4.1 Article

Effect of solution matrix and pH in Z-nZVI-catalyzed percarbonate system on the generation of reactive oxygen species and degradation of 1,1,1-trichloroethane

期刊

WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY-WATER SUPPLY
卷 17, 期 6, 页码 1568-1578

出版社

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/ws.2017.060

关键词

groundwater remediation; hydroxylamine; nano-scale composite; reactive oxygen species; sodium percarbonate; solution matrix

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41373094, 51208199]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2015M570341]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [22A201514057]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study primarily focuses on evaluating the effects of solution matrix and pH for the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROSs) in a Z-nZVI-catalyzed sodium percarbonate (SPC) system to degrade 1,1,1-trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA) in the absence and presence of a reducing agent (RA), i.e. hydroxylamine. Degradation of 1,1,1-TCA was 49.5% and 95% in the absence and presence of RA. Probe tests confirmed the generation of major hydroxyl radicals (OH center dot) and minor superoxide species (O-2(-center dot)), and scavenger tests verified the key role of OH center dot and less of O-2(-center dot) radicals. Degradation of 1,1,1-TCA decreased significantly in the presence of Cl- and HCO3-, while NO3- and SO42- had negligible effects in the absence of RA. Addition of RA significantly enhanced 1,1,1-TCA degradation by generating more OH center dot and O-2(-center dot) radicals in the presence of anions. Degradation of 1,1,1-TCA increased in the acidic range (1-5), while an inhibitive trend from neutral to basic (7-9) was observed. In contrast, a significant increase in 1,1,1-TCA degradation was observed with the addition of RA at all pH values (1-9). In conclusion, the anions and pH significantly influenced the generation and intensity of ROSs and 1,1,1-TCA was effectively degraded in the Z-nZVI-catalyzed SPC system in the presence of RA.

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

4.1
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