4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Ozonation and peroxone oxidation of ethylenethiourea in water: operational parameter optimization and by-product identification

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages 903-908

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-014-3616-y

Keywords

Pesticide metabolite; Ethylenethiourea; Ozonation; Peroxone process; Operational parameters; Advanced oxidative process

Funding

  1. Foundation for Research Support of the State of Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG)
  2. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES)
  3. National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this work was to study the degradation and mineralization of ethylenethiourea (ETU) in water by ozonation at different pH values and in the presence of hydrogen peroxide. Degradation experiments were performed using an initial ETU concentration of 50 ppm for 180 min with a gas flux of 0.25 dm(3) min(-1) and an O-3 production rate of 12.1 mg min(-1). Degradation of by-products was monitored by direct injection electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (ESI-MS), ETU concentration was determined by HPLC-UV, and its mineralization was detected by total organic carbon (TOC) analysis. Optimum degradation of ETU in water was observed at pH = 11, whereas at pH = 3, the degradation of ETU was slowest, indicating that the reaction occurred through different mechanisms. The additional effects of hydroxyl radicals formed at the highest pH can be used to explain the results obtained in this study. Peroxone experiments were carried out in the presence of 400 and 800 mg L-1 H2O2; the degradation of ETU was faster at 400 mg L-1 H2O2. This was attributed to the scavenging effect of the excess H2O2. ETU treatment by ozonation produced several by-products of degradation such as ethylene urea and 2-imidazoline.

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