Degradation kinetics of tetracycline by UV/H2O2 process with various light sources
HU Jinbo1,2,3,, LI Mengkai2,4, CAI Hengwen5, YAN Qun1,3,,, LIAN Junfeng1, LI Wentao2, QIANG Zhimin2,3 1.School of Civil and Surveying & Mapping Engineering, Jiangxi University of Science and Technology, Ganzhou 341000, China 2.Key Laboratory of Drinking Water Science and Technology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100085, China 3.Ganzhou Innovation Center for Water Quality Security Technology at Ganjiang River Basin, Jiangxi University of Science and Technology, Ganzhou 341000, China 4.University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China 5.School of Pre-School Education, Yuzhang Normal University, Nanchang 330103, China
Abstract:Light source selection is important for ultraviolet (UV) based advanced oxidation processes (UV-AOPs). Through the mini-fluidic photoreaction system (MFPS), the degradation kinetics of tetracycline (TC) by UV/H2O2 process with three different UV light sources including low pressure UV (LPUV) mercury lamp, medium pressure UV (MPUV) mercury lamp and vacuum UV/UV (VUV/UV) mercury lamp were compared, and a degradation kinetic model was established. The results indicated that the degradation rate constants of TC (0.1 mg·L?1 and 5.0 mg·L?1) by VUV/UV/H2O2 were significantly higher than those by MPUV/H2O2 and LPUV/H2O2. With the increase of initial H2O2 concentration, the degradation rate constants of TC (0.1 mg·L?1 and 5.0 mg·L?1) by LPUV/H2O2 and MPUV/H2O2 increased rapidly. However, the degradation rate constant of low-concentration TC (0.1 mg·L?1) by VUV/UV/H2O2 decreased, and that of high-concentration TC (5.0 mg·L?1) increased. The experimental and modeled results agreed with each other. For the light source selection in practical, the degradation kinetics comparison had the advantages of high accuracy and low cost, and the disadvantages such as the neglect of lamp efficiency and oxidant cost. Therefore, it should also consider the energy consumption comparison results in pilot tests. Key words:mini-fluidic photoreaction system/ tetracycline/ UV light sources/ degradation kinetic model/ UV/H2O2 process.
图4实验测定及模型模拟LPUV/H2O2、MPUV/H2O2(200~300 nm)和VUV/UV/H2O2降解TC的速率常数 Figure4.Measured and modeled degradation rate constants of TC by LPUV/H2O2, MPUV/H2O2 (200~300 nm) and VUV/UV/H2O2
下载: 导出CSV 表2不同溶质在不同波长下的摩尔吸光系数 Table2.Molar absorption coefficients of various solution components at various wavelengths
波长/nm
摩尔吸光系数/(L·(mol·cm)?1)
H2O2
TC
H2O
185
341.00
18 000
0.032
200~204
179.21
12 648
0.005 405
205~209
155.84
11 881
0.004 505
210~214
132.23
11 821
0.003 784
215~219
110.12
11 736
0.003 063
220~224
89.97
10 932
0.002 523
225~229
72.07
9 097
0.001 982
230~234
55.83
7 725
0.001 441
235~239
43.28
7 884
0.001 081
240~244
33.45
8 624
0.000 721
245~249
25.31
9 148
0.000 36
250~254
19.02
9 255
0.000 18
255~259
14.13
9 361
0
260~264
10.47
10 016
0
265~269
7.68
12 390
0
270~274
5.57
12 731
0
275~279
3.99
12 044
0
280~284
2.83
11 197
0
285~289
1.94
10 589
0
290~294
1.32
10 192
0
295~299
0.88
10 044
0
波长/nm
摩尔吸光系数/(L·(mol·cm)?1)
H2O2
TC
H2O
185
341.00
18 000
0.032
200~204
179.21
12 648
0.005 405
205~209
155.84
11 881
0.004 505
210~214
132.23
11 821
0.003 784
215~219
110.12
11 736
0.003 063
220~224
89.97
10 932
0.002 523
225~229
72.07
9 097
0.001 982
230~234
55.83
7 725
0.001 441
235~239
43.28
7 884
0.001 081
240~244
33.45
8 624
0.000 721
245~249
25.31
9 148
0.000 36
250~254
19.02
9 255
0.000 18
255~259
14.13
9 361
0
260~264
10.47
10 016
0
265~269
7.68
12 390
0
270~274
5.57
12 731
0
275~279
3.99
12 044
0
280~284
2.83
11 197
0
285~289
1.94
10 589
0
290~294
1.32
10 192
0
295~299
0.88
10 044
0
下载: 导出CSV 表3不同浓度H2O2下、不同光源UV/H2O2工艺对TC的降解速率 Table3.Degradation rates of TC by UV/H2O2 process with different light sources at different concentrations of H2O2
BAEZA C, KNAPPE D R U. Transformation kinetics of biochemically active compounds in low-pressure UV photolysis and UV /H2O2 advanced oxidation processes[J]. Water Research, 2011, 45(15): 4531-4543. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.05.039
[2]
SNYDER S A, WESTERHOFF P, YOON Y, et al. Pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and endocrine disruptors in water: Implications for the water industry[J]. Environmental Engineering Science, 2003, 20(5): 449-469. doi: 10.1089/109287503768335931
[3]
MARTINEZ J L. Environmental pollution by antibiotics and by antibiotic resistance determinants[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2009, 157(11): 2893-2902. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2009.05.051
[4]
KONG X J, JIANG J, MA J, et al. Degradation of atrazine by UV/chlorine: Efficiency, influencing factors, and products[J]. Water Research, 2016, 90: 15-23. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2015.11.068
[5]
SOLTERMANN F, WIDLER T, CANONICA S, et al. Photolysis of inorganic chloramines and efficiency of trichloramine abatement by UV treatment of swimming pool water[J]. Water Research, 2014, 56: 280-291. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.02.034
[6]
KEEN O S, LINDEN K G. Degradation of antibiotic activity during UV/H2O2 advanced oxidation and photolysis in wastewater effluent[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2013, 47(22): 13020-13030.
[7]
WOLS B A, HOFMAN-CARIS C H M. Modelling micropollutant degradation in UV/H2O2 systems: Lagrangian versus Eulerian method[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2012, 210: 289-297. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2012.08.088
[8]
FANG J Y, FU Y, SHANG C. The roles of reactive species in micropollutant degradation in the UV/free chlorine system[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2014, 48(3): 1859-1868.
[9]
FANG Y, HU C, HU X X, et al. Degradation of selected pharmaceuticals in aqueous solution with UV and UV/H2O2[J]. Water Research, 2009, 43(6): 1766-1774. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2009.01.008
[10]
IMOBERDORF G, MOHSENI M. Kinetic study and modeling of the vacuum-UV photoinduced degradation of 2, 4-D[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2012, 187: 114-122. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2012.01.107
[11]
ZOSCHKE K, BORNICK H, WORCH E. Vacuum-UV radiation at 185 nm in water treatment: A review[J]. Water Research, 2014, 52: 131-145. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.12.034
[12]
LI M K, HAO M Y, YANG L X, et al. Trace organic pollutant removal by VUV/UV/chlorine process: Feasibility investigation for drinking water treatment on a mini-fluidic VUV/UV photoreaction system and a pilot photoreactor[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2018, 52: 7426-7433.
[13]
ROSENFELDT E J, LINDEN K G. The ROH, UV concept to characterize and the model UV/H2O2 process in natural waters[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2007, 41(7): 2548-2553.
[14]
BOLTON J R, MAYOR-SMITH I, LINDEN K G. Rethinking the concepts of fluence (UV Dose) and fluence rate: The importance of photon-based units: A systemic review[J]. Photochemistry and Photobiology, 2015, 91(6): 1252-1262. doi: 10.1111/php.12512
[15]
BOLTON J R, LINDEN K G. Standardization of methods for fluence (UV dose) determination in bench-scale UV experiments[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2003, 129(3): 209-215. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2003)129:3(209)
[16]
LI M K, Li W T, WEN D, et al. Micropollutant degradation by the UV/H2O2 process: Kinetic comparison among various radiation sources[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2019, 53(9): 5241-5248.
[17]
LI M K, LI W T, BOLTON J R, et al. Organic pollutant degradation by VUV/UV/H2O2 process: Inhibition and enhancement roles of H2O2[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2019, 53: 912-918.
[18]
WANG D, BOLTON J R, HOFMANN R. Medium pressure UV combined with chlorine advanced oxidation for trichloroethylene destruction in a model water[J]. Water Research, 2012, 46 (15): 4677-4686.
[19]
WOLS B A, HOFMAN-CARIS C H M. Review of photochemical reaction constants of organic micropollutants required for UV advanced oxidation processes in water[J]. Water Research, 2012, 46(9): 2815-2827. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2012.03.036
[20]
CRITTENDEN J C, HU S, HAND D W, et al. A kinetic model for H2O2/UV process in a completely mixed batch reactor[J]. Water Research, 1999, 33: 2315-2328. doi: 10.1016/S0043-1354(98)00448-5
[21]
ROSS A B, BIELSKI B H J, BUXTON G V, et al. NIST Standard Reference Database 40: NDRL/NIST Solutions Kinetics Database V. 3.0[S]. Gaithersburg, MD, 1998.
[22]
XU M Y, DENG J, CAI A H, et al. Comparison of UVC and UVC/persulfate processes for tetracycline removal in water[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2020, 384: 123320. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.123320
1.School of Civil and Surveying & Mapping Engineering, Jiangxi University of Science and Technology, Ganzhou 341000, China 2.Key Laboratory of Drinking Water Science and Technology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100085, China 3.Ganzhou Innovation Center for Water Quality Security Technology at Ganjiang River Basin, Jiangxi University of Science and Technology, Ganzhou 341000, China 4.University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China 5.School of Pre-School Education, Yuzhang Normal University, Nanchang 330103, China Received Date: 2020-12-21 Accepted Date: 2021-06-28 Available Online: 2021-09-15 Keywords:mini-fluidic photoreaction system/ tetracycline/ UV light sources/ degradation kinetic model/ UV/H2O2 process Abstract:Light source selection is important for ultraviolet (UV) based advanced oxidation processes (UV-AOPs). Through the mini-fluidic photoreaction system (MFPS), the degradation kinetics of tetracycline (TC) by UV/H2O2 process with three different UV light sources including low pressure UV (LPUV) mercury lamp, medium pressure UV (MPUV) mercury lamp and vacuum UV/UV (VUV/UV) mercury lamp were compared, and a degradation kinetic model was established. The results indicated that the degradation rate constants of TC (0.1 mg·L?1 and 5.0 mg·L?1) by VUV/UV/H2O2 were significantly higher than those by MPUV/H2O2 and LPUV/H2O2. With the increase of initial H2O2 concentration, the degradation rate constants of TC (0.1 mg·L?1 and 5.0 mg·L?1) by LPUV/H2O2 and MPUV/H2O2 increased rapidly. However, the degradation rate constant of low-concentration TC (0.1 mg·L?1) by VUV/UV/H2O2 decreased, and that of high-concentration TC (5.0 mg·L?1) increased. The experimental and modeled results agreed with each other. For the light source selection in practical, the degradation kinetics comparison had the advantages of high accuracy and low cost, and the disadvantages such as the neglect of lamp efficiency and oxidant cost. Therefore, it should also consider the energy consumption comparison results in pilot tests.
下载: 
点击查看大图
