Critical review demonstrates strong laboratory pesticide degradation using green nanomaterials, highlighting scaling challenges and the need for standardized real-matrix testing.
Pesticide contamination of aquatic systems remains a persistent environmental and public-health concern, while many conventional treatment technologies are limited by high energy demand, secondary waste generation, and incomplete mineralization. This review critically evaluates green-synthesized metal-based nanomaterials (GS-MBNMs), comprising metallic nanoparticles, and their biofunctionalized or supported nanocomposites, for pesticide remediation by linking biological precursor chemistry, synthesis conditions, nanostructure, surface properties, removal mechanisms, durability, environmental safety, and scale-up readiness. Adsorption, photocatalytic oxidation, reactive oxygen species-mediated transformation, Fenton-like reactions, and redox degradation are examined alongside the effects of particle size, morphology, porosity, crystallinity, defect density, and biomolecular corona composition. Available studies confirm strong laboratory-scale adsorption and degradation performance; however, direct comparison remains constrained by inconsistent operating conditions, incomplete reporting of surface area and kinetic parameters, and frequent reliance on parent-pesticide disappearance rather than mineralization, transformation-product identification, or toxicity reduction. Green synthesis can reduce hazardous reagent use and provide beneficial surface functionality, but biological-feedstock variability, difficult purification, uncertain yield, nanoparticle leaching, and limited batch reproducibility restrict practical deployment. Hybrid nanostructures and machine-learning-assisted optimization offer potential gains in selectivity, charge transfer, recovery, and process control, yet evidence remains limited for pesticide-specific systems. A source-to-deployment framework is proposed, integrating standardized synthesis, mechanistic validation, real-matrix testing, regeneration, continuous-flow operation, life-cycle assessment, techno-economic analysis, and regulatory evaluation to support safe and commercially credible scale-up. The evidence therefore supports technical promise, but not universal superiority over conventionally synthesized counterparts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Umaru et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: