4.7 Article

Investigation of the synergistic effects for p-nitrophenol mineralization by a combined process of ozonation and electrolysis using a boron-doped diamond anode

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 280, 期 -, 页码 644-653

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.09.001

关键词

Advanced oxidation; Boron-doped diamond; Phenol; Ozone; Wastewater

资金

  1. National High Technology Research and Development of China [2013AA06A305]
  2. special fund of State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control [13Y01ESPCT]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electrolysis and ozonation are two commonly used technologies for treating wastewaters contaminated with nitrophenol pollutants. However, they are often handicapped by their slow kinetics and low yields of total organic carbon (TOC) mineralization. To improve TOC mineralization efficiency, we combined electrolysis using a boron-doped diamond (BDD) anode with ozonation (electrolysis-O-3) to treat a p-nitrophenol (PNP) aqueous solution. Up to 91% TOC was removed after 60 min of the electrolysis-O-3 process. In comparison, only 20 and 44% TOC was respectively removed by individual electrolysis and ozonation treatment conducted under similar reaction conditions. The result indicates that when electrolysis and ozonation are applied simultaneously, they have a significant synergy for PNP mineralization. This synergy can be mainly attributed to (i) the rapid degradation of PNP to carboxylic acids (e.g., oxalic acid and acetic acid) by O-3, which would otherwise take a much longer time by electrolysis alone, and (ii) the effective mineralization of the ozone-refractory carboxylic acids to CO2 by (OH)-O-center dot generated from multiple sources in the electrolysis-O-3 system. The result suggests that combining electrolysis with ozonation can provide a simple and effective way to mutually compensate the limitations of the two processes for degradation of phenolic pollutants. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据