4.8 Article

Abiotic transformation of hexabromocyclododecane by sulfidated nanoscale zerovalent iron: Kinetics, mechanism and influencing factors

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 121, 期 -, 页码 140-149

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2017.05.019

关键词

HBCD; S-nZVI; Transformation; Mechanism; Influencing factor

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41120134006, 41473107]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies showed that sulfidated nanoscale zerovalent iron (S-nZVI) is a better reducing agent than nanoscale zerovalen iron (nZVI) alone for reductive dechlorination of several organic solvents such as trichloroethylene (TCE) due to the catalytic role of iron sulfide (FeS). We measured the rates of transformation of hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) by S-nZVI and compared them to those by FeS, nZVI, and reduced sulfur species. The results showed that: i) HBCD (20 mg L-1) was almost completely transformed by S-nZVI (0.5 g L-1) within 12 h; ii) the reaction with beta-HBCD was much faster than with alpha- and gamma-HBCD, suggesting the diastereoisomeric selectivity for the reaction by S-nZVI; and iii) the reaction with S-nZVI was 1.4-9.3 times faster than with FeS, S2- and nZVI, respectively. The study further showed that the HBCD reaction by S-nZVI was likely endothermic, with the optimal solution pH of 5.0, and could be slowed in the presence of Ca2+, Mg2+, NO3, HCO3 and Cl, and by increasing ionic strength, solvent content and initial HBCD concentration, or decreasing the S-nZVI dosage. GC-MS analysis showed that tetrabromocyclododecene and dibromocyclododecadiene were the products. XPS spectra indicated that both Fe(II) and S(-II) on the S-nZVI surface were oxidized during the reaction, suggesting that FeS might act as both catalyst and reactant. The study not only demonstrated the superiority of S-nZVI over other well-known reactive reagents, but also provided insight to the mechanisms of the reaction. (C) 2017 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