4.7 Article

Investigating the role of dissolved inorganic and organic carbon in fluoride removal by membrane capacitive deionization

期刊

DESALINATION
卷 528, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.desal.2022.115618

关键词

Membrane capacitive deionization; Fluoride; Dissolved inorganic carbon; Dissolved organic carbon; Humic acid; Water treatment

资金

  1. Royal Academy of Engi-under the Research scheme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reveals for the first time the impact of dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) on fluoride removal by membrane capacitive deionization (MCDI). The results show that DIC species decrease fluoride removal, while DOC has an insignificant impact at a moderate concentration.
Natural fluoride-containing waters are characterized by high contents of dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) and dissolved organic carbon (DOC). For the first time, the impact of DIC and DOC on fluoride removal by membrane capacitive deionization (MCDI) was unravelled. A series of MCDI experiments were conducted by mixing NaF solutions with three DIC species (H2CO3, NaHCO3, and Na2CO3) and a DOC representative (humic acid). All three DIC species decrease fluoride removal, among which CO(3)(2-)causes the greatest reduction. This is because the divalent CO(3)(2-)is preferably adsorbed by MCDI over monovalent DIC ions. When the initial concentrations of F and DIC ions are equal, F- is less adsorbed than DIC because the stronger hydration energy of F- makes its interaction with the electrode more difficult. DIC species also act as a buffering agent, reducing pH fluctuations during the adsorption and desorption cycle. On the other hand, DOC at a moderate concentration (10.9 mg/L) has an insignificant impact on fluoride removal. DIC significantly decreases both fluoride and DOC removal in ternary fluoride-rich water. This work highlights the importance of water characteristics in the selective removal of ions and demonstrates the potential applicability of MCDI to treat natural waters.

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