UV/SO32− based advanced reduction processes of aqueous contaminants: Current status and prospects

Yang, Lie; He, Liuyang; Xue, Jianming; Ma, Yongfei; Shi, Yue; Wu, Li; Zhang, Zulin

doi:10.1016/j.cej.2020.125412

Cited by 68 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This regeneration condition was adopted based on prior literature studies on commonly examined regenerating agents and optimized anionic PFAS recovery protocols on ion exchange resins. , Moreover, salts such as Na 2 SO 3 were selected as they have been previously reported to aid the degradation of PFAS in aqueous matrices during ultraviolet (UV) treatment (see details in section S.24). − We verified that the strongly acidic and basic conditions would not cause hydrolytic transformation of zwitterionic PFAS; our results indicate suitable recoveries of FTAB and FTB in 0.1 N HCl or NaOH compared to the acetonitrile reference (Figure S.22). , Note that for certain IX resins, the efficiency of regeneration for PFAS have been found to be high, especially when salts such as chlorides are coupled with organic solvents such as methanol. , However, given the challenge associated with the storage and management of organic solvents contaminated with PFAS, organic solvents are considered unsuitable as regenerants for water treatment applications .…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 62%

Removal of Zwitterionic PFAS by MXenes: Comparisons with Anionic, Nonionic, and PFAS-Specific Resins

Dixit

Munoz

Mirzaei

et al. 2022

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zwitterionic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances are increasingly detected in aquatic environments. The magnitude of their concentration and increased frequency of detection worldwide raise questions on their presence in drinking water and associated health risk. Scientific knowledge on the identification of treatment technologies to effectively capture such zwitterionic PFAS from contaminated water sources remains largely unknown. In this study, we investigated the application of anionic organic scavenger ion exchange (IX) resins (A860), nonionic IX resins (XAD 4 and XAD 7), PFAS-specific resins (A694 and A592), and Ti3C2 MXenes (novel two-dimensional metal carbides) for the removal of select fluorotelomer zwitterionic PFAS from natural waters. The cumulative removal of zwitterionic PFAS at pH ∼ 7 follows the order: Ti3C2 MXenes > A694 > A592 > A860 > XAD 4 ∼ XAD 7. Ti3C2 MXenes were able to capture >75% of the total influent zwitterionic PFAS and the performance remained consistent in natural and synthetic water. Ti3C2 MXenes also exhibited efficient regeneration (>90% recovery) with 0.4 M Na2SO3 solution, while the regeneration efficacy of other IX resins generally remained below 20%. Treatment with ∼180 J/cm2 UV dosage in the 0.4 M Na2SO3 regenerant brine solution yielded >99.9% reduction in the zwitterionic PFAS concentration indicating that UV–sulfite systems exhibit promising potential for the treatment of zwitterionic PFAS concentrates.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 62%

Removal of Zwitterionic PFAS by MXenes: Comparisons with Anionic, Nonionic, and PFAS-Specific Resins

Dixit

Munoz

Mirzaei

et al. 2022

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main difference between both processes is the nature of the produced reactive species: SR-AOPs produce highly oxidizing reactive species (e.g., •SO4 -(mainly) and •OH), whereas ARPs rely on the production of highly reducing species (•SO3 -, •eaq -,•H, •SO2and HS* -) (Wacławek et al, 2017;Yu et al, 2018), leading to a degradation of the target contaminant via an oxidative or reductive pathway, respectively. Furthermore, ARPs are specifically suitable for the treatment of halogenated organics (which are less prone to oxidation), efficiently breaking the carbon-halogen bond by introducing reactive reducing species (Li et al, 2012;Yang et al, 2020). SR-AOPs in general, however, are found to be suitable to degrade a myriad of molecules, because they combine the selective nature of •SO4 -(reaction mainly through electron transfer) and the non-selective nature of •OH (various reaction routes with equal preference) (Ghanbari and Moradi, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Degradation of ciprofloxacin using UV-based advanced removal processes: Comparison of persulfate-based advanced oxidation and sulfite-based advanced reduction processes

Milh

Cabooter

et al. 2021

Science of The Total Environment

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, the degradation of ciprofloxacin (CIP) in wastewater was investigated using UVbased sulfate radical advanced oxidation processes (SR-AOP) and UV-based advanced reduction processes (ARP). More specifically, a comparison of the UV-based persulfate advanced oxidation process (the UV/PS process) and the UV-based sulfite advanced reduction process (the UV/sulfite process) was made. As for the UV-based SR-AOPs, the UV/PS process was much more efficient than the UV-based peroxymonosulfate advanced oxidation process (the UV/PMS process), with pseudo first order reaction rate constants (kobs) of 0.752 and 0.145 min -1 , respectively. For the UV-based ARPs, the UV/sulfite process was the most efficient, compared to the UV/sulfide and the UV/dithionite process (kobs of 0.269, 0.0157 and 0.0329 min -1 , respectively). The optimal process parameters for both the UV/PS and the UV/sulfite process were determined and the contribution of the produced reactive species were identified.For the UV/PS process, maximal CIP degradation was found at pH 8, and both •OH and •SO4were responsible for CIP degradation. For the UV/sulfite process, •H and •eaqwere responsible for CIP degradation, with •eaqbeing the predominant radical at pH 8.5. Although CIP degradation was much faster for the UV/PS process, the UV/sulfite process was determined to be much more efficient in the defluorination of CIP.

show abstract

“…41 The units in eq 2. 4 are consistent because the conversion from mmol to mol and cm 3 to L cancel each other. 41 Integrating eq 2.1 results in a complete expression (eq 2.5), which can be employed to model the change in [TC] as a function of time.…”

Section: Transformation Of a Target Contaminant By Hydrated Electronsmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Ultraviolet-based advanced reduction processes (UV-ARP) have received significant attention in recent years for the treatment of several classes of recalcitrant chemical contaminants in water. − Advanced reduction processes are based on production of highly reducing hydrated electrons (e aq – , Figure ), which exhibit fast bimolecular reaction rate constants with inorganic and organic compounds . In UV-ARP, e aq – are produced by the illumination of e aq – sensitizers with UV lamps.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical Review of UV-Advanced Reduction Processes for the Treatment of Chemical Contaminants in Water

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

UV-advanced reduction processes (UV-ARP) are an advanced water treatment technology characterized by the reductive transformation of chemical contaminants. Contaminant abatement in UV-ARP is most often accomplished through reaction with hydrated electrons (e aq − ) produced from UV photolysis of chemical sensitizers (e.g., sulfite). In this Review, we evaluate the photochemical kinetics, substrate scope, and optimization of UV-ARP. We find that quantities typically reported in photochemical studies of natural and engineered systems are under-reported in the UV-ARP literature, especially the formation rates, scavenging capacities, and concentrations of key reactive species like e aq − . The absence of these quantities has made it difficult to fully evaluate the impact of operating conditions and the role of water matrix components on the efficiencies of UV-ARP. The UV-ARP substrate scope is weighted heavily toward contaminant classes that are resistant to degradation by advanced oxidation processes, like oxyanions and per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Some studies have sought to optimize the UV-ARP treatment of these contaminants; however, a thorough evaluation of the impact of water matrix components like dissolved organic matter on these optimization strategies is needed. Overall, the data compilation, analysis, and research recommendations provided in this Review will assist the UV-ARP research community in future efforts toward optimizing UV-ARP systems, modeling the e aq − -based chemical transformation kinetics, and developing new UV-ARP systems.

show abstract

UV/SO32− based advanced reduction processes of aqueous contaminants: Current status and prospects

Cited by 68 publications

References 75 publications

Removal of Zwitterionic PFAS by MXenes: Comparisons with Anionic, Nonionic, and PFAS-Specific Resins

Removal of Zwitterionic PFAS by MXenes: Comparisons with Anionic, Nonionic, and PFAS-Specific Resins

Degradation of ciprofloxacin using UV-based advanced removal processes: Comparison of persulfate-based advanced oxidation and sulfite-based advanced reduction processes

Critical Review of UV-Advanced Reduction Processes for the Treatment of Chemical Contaminants in Water

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About