4.7 Article

A novel wastes-treat-wastes technology: Role and potential of spent fluid catalytic cracking catalyst assisted ozonation of petrochemical wastewater

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 152, 期 -, 页码 58-65

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.01.022

关键词

Wastes-treat-wastes; Spent catalyst; Petrochemical wastewater; Catalytic ozonation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51209216]
  2. China Scholarship Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Catalytic ozonation is a promising wastewater treatment technology. However, the high cost of the catalyst hinders its application. A novel wastes-treat-wastes technology was developed to reuse spent fluid catalytic cracking catalysts (sFCCc) for the ozonation of petrochemical wastewater in this study. Multivalent vanadium (V4+ and V5+), iron (Fe2+ and Fe3+) and nickel (Ni2+) oxides that are distributed on the surface of sFCCc and poisoned FCC catalysts are the catalytic components for ozonation. The sFCCc assisted catalytic ozonation (sFCCc-O) of nitrobenzene indicated that the sFCCc significantly promoted hydroxyl radical mediated oxidation. The degradation rate constant of nitrobenzene in sFCCc-O (0.0794 min(-1) at 298 K) was approximately doubled in comparison with that in single ozonation (0.0362 min(-1) at 298 K). The sFCCc-O of petrochemical wastewater increased chemical oxygen demand removal efficiency by three-fold relative to single ozonation. The number of oxygen-containing (O-x) polar contaminants in the effluent (253) from sFCCc-O treatment decreased to about 70% of the initial wastewater (353). The increased oxygen/carbon atomic ratio and decreased number of Ox polar contaminants indicated a high degree of degradation. The present study showed the role and potential of sFCCc for catalytic ozonation of petrochemical wastewater, particularly in an advantage of the cost-effectiveness through wastes-treat-wastes. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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