer nanocomposites with graphene-based hierarchical fillers as materials for multifunctional water treatment membranes. Water Res. 2013, 47, 3984–3996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  242. Han, Y.; Xu, Z.; Gao, C. Ultrathin Graphene Nanofi ltration Membrane forWater Purification. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2013, 23, 3693–3700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Toroghi, M.; Raisi, A.; Aroujalian, A. Preparation and characterization of polyethersulfone/silver nanocomposite ultrafiltration membrane for antibacterial applications. Polym. Adv. Technol. 2014, 25, 711–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  244. Zhang, M.; Zhang, K.; de Gusseme, B.; Verstraete, W. Biogenic silver nanoparticles (bio-Ag0) decrease biofouling of bio-Ag0/PES nanocomposite membranes. Water Res. 2012, 46, 2077–2087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  245. Koseoglu-Imer, D.Y.; Kose, B.; Altinbas, M.; Koyuncu, I. The production of polysulfone (PS) membrane with silver nanoparticles (AgNP): Physical properties, filtration performances, and biofouling resistances of membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2013, 428, 620–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  246. Ben-Sasson, M.; Lu, X.; Bar-Zeev, E.; Zodrow, K.R.; Nejati, S.; Qi, G.; Giannelis, E.P.; Elimelech, M. In situ formation of silver nanoparticles on thin-film composite reverse osmosis membranes for biofouling mitigation. Water Res. 2014, 62, 260–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  247. Yang, Z.; Wu, Y.; Wang, J.; Cao, B.; Tang, C.Y. In situ reduction of silver by polydopamine: A novel antimicrobial modification of a thin-film composite polyamide membrane. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 9543–9550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  248. Hoek, E.M.V.; Ghosh, A.K.; Huang, X.; Liong, M.; Zink, J.I. Physical-chemical properties, separation performance, and fouling resistance of mixed-matrix ultrafiltration membranes. Desalination 2011, 283, 89–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  249. Shi, F.; Ma, Y.; Ma, J.; Wang, P.; Sun, W. Preparation and characterization of PVDF/TiO2 hybrid membranes with different dosage of nano-TiO2. J. Membr. Sci. 2012, 389, 522–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Amini, M.; Rahimpour, A.; Jahanshahi, M. Forward osmosis application of modified TiO2-polyamide thin film nanocomposite membranes. Desalin. Water Treat. 2016, 57, 14013–14023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Emadzadeh, D.; Lau, W.J.; Matsuura, T.; Rahbari-Sisakht, M.; Ismail, A.F. A novel thin film composite forward osmosis membrane prepared from PSf-TiO2 nanocomposite substrate for water desalination. Chem. Eng. J. 2014, 237, 70–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Molecules 27 06433 g001 550
Figure 1. Structural representation of 2D graphene with different dimensions. [Reprinted with permission from ref. [28], Wan, X., Huang, Y., & Chen, Y. (2012). Focusing on energy and optoelectronic applications: a journey for graphene and graphene oxide at large scale. Accounts of chemical research, 45(4), 598–607. Copyright © American Chemical Society].
Figure 1. Structural representation of 2D graphene with different dimensions. [Reprinted with permission from ref. [28], Wan, X., Huang, Y., & Chen, Y. (2012). Focusing on energy and optoelectronic applications: a journey for graphene and graphene oxide at large scale. Accounts of chemical research, 45(4), 598–607. Copyright © American Chemical Society].
Molecules 27 06433 g001
Molecules 27 06433 g002 550
Figure 2. Schematic representation of a graphene timeline.
Figure 2. Schematic representation of a graphene timeline.
Molecules 27 06433 g002
Molecules 27 06433 g003 550
Figure 3. Schematic representation of the general methods for graphene synthesis.
Figure 3. Schematic representation of the general methods for graphene synthesis.
Molecules 27 06433 g003
Molecules 27 06433 g004 550
Figure 4. Mechanical exfoliation of graphene using the Scotch tape method [Reprinted with permission from ref. [39] Ibrahim, A.; Klopocinska, A.; Horvat, K.; Abdel Hamid, Z. Graphene-Based Nanocomposites: Synthesis, Mechanical Properties, and Characterizations. Polymers 2021, 13, 2869. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13172869, Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 4. Mechanical exfoliation of graphene using the Scotch tape method [Reprinted with permission from ref. [39] Ibrahim, A.; Klopocinska, A.; Horvat, K.; Abdel Hamid, Z. Graphene-Based Nanocomposites: Synthesis, Mechanical Properties, and Characterizations. Polymers 2021, 13, 2869. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13172869, Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g004
Molecules 27 06433 g006 550
Figure 6. Schematic representation of the laser ablation method for graphene synthesis [Reprinted with permission from ref. [56] Nancy, P.; Jose, J.; Joy, N.; Valluvadasan, S.; Philip, R.; Antoine, R.; Thomas, S.; Kalarikkal, N. Fabrication of Silver-Decorated Graphene Oxide Nano-hybrids via Pulsed Laser Ablation with Excellent Antimicrobial and Optical Limiting Performance. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 880. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11040880, Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 6. Schematic representation of the laser ablation method for graphene synthesis [Reprinted with permission from ref. [56] Nancy, P.; Jose, J.; Joy, N.; Valluvadasan, S.; Philip, R.; Antoine, R.; Thomas, S.; Kalarikkal, N. Fabrication of Silver-Decorated Graphene Oxide Nano-hybrids via Pulsed Laser Ablation with Excellent Antimicrobial and Optical Limiting Performance. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 880. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11040880, Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g006
Molecules 27 06433 g007 550
Figure 7. Schematic representation of the CVD method for graphene [Reprinted with permission from ref. [67], Saeed, M.; Alshammari, Y.; Majeed, S.A.; Al-Nasrallah, E. Chemical Vapour Deposition of Graphene Synthesis, Characterisation, and Applications: A Review. Molecules 2020, 25, 3856. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25173856, Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 7. Schematic representation of the CVD method for graphene [Reprinted with permission from ref. [67], Saeed, M.; Alshammari, Y.; Majeed, S.A.; Al-Nasrallah, E. Chemical Vapour Deposition of Graphene Synthesis, Characterisation, and Applications: A Review. Molecules 2020, 25, 3856. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25173856, Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g007
Molecules 27 06433 g008 550
Figure 8. Schematic representation of the arc discharge method for the synthesis of graphene [Reprinted with permission from ref. [71], Tan, H.; Wang, D.; Guo, Y. A Strategy to Synthesize Multilayer Graphene in Arc-Discharge Plasma in a Semi-Opened Environment. Materials 2019, 12, 2279. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12142279, Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 8. Schematic representation of the arc discharge method for the synthesis of graphene [Reprinted with permission from ref. [71], Tan, H.; Wang, D.; Guo, Y. A Strategy to Synthesize Multilayer Graphene in Arc-Discharge Plasma in a Semi-Opened Environment. Materials 2019, 12, 2279. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12142279, Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g008
Molecules 27 06433 g009 550
Figure 9. Schematic representation of the graphene and graphene oxide structures and graphene oxide oxygenated groups. [Reprinted with permission from ref. [87], Olean-Oliveira, A.; Oliveira Brito, G.A.; Cardoso, C.X.; Teixeira, M.F.S. Nanocomposite Materials Based on Electrochemically Synthesized Graphene Polymers: Molecular Architecture Strategies for Sensor Applications. Chemosensors 2021, 9, 149. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors9060149, Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 9. Schematic representation of the graphene and graphene oxide structures and graphene oxide oxygenated groups. [Reprinted with permission from ref. [87], Olean-Oliveira, A.; Oliveira Brito, G.A.; Cardoso, C.X.; Teixeira, M.F.S. Nanocomposite Materials Based on Electrochemically Synthesized Graphene Polymers: Molecular Architecture Strategies for Sensor Applications. Chemosensors 2021, 9, 149. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors9060149, Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g009
Molecules 27 06433 g010 550
Figure 10. Schematic representation of the various applications of graphene oxide.
Figure 10. Schematic representation of the various applications of graphene oxide.
Molecules 27 06433 g010
Molecules 27 06433 g011 550
Figure 11. Schematic representation of the synthesis of graphene oxide with different methods.
Figure 11. Schematic representation of the synthesis of graphene oxide with different methods.
Molecules 27 06433 g011
Molecules 27 06433 g012 550
Figure 12. Schematic representation of the year-wise progress in proposed structures of graphene oxide [135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142].
Figure 12. Schematic representation of the year-wise progress in proposed structures of graphene oxide [135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142].
Molecules 27 06433 g012
Molecules 27 06433 g014 550
Figure 14. Schematic representation of the adsorption process and its mechanism for the adsorption of pollutants [Reprinted with permission from ref. [169], Hamad, H.N.; Idrus, S. Recent Developments in the Application of Bio-Waste-Derived Adsorbents for the Removal of Methylene Blue from Wastewater: A Review. Polymers 2022, 14, 783. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14040783], Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 14. Schematic representation of the adsorption process and its mechanism for the adsorption of pollutants [Reprinted with permission from ref. [169], Hamad, H.N.; Idrus, S. Recent Developments in the Application of Bio-Waste-Derived Adsorbents for the Removal of Methylene Blue from Wastewater: A Review. Polymers 2022, 14, 783. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14040783], Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g014
Molecules 27 06433 g015 550
Figure 15. Schematic representation of the basic purification setup with a membrane [Reprinted with permission from ref. [196], Roy, S.; Singha, N.R. Polymeric Nanocomposite Membranes for Next Generation Pervaporation Process: Strategies, Challenges and Future Prospects. Membranes 2017, 7,53. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes7030053], Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 15. Schematic representation of the basic purification setup with a membrane [Reprinted with permission from ref. [196], Roy, S.; Singha, N.R. Polymeric Nanocomposite Membranes for Next Generation Pervaporation Process: Strategies, Challenges and Future Prospects. Membranes 2017, 7,53. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes7030053], Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g015
Molecules 27 06433 g016 550
Figure 16. Schematic representation of the fabrication of a polymeric membrane [Reprinted with permission from ref. [196], Roy, S.; Singha, N.R. Polymeric Nanocomposite Membranes for Next Generation Pervaporation Process: Strategies, Challenges and Future Prospects. Membranes 2017, 7, 53. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes7030053], Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 16. Schematic representation of the fabrication of a polymeric membrane [Reprinted with permission from ref. [196], Roy, S.; Singha, N.R. Polymeric Nanocomposite Membranes for Next Generation Pervaporation Process: Strategies, Challenges and Future Prospects. Membranes 2017, 7, 53. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes7030053], Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g016
Molecules 27 06433 g017 550
Figure 17. Schematic representation of the fabrication of a polymeric nanocomposite membrane, along with its surface properties [Reprinted with permission from ref. [87], Kausar, A.; Bocchetta, P. Polymer/Graphene Nanocomposite Membranes: Status and Emerging Prospects. J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs6030076, Copyright © MDPI].
Figure 17. Schematic representation of the fabrication of a polymeric nanocomposite membrane, along with its surface properties [Reprinted with permission from ref. [87], Kausar, A.; Bocchetta, P. Polymer/Graphene Nanocomposite Membranes: Status and Emerging Prospects. J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs6030076, Copyright © MDPI].
Molecules 27 06433 g017
Table
Table 1. Advantages and disadvantages of various methods used to synthesize graphene.
Table 1. Advantages and disadvantages of various methods used to synthesize graphene.
Top Down Method
S. NoMethodsThickness of Graphene ObtainedAdvantageDisadvantageReference
1Micromechanical exfoliationSingle layer of grapheneSimple method with the formation of large size layers of grapheneLow yield[32,33,34,35,36,37,38]
2Electrochemical exfoliationSingle and few layers of graphene formedHigh yield and quick processHaving structural defects and workup is expensive.[40,41,42,43]
3Liquid phase exfoliationMostly single
layers of graphene obtained		Reliable and scalable method with the high exfoliation of graphite Involves the use of hazardous chemical
(chloro sulfonic acid) and the removal of used acid in the process is costly		[45,46,47]
4Laser ablationSingle, bi, and multiple layers of grapheneRapid, simple, and eco-friendly process with high-quality graphene. Small laser-irradiating area for evaporating
the target material		[49,50,51,52,53,54,55]
Bottom Up Method
S. NoTechniquesThicknessAdvantageDisadvantageReference
1CVDMono and few-layer graphene sheetsLarge size sheets of graphene obtainedDifficult to control numerous parameters[61,62,63,64,65,66]
2Arc dischargeSingle, bi, and few layers of grapheneCost-effective method with high-quality productRequires a gaseous atmosphere, and the product contains structural defects[68,69,70]
3Plasma enhanced chemical vapor depositionBi and tri layers of grapheneLow temperature and less duration with high productionRequires high plasma power and different substrates[74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81]
4PyrolysisFew-layer grapheneRequires low cost and the high quality of graphene producedMethod used on a small scale[83]
Table
Table 2. List of different methods used to synthesize graphene oxide.
Table 2. List of different methods used to synthesize graphene oxide.
MethodsYearStarting MaterialDifferent Oxidants UsedReaction Time for GO SynthesisTemperature °CFeaturesReferences
Brodie1859GraphiteKclO3, HNO33–4 days60First attempt to synthesize GO[96]
Staudenmaier1898GraphiteKclO3, H2SO4, HNO396 hRoom temperatureImproved efficiency[97]
Hummers1958GraphiteKmnO4, H2SO4, NaNO3<2 h<20–35–98Water-free, less than 2 h of reaction time[98]
Fu2005GraphiteKmnO4, H2SO4, NaNO3<2 h35Validation of NaNO3 [99]
Shen2009Graphite Benzoyl peroxide10 min110Fast and non-acidic[100]
Su2009 GraphiteKmnO4, H2SO44 hRoom temperatureLarge-size GO sheets formed[101]
Marcano and Tour 2010 & 2018GraphiteKmnO4, H3PO4, H2SO412 h50Eco-friendly resulting in a high yield[102]
Sun2013GraphiteKmnO4, H2SO41.5 hRoom temperature-90High-yield and safe method[103]
Eigler2013GraphiteKmnO4, NaNO3, H2SO416 h10High-quality GO produced[104]
Chen 2015Graphite KmnO4, H2SO4<1 h40–95High-yield product[105]
Panwar 2015GraphiteH2SO4, H3PO4, KmnO4, HNO33 h50Three component acids and high-yield product[106]
Peng 2015Graphite K2FeO4, H2SO41 hRoom temperatureResults in a high-yield and eco-friendly method[107]
Rosillo-Lopez 2016GraphiteHNO320 hRoom temperatureNano-sized GO obtained[108]
Yu2016Graphite K2FeO4, KmnO4 H2SO4, H3BO3 (NH4)2S2O85 h<5–35–95Low manganite impurities and high yield obtained[109]
Dimiev 2016Graphite98% H2SO4, fuming H2SO43–4 hRoom temperature25 nm thick and ~100%conversion rate[110]
Pei2018Graphite foilH2SO4<5 minRoom temperatureHigh efficiency [111]
Ranjan2018GraphiteH2SO4, H3PO4, KmnO4<24 h<RT-35–95Cooled exothermal reaction to make the process
safe		[112]
Table
Table 3. Effect of acid concentration, reaction temperature, reaction time, and the quantity of the oxidizing agent on the oxidation of graphene [113].
Table 3. Effect of acid concentration, reaction temperature, reaction time, and the quantity of the oxidizing agent on the oxidation of graphene [113].
S. No.Source of CarbonH2SO4
(in mL)		Other IngredientsTemp.
(in °C)		Time
(in h)		C:OColour of GO Obtained
1Graphite15.01.0 g Na2Cr2O7307216:1Black
2Graphite15.04.0 g Na2Cr2O730723.4:1Black
3Graphite15.015.0 mL 70% HNO3
3.0 g KmnO4,		3024--Black
4Graphite20.011.0 g KclO3,
10.0 mL 70% HNO3		0–60333.1:1Midnight green
5Graphite30.03.0 g KmnO4,1.0 g
NaNO3		3023.0:1Bluish green
6Graphite30.03.0 g KmnO4,1.0 g
NaNO3		451--Green
7Graphite22.53.0 g KmnO4,1.0 g
NaNO3		451--Brittle yellow
8Graphite22.53.0 g KmnO4,0.5 g
NaNO3		451--Yellow
9Graphite22.53.0 g KmnO4,0.5 g
NaNO3		450.52.3:1Yellow
10Graphite22.53.0 g KmnO4,0.5 g
NaNO3		350.52.05:1Bright yellow
11Graphite22.53.0 g KmnO4, 1.0 g
fuming HNO3		351--Bright yellow
12Graphite22.53.0 g KmnO4, 1.0 g
BaNO3		452--Light green
Table
Table 4. Analysis of the elements present in different samples at various temperatures [131].
Table 4. Analysis of the elements present in different samples at various temperatures [131].
Elements Present in GO (Weight %)Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
Temperature 35 °CTemperature 27 °C Temperature 20 °C
Carbon 44.0945.5144.55
Oxygen 49.9248.9347.16
Hydrogen 3.302.963.02
Atomic ratio of carbon and oxygen 1.181.241.26
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Goyat, R.; Saharan, Y.; Singh, J.; Umar, A.; Akbar, S. Synthesis of Graphene-Based Nanocomposites for Environmental Remediation Applications: A Review. Molecules 2022, 27, 6433. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27196433

AMA Style

Goyat R, Saharan Y, Singh J, Umar A, Akbar S. Synthesis of Graphene-Based Nanocomposites for Environmental Remediation Applications: A Review. Molecules. 2022; 27(19):6433. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27196433

Chicago/Turabian Style

Goyat, Rohit, Yajvinder Saharan, Joginder Singh, Ahmad Umar, and Sheikh Akbar. 2022. "Synthesis of Graphene-Based Nanocomposites for Environmental Remediation Applications: A Review" Molecules 27, no. 19: 6433. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27196433

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop