Comparative Study of Cationic Dye Adsorption Using Industrial Latex Sludge with Sulfonate and Pyrolysis Treatment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper reports the preparation and cationic dye adsorption performance of latex sludge treated by sulfonate and pyrolysis routes. The author first took industrial latex sludge as raw material then produced new sulfonated latex sludge (SLS) and latex sludge active carbon (LSC) absorbents to remove cationic blue X-GRRL. Adsorption kinetic models and adsorption isotherms were intensively investigated. They showed that the adsorption of X-GRRL onto LSC and SLS fitted the pseudo-second order kinetic model well. They concluded that the sulfonate treatment was a more efficient way to recycle industrial solid waste latex sludge into wastewater absorbent. This work may have some beneficial influence in the recycling use of solid waste for environment remediation. In my opinion, it can be worthy of publication after some points are clarified and improved. Thus before it is recommended for publication in Sustainability, I still have following points for authors to improve their paper.
- Line 55, “Figure 1. Structures of styrene-butadiene latex and Cationic Blue X-GRRL.” It is better to be “Structures of (a) styrene-butadiene latex and (b) cationic blue X-GRRL.”
- Line 81, “Firstly, the crushed LS was chemically activated by 50 g/L sodium bicarbonate…” What is the purpose of this chemical activation?
- Why there is no reusability test?
- Line 223, “… pseudo-second order kinetic model well (Xiao et al., 2018).” Which reference is this “Xiao et al., 2018”?
- The writing quality is largely acceptable, however, bad grammar and usage is frequent. The manuscript should be checked further by a native speaker. For instance, line 39, “so many methods have inherent limitations and few effect on removing dyes.”.
- Line 129, “… a higher density of porosity in a honeycomb structure.” Figure 2f is not clear enough to show this, a SEM image with better resolution should be provided to support this claim. Besides, why it becomes honeycomb structure?
- Four kinetic models were tested in 3.3. What are the meanings of these models? When a system follows pseudo-second order model, what different mechanism is involved with systems obeying pseudo-first order model? Author should comment on the meanings of their fitting results.
- Can the pH dependence extend to pH 9 -11?
- Please explain what is meant by the rate limiting step.
- (8-13) should have proper citations. Eq. (14) should has proper citation. Eq. (15-17) should have proper citations.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article “Comparative study of cationic dye adsorption onto industrial latex sludge with sulfonate and pyrolysis treatment” is interesting and suitable for publication in Sustainability. I have several comments to the author. I am sure, that they should have no problems with improving their article before publication.
Title
I suggest to change title into: Comparative study of cationic dye adsorption using industrial latex sludge with sulfonate and pyrolysis treatment
Abstract
It concerns to the whole article, please ask native speaker to correct the language.
Introduction
Lines 42-45
Describe shortly adsorbent materials. Do not write “etc” in research paper.
Line 49 Describe what it does it mean huge – it is necessary to give some indicators of latex wastewater versus sludge quantity.
Line 56-66 Some information should be moved to Material and methods. Define clearly the scientific and practical purpose of the research in the end of introduction.
Material and methods
chapter 2.4 - Measurement techniques instead characterization
Conclusions
Please extend this chapter using specific results presented in chapter Results and discussion. The information given in lines 304-306 as a practical purpose of your research could be also given at the end of introduction.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors in the manuscript titled “Comparative study of cationic dye adsorption onto industrial latex sludge with sulfonate and pyrolysis treatment”, examine the adsorption of dyes on adsorbents produced from waste sludge. The experimental procedure and analysis seem sound. The authors have carried out a very thorough examination of the adsorption process. The fact that the activated carbon form of the adsorbent had lower adsorption capacity compared to the sulfonated adsorbent is very interesting, especially when taking into account the difference in their surface area per g of adsorbent. Was the aggregation of adsorbent particles that caused the sharp drop in adsorption described for SLS in Figure 4.a visible? Some minor corrections in the written English is required throughout the manuscript.
Line 11: Please replace “absorbents” with “adsorbents”
Line 13: Please replace “absorbents” with “adsorbents”
Line 59: Please replace “absorbents” with “adsorbents”
Line 131: Please replace “great” with “significantly”
Line 212: Please replace “SLC” with “LSC”
Line 265: Please replace “On the hand” with “On the other hand”
Line 127: Please replace “electrical” with “electron”
Line 193: Please replace “till” with “until”
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The authors present preparation of sulfonated sludge latex and its carbonized form for functional dye adsorbent synthesis. Results are well characterized (especially adsorption section) and I would suggest for publication after minor revisions:
1- For the polymer structure, authors should mention where the acrylic acid section comes from (pure styrene-butadiene does not include)
2- Can the authors control the sulfonation degree on the sludge?
3- Raman and XRD should be presented for catalysts.
4- Is it necessary to apply a cleaning procedure for the latex sludge prior to use?
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
