4.7 Article

Degradation of pollutants in water by Fenton-like oxidation over LaFe-catalysts: Optimization by experimental design

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.micromeso.2022.112422

关键词

Box-Behnken design; Heterogeneous catalysts; Pollutants; Fenton -like oxidation; Mineralization; La3+; Fe3+

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effect of different parameters on the degradation of pollutants in water by Fenton-like oxidation was studied using the Box-Behnken design. Three bimetallic catalysts were prepared and used for Fenton-like oxidation of organic pollutants in water. The optimal catalytic conditions were found to be a temperature of 40 degrees C and an H2O2 concentration of 90 mM, resulting in high conversion rates for Tar and Caf.
The effect of different parameters such as temperature, type of catalyst and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) con-centration on the degradation of pollutants in water by Fenton-like oxidation was studied by using the Box-Behnken design (BBD), an effective statistical model to design the experiments. Concerning the heterogeneous catalysts, three bimetallic catalysts with lanthanum (La) and iron (Fe) ion-exchanged into zeolites (NaY and ZSM5) and a natural clay from Morocco were prepared and used for Fenton-like oxidation of organic pollutants in water. Tartrazine (Tar, a food coloring compound known as E102) and caffeine (Caf, a stimulant drug present in popular beverages such as coffee and tea) were selected as pollutants due to their presence in several com-mercial products for daily consumption. The BBD model indicated that the optimum catalytic conditions for Fenton-like reaction with an initial pollutant concentration of 30 ppm at pH 3.0 were T = 40 degrees C and 90 mM of H2O2. The maximum conversion values achieved with the best catalyst, LaFeZSM5, were 96.6% for Tar after 180 min and 51.0% for Caf after 300 min of reaction. To increase the conversion of Caf, a modified zeolite electrode was used for electro Fenton-like oxidation without H2O2, at room temperature.

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