4.7 Article

Towards wastewater treatment: Photo-assisted electrochemical degradation of 2-nitrophenol and orange II dye at a tungsten trioxide exfoliated graphite composite electrode

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 317, 期 -, 页码 290-301

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2017.02.084

关键词

Photo-assisted; Electrochemical; Tungsten trioxide; Exfoliated graphite; Electrode

资金

  1. Centre for Nanomaterials Science Research, University of Johannesburg (UJ)
  2. Faculty of Science, UJ
  3. National Research Foundation of South Africa (CPRR) [98887]
  4. Water Research Commission of South Africa [K5/2567]
  5. Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
  6. L'Oreal-UNESCO For Women in Science

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The degradation of organics in water treatment by electrochemical and photo-assisted electrochemical processes was carried out using a photoanode consisting of tungsten trioxide (WO3) and exfoliated graphite (EG). The WO3-EG nanocomposite was characterised using voltammetry, X-ray diffractometry, Raman and FTIR spectroscopy, and scanning electron microscopy connected to energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry. The applicability of the WO3-EG as photoanode material was investigated by the degradation of 2-nitrophenol and orange II dye as model organic pollutants in a 0.1 M Na2SO4 solution, using a 10 mA cm(-2) current density. The removal efficiencies and the extent of mineralisation of the dye and 2-nitrophenol were monitored using a UV-Visible spectrophotometer and a TOC analyser respectively. The results showed that the WO3-EG nanocomposite electrode gave a higher removal efficiency (82% for 2-nitrophenol and 95% for orange II dye) and a higher degree of mineralisation (69% for 2-nitrophenol and 67% for orange H dye) in comparison to the EG electrode. Furthermore, efforts were made to evaluate the degradation intermediates which indicated the formation of carboxylic acids that were further degraded by hydroxyl radicals. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
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