4.7 Article

Efficient degradation of rhodamine B using modified graphite felt gas diffusion electrode by electro-Fenton process

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 23, Issue 12, Pages 11574-11583

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-016-6360-7

Keywords

Electro-Fenton; Graphite felts modification; RhB; Mineralization current efficiency; Biodegradability

Funding

  1. Science and Technology Service Network Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences (STS project) [KFJ-EW-STS-049]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The electro-Fenton (EF) process treatment of 0.1-M (rhodamine B) RhB solution was studied with different graphite cathode materials, and graphite felt (GF) was selected as a promising material in further investigation. Then, the degradation performances of gas diffusion electrode (GDE) and graphite felt (GF) were compared, and GDE was confirmed to be more efficient in RhB removal. The operational parameters such as Fe2+ dosage and current density were optimized, and comparison among different modified methods-polytetrafluoroethylene-carbon black (PTFE-CB), polytetrafluoroethylene-carbon nanotube (PTFE-CNT), electrodeposition-CB, and electrodeposition-CNT-showed 98.49 % RhB removal by PTFE-CB-modified cathode in 0.05 M Na2SO4 at a current density of 50 A/m(2) and an air flow rate of 1 L/min after 20 min. Meanwhile, after cathode modified by PTFE-CB, the mineralization efficiency and mineralization current efficiency performed absolutely better than the pristine one. Cyclic voltammograms, SEM images, contact angles, and BET surface area were carried out to demonstrate stronger current responses and higher hydrophilicity of GF after modified. The value of biochemical oxygen demand/chemical oxygen demand (BOD5/COD) increased from 0.049 to 0.331 after 90-min treatment, suggesting the solution was biodegradable, and the modified cathode was confirmed to be stable after ten circle runs. Finally, a proposed degradation pathway of RhB was put forward.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available