References

  1. M.M. Rieger, L.D. Rhein, Surfactants in Cosmetics, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1997.
  2. G.F. Cata, H.C. Rojas, A.P. Gramatges, C.M. Zicovich-Wilson, L.J. Alvarez, C. Searle, Initial structure of cetyltrimethylammonium bromide micelles in aqueous solution from molecular dynamic simulations, Soft. Matter, 7 (2011) 8508–8515.
  3. G. Nałęcz-Jewiecki, E. Grabińska-Sota, P. Narkiewicz, The toxicity of cationic surfactants in four bioassays, Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 54 (2003) 87–91.
  4. R.J. Farn, Chemistry and Technology of Surfactants, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, New Delhi, 2006.
  5. http://www.cesio.eu/media/industry-data/CESIO-Statistics-2013.pdf.
  6. G. Zakrzewska-Trznadel, Membrane processes for environmental protection: applications in nuclear technology, Nukleonika, 51 (2006) 101–111.
  7. E. Fernández, J.M. Benito, C. Pazos, J. Coca, Ceramic membranes ultrafiltration of anionic and nonionic surfactant solutions, J. Membr. Sci., 246 (2005) 1–6.
  8. M. Forstmeier, B. Goers, G. Wozny, UF/NF treatment of rinsing waters in a liquid detergent production plant, Desalination, 149 (2002) 175–177.
  9. C. Korzenowski, M.B.O. Martins, A. Moura Bernardes, J. Zoppas Ferreira, E.C.N.F. Duarte, M. Norberta De Pinho, Removal of anionic surfactants by nanofiltration, Desal. Wat. Treat., 44 (2012) 269–275.
  10. B. Goers, J. Mey, G. Wozny, Optimised product and water recovery from batch production rinsing waters, Waste Manage., 20 (2000) 651–658.
  11. S. Kertész, Z. László, Z.H. Horváth, C. Hodúr, Analysis of nanofiltration parameters of removal of an anionic detergent, Desalination, 221 (2008) 303–311.
  12. https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/content/dam/sigma-aldrich/docs/Sigma/Product_Information_Sheet/2/h6269pis.pdf.
  13. E. Kudlek, M. Dudziak, J. Bohdziewicz, Influence of water matrix on the retention of pharmaceutical compounds by nanofiltration, Proc. ECOpole, 10 (2016) 469–479 (in Polish).
  14. M. Dudziak, M. Gryta, Nanofiltration of fermentation solutions – unfavorable phenomena and membrane cleaning, Proc. ECOpole, 7 (2013) 1285–1294 (in Polish).
  15. D. Qadir, H.B. Mukhtar, L.K. Keong, Rejection of divalent ions in commercial tubular membranes: effect of feed concentration and anion type, Sustainable Environ. Res., 27 (2017) 103–106.
  16. A.S. Jönsson, B. Jönsson, The influence of nonionic and ionic surfactants on hydrophobic and hydrophilic ultrafiltration membranes, J. Membr. Sci., 56 (1991) 49–76.
  17. J. Iqbal, K.J. Kim, J.S. Yang, K. Baek, J.W. Yang, Removal of arsenic from groundwater by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF), Chemosphere, 66 (2007) 970–976.
  18. K. Mizoguchi, K. Fukui, H. Yanagishita, T. Nakane, T. Nakata, Ultrafiltration behavior of a new type of non-ionic surfactant around the CMC, J. Membr. Sci., 208 (2002) 285–288.