Treatment of refinery wastewater is very significant to protect the downstream users from health risks and to meet the ever increasing water demand. Seaweeds are one of the most common adsorbent and biofilters used for treating industrial effluent, due to its excellent properties such as availability in large quantities, contain a variety of functional groups, low-cost and eco-friendly. In this research, naturally found brown seaweeds “Sargassum ilicifolium” was employed in the batch treatment of refinery wastewater in a most efficient, cost-effective and environmentally friendly way. The surface morphological characterizations of the algae before and after treatment are carried out using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). A series of batch experimental studies were carried out for the removal of pollutants from refinery wastewater by varying the effluent solution pH, mixing time, stirring speed, dosage of algae and temperature of the effluent solution. The pollutant removal efficiency was assessed by measuring the chemical oxygen demand (COD), total dissolved solids (TDS), total suspended solids (TSS), turbidity and dissolved oxygen (DO) of the effluent before and after treatment. The study demonstrates that the optimum efficiency of the treatment process are pH 5.0, 75 minutes of stirring time, 0.6 g of Sargassum ilicifolium, 125 RPM stirring speed and a solution temperature of 35˚C. The experimental result of the study demonstrates that the brown seaweed Sargassum ilicifolium was found to be an ecofriendly and inexpensive adsorbentfor the effective removal of contaminants from refinery effluent. Sargassum ilicifolium showed excellent pollution removal efficiency by significantly reducing the chemical oxygen demand by 84.9%, dissolved oxygen 80%, turbidity 78.05%, dissolved solids 78.3% and suspended matter 78.70%.

1.
G.
Zafra
,
A.M.
Montano
, and
A.
Absalon
,
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
22
,
1034
1042
(
2015
).
2.
Y.
Chen
,
Journal of Cleaner Production
192
,
262
269
(
2018
).
3.
S.
Varjani
,
R.
Joshi
,
V.
Srivastava
,
H.
Ngo
, and
W.
Guo
,
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
27
,
27172
27180
(
2019
).
4.
I.
Ahmed
,
H.M.
Iqbal
and
K.
Dhama
,
Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences
5
(
4
),
402
411
(
2017
).
5.
L.
Yan
,
Y.
Wang
,
J.
Li
,
H.
Ma
,
H.
Liu
, and
T.
Li
,
Desalination
341
,
87
93
(
2014
).
6.
N.S.
Mizzouri
, and
M.G.
Shaaban
,
International Biodeterioration & BiodegradationJournal
83
,
1
9
(
2013
).
7.
B.
Santos
,
C.F.
Galinha
,
J.G.
Crespo
,
M.A.
Santos
, and
S.
Velizarov
,
Separation and Purification Technology
119
,
51
57
(
2013
).
8.
G.
Hu
,
J.
Li
, and
H.
Hou
,
Journal of Hazardous Materials
283
,
832
840
(
2015
).
9.
R.
Surkatti
, and
M.H.
El-Naas
,
Journal of Water Process Engineering
11
,
84
90
(
2014
).
10.
C.
Chen
,
L.
Wei
,
X.
Guo
,
S.
Guo
, and
G.
Yan
,
Fuel Processing Technology
124
,
165
173
(
2014
).
11.
D.
Xie
,
C.
Li
,
R.
Tang
,
Z.
Lv
,
Y.
Ren
, and
C.
Wei
,
Electrochemistry Communications
46
,
99
102
(
2014
).
12.
H.G.
Yang
,
H.Y.
Chun
, and
D.
Pak
,
Biochemical Engineering Journal
90
,
44
48
(
2014
).
13.
S.L.
Holdt
, and
M.D.
Edwards
,
Journal of Applied Phycology
26
,
933
945
(
2014
).
14.
J.K.
Kim
,
C.
Yarish
,
E.K.
Hwang
,
M.
Park
, and
Y.
Kim
,
Algae
32
,
1
13
(
2017
).
15.
A.F.
Safinaz
, and
A.H.
Ragaa
,
International Food Research Journal
20
,
1629
1632
(
2013
).
16.
G.G.
Selvam
, and
K.
Sivakumar
.
Asian Pacific Journal of Reproduction
3
,
18
22
(
2014
).
17.
J.
Hinks
,
S.
Edwards
,
P.J.
Sallis
, and
G.S.
Caldwell
,
Bioresource Technology
143
,
221
230
(
2013
).
18.
W.K.
Lee
,
Y.Y.
Lim
,
A.T.C.
Leow
,
P.
Namasivayam
,
J.O.
Abdullah
, and
C.L.
Ho
,
Journal of Applied Phycology
29
,
1527
1540
(
2017
).
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.