Research Article

Received: 7 May 2013 Revised: 20 June 2013 Accepted: 20 June 2013

(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI 10.1002/jctb.4317

Investigation of process parameters

for removal of bisphenol A (BPA) from water
by polymeric adsorbents
in adsorption-ultrafiltration hybrid system
İdil Y𝒊lmaz İpek, Suna Yüksel, Nalan Kabay* and Mithat Yüksel

Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effect of process parameters of a hybrid process integrating adsorption and ultrafiltration in a single system
was investigated for bisphenol A (BPA) removal from water. The styrene-divinylbenzene-based, macroporous Purolite MN
202 and Dowex Optipore L493 polymeric adsorbents were employed for adsorption of BPA from water while a ZW-1 model
submerged ultrafiltration module was applied in the hybrid system to separate the fine adsorbent particles from treated water.

RESULTS: According to the results obtained using Dowex Optipore L493, the optimum operating conditions to reach minimum
BPA concentration in the treated water were found to be: adsorbent concentration 0.5 g-adsorbent L−1 -solution, replacement
rate of saturated and fresh adsorbents 9 mL min−1 , permeate flow rate 3 mL min−1 , and polymeric adsorbent particle size range
50–100 𝛍m.

CONCLUSION: The adsorption–ultrafiltration hybrid system is considered as a promising treatment process for removal of BPA
from water using highly crosslinked polymeric adsorbents Purolite MN 202 and Dowex Optipore L493.
© 2014 Society of Chemical Industry

Keywords: bisphenol A; adsorption; polymeric adsorbent; ultrafiltration; hybrid process

INTRODUCTION Several alternative processes have been proposed to control BPA

Bisphenol A (BPA), also known as 2,2-bis-(4-hydroxyphenyl)
propane, is an important industrial chemical widely used for
the production of various plastic materials such as polycarbon-
ate and polysulphone plastics, baby bottles, flame retardants,
compact disks, thermal paper, paper coatings, adhesives, plastic
drink bottles, composite dental fillings and sealants, eyeglass
lenses, household appliances, consumer electronics, etc. It was
reported that global production of BPA is over a million tonnes
per year, with an estimated European annual production of 504
000 tonnes and 200 000 tonnes in Japan. For this reason, BPA
has frequently been detected in both industrial wastewater and
drinking water sources.1 – 4 Effluents from municipal and mixed
municipal–industrial wastewater treatment plants are the major
sources of BPA contamination although reported BPA concentra-
tions associated with these plants are generally lower than 1.5
μg L−1 . BPA concentrations in surface water vary considerably
depending on the location and sampling period, and are mostly
below 1 μg L−1 . However, one study of paper-mill effluent in
Japan found mean and maximum BPA concentrations of 59 and
370 μg L−1 , respectively. BPA is also known to be an endocrine
disrupting chemical (EDC) and highly toxic compound for aquatic
organisms.3,5 It is documented that continuous exposure to even
at low level of BPA (usually present in μg L−1 ) could result in
hormonal imbalance, male infertility, prostate and breast cancers
released into the environment such as biological and chemical
methods, advanced oxidation technology, membrane filtra-
tion, and adsorption. However, these methods suffer drawbacks
such as requiring large energy input (e.g. thermal destruction
and ozonation), slow process (e.g. biological treatment) or con-
suming chemicals (e.g. Fenton/photo-Fenton processes).4,6 – 8
Among the treatment processes, one of the most promising
methods is photocatalytic degradation due to its high miner-
alization efficiency, low toxigenicity, ideally producing carbon
dioxide, water and inorganic mineral ions as end products.6,9
Even though TiO2 is considered a very efficient photocatalysts,
commercial-scale TiO2 application in water treatment is still
limited.1,4,6,8,10,11 Recently, some researchers have reported the
photocatalytic degradation of BPA using TiO2 aqueous suspension
by means of an artificial light source such as a Hg–Xe lamp.10 Fur-
thermore, adsorption is one of the most widely applied method
for removal of organic pollutants from water. Several researchers
synthesized and used various kinds of adsorbents such as peat
∗ Correspondence to: Nalan Kabay, Department of Chemical Engineering, Fac-
ulty of Engineering, Ege University, 35100 İzmir, Turkey.
E-mail: nalan.kabay@ege.edu.tr
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ege University,
835

in humans.5 35100 İzmir, Turkey

J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2014; 89: 835–840 www.soci.org © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry
 www.soci.org
modified with hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide,12 zeolite
from coal fly ash modified with hexadecyltrimethylammonium,13
carbon nanotubes,14 andesite, diatomaceous earth, titanium
dioxide,15 polyethersulfone–organophilic montmorillonite hybrid
particles,16 commercial carbons,17 photocatalytic composite
material,18 mesoporous carbon,19 polymeric adsorbent modified
with acetylaniline,20 and organic–inorganic hybrid mesoporous
material,21 for adsorption of BPA from water. Membrane processes
for removal of BPA from water have also been used by employing
such membrane filters as an ultrafiltration membrane, hollow
fiber microfiltration membrane, nanofiltration membrane, single
walled carbon nanotubes–ultrafiltration membrane systems, and
hybrid membranes.22 – 28
Beyond these methods, a hybrid process that integrates at least
two methods for treatment of BPA- containing water has been
also employed. Membrane filtration can help to overcome signif-
icant challenges such as separation of the micron-sized particles
from the system. In a submerged membrane module, air bubbling
to minimize membrane fouling and suction to withdraw the per-
meate from the system to prevent overpressure are quite crucial
issues to be considered.29 According to our previous studies, the
adsorption–membrane filtration hybrid process is quite promis-
ing for boron and phenol removal from water.30 – 36 In this study,
the effects of process parameters on an adsorption–ultrafiltration
hybrid process for BPA removal from water were investigated
using highly crosslinked polymeric adsorbents Purolite MN 202
and Dowex Optipore L493.
EXPERIMENTAL
Material
The polymeric adsorbents Purolite MN 202 and Dowex Optipore
L493 were provided by Purolite Chem. Co., Romania and Dow
Chem. Co., USA, respectively. The tests were performed using an
adsorption–ultrafiltration hybrid system for BPA removal from 0.2
mmol L−1 and 0.4 mmol L−1 BPA solutions. The BPA (purity 97%)
and ethanol were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich Co., USA and Merck
Co., Germany, respectively. The BPA solution was prepared by dis-
solving BPA first in ethanol and then diluting with Millipore deion-
ized water. The properties of the polymeric adsorbents employed
are presented in Tables 1 and 2.
Adsorption-ultrafiltration hybrid system
The adsorption–ultrafiltration hybrid process was applied in a
lab-scale system with a submerged ZW-1 Model UF module (GE)
including non-ionic, hydrophilic membranes with a nominal pore
size of 0.04 μm and a membrane surface area of 0.047 m2 (Fig. 1).
The membrane module was operated at controlled operating
Table 1. Properties of Purolite MN 202 adsorbent
Moisture retention (%) 50–60
Mean diameter (μm) 535 ± 85
Uniformity coefficient (max.) 1.4
Pore volume (mL g−1 ) 1–1.1
Surface area (m2 g−1 ) (min.) 825
d50, meso and macropores (Å) 600–900
d50, micropores (Å) 15
Specific gravity 1.04
Shipping weight (g L−1 ) (approx.) 610–640
836
wileyonlinelibrary.com/jctb © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry
İ Y İpek et al.
Table 2. Properties of Dowex Optipore L 493 adsorbent
Typical surface area (m2 g−1 ) > 1100
Average pore diameter (Å) 46
Pore volume (mL g−1 ) 1.16
Water retention capacity (%) 50–65
Particle size distribution (mesh) 20–50
fluxes of 3.83 and 6.38 L m−2 h−1 . Peristaltic pumps (Masterflex
and Ismatec) were used for circulating the suspension of adsorbent
through the system. The permeation pressure was controlled
using a manometer (Pakkens) fixed to the permeate line. The
ZW-1 membrane module was immersed in a tank containing
polymer adsorbent and BPA solution. Permeate was withdrawn
through the membrane module periodically while feed solution
was transferred to the tank to keep the volume of the solution
in the tank constant (1200 mL). At the same time, adsorbent
saturated with BPA inside the tank was replaced periodically with
fresh adsorbent fed to the tank at the same flow rate (Qsat’d = Qfresh )
in order to keep the adsorbent concentration (X) in the tank
nearly constant. A compressor was used to minimize clogging of
the membrane pores due to the accumulation of fine adsorbent
particles on the membrane surface. Flow rate of air was controlled
by a flow meter (Dwyer) keeping the flow rate constant at 4 L min−1
for all tests.
The influence of the UF membrane on BPA removal was checked
by running the test circulating only 0.4 mmol L−1 BPA solution
without using polymer adsorbents. Besides, the inevitable dilution
effect caused by circulation of the fresh adsorbent suspension
in deionized water to the main tank during the tests performed
for BPA removal was investigated in the absence of polymer
adsorbents. The effects of membrane module only and dilution
attained by the circulation of polymer suspension on BPA removal
from 0.4 mmol L−1 BPA solution were compared with the results
obtained using Purolite MN 202 polymer adsorbent at a particle
size range of 50–100 μm (8 g L−1 ) in the hybrid system at a flow rate
of 5 mL min−1 and by replacing the fresh and saturated adsorbent
at a flow rate of 6 mL min−1 .
The efficiency of the hybrid process in terms of process variables
such as adsorbent concentration, replacement rate of fresh and
saturated adsorbents, permeate flow rate, and adsorbent particle
size was evaluated using Dowex Optipore L493 adsorbent for
removal of BPA from 0.2 mmol L−1 BPA containing solution. The
process parameters applied to the system for BPA removal are
summarized in Table 3. Only one parameter was altered while the
other parameters were kept constant during the process such as
the adsorbent concentration of 1 g L−1 , adsorbent replacement
rate of 9 mL min−1 , permeate flow rate of 3 mL min−1 , and
adsorbent particle size of 100–250 μm. It is worth noting that
the adsorbent concentration in the tank was the same as used
for fresh adsorbent concentration that fed to the tank containing
suspension and membrane module. Each test was duplicated to
check the reproducibility of the process.
BPA concentration in the permeate was determined by a spec-
trophotometer (Shimadzu, UV-1800 Model) at a wavelength of
276 nm.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The hybrid process provides opportunity to use the adsorbents as
very fine particles by increasing the effective surface area while
J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2014; 89: 835–840
Removal of bisphenol A (BPA) from water by polymeric adsorbents in a hybrid system www.soci.org

Compressor

Manometer Air Flow Meter

UF
Module
Feed
Vessel

Permeate Peristaltic
Pump
Magnetic
Peristaltic Stirrer Saturated
Pump Adsorbent Fresh Adsorbent

Figure 1. Adsorption–ultrafiltration hybrid system for BPA removal.

Table 3. Operating parameters applied for BPA removal from

water by employing polymeric adsorbent Dowex Optipore L 493 in
adsorption–ultrafiltration hybrid system

Adsorbent
Adsorbent replacement Permeate Adsorbent
concentration rate Qsat’d = Qfresh flow rate particle size
Only membrane module
X (g L−1 ) (mL min−1 ) Qp (mL min−1 ) dp (μm)
Without adsorbent
0.1 9 3 100–250 X = 8 g Purolite MN 202/L
0.5 9 3 100–250
1.0 9 3 100–250
1.0 6 3 100–250
1.0 9 5 100–250
1.0 9 3 50–100 Figure 2. Preliminary tests to check the applicability of the hybrid system
for BPA removal from water (Co = 0.4 mmol L−1 BPA, Qsat’d = Qfresh = 6 mL
0.5 9 3 50–100 min−1 , Qfeed = Qper = 5 mL min−1 , dp = 50–100 μm).

avoiding the pressure drop through the system. As a consequence,
higher uptakes are obtained and kinetics of the process enhanced.
However, separation of the micron-sized particles is a significant
challenge in practical application. This drawback can be minimized
by membrane separation resulting in higher throughput of the
treated water. For this purpose, nanofiltration (NF), microfiltration
(MF), and ultrafiltration (UF) membrane modules can be employed.
Submerged membranes have been widely used in MF and UF
systems due to the advantages of lower cost of fabrication and
maintenance. A hybrid process integrating the adsorption method
with ultrafiltration is introduced as an alternative system to that
using individual processes by combining the advantages of both
systems including high yield combined with high efficiency of
separation.
In this study, first, the use of membrane module only and dilution
with polymer suspension was investigated and then compared
with results obtained by employing polymeric adsorbent Purolite
MN 202 in the adsorption–ultrafiltration hybrid process. Subse-
quently, the effect of operating conditions to achieve an effective
BPA removal from water using Dowex Optipore L493 adsorbent in
the adsorption–ultrafiltration hybrid system was studied by apply-
adsorbent replacement rate, permeate flow rate, and adsorbent
particle size.
The individual influences of UF membrane, dilution resulting
from transferring fresh adsorbent suspension in deionized water
to the main tank, and the use of polymeric adsorbent Purolite
MN 202 on BPA removal from water by the hybrid system were
examined prior to tests performed for specification of the opti-
mum process parameters using polymeric adsorbent Dowex Opti-
pore L493. First of all, a UF membrane module was employed for
BPA removal from 0.4 mmol L−1 BPA solution in the absence of
adsorbent by withdrawing permeate at a flow rate of 5 mL min−1
without adsorbent replacement. As shown in Fig. 2, BPA concen-
tration in the permeate was dramatically decreased in the first 5
min. This behaviour of the system was followed by an increase
in BPA concentration gradually, reaching equilibrium upon satura-
tion of the membrane by BPA. This outcome was attributed to the
hydophobic interaction between the BPA and membrane surface.
In addition to size and electrical charge, hydrophobicity has also
been identified as an important parameter influencing the filtra-
tion behaviour of organics. If a solute has a high hydrophobicity, it
will prefer to be adsorbed in the membrane polymeric phase rather
837

ing different process parameters such as adsorbent concentration, than remaining in the aqueous phase. The highly hydrophobic

J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2014; 89: 835–840 © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry wileyonlinelibrary.com/jctb
 www.soci.org
Figure 3. Effect of adsorbent concentration on BPA removal using
Dowex Optipore L493 polymer adsorbent (Co = 0.2 mmol L−1 BPA,
Qsat’d = Qfresh = 9 mL min−1 , Qfeed = Qper = 3 mL min−1 , dp = 100–250 μm).
nature of BPA leads to the adsorption of this compound by the
polymer layer of the membrane.37 According to Zhang et al., in
a membrane filtration process involving organics such as BPA it
is possible that both chemical (hydrogen bonding) and physical
(hydrophobic interactions) adsorption occurs on the membrane
structure.38 The effect of dilution resulting from transferring deion-
ized water into the fresh adsorbent suspension in the main tank
was investigated by applying a permeate flow rate of 5 mL min−1
without adsorbent addition. The replacement rates of deionized
water in the fresh adsorbent resorvoir and 0.4 mmol L−1 BPA solu-
tion mixed in the main tank was kept constant at 6 mL min−1 . Ulti-
mately, to compare the effect of these factors on BPA removal from
0.4 mmol L−1 BPA solution, a test was performed using Purolite MN
202 polymer adsorbent by providing the same operating condi-
tions. Figure 2 shows the unavoidable decrease in BPA concentra-
tion caused by transferring deionized water into the suspension of
fresh adsorbent when compared with the results obtained using
Purolite MN 202 adsorbent. The contribution of Purolite MN 202
adsorbent to the hybrid system in shown in Fig. 2. After 5 min of the
process, the minimum BPA concentration was reached and then
this decrease was kept constant during 3 h operation.
These preliminary results introduced the idea to specify the
optimum process parameters for BPA removal from water using
Dowex Optipore L493 polymer adsorbent for the next study.
Effect of adsorbent concentration on BPA removal
The polymer adsorbent Dowex Optipore L493 with adsorbent con-
centrations of 0.1, 0.5, and 1 g L−1 was used in the hybrid system to
determine the optimum adsorbent concentration for BPA removal
from 0.2 mmol L−1 (45.66 mg L−1 ) BPA solution to meet the goal of
an economic process. Figure 3 depicts the change in concentration
of BPA relative to the initial concentration with increasing amount
of adsorbent. As expected, the minimum BPA concentration in the
permeate reached during the process was found to be decreased
as the adsorbent concentration was increased from 0.1 g L−1 to 1
g L−1 . The minimum BPA concentrations were obtained as 4.19 mg
L−1 , 3.08 mg L−1 , and 2.28 mg L−1 when 0.1, 0.5, and 1 g adsorbent
L−1 were used, respectively.
Effect of adsorbent replacement rate on BPA removal
To improve the efficiency of the system, the rate of adsorbent
replacement was altered for the circulation of fresh and satu-
rated adsorbents to 6 and 9 mL min−1 , which were 2 and 3 times
838
faster than the permeate flow rate employed, respectively. It is
wileyonlinelibrary.com/jctb © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry
İ Y İpek et al.
Figure 4. Effect of replacement rate of adsorbent on BPA removal using
Dowex Optipore L493 polymer adsorbent (Co = 0.2 mmol L−1 BPA, X = 1 g
L−1 , Qfeed = Qper = 3 mL min−1 , dp = 100–250 μm).
worth noting that the flow rates of both fresh and saturated adsor-
bent suspensions were kept the same. The concentrations of fresh
adsorbent passed through the main tank and adsorbent in the
main tank were provided as the same. The other operating param-
eters were kept constant at adsorbent concentration 1.0 g L−1 , per-
meate flow rate 3 mL min−1 , and adsorbent particle size 100–250
μm. Figure 4 shows the behaviour of the system against time due
to the change in the rate of adsorbent replacement. According
to the minimum BPA concentration in the permeate reached by
the system, the optimum replacement rate was obtained as 9 mL
min−1 . If the rate of replacement was increased from 6 mL min−1
to 9.0 mL min−1 , the BPA concentration in the permeate decreased
from 3.88 mg L−1 to 2.28 mg L−1 . As the flow rates of the suspen-
sions containing fresh and saturated adsorbents were increased,
the possibility of replacement of the saturated adsorbents in the
main tank with fresh ones was enhanced so that the concentration
of the fresh adsorbent per unit time in the main tank was increased.
Effect of permeate flow rate on BPA removal
Permeate flow rates of 3 and 5 mL min−1 were used to check the
system efficiency for BPA removal while the other parameters were
kept constant at adsorbent concentration 1 g L−1 , replacement rate
9 mL min−1 and adsorbent particle size 100–250 μm. Although
there is no distinctive difference between the results obtained by
applying these permeate flow rates, a favorable permeate flow
rate was decided considering the requirements of this treatment
process such as economic considerations, volume of permeate,
and concentration of BPA in the permeate. According to Fig. 5
indicating the variation of BPA concentrations in permeate against
Figure 5. Effect of permeate flow rate on BPA removal using Dowex
Optipore L493 polymer adsorbent (Co = 0.2 mmol L−1 BPA, X = 1 g L−1 ,
Qsat’d = Qfresh = 9 mL min−1 , dp = 100–250 μm).
J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2014; 89: 835–840
Removal of bisphenol A (BPA) from water by polymeric adsorbents in a hybrid system
Figure 6. Effect of particle size on BPA removal using Dowex Optipore L493
polymer adsorbent (Co = 0.2 mmol L−1 BPA, X = 1 g L−1 , Qsat’d = Qfresh = 9
mL min−1 , Qfeed = Qper = 3 mL min−1 ).
Figure 7. Effect of particle size on BPA removal using Dowex Optipore L493
polymer adsorbent (Co = 0.2 mmol L−1 BPA, X = 0.5 g L−1 , Qsat’d = Qfresh = 9
mL min−1 , Qfeed = Qper = 3 mL min−1 ).
time, 3 mL min−1 was found to be the optimum permeate flow rate
among the flow rates tested.
Effect of adsorbent particle size on BPA removal
The effect of adsorbent particle size on BPA removal by hybrid
proces was additionally investigated using Dowex Optipore
L493 polymer adsorbent with particle size ranges of 50–100
and 100–250 μm. As the adsorbent particle size was gradually
decreased, the minimum BPA concentration decreased from 2.28
to 1.14 mg L−1 due to the enhanced surface area generated by the
fine adsorbent particles (Fig. 6). Eventually, the efficiency of the
hybrid system was checked using pre-determined optimum con-
ditions for BPA removal from water to verify the results obtained.
For this purpose, 0.5 g L−1 of Dowex Optipore L493 adsorbent at
a particle size of 50–100 and 100–250 μm was employed in the
system applying a replacement rate of 9 mL min−1 and permeate
flow rate of 3 mL min−1 . Figure 7 shows that as the particle size
was reduced using the optimum adsorbent concentration 0.5
g L−1 , the change in BPA concentration was found to be much
more prominent particularly after 40 min, revealing a tendency
for significant decrease. According to the results obtained, the
optimum conditions were probably acceptable to meet the goal
of this treatment process for BPA removal from water.
CONCLUSION
The decrease in BPA concentration by an adsorption–ultrafiltration
hybrid system was found to be attributed mostly due to the
J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2014; 89: 835–840 © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry
www.soci.org
adsorption of BPA by polymeric adsorbent Purolite MN 202 rather
than by the membrane module itself and dilution resulted from
the circulation of fresh adsorbent. According to the results, the
adsorption–ultrafiltration hybrid system is a promising treatment
process for removal of BPA from water using highly crosslinked
polymeric adsorbents Purolite MN 202 and Dowex Optipore L493.
Due to the minimum BPA concentration reached during the treat-
ment process, the optimum operating conditions obtained using
Dowex Optipore L493 polymeric adsorbent can be summarized as
follows: polymeric adsorbent concentration 0.5 g L−1 ; flow rates
of suspensions of saturated and fresh adsorbents 9 mL min−1 ;
permeate flow rate 3 mL min−1 ; adsorbent particle size range
50–100 μm.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This study has been supported financially by TÜBİTAK-GSRT
(Project Number: 109M715). We would like to thank Purolite
Chem. Co., Romania and Dow Chem. Co., USA for providing
polymeric adsorbents as gifts.
REFERENCES
1 Wang G, Wu F, Zhang X, Luo M and Deng N, Enhanced TiO2 photocat-
alytic degradation of bisphenol A by 𝛽-cyclodextrin in suspended
solutions. J Photochem Photobiol A: Chem 179:49–56 (2006).
2 Zhang K, Gao N, Deng Y, Lin TF, Ma Y, Li L and Sui M, Degra-
dation of bisphenol-A using ultrasonic irradiation assisted by
low-concentration hydrogen peroxide. J Environ Sci 23:31–36
(2011).
3 Flint S, Markle T, Thompson S and Wallace E, Bisphenol A expo-
sure, effects, and policy: a wildlife perspective. J Environ Manage
104:19–34 (2012).
4 Chiang K, Lim TM, Tsen L and Lee CC, Photocatalytic degradation and
mineralization of bisphenol A by TiO2 and platinized TiO2 . Appl Catal
A: Gen 261:225–237 (2004).
5 Crain D A, Eriksen M, Iguchi T, Jobling S, Laufer H, LeBlanc GA and
Guillette Jr LJ, An ecological assessment of bisphenol-A: evidence
from comparative biology. Reproduct Toxicol 24:225–239 (2007).
6 Wang R, Ren D, Xia S, Zhang Y and Zhao J, Photocatalytic degradation
of Bisphenol A (BPA) using immobilized TiO2 and UV illumination
in a horizontal circulating bed photocatalytic reactor (HCBPR). J
Hazard Mater 169:926–932 (2009).
7 Huang YF and Huang YH, Identification of produced powerful rad-
icals involved in the mineralization of bisphenol A using a novel
UV-Na2 S2 O8 /H2 O2 -Fe(II,III) two-stage oxidation process. J Hazard
Mater 162:1211–1216 (2009).
8 Subagio DP, Srinivasan M, Lim M and Lim TT, Photocatalytic degra-
dation of bisphenol-A by nitrogen-doped TiO2 hollow sphere
in a vis-LED photoreactor. Appl Catal B: Environ 95:414–422
(2010).
9 Belgiorno V, Rizzo L, Fatta D, Rocca CD, Lofrano G, Nikolaou A and
Naddeo V, Review on endocrine disrupting-emerging compounds
in urban wastewater: occurrence and removal by photocataly-
sis and ultrasonic irradiation for wastewater reuse. Desalination
215:166–176 (2007).
10 Kaneco S, Rahmana MA, Suzuki T, Katsumata H and Ohta K, Optimiza-
tion of solar photocatalytic degradation conditions of bisphenol
A in water using titanium dioxide. J Photochem Photobiol A: Chem
163:419–424 (2004).
11 Sivalingam G and Madras G, Photocatalytic degrada-
tion of poly(bisphenol-A-carbonate) in solution over
combustion-synthesized TiO2 : mechanism and kinetic. Appl
Catal A: Gen 269:81–90 (2004).
12 Zhou Y, Chen L, Lu P, Tang X and Lu J, Removal of bisphenol A from
aqueous solution using modified fibric peat as a novel biosorbent.
Sep Purif Technol 81:184–190 (2011).
13 Dong Y, Wu D, Chen X and Lin Y, Adsorption of bisphenol A from water
by surfactant-modified zeolite. J Colloid Interface Sci 348:585–590
839
(2010).
wileyonlinelibrary.com/jctb
 www.soci.org
14 Joseph L, Zaib Q, Khan IA, Berge ND, Park YG, Saleh NB and Yoon
Y, Removal of bisphenol A and 17𝛼-ethinyl estradiol from land-
fill leachate using single-walled carbon nanotubes. Water Res 28
45:4056–4068 (2011).
15 Tsai WT, Lai CW and Su TY, Adsorption of bisphenol-A from aqueous
solution onto minerals and carbon adsorbents. J Hazard Mater
B134:169–175 (2006). 29
16 Cao F, Bai P, Li H, Ma Y, Deng X and Zhao C, Preparation of
polyethersulfone–organophilic montmorillonite hybrid parti-
cles for the removal of bisphenol A. J Hazard Mater 162:791–798 30
(2009).
17 Liu G, Mab J, Li X and Qin Q, Adsorption of bisphenol A from aqueous
solution onto activated carbons with different modification treat-
ments. J Hazard Mater 164:1275–1280 (2009). 31
18 Yap PS, Lim TT, Lim M and Srinivasan M, Synthesis and char-
acterization of nitrogen-doped TiO2 /AC composite for the
adsorption–photocatalytic degradation of aqueous bisphenol-A 32
using solar light. Catal Today 151:8–13 (2010).
19 Sui Q, Huang J, Liu Y, Chang X, Ji G, Deng S, Xie T and Yu G, Rapid
removal of bisphenol A on highly ordered mesoporous carbon. J 33
Environ Sci 23:177–182 (2011).
20 Xiao G, Fu L and Li A, Enhanced adsorption of bisphenol A from water
by acetylaniline modified hyper-cross-linked polymeric adsorbent:
effect of the cross-linked bridge. Chem Eng J 191:171–176 (2012). 34
21 Kim YH, Lee B, Choo KH and Choi SJ, Selective adsorption of bisphenol
A by organic–inorganic hybrid mesoporous silicas. Micropor Meso-
por Mater 138:184–190 (2011).
22 Son LT, Katagawa K and Kobayashi T, Using molecularly imprinted 35
polymeric spheres for hybrid membranes with selective adsorption
of bisphenol A derivatives. J Membr Sci 375:295–303 (2011).
23 Su-Hua W, Bing-zhi D and Yu H, Adsorption of bisphenol A by polysul-
phone membrane. Desalination 253:22–29 (2010). 36
24 Bing-zhi D, Lin W and Nai-yun G, The removal of bisphenol A by
ultrafiltration. Desalination 221:312–317 (2008).
25 Bing-zhi D, Hua-qiang C, Lin W, Sheng-ji X and Nai-yun G, The removal
of bisphenol A by hollow fiber microfiltration membrane. Desalina- 37
tion 250:693–697 (2010).
26 Zhang Y, Causserand C, Aimar P and Cravedi JP, Removal of bisphenol
A by a nanofiltration membrane in view of drinking water produc- 38
tion. Water Res 40:3793–3799 (2006).
27 Bolong N, Ismail AF, Salim MR, Rana D, Matsuura T and
Tabe-Mohammadi A, Negatively charged polyethersulfone hollow
840
wileyonlinelibrary.com/jctb © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry
İ Y İpek et al.
fiber nanofiltration membrane for the removal of bisphenol A from
wastewater. Sep Purif Technol 73:92–99 (2010).
Heo J, Flora JRV, Her N, Park YG, Cho J, Son A and Yoon Y, Removal
of bisphenol A and 17𝛽-estradiol in single walled carbon
nanotubes–ultrafiltration (SWNTs–UF) membrane systems. Sep
Purif Technol 90:39–52 (2012).
Chin SS, Lim TM, Chiang K and Fane AG, Hybrid low-pressure sub-
merged membrane photoreactor for the removal of bisphenol A.
Desalination 202:253–261 (2007).
Guler E, Kabay N, Yuksel M, Yigit NO, Kitis M and Bryjak M, Inte-
grated solution for boron removal from seawater using RO pro-
cess and sorption-membrane filtration hybrid method. J Membr Sci
375:249–257 (2011).
Kabay N, Yilmaz I, Bryjak M and Yüksel M, Removal of boron from
aqueous solutions by a hybrid ion exchange–membrane process.
Desalination 198:74–81 (2006).
Yilmaz I, Kabay N, Brjyak M, Yüksel M, Wolska J and Koltuniewicz A,
A submerged membrane–ion-exchange hybrid process for boron
removal. Desalination 198:310–315 (2006).
Kabay N, Yilmaz-Ipek I, Soroko I, Makowski M, Kirmizisakal O, Yag S,
Bryjak M and Yuksel M, Removal of boron from Balcova geothermal
water by ion exchange-microfiltration hybrid process. Desalination
241:167–173 (2009).
İpek Yilmaz I, Kabay N, Yuksel M, Yap𝚤c𝚤 D and Yüksel U, Application
of adsorption-ultrafiltration hybrid method for removal of phenol
from water by hypercrosslinked polymer adsorbents. Desalination
306:24–28 (2012).
Kabay N, Köseoğlu P, Yavuz E, Yüksel U and Yüksel M, An innovative
integrated system for boron removal from geothermal water using
RO process and ion exchange-ultrafiltration hybrid method. Desali-
nation 316:1–7 (2013).
Kabay N, Köseoğlu P, Yap𝚤c𝚤 D, Yüksel U and Yüksel M, Coupling ion
exchange with ultrafiltration for boron removal from geothermal
water-investigation of process parameters and recycle tests, Desali-
nation 316:17–22 (2013).
Nghiem LD and Hawkes S, Effects of membrane fouling on the nanofil-
tration of trace organic contaminants. Desalination 236:273–281
(2009).
Zhang Y, Causserand C, Aimar P and Cravedi JP, Removal of bisphenol
A by a nanofiltration membrane in view of drinking water produc-
tion. Water Res 40:23–31 (2006).
J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2014; 89: 835–840