Effects of modified sugar cane and plantain pseudo-stem fibers for oil spill remediation

Figures & data

Figure 1. (a–d) Water contact angle (WCA) and time for water droplets to linger on the surface of the modified and unmodified PF sorbents and (e and f) water contact angle (WCA) and time for the water droplets to linger on the surface of the SF and its modified form showing the optimization of the chemicals used in the modification process. 4 mg/mL (2) of GO (G) and 400 mg (4) of stearic acid (SA), and 100 mg (1) of TiO₂ (T) were used.

Figure 2. (a). Uptake/absorption capacities of the SF and PF modified and unmodified sorbents for some oils (b) uptake capacity/absorption capacity of the unmodified and modified SF sorbents in a crude oil/seawater environment, (c and d) recyclability of the modified PF and SF sorbents respectively for 5 cycles making use of crude oil.

Figure 3. Schematic diagram of the sorption mechanism of the bagged sorbents (a) at the initial stage and (b) at the final stage.

Figure 4. Microscopic images of (a) packed fibers in the tea bag, (b) the surface of the unmodified bagged sorbent (c) the surface of the modified bagged sorbent, (d) the modified fibers’ interaction with crude oil, (e) unmodified sorbent interaction with water and (f) modified sorbent’s interaction with crude oil.

Figure 5. (a–d) SEM-EDS of unmodified and modified surfaces of the bagged sorbent material respectively, (e–h) SEM-EDS of unmodified and modified surfaces of the plantain pseudo-stem fiber respectively, and (i–l) SEM-EDS of the unmodified and modified surfaces of the sugar cane fibers respectively.

Figure 6. (a and b) Microscopy images of unmodified and modified surfaces of the sorbent material respectively.

Figure 7. (a–d) Photographic images of the water droplets on the surfaces of the unmodified SF, modified SF, unmodified PF, and unmodified PF sorbent materials respectively, and (e–h) Photographic images of crude oil droplets on the surfaces of the unmodified SF, modified SF, unmodified PF, and unmodified PF sorbent materials respectively.

Figure 8. (a–f). Water Contact Angle (WCA) and time for water droplets to linger on the surface of the modified and unmodified SF sorbents using varying amounts of SA (S), GO (G), and TiO2 (T) in the surface modification.

Figure 9. a–c. FTIR of a. unmodified and modified surfaces of the bagged PF and SF sorbent materials, b. the unmodified and modified PF and SF fibers in the bagged sorbent materials and c. SA, TiO₂ and GO.

Table 1. Chemical Composition of the SF and PF.

Component	Average mass % of Plantain Fiber	Average mass % of sugarcane fiber
SiO2	10.2	17.35
K2O	37.8	17.85
CaO	34.4	27
Fe2O3	1.65	4.995
CuO	5.69	12.9
ZrO2	2.14	11.35
MgO	2.59	–
P2O5	2.89	–
SO3	–	4.415
Others	2.64	4.14

Figure 10. (a) TGA and (b) thermographic analysis for derivatives of mass min⁻¹ versus temperature for the tea bag, plantain pseudo-stem fiber (PF), sugar cane fiber (SF), unmodified SF and PF sorbents (UMSF and UMPF, respectively), and modified SF and PF sorbents (MSF and MPF, respectively).

Table 2. Parameters used in the calculation of the tensile properties of the unmodified and modified tea bag.

Material	Dimensions (×10^−3)/(m)	(Area × 10^−4)/(m^2)	Force (F)/(N)	Initial length (L1×10^−3)/(m)	Final length (L2 × 10^−3)/(m)
Unmodified Tea bag	32.64 × 29.76	9.7	3.0	32.64	45.65$$
Modified tea bag.	18.03 × 16.39$$	3.0	3.0	18.03	29.06$$

Table 3. Tensile properties of the unmodified and modified tea bag.

Materials	Tensile strength ($\mathit{\sigma })/\mathit{\text{MPa}}$	Tensile Strain ($\mathit{\epsilon })$	Young’s Modulus (E)/(GPa)
Unmodified tea bag	3.1	0.4	7.75
Modified tea bag	10.2	0.61	16.72

Table 4. Static contact angles of crude oil at 1 s on the unmodified and modified sorbent surfaces.

Sorbents	Unmodified SF	Unmodified PF	Modified SF	Modified PF
Static contact angle (°)	34.2°	41.8°	36.9°	50.4°

Figure 11. (a and b) Photographic images of the PF and SF sorbents, respectively, after 5 cycles with water droplets on the surface to analyze their hydrophobic state.

Table 5. Absorption/sorption capacities of different natural sorbents.

Sorbent	Modification method	Sorption capacity	Type Of Oil	API gravity/density/ viscosity of crude oil	Contact time (Min)	Dripping Time	Ref
Bagged sugar cane fiber	Raw	11.43	Crude oil	(API) gravity of 27.03 at 15 °C/ 0.8899 g/cm^3	30 min	10 min	In this study
Bagged sugar cane fiber	Dip coating with SA, GO, and TiO2 in ethanol.	10.29	Crude oil	(API) gravity of 27.03 at 15 °C/ 0.8899 g/cm^3	30 min	10 min	In this study
Bagged plantain pseudo-stem fiber	Raw	6.4	Crude oil	(API) gravity of 27.03 at 15 °C/ 0.8899 g/cm^3	30 min	10 min	In this study
Bagged plantain pseudo-stem fiber	Dip coating with SA, GO, and TiO2 in ethanol.	5.77	Crude oil	(API) gravity of 27.03 at 15 °C/ 0.8899 g/cm^3	30 min	10 min	In this study
Banana Peel	Raw	6–7	Crude Oil	41.38°/ 0.8180 g/cm^3 at 15 °C /2.29CST at 40 °C	15min	5 min	El-Din et al. (2018)
Saw Dust	Raw	4.1–6.4	Crude Oil	25.8°/0.90 g/cm^3/34 Cp	5,10,20,40,60,1440 (min)	5 min	Annunciado et al. (2005)
Coir Fiber	Raw	1.8–5.4	Crude Oil	25.8°/0.90 g/cm^3/34 Cp	5,10,20,40,60,1440 (min)	5 min	Annunciado et al. (2005)
Luffa	Raw	1.9–4.6	Crude Oil	25.8°/0.90 g/cm^3/34 Cp	5,10,20,40,60,1440 (min)	5 min	Annunciado et al. (2005)
Orange Peel	Raw	3–5	Crude Oil	The specific gravity of 0.89	5.10.15.30 and 60 (min)	5 min	El Gheriany et al. (2020)
Barley Straw	Raw	6.5–12	Crude Oil	29.66°/0.82 g/cm^3/17.18 Cs	5–30 min	5 min	Husseien et al. (2009b)
Rice Husk	Pyrolysis	6 & 9.2 for light crude and heavy crude resp.	Heavy Crude Oil and Light Crude	0.937 g/cm^3 and 0.792 g/cm^3	10 min	10 min	Angelova et al. (2011)
Rice Husk	Pyrolysis	15	Crude Oil	0.937 g/cm^3 and 0.792 g/cm^3	30 min	10 min	Kudaybergenov et al. (2013)
Rice Husk	Pyrolysis	2.98–6.22	Crude Oil	at 293 K = 869.8 kg/m^3, viscosity at 313 K = 12.28 mm^2 /s, p	5–20 min	2–3 min	Vlaev et al. (2011)
Rice Husk	Pyrolysis	6	Heavy Crude Oil	0.937 g/cm^3 and 0.792 g/cm^3	30 min	10 min	Kumagai et al. (2007)
Soybean	Mercerization	5	Crude Oil	191 kg/m^3	10 min	15 min	Wong et al. (2016)
Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunch	Acetylation	7	Crude Oil	–	10–15 min	4 h in oven at 60°	Onwuka et al. (2018)
Cocoa Pods	Acetylation	8	Crude Oil	–	10–15 min	4 h in oven at 60°	Onwuka et al.(2018)
Wastepaper	Aerogel with MTMS	24.4	Crude Oil	–	–	–	Tang et al. (2015)
Pomelo Peel	Aerogel with MTMS	49.8	Crude Oil	–	–	–	Ratcha et al. (2014)
Kenaf core fiber (Sachet & Powder)	–	6.7–8	Crude Oil	–	2 min	15 min	Yen Tan et al. (2021)
Jute fiber	Carbonization	7.8–8.7	Crude Oil	15°: 0.8703 g/mL	15 min	30 s	Kovačević et al. (2023)

El-Din, G. A., Amer, A. A., Malsh, G., & Hussein, M. (2018). Study on the use of banana peels for oil spill removal. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 57(3), 2061–2068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2017.05.020

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Annunciado, T. R., Sydenstricker, T. H. D., & Amico, S. C. (2005). Experimental investigation of various vegetable fibers as sorbent materials for oil spills. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 50(11), 1340–1346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.04.043

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

El Gheriany, I. A., El Saqa, F. A., Amer, A. A. E. R., & Hussein, M. (2020). Oil spill sorption capacity of raw and thermally modified orange peel waste. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 59(2), 925–932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2020.03.024

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Husseien, M., Amer, A. A., El-Maghraby, A., & Taha, N. A. (2009). Availability of barley straw application on oil spill clean up. International Journal of Environmental Science & Technology, 6(1), 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03326066

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Angelova, D., Uzunov, I., Uzunova, S., Gigova, A., & Minchev, L. (2011). Kinetics of oil and oil products adsorption by carbonized rice husks. Chemical Engineering Journal, 172(1), 306–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2011.05.114

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Vlaev, L., Petkov, P., Dimitrov, A., & Genieva, S. (2011). Cleanup of water polluted with crude oil or diesel fuel using rice husk ash. Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 42(6), 957–964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2011.04.004

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kumagai, S., Noguchi, Y., Kurimoto, Y., & Takeda, K. (2007). Oil adsorbent is produced by the carbonization of rice husks. Waste Management (New York, N.Y.), 27(4), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2006.04.006

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wong, C., McGowan, T., Bajwa, S. G., & Bajwa, D. S. (2016). Impact of fiber treatment on the oil absorption characteristics of plant fibers. BioResources, 11(3), 6452–6463. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.11.3.6452-6463

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Onwuka, J. C., Agbaji, E. B., Ajibola, V. O., & Okibe, F. G. (2018). Treatment of crude oil-contaminated water with chemically modified natural fiber. Applied Water Science, 8(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-018-0727-5

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tang, Z., Hess, D. W., & Breedveld, V. (2015). Fabrication of oleophobic paper with tunable hydrophilicity by treatment with non-fluorinated chemicals. Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 3(28), 14651–14660. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5TA03520A

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Yen Tan, J., Yan Low, S., Ban, Z. H., & Siwayanan, P. (2021). A review on oil spill clean-up using bio-sorbent materials with special emphasis on utilization of Kenaf Core Fibers. BioResources, 16(4), 8394–8416. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.16.4.8394-8416

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kovačević, A., Radoičić, M., Marković, D., Ponjavić, M., Nikodinovic-Runic, J., & Radetić, M. (2023). Non-woven sorbent based on recycled jute fibers for efficient oil spill clean-up: From production to biodegradation. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 31, 103170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2023.103170

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.