4.8 Article

Comparison of the Effects of Extracellular and Intracellular Organic Matter Extracted From Microcystis aeruginosa on Ultrafiltration Membrane Fouling: Dynamics and Mechanisms

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 48, 期 24, 页码 14549-14557

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es5035365

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51308398, 51278353]
  2. National Water Pollution Control and Treatment Key Technologies RD Program [2012ZX07403-001, 2014ZX07405-003]
  3. Chinese Government Award for Outstanding Self-Financed Students Abroad [ZF2013015018]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Algae organic matter (AOM), including intracellular organic matter (IOM) and extracellular organic matter (EOM), are major membrane foulants in the treatment of algae-polluted water. In this study, the effects of EOM and IOM (at dissolved organic concentrations of 8 mg/L) on the fouling of a poly(ether sulfone) ultrafiltration (UF) membrane were investigated using a dead-end down-flow UF unit. Changes in the membrane pore geometry and the interaction energy between the membrane and foulants were analyzed based on the extended DerjaguinLandauVerweyOverbeek (XDLVO) theory. The data (relative standard deviation within 10%) showed that UF was able to retain 57% and 46% of IOM and EOM respectively, while the corresponding membrane fluxes rapidly reduced to 28% and 33% of their respective initial values after a specific filtration volume of only 3.75 mL/cm(2). The fouling model implied that cake formation was the major mechanism. Specifically, IOM foulant had a much greater free energy of cohesion (-59.08 mJ/m(2)) than EOM foulant (3.2 mJ/m(2)), leading to the formation of a compacted cake layer on the membrane surface. In contrast, small molecules of hydrophobic EOM tended to be adsorbed into the membrane pores, leading to significant reduction of the pore size and membrane flux. Therefore, the overall fouling rates caused by EOM and IOM were comparable when both of the above-mentioned mechanisms were considered.

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