4.7 Article

Synthetic olive mill wastewater treatment by Fenton's process in batch and continuous reactors operation

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 25, 期 35, 页码 34826-34838

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-0532-y

关键词

Advanced oxidation process; Phenolic acids; OMW; CSTR

资金

  1. North Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE 2020), under the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) [NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000005-LEPABE-2- ECO-INNOVATION]
  2. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia-FCT [SFRH/BPD/115879/2016]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Degradation of total phenol (TPh) and organic matter, (expressed as total organic carbon TOC), of a simulated olive mill wastewater was evaluated by the Fenton oxidation process under batch and continuous mode conditions. A mixture of six phenolic acids usually found in these agro-industrial wastewaters was used for this purpose. The study focused on the optimization of key operational parameters of the Fenton process in a batch reactor, namely Fe2+ dosage, hydrogen peroxide concentration, pH, and reaction temperature. On the assessment of the process efficiency, > 99% of TPh and > 56% of TOC removal were attained when [Fe2+] = 100 ppm, [H2O2] = 2.0g/L, T = 30 degrees C, and initial pH = 5.0, after 300 min of reaction. Under those operational conditions, experiments on a continuous stirred-tank reactor (CSTR) were performed for different space-time values (tau). TOC and TPh removals of 47.5 and 96.9%, respectively, were reached at steady-state (for tau = 120 min). High removal of COD (> 75%) and BOD5 (> 70%) was achieved for both batch and CSTR optimum conditions; analysis of the BOD5/COD ratio also revealed an increase in the effluent's biodegradability. Despite the high removal of lumped parameters, the treated effluent did not met the Portuguese legal limits for direct discharge of wastewaters into water bodies, which indicates that coupled chemical-biological process may be the best solution for real olive mill wastewater treatment.

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