4.7 Article

Removal and transport behavior of trace organic compounds and degradation byproducts in forward osmosis process: Effects of operation conditions and membrane properties

Journal

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
Volume 375, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.122030

Keywords

Advanced oxidation process; Degradation byproduct; Forward osmosis; Trace organic compound

Funding

  1. Korea Ministry of Environment as Global Top Project ((Project(R&D Center for Advanced Technology of wastewater Treatment and Reuse) [2016002210002]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The issue of trace organic compounds (TOrCs) is constantly increasing owing to the requirement of improvements to the quality of life and the development of analytical technologies. To remove the TOrCs in waste water, advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) were introduced owing to their effective degradation of the TOrCs. However, these methods can transform the TOrCs into toxic degradation byproducts (BPs). Forward osmosis (FO) studies were recently conducted for removing the TOrCs in the water treatment process because it is a cost-effective process using the osmotic pressure difference between the feed solution (FS) and the draw solution (DS). However, the studies comparing the original TOrCs and their degradation BPs following removal or adsorption were not conducted in FO membranes. To identify the possibility of an FO process as a post-treatment or alternative process to the AOPs, the removal and adsorption of the original TOrCs and degradation BPs were evaluated under various conditions such as pH (5, 7), draw solutes (NaCl, MgSO4), and membrane properties (cellulose triacetate, polyamide). The original TOrCs (85.5-93.4%) were observed to have a higher rejection rate than the degradation BPs (53.6-68.9%), except for carbamazepine (73.8%) and acridine (85.5%) on the cellulose triacetate (CTA)-based FO membrane.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available