Organic pollutant degradation by UV/peroxydisulfate process: Impacts of UV light source and phosphate buffer

Lou, Fei; Qiang, Zhimin; Zou, Xue; Lv, Jinrong; Li, Mengkai

doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.133387

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently, two different types of UV lights, low-pressure UV (LUV) and vacuum UV (VUV), are used in advanced AOPs. While LUV emitting 254 nm beam showed promising performance for micropollutants degradation, , VUV emits both 254 and 185 nm beams and generates abundant OḢ, − which may result in higher micropollutant degradation efficiency. , Therefore, this study compares the micropollutant removal efficiencies of LUV and VUV. The study also investigated if any treatment synergy exists between the ceramic membrane PMR treatment process and UV light types.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Photocatalytic Membrane Reactor Utilizing Immobile Photocatalytic Active Layer on Membranes for the Removal of Micropollutants

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Treatment of micropollutant-contaminated water using photocatalytic membrane reactors (PMRs) faces certain operational challenges including catalyst agglomeration and loss of reactor efficiency over time. Designing a PMR with a photocatalytic active layer on the membrane surface could be an alternative strategy to improve the reactor efficiency. Therefore, this study determined the optimum PMR design using commercially available membranes with two different catalysts (ZrO 2 and TiO 2 ) in the presence or absence of ultraviolet (UV) light at both high and low fluences for efficient photodegradation of para-chlorobenzoic acid (pCBA) and 15 different organic micropollutants. Comparing the UV types, vacuum UV (VUV) showed 24−36% higher micropollutant degradation than low-pressure UV (LUV). Micropollutant degradation was 20−36% higher in the presence of the membrane than in its absence and similar at both fluences for both UV types. VUV had 28−35 and 14−21% higher pCBA degradation than LUV at high and low fluences, respectively. The high fluence showed 3.6−6.7 and 12.5−24.5% higher pCBA degradation capacity than the low fluence for LUV and VUV, respectively. Comparing the catalyst types, there was a negligible difference in the degradation efficiency between TiO 2 and ZrO 2 . The results indicate a promising pathway for developing a pilot-scale VUV-equipped PMR for treating micropollutant-contaminated water.

show abstract