4.7 Article

Performance of nanoscale zero-valent iron in nitrate reduction from water using a laboratory-scale continuous-flow system

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 197, 期 -, 页码 502-512

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.01.084

关键词

Nanoscale zero-valent iron; Laboratory-scale application; Continuous-flow system; Nitrate removal; Copper salt addition; River water

资金

  1. Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanoscale zero-valent iron (nZVI) is a versatile treatment reagent that should be utilized in an effective application for nitrate remediation in water. For this purpose, a laboratory-scale continuous-flow system (LSCFS) was developed to evaluate nZVI performance in removal of nitrate in different contaminated water bodies. The equipment design (reactor, settler, and polisher) and operational parameters of the LSCFS were determined based on nZVI characterization and nitrate reduction kinetics. Ten experimental runs were conducted at different dosages (6, 10 and 20 g) of nZVI-based reagents (nZVI, bimetallic nZVI-Cu, CuCl2-added nZVI). Effluent concentrations of nitrogen and iron compounds were measured, and pH and ORP values were monitored. The major role exhibited by the recirculation process of unreacted nZVI from the settler to the reactor succeeded in achieving overall nitrate removal efficiency (RE) of >90%. The similar performance of both nZVI and copper-ions-modified nZVI in contaminated distilled water was an indication of LSCFS reliability in completely utilizing iron nanoparticles. In case of treating contaminated river water and simulated groundwater, the nitrate reduction process was sensitive towards the presence of interfering substances that dropped the overall RE drastically. However, the addition of copper ions during the treatment counteracted the retardation effect and greatly enhanced the nitrate RE. (C) 2018 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

4.7
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