Grafted Chitosan for Dye Removal: Synthesis Cost, Material Efficiency and Reuse Risk

Abstract The economic viability of chitosan-based adsorbents depends on laboratory-scale synthesis costs, adsorption performance, regeneration behavior and synthesis-route complexity. However, these factors are rarely evaluated within a unified framework, limiting informed material selection. Herein, an integrated framework combining activity-based costing and total cost of ownership (ABC−TCO), cost-effectiveness analysis, material-use efficiency and complexity-adjusted risk−return assessment was developed. Four chitosan derivatives, chitosan grafted with acrylic acid (Ch-g-Aa) or acrylamide (Ch-g-Aam) in powder and bead forms, were systematically evaluated for Remazol Yellow Gelb 3RS (RY) and Basic Yellow 37 (BY) removal over four consecutive adsorption−desorption cycles. The results revealed that bead formation improved cost-effectiveness for Ch-g-Aa but reduced it for Ch-g-Aam. Notably, the lowest synthesis cost (€14.35 g−1, Ch-g-Aa beads) did not correspond to the lowest synthesis cost per mg of RY removed: Ch-g-Aa beads incurred 2.6 times the cost of Ch-g-Aam powder (0.01085 versus 0.00423 € mg−1). To assess synthesis-route efficiency, complexity-adjusted risk−return analysis demonstrated that Ch-g-Aa beads achieved the highest economic return (39.01%) and return-to-risk ratio (5.02), despite requiring nine synthesis steps versus six for powders. Raw materials consistently dominated synthesis costs (>60% of batch costs for powders), identifying reagent optimization and solvent recovery as key priorities for synthesis optimization. Overall, bead formation provided no universal advantage; its value depended on graft chemistry, synthesis yield and target pollutant. The framework delivers three benefits: it distinguishes synthesis cost from cost-effectiveness, revealing overlooked trade-offs; identifies when additional synthesis complexity is economically justified; and pinpoints cost and material-use hotspots to guide polymeric adsorbent design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACS Applied Engineering Materials
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsaenm.6c01272
Primary Topic
Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Grafted Chitosan for Dye Removal: Synthesis Cost, Material Efficiency and Reuse Risk

Despina A. Gkika, George Z. Kyzas
2 links
ACS Applied Engineering Materials
Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
article

Grafted Chitosan for Dye Removal: Synthesis Cost, Material Efficiency and Reuse Risk

Despina A. Gkika, George Z. Kyzas
article en

Abstract

Abstract The economic viability of chitosan-based adsorbents depends on laboratory-scale synthesis costs, adsorption performance, regeneration behavior and synthesis-route complexity. However, these factors are rarely evaluated within a unified framework, limiting informed material selection. Herein, an integrated framework combining activity-based costing and total cost of ownership (ABC−TCO), cost-effectiveness analysis, material-use efficiency and complexity-adjusted risk−return assessment was developed. Four chitosan derivatives, chitosan grafted with acrylic acid (Ch-g-Aa) or acrylamide (Ch-g-Aam) in powder and bead forms, were systematically evaluated for Remazol Yellow Gelb 3RS (RY) and Basic Yellow 37 (BY) removal over four consecutive adsorption−desorption cycles. The results revealed that bead formation improved cost-effectiveness for Ch-g-Aa but reduced it for Ch-g-Aam. Notably, the lowest synthesis cost (€14.35 g−1, Ch-g-Aa beads) did not correspond to the lowest synthesis cost per mg of RY removed: Ch-g-Aa beads incurred 2.6 times the cost of Ch-g-Aam powder (0.01085 versus 0.00423 € mg−1). To assess synthesis-route efficiency, complexity-adjusted risk−return analysis demonstrated that Ch-g-Aa beads achieved the highest economic return (39.01%) and return-to-risk ratio (5.02), despite requiring nine synthesis steps versus six for powders. Raw materials consistently dominated synthesis costs (>60% of batch costs for powders), identifying reagent optimization and solvent recovery as key priorities for synthesis optimization. Overall, bead formation provided no universal advantage; its value depended on graft chemistry, synthesis yield and target pollutant. The framework delivers three benefits: it distinguishes synthesis cost from cost-effectiveness, revealing overlooked trade-offs; identifies when additional synthesis complexity is economically justified; and pinpoints cost and material-use hotspots to guide polymeric adsorbent design.

ACS Applied Engineering Materials
Democritus University of Thrace (GR)
Hellenic Academic Libraries Link
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon