English

Highly Efficient Degradation of Sulfamethoxazole Using Activating Peracetic Acid with CoFe₂O₄/CuO

• Zhenzhong Liu ^{1, ,} ,
• Siwen Wan ^2, ,
• Yang Wu ^2, ,
• Boyan Wang ^2, ,
• Hongliang Ji ^1,

• 1.

  School of Resources and Environment, Nanchang University, Nanchang 330031, China

• 2.

  School of Infrastructure Engineering, Nanchang University, Nanchang 330031, China

Corresponding author: Zhenzhong Liu, liuzz79@126.com

• Received Date: 12 November 2022
  Accepted Date: 14 December 2022
  Revised Date: 13 December 2022
  Available Online: 15 May 2023

Abstract: Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs), especially AOPs that use transition metals as catalyst activated oxidants, are extremely effective in removing organic pollutants; they can completely degrade pollutants into CO₂ and H₂O. Thus, they have been widely studied in the field of water treatment. However, owing to the low catalytic efficiency and metal leakage, their applicability is currently limited. In this paper, the composite catalyst CoFe₂O₄/CuO containing spinel cobalt ferrite and copper oxide was successfully prepared by the chemical precipitation and sol-gel methods with two steps. The prepared CoFe₂O₄/CuO was characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and X-ray diffraction (XRD), and its ability to remove sulfamethoxazole (SMX) with different AOPs was evaluated. Characterization results show that CoFe₂O₄ and CuO are well-complexed together, and the catalyst has good crystallinity. The effects of peracetic acid (PAA) concentration, catalyst dosage, common interfering substances (Cl⁻, HCO₃⁻, SO₄²⁻, and HA) in water, and different radical scavengers on SMX removal were also investigated. The results show that CoFe₂O₄/CuO has the characteristics of both CoFe₂O₄ and CuO. Compared with CoFe₂O₄ or CuO alone, CoFe₂O₄/CuO exhibits an excellent activation performance for PAA. Under the optimal reaction conditions (catalyst dosage = 20 mg·L⁻¹, c(PAA) = 200 μmol·L⁻¹, c(SMX) = 10 μmol·L⁻¹), the degradation rate of SMX reaches 92% within 90 s. The existence of Cu⁺/Cu²⁺ electron pairs can convert Co from the high valence to low valence state and accelerate the conversion of Co²⁺/Co³⁺, thereby improving the catalytic performance. An increase in the PAA concentration increases the removal efficiency of SMX; however, too high a concentration lowers removal efficiency. Compared to acidic or alkaline conditions, the CoFe₂O₄/CuO reaction system exhibits a better removal rate of SMX under neutral conditions. The common interfering substances in the environment have different effects on the CoFe₂O₄/CuO reaction system. Cl⁻ promotes the degradation of SMX by producing Cl•, HCO₃⁻ and HA inhibit the removal of SMX because of their quenching effect on free radicals, and SO₄²⁻ has no significant effect on the progress of the reaction. The XPS characterization results before and after the reaction show that the valence state of Co changes, indicating that Co is the main element involved in the activation of PAA. Radical quenching experiments demonstrate that the organic radical (R―O•) plays a dominant role in the removal of SMX. Further, the removal rate of SMX decreases after the catalyst is subjected to 3 recycle; nevertheless, it achieves a relatively rapid degradation of SMX (85% within 10 min).

Key words:
• Spinel cobalt ferrite
•  /  Copper oxide
•  /  Advanced oxidation
•  /  Sulfamethoxazole
•  /  Peracetic acid
•  /  Organic radical

• 1. [1]

     Xie, Y.; Wan, J.; Yan, Z.; Wang, Y.; Xiao, T.; Hou, J.; Chen, H. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 429, 132237. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2021.132237

  2. [2]

     Fu, J.; Feng, L.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, L.; Li, S. Chemosphere 2022, 287, 132094. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132094

  3. [3]

     Zhu, W.; Sun, F.; Goei, R.; Zhou, Y. Appl. Catal. B 2017, 207, 93. doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2017.02.012

  4. [4]

     Nguyen, T.-B.; Huang, C.; Doong, R.-A.; Chen, C.-W.; Dong, C.-D. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 384, 123383. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.123383

  5. [5]

     Wang, X.; Lu, W.; Zhao, Z.; Zhong, H.; Zhu, Z.; Chen, W. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 400, 125872. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2020.125872

  6. [6]

     Kim, J.; Du, P.; Liu, W.; Luo, C.; Zhao, H.; Huang, C.-H. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 5268. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.0c00356

  7. [7]

     Luukkonen, T.; Heyninck, T.; Rämö, J.; Lassi, U. Water Res. 2015, 85, 275. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2015.08.037

  8. [8]

     Henao, L. D.; Turolla, A.; Antonelli, M. Chemosphere 2018, 213, 25. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.09.005

  9. [9]

     Zhou, X.; Wu, H.; Zhang, L.; Liang, B.; Sun, X.; Chen, J. Molecules 2020, 25, 2725. doi: 10.3390/molecules25122725

  10. [10]

      Cai, M.; Sun, P.; Zhang, L.; Huang, C.-H. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 14217. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b04694

  11. [11]

      Chen, S.; Cai, M.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, L.; Feng, L. Water Res. 2019, 150, 153. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2018.11.044

  12. [12]

      Li, W.; Li, Y.; Zhang, D.; Lan, Y.; Guo, J. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 381, 121209. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121209

  13. [13]

      Cruz, D. R.; de Jesus, G. K.; Santos, C. A.; Silva, W. R.; Wisniewski, A., Jr.; Cunha, G. C.; Romão, L. P. Chemosphere 2021, 280, 130675. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130675

  14. [14]

      Yu, J.; Qiu, W.; Xu, H.; Lu, X.; Ma, J.; Lu, D. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 421, 129498. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2021.129498

  15. [15]

      Ding, R.-R.; Li, W.-Q.; He, C.-S.; Wang, Y.-R.; Liu, X.-C.; Zhou, G.-N.; Mu, Y. Appl. Catal. B 2021, 291, 120069. doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2021.120069

  16. [16]

      Hasanvandian, F.; Shokri, A.; Moradi, M.; Kakavandi, B.; Setayesh, S. R. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 423, 127090. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127090

  17. [17]

      熊文慧, 张文超, 俞春培, 沈瑞琪, 程佳, 叶家海, 秦志春. 物理化学学报, 2016, 32, 2093. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201605121Xiong, W.-H.; Zhang, W.-C.; Yu, C.-P.; Shen, R.-Q.; Cheng, J.; Ye, J.-H.; Qin, Z.-C. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2016, 32, 2093. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201605121

  18. [18]

      Ren, Y.; Lin, L.; Ma, J.; Yang, J.; Feng, J.; Fan, Z. Appl. Catal. B 2015, 165, 572. doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2014.10.051

  19. [19]

      Guan, Y.-H.; Ma, J.; Ren, Y.-M.; Liu, Y.-L.; Xiao, J.-Y.; Lin, L.-Q.; Zhang, C. Water Res. 2013, 47, 5431. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.06.023

  20. [20]

      Chen, X.-L.; Li, F.; Zhang, M.; Liu, B.; Chen, H.; Wang, H. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 777, 145794. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145794

  21. [21]

      楚森林, 李欣, Alex W. Robertson, 孙振宇. 物理化学学报, 2021, 37, 2009023. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202009023Chu, S.; Li, X.; W. Robertson, A.; Sun, Z. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2021, 37, 2009023. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202009023

  22. [22]

      Wang, M.; Jin, C.; Kang, J.; Liu, J.; Tang, Y.; Li, Z.; Li, S. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 416, 128118. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2020.128118

  23. [23]

      Kiani, R.; Mirzaei, F.; Ghanbari, F.; Feizi, R.; Mehdipour, F. J. Water Process Eng. 2020, 38, 101623. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101623

  24. [24]

      Zhou, J.-J.; Ji, W.; Xu, L.; Yang, Y.; Wang, W.; Ding, H.; Xu, X.; Wang, W.; Zhang, P.; Hua, Z. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 428, 132123. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2021.132123

  25. [25]

      Yu, R.; Zhao, J.; Zhao, Z.; Cui, F. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 390, 121998. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121998

  26. [26]

      Lin, J.-Y.; Chen, P.-Y.; Kwon, E.; Da Oh, W.; You, S.; Huang, C.-W.; Ghanbari, F.; Wi-Afedzi, T.; Lin, K.-Y. A. J. Water Process Eng. 2021, 40, 101933. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.101933

  27. [27]

      Li, Y.; Zhu, W.; Guo, Q.; Wang, X.; Zhang, L.; Gao, X.; Luo, Y. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 276. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2021.119403

  28. [28]

      Wang, J.; Xiong, B.; Miao, L.; Wang, S.; Xie, P.; Wang, Z.; Ma, J. Appl. Catal. B 2021, 280, 119422. doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2020.119422

  29. [29]

      Zhang, P.; Zhang, X.; Zhao, X.; Jing, G.; Zhou, Z. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 424, 127653. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127653

  30. [30]

      Chen, C.; Liu, L.; Guo, J.; Zhou, L.; Lan, Y. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 361, 1304. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2018.12.156

  31. [31]

      Li, R.; Manoli, K.; Kim, J.; Feng, M.; Huang, C. H.; Sharma, V. K. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 55, 9150. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.0c06676

  32. [32]

      Zhang, L.; Chen, J.; Zheng, T.; Xu, Y.; Liu, T.; Yin, W.; Zhang, Y.; Zhou, X. Water Res. 2022, 229, 119462. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2022.119462

  33. [33]

      Kim, J.; Zhang, T.; Liu, W.; Du, P.; Dobson, J. T.; Huang, C.-H. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 13312. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.9b02991

  34. [34]

      Wu, W.; Tian, D.; Liu, T.; Chen, J.; Huang, T.; Zhou, X.; Zhang, Y. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 394, 124938. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2020.124938

  35. [35]

      Dong, J.; Xu, W.; Liu, S.; Gong, Y.; Yang, T.; Du, L.; Chen, Q.; Tan, X.; Liu, Y. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 430, 132868. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2021.132868

  36. [36]

      Liu, Y.; He, X.; Duan, X.; Fu, Y.; Dionysiou, D. D. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 276, 113. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2015.04.048

  37. [37]

      Hu, J.; Li, T.; Zhang, X.; Ren, H.; Huang, H. Chemosphere 2022, 287, 132261. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132261

  38. [38]

      Wang, L.; Yan, T.; Tang, R.; Ping, Q.; Li, Y.; Wang, J. Water Res. 2021, 205, 117684. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2021.117684

  39. [39]

      Zhang, L.; Fu, Y.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, G.; Zhou, R.; Liu, Y. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 276, 119319. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2021.119319

  40. [40]

      Hu, P.; Long, M. Appl. Catal. B 2016, 181, 103. doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2015.07.024

  41. [41]

      Chen, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, L.; Xie, P.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, A.; Fang, Z.; Ma, J. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018, 353, 18. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.03.050

•