4.5 Article

Catalytic studies for the abatement of emerging contaminants by ozonation

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jctb.4711

关键词

ozonation; emerging contaminants; diclofenac; sulfamethoxazole; heterogeneous catalysts; wastewater

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia [BPD/72200/2010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUNDPharmaceutical industry generates a large amount of liquid effluents rich in toxic compounds that reach natural water streams, if improperly degraded, being a threat for ecosystems. In this context, ozonation appears as an interesting alternative to conventional treatments. This work aims to study the effect of this technology aided by two ceramic catalysts (the laboratory Mn-Ce-O and the commercial N-150) on the degradation of a mixture of two contaminants: sulfamethoxazole and diclofenac. RESULTS: The presence of the catalysts had no significant impact on pharmaceuticals removal when compared with single ozonation. However, both materials increased the amount of COD removed per mg of ozone applied (0.10 mgCOD(removed) mg(-1)O(3) and 0.067 mgCOD(removed) mg(-1)O(3) for catalytic and single ozonation, respectively). The performance of Mn-Ce-O was very dependent upon the solution pH whereas no significant pH impact was detected for N-150. The generalized kinetic model (GKM) was able to satisfactorily describe the lumped kinetic mechanism concerning COD abatement. Moreover, no differences in the degradation results were observed for the Mn-Ce-O system when comparing two types of waters (ultrapure and natural) used to dissolve the pharmaceutical compounds. Importantly, the presence of the solid catalyst improved ozone usage and reduced the effluents' toxicity. CONCLUSIONAlthough work has been published regarding the removal of single emerging contaminants, the analysis of mixtures is not so frequent. The use of Mn-Ce-O truly enhances COD degradation revealing its potential as heterogeneous catalytic material to improve ozone action on pollutants. (c) 2015 Society of Chemical Industry

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

4.5
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