Improving the degradation of low concentration of microcystin-LR with PEM 2 electrolyzers and photo-electrolyzers
In this work, the performances of two electrochemical cells, a conventional liquid-electrolyte electrolyzer (LEE) and a solid-electrolyte electrolyzer (SEE) were compared for the treatment of two real water matrixes polluted with microcystin-LR at trace concentrations. The first consists of single-c...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha |
| Repositorio: | RUIdeRA. Repositorio Institucional de la UCLM |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ruidera.uclm.es:10578/29140 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10578/29140 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Electroquímica Ingeniería química |
| Sumario: | In this work, the performances of two electrochemical cells, a conventional liquid-electrolyte electrolyzer (LEE) and a solid-electrolyte electrolyzer (SEE) were compared for the treatment of two real water matrixes polluted with microcystin-LR at trace concentrations. The first consists of single-compartment flow cell, while the second consists of membrane-electrode assembly flow cell. Both cells can attain the removal of the microcystin, although the toxin degradation was more efficient in the SEE, for both water matrixes assessed, decreasing the initial concentration by 3-logs and achieving in short treatment times concentrations below the guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) for drinking water. Irradiation of UVC improves results reached by the electrochemical technologies, although in lower extension than initially expected. The great performance of SEE reactor is attributed to a more suitable production of oxidants and a lower operation-dependence with respect to the water matrix conductivity. This cell can remove pollutants also faster than the single photolysis and, in comparing its performance with the other technologies assessed in this work, it is the best choice requiring the less time and energy to meet the WHO standards, without being necessary the coupling with photolysis. |
|---|