4.8 Article Proceedings Paper

Modelling of the operation of raceway pond reactors for micropollutant removal by solar photo-Fenton as a function of photon absorption

期刊

APPLIED CATALYSIS B-ENVIRONMENTAL
卷 178, 期 -, 页码 210-217

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2014.09.015

关键词

Acetamiprid; Thiabendazole; Photon absorption; Kinetic model; Treatment capacity

资金

  1. Junta de Andalucia (Andalusian Regional Government) [P10-RNM-05951]
  2. Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad (Spanish Government) [CTQ2013-46398-R]
  3. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
  4. Ministerio de Educacion, Cultura y Deporte [AP2010-3218]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Raceway ponds reactors (RPRs) are extensive non-concentrating photoreactors which allow large volumes of water to be treated. They consist of channels where water is set in motion by a paddlewheel system. In this work the effect of solar irradiance on RPR operation to remove micropollutants by solar photo-Fenton was studied. A RPR was used at pilot plant scale (up to 360 L) and the pesticides acetamiprid (ACTM) and thiabendazole (TBZ) were used as a model pollutant mixture (100 mu g/L each) in simulated effluent. Averaged UV irradiances ranged from 10 to 30 W/m(2) and three values of iron concentration (1, 5.5 and 10 mg/L) were used. Different liquid depths were also used to evaluate the relationship between the rate of photon absorption and pollutant removal. A model was proposed to predict degradation rate and treatment capacity as a function of the volumetric rate of photon absorption (VRPA). Under low irradiance conditions (10 W/m(2)) the treatment capacity was not sensitive above 10 cm liquid depth, so a low iron concentration should be used (5 mg Fe/L). For high irradiance values (30 W/m(2)), greater liquid depth (20 cm) and iron concentration (10 mg Fe/L) should be used to take full advantage of photon availability. Treatment capacity values of 133 mg/h m(2) can be reached under these conditions. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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