Next Article in Journal
Extraction of the Rare Element Vanadium from Vanadium-Containing Materials by Chlorination Method: A Critical Review
Previous Article in Journal
An Experimental Study of the Tension-Compression Asymmetry of Extruded Ti-6.5Al-2Zr-1Mo-1V under Quasi-Static Conditions at High Temperature
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Recovery of Copper(II) and Silver(I) from Nitrate Leaching Solution of Industrial Dust via Solvent Extraction with LIX63

Metals 2021, 11(8), 1300; https://doi.org/10.3390/met11081300
by Pan-Pan Sun 1, Tae-Young Kim 1, Hyeon Seo 2 and Sung-Yong Cho 1,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Metals 2021, 11(8), 1300; https://doi.org/10.3390/met11081300
Submission received: 18 July 2021 / Revised: 9 August 2021 / Accepted: 13 August 2021 / Published: 17 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Extractive Metallurgy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript described the solvent-extraction process to recover Cu and Ag from the nitrate leaching solution of an industrial dust with LIX63. From the leaching solution, Cu and Ag were selectively extracted with LIX63 in two stages, then 4 M nitric acid and 0.1 M thiourea were used as strippants to strip copper and silver, respectively. This work is novel and has application value.

The reviewer has encountered some major and minor problems as follows;

  1. It is recommended to detect the concentration of metal ions in some organic phases to verify the error of the data.
  2. There are some errors in the article, I recommend you to check carefully and revised. Some examples are listed below: A. In line 107, the position of reference [29] is wrong. B. Please unify the “Figure” and “Fig”. C. It is recommended to change the axis values to clearly show each data point, especially Figure 1.
  3. How to deal with the copper-containing and silver-containing solution after stripping, and whether the solution contains a small amount of organic phase, which will affect the subsequent processing.
  4. Since the value of silver is much higher than that of copper, have you considered the recovery of Ag co-stripped with Cu?
  5. English writing must be revised thoroughly in terms of grammar and vocabulary.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors studied the solvent extracton of Cu and Ag from the synthetic leaching solution, using 5,8-diethyl-7-hydroxydodecan-6-oxime (LIX63). The results obtained are interesting, but before its publication, I suggest the following corrections:

  • In section 2. Materials and Methods, include references to support the concentration of the synthetic PLS.
  • For the extraction and stripping tests, inlude the separation time and the rpm.
  • In section 3.1, please clarify if the O/A ratio remained at 1:1 as HNO3 concentration increased.
  • In figures 3 and 4, correct the "X" and "Y" axis labels.
  • In section 3.4, why were these stripping agents selected?
  • In table 3, include the pH values of the stripping solutions.
  • In figures 5 and 6, correct the "X" axis labels.
  • In section 3, the authors should compare their results with the bibliography, what are the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed process?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article entitled "Recovery of copper and silver from a nitrate leaching solution of an industrial dust via solvent extraction with LIX63" describes the Cu (II) and Ag (I) ions recovery from the nitrate leaching solution of an industrial dust that occurs during the pyrometallurgy of spent camera modules, with utilization of LIX63 as an extractant.

The text is consistent, contains detailed information on the performed experiments and well-formed conclusions.

Minor remarks:

  • to avoid any doubts, it is worth giving the valence of the examined metal ions, e.g. Cu (II),
  • in section 2.1. "Materials" was given the wrong formula for copper nitrate (Cu(NO3)3 3H2O),
  • in the y axis description in Fig. 2, there should be a space in front of the parentheses.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. We have addressed all the issues pointed out by you in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

It is acceptable now.

Author Response

Thank you very much for yor comments

Reviewer 2 Report

Most of the corrections were solved by the authors, I only have the following correction:

- Include more details on leaching tests and the PLS obtained.

Author Response

thank you for you rcomments. The manuscript has been revised accordign to this comment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop