4.8 Article

Removal of veterinary antibiotics from sequencing batch reactor (SBR) pretreated swine wastewater by Fenton's reagent

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 43, 期 17, 页码 4392-4402

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2009.06.057

关键词

Antibiotics degradation; Swine wastewater; Fenton's reagent; Sequencing batch reactor; Heavy metals

资金

  1. National High Technology RD (863) program [2007AA06Z344]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50878206, 50621804]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Environmental Aquatic Chemistry [08Z01ESPCR]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The large-scale application of veterinary antibiotics in livestock industry makes swine wastewater an important source of antibiotics pollution. This work investigated the degradation of six selected antibiotics, including five sulfonamides and one macrolide, by Fenton's reagent in swine wastewater pretreated with sequencing batch reactor (SBR). The dosing mode and practical dosage of Fenton's reagent were optimized to achieve an effective removal of antibiotics while save the treatment cost. The effects of initial pH, chemical oxygen demand (COD) and suspended solids (SS) of the SBR effluent on antibiotics degradation were examined. The results indicate that the optimal conditions for Fenton's reagent with respect to practical application were as follows: batch dosing mode, 15:1 molar ratio of [H2O2]/[Fe2+], initial pH 5.0. Under the optimal conditions, Fenton's reagent could effectively degrade all the selected antibiotics and was resistant to the variations in the background COD (0-419 mg/L) and SS (0-250 mg/L) of the SBR effluent. Besides, Fenton's reagent helped to not only remove total organic carbon (TOC), heavy metals (As, Cu and Pb) and total phosphorus (TP), but also inactivate bacteria and reduce wastewater toxicity. This work demonstrates that the integrated process combining SBR with Fenton's reagent could provide comprehensive treatment to swine wastewater. (c) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
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