Advertisement

Heterogeneous Fenton Oxidation of Caffeine Using Zeolite-Supported Iron Nanoparticles

  • Mehwish Anis
  • Sajjad Haydar
Research Article - Chemistry
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

The current study aimed at exploring the potential of iron-embedded zeolites to serve as heterogeneous Fenton catalyst for the treatment of caffeine. Synthetic zeolites were modified through co-precipitation and subsequent deposition of iron precipitates on the zeolites. Catalyst was characterized through chemical composition, particle size and its distribution, BET specific surface area, FTIR, and XRD techniques. Batch mode studies were carried out, and process parameters including pH, contact time, and iron to hydrogen peroxide ratio (\(\hbox {Fe}^{+2}\):\(\hbox {H}_{2}\hbox {O}_{2})\) were optimized. Response surface methodology was employed for this purpose using Design Expert 10.0 software. \(\hbox {Fe}^{+2}\):\(\hbox {H}_{2}\hbox {O}_{2}\) ratio was found to be the most important parameter affecting the removal of caffeine. Significant interaction between pH and \(\text {Fe}^{+2}\):\(\hbox {H}_{2}\hbox {O}_{2}\) ratio was also observed. More than 80% removal of caffeine was achieved when the pH was in the range of 5.8–7 and \(\text {Fe}^{+2}\):\(\hbox {H}_{2}\hbox {O}_{2}\) ratio in the range of 2.5–3. Catalyst was found stable, and negligible loss of iron under experimental conditions was observed. Moreover, the catalyst could be reused for at least three successive runs of treatment without significant loss in the activity of the catalyst.

Keywords

Response surface methodology Advanced oxidation process Catalyst Design Expert Heterogeneous fenton Nanoparticle 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Funding Information

This research was funded by University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Ellis, J.B.: Assessing sources and impacts of priority PPCP compounds in urban receiving waters. In: 11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Owens, B.: Pharmaceuticals in the environment: a growing problem. https://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/news-and-analysis/features/pharmaceuticals-in-the-environment-agrowing-problem/20067898.article (2015). Accessed 25 Feb 2018
  3. 3.
    Reiner, J.; Berset, J.; Kannan, K.: Mass flow of polycyclic musks in two wastewater treatment plants. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 52(4), 451–457 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sui, Q.; Cao, X.; Lu, S.; Zhao, W.; Qiu, Z.; Yu, G.: Occurrence, sources and fate of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in the groundwater: a review. Emerg. Contam. 1(1), 14–24 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang, J.; Wang, S.: Removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) from wastewater: a review. J. Environ. Manag. 182, 620–640 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bolong, N.; Ismail, A.; Salim, M.R.; Matsuura, T.: A review of the effects of emerging contaminants in wastewater and options for their removal. Desalination 239(1–3), 229–246 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boxall, A.B.; Rudd, M.A.; Brooks, B.W.; Caldwell, D.J.; Choi, K.; Hickmann, S.; Innes, E.; Ostapyk, K.; Staveley, J.P.; Verslycke, T.: Pharmaceuticals and personal care products in the environment: what are the big questions? Environ. Health Perspect. 120(9), 1221 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brooks, B.W.; Huggett, D.B.; Boxall, A.: Pharmaceuticals and personal care products: research needs for the next decade. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 28(12), 2469–2472 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Daughton, C.G.: Pharmaceuticals and the environment (PiE): evolution and impact of the published literature revealed by bibliometric analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 562, 391–426 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kümmerer, K.: Antibiotics in the aquatic environment—a review-part I. Chemosphere 75(4), 417–434 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murdoch, K.: Pharmaceutical pollution in the environment: issues for Australia, New Zealand and Pacific island countries. Natl. Toxic Netw. 22, 1–36 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Buerge, I.J.; Poiger, T.; Müller, M.D.; Buser, H.-R.: Caffeine, an anthropogenic marker for wastewater contamination of surface waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37(4), 691–700 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Edwards, Q.A.; Kulikov, S.M.; Garner-O’Neale, L.D.: Caffeine in surface and wastewaters in Barbados, West Indies. SpringerPlus 4(1), 57 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Knee, K.L.; Gossett, R.; Boehm, A.B.; Paytan, A.: Caffeine and agricultural pesticide concentrations in surface water and groundwater on the north shore of Kauai (Hawaii, USA). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60(8), 1376–1382 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maryam Saad, D.F.S.; Khan, W.; Ijaz, A.; Qasim, M.; Hafeez, A.; Khan, A.; Baig, S.A.; Ahmed, N.: Occurrence of selected pesticides and PCPs in surface water receiving untreated discharge in Pakistan. J. Environ. Anal. Toxicol. 7(5), 500 (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bruton, T.; Alboloushi, A.; de la Garza, B.; Kim, B.-O.; Halden, R.U.: Fate of caffeine in the environment and ecotoxicological considerations. In: Contaminants of Emerging Concern in the Environment: Ecological and Human Health Considerations, vol. 1048. ACS Symposium Series, vol. 1048, pp. 257–273. American Chemical Society (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Halden, R.U. (ed.): Contaminants of Emerging Concern in the Environment: Ecological and Human Health Considerations. American Chemical Society, Washington (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Potera, C.: Caffeine in wastewater is a tracer for human fecal contamination. Environ. Health Perspect. 120(3), a108 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stamatis, N.K.; Konstantinou, I.K.: Occurrence and removal of emerging pharmaceutical, personal care compounds and caffeine tracer in municipal sewage treatment plant in Western Greece. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B 48(9), 800–813 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sui, Q.; Huang, J.; Deng, S.; Yu, G.; Fan, Q.: Occurrence and removal of pharmaceuticals, caffeine and DEET in wastewater treatment plants of Beijing, China. Water Res. 44(2), 417–426 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    del Rey, Z.R.; Granek, E.F.; Sylvester, S.: Occurrence and concentration of caffeine in Oregon coastal waters. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 64(7), 1417–1424 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Martín, J.; Camacho-Muñoz, D.; Santos, J.; Aparicio, I.; Alonso, E.: Occurrence of pharmaceutical compounds in wastewater and sludge from wastewater treatment plants: removal and ecotoxicological impact of wastewater discharges and sludge disposal. J. Hazard. Mater. 239, 40–47 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Al Qarni, H.; Collier, P.; O’Keeffe, J.; Akunna, J.: Investigating the removal of some pharmaceutical compounds in hospital wastewater treatment plants operating in Saudi Arabia. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23(13), 13003–13014 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhou, H.; Wu, C.; Huang, X.; Gao, M.; Wen, X.; Tsuno, H.; Tanaka, H.: Occurrence of selected pharmaceuticals and caffeine in sewage treatment plants and receiving rivers in Beijing, China. Water Environ. Res. 82(11), 2239–2248 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moore, M.T.; Greenway, S.L.; Farris, J.L.; Guerra, B.: Assessing caffeine as an emerging environmental concern using conventional approaches. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 54(1), 31–35 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dafouz, R.; Cáceres, N.; Rodríguez-Gil, J.L.; Mastroianni, N.; de Alda, M.L.; Barceló, D.; de Miguel, Á.G.; Valcárcel, Y.: Does the presence of caffeine in the marine environment represent an environmental risk? A regional and global study. Sci. Total Environ. 615, 632–642 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rey, Z.R.: Occurence and concentrations of caffeine in saewater from the Oregon coast and potential effects on dominant Mussel, Mytilus calfornians. M.Sc. Thesis. Portland State University (2010)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ladu, F.; Mwaffo, V.; Li, J.; Macrì, S.; Porfiri, M.: Acute caffeine administration affects zebrafish response to a robotic stimulus. Behav. Brain Res. 289, 48–54 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Barone, R.; Nanna, M.P.; Patullo, C.: Effects of exposure to caffeine on the swimming behavior of the fathead minnow. Whalen Symposium Abstract (2017)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Al-Farsi, R.S.; Ahmed, M.; Al-Busaidi, A.; Choudri, B.: Translocation of pharmaceuticals and personal care products. (PPCPs) into plant tissues: a review. Emerg. Contam. 3(4), 132–137 (2018)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wu, X.; Dodgen, L.K.; Conkle, J.L.; Gan, J.: Plant uptake of pharmaceutical and personal care products from recycled water and biosolids: a review. Sci. Total Environ. 536, 655–666 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang, J.; Gardinali, P.R.: Uptake and depuration of pharmaceuticals in reclaimed water by mosquito fish (Gambusia holbrooki): a worst-case, multiple-exposure scenario. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 32(8), 1752–1758 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Grandclement, C.; Seyssiecq, I.; Piram, A.; Wong-Wah-Chung, P.; Vanot, G.; Tiliacos, N.; Roche, N.; Doumenq, P.: From the conventional biological wastewater treatment to hybrid processes, the evaluation of organic micropollutant removal: a review. Water Res. 111, 297–317 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roth, O.: Evaluating the effectiveness of three Utah wastewater treatment facilities in removing pharmaceuticals and personal care products. Msc Thesis, Utah State University (2012)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Commission, E.: Directive 2013/39/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 August 2013 amending Directives 2000/60/EC and 2008/105/EC as regards priority substances in the field of water policy. Off. J. Eur. Union 226, 1–17 (2013)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ebrahiem, E.E.; Al-Maghrabi, M.N.; Mobarki, A.R.: Removal of organic pollutants from industrial wastewater by applying photo-Fenton oxidation technology. Arab. J. Chem. 10, S1674–S1679 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Oliveira, T.D.D.; Martini, W.S.; Santos, M.D.; Matos, M.A.C.; Rocha, L.L.D.: Caffeine oxidation in water by Fenton and Fenton-like processes: effects of inorganic anions and ecotoxicological evaluation on aquatic organisms. J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 26(1), 178–184 (2015)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Meng, X.; Yan, S.; Wu, W.; Zheng, G.; Zhou, L.: Heterogeneous Fenton-like degradation of phenanthrene catalyzed by schwertmannite biosynthesized using Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans. RSC Adv. 7(35), 21638–21648 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Trovó, A.G.; Silva, T.F.; Gomes, O.; Machado, A.E.; Neto, W.B.; Muller, P.S.; Daniel, D.: Degradation of caffeine by photo-Fenton process: optimization of treatment conditions using experimental design. Chemosphere 90(2), 170–175 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Klamerth, N.; Malato, S.; Maldonado, M.; Aguera, A.; Fernández-Alba, A.: Application of photo-fenton as a tertiary treatment of emerging contaminants in municipal wastewater. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44(5), 1792–1798 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Trovó, A.G.; Silva, T.F.; Gomes Jr., O.; Machado, A.E.; Neto, W.B.; Muller Jr., P.S.; Daniel, D.: Degradation of caffeine by photo-Fenton process: optimization of treatment conditions using experimental design. Chemosphere 90(2), 170–175 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yamal-Turbay, E.; Graells, Ms; Pérez-Moya, M.: Systematic assessment of the influence of hydrogen peroxide dosage on caffeine degradation by the photo-Fenton process. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51(13), 4770–4778 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rodríguez-Gil, J.L.; Catalá, M.; Alonso, S.G.; Maroto, R.R.; Valcárcel, Y.; Segura, Y.; Molina, R.; Melero, J.A.; Martínez, F.: Heterogeneous photo-Fenton treatment for the reduction of pharmaceutical contamination in Madrid rivers and ecotoxicological evaluation by a miniaturized fern spores bioassay. Chemosphere 80(4), 381–388 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ganzenko, O.; Oturan, N.; Huguenot, D.; Van Hullebusch, E.D.; Esposito, G.; Oturan, M.A.: Removal of psychoactive pharmaceutical caffeine from water by electro-Fenton process using BDD anode: effects of operating parameters on removal efficiency. Sep. Purif. Technol. 156, 987–995 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Klavarioti, M.; Mantzavinos, D.; Kassinos, D.: Removal of residual pharmaceuticals from aqueous systems by advanced oxidation processes. Environ. Int. 35(2), 402–417 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bernabeu, A.; Vercher, R.; Santos-Juanes, L.; Simón, P.; Lardín, C.; Martínez, M.; Vicente, J.; González, R.; Llosá, C.; Arques, A.: Solar photocatalysis as a tertiary treatment to remove emerging pollutants from wastewater treatment plant effluents. Catal. Today 161(1), 235–240 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Gonzalez-Olmos, R.; Kopinke, F.-D.; Mackenzie, K.; Georgi, A.: Hydrophobic Fe-zeolites for removal of MTBE from water by combination of adsorption and oxidation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47(5), 2353–2360 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ünnü, B.A.; Gündüz, G.; Dükkancı, M.: Heterogeneous Fenton-like oxidation of crystal violet using an iron loaded ZSM-5 zeolite. Desalin. Water Treat. 57(25), 11835–11849 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kim, K.S.; Park, J.O.; Nam, S.C.: Synthesis of iron-loaded zeolites for removal of ammonium and phosphate from aqueous solutions. Environ. Eng. Res. 18(4), 267–276 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Qi, F.; Chu, W.; Xu, B.: Modeling the heterogeneous peroxymonosulfate/Co-MCM41 process for the degradation of caffeine and the study of influence of cobalt sources. Chem. Eng. J. 235, 10–18 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Guo, Y.; Shen, T.; Wang, C.; Sun, J.; Wang, X.: Rapid removal of caffeine in aqueous solutions by peroxymonosulfate oxidant activated with cobalt ion. Water Air Soil Pollut. 72(3), 478–483 (2015)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ranga, S.; Jaimini, M.; Sharma, S.K.; Chauhan, B.S.; Kumar, A.: A review on design of experiments (DOE). Int. J. Pharm. Chem. Sci. 3(1), 216–224 (2014)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tamura, H.; Goto, K.; Yotsuyanagi, T.; Nagayama, M.: Spectrophotometric determination of iron (II) with 1, 10-phenanthroline in the presence of large amounts of iron (III). Talanta 21(4), 314–318 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Jacqueline George, S.; Gandhimathi, R.; Nidheesh, P.V.; Ramesh, S.T.: Optimization of salicylic acid removal by electro Fenton process in a continuous stirred tank reactor using response surface methodology. Desalin. Water Treat. 57(9), 4234–4244 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Louhichi, B.; Bensalah, N.: Comparative study of the treatment of printing ink wastewater by conductive-diamond electrochemical oxidation, Fenton process, and ozonation. Environ. Res. 24(1), 49–58 (2014)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Canizares, P.; Paz, R.; Sáez, C.; Rodrigo, M.A.: Costs of the electrochemical oxidation of wastewaters: a comparison with ozonation and Fenton oxidation processes. J. Environ. Manag. 90(1), 410–420 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Environmental Engineering and Research (IEER)University of Engineering and Technology (UET)LahorePakistan
  2. 2.IEERUETLahorePakistan

Personalised recommendations