Cited by 158Advanced oxidation water treatmentEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterialsSulfur-Based Synthesis Techniques

Different mechanisms between biochar and activated carbon for the persulfate catalytic degradation of sulfamethoxazole: Roles of radicals in solution or solid phase

Liang, Jun, Xu, Xiaoyun, Qamar Zaman, Waqas, Hu, Xiaofang, Zhao, Ling, Qiu, Hao, Cao, Xinde·2019·Chemical Engineering Journal

Abstract

Biochar as a carbonaceous material alternative to activated carbon (AC) has received increasing application in the catalytic degradation of organic pollutants. However, the different underlying mechanism between biochar and AC for the catalytic degradation is still unclear. In this study, two biochar produced from the pyrolysis of peanut shell at 400 °C (BC400) and 700 °C (BC700) were used to assist persulfate (PS) catalytic degradation of sulfamethoxazole (SMX), a commercial AC was included as a comparison. Results showed that BC700 had a comparable high catalytic degradation performance to AC (88.7% vs 91.2%) but less effective degradation was observed for BC400 (30.4%). Strong sulfate radicals and hydroxyl radials contributed to the higher catalytic abilities of BC700 and AC, as evidenced by Electron Paramagnetic Resonance analysis. Degradation of SMX by BC700 + PS system mainly happened in solution (53.1%) with the relatively complete degradation. High sorption and dominance of radicals in solid phase of AC (84.3%) was responsible for the faster catalytic performance of AC, but incomplete degradation was observed. Density functional theory calculations confirmed that S-N bond adjacent to the S atom in SMX was the susceptible site for radical’s attack. Our findings provide new insight into the different catalytic mechanisms for different carbon materials, which is helpful for the specific carbon materials designed for antibiotics wastewater treatment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cej.2019.121908

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Comparison between activated carbon and biochar pyrolyzed at 700 °C with respect to generation of solid-confined radicals unveiled synergies between defective sites and carbon matrices.

    “The comparison between AC and biochar pyrolyzed at 700 °C with respect to the generation of solid-confined radicals unveiled the synergies between defective sites and carbon matrices.150”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liang, J., Xu, X., Qamar Zaman, W., Hu, X., Zhao, L., Qiu, H., & Cao, X.
Affiliations
Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
Corresponding author
Cao, Xinde
Venue
Chemical Engineering Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-11
Volume
375
Pages
121908
ISSN
1385-8947 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2950851730
Cited by
158
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 4
FWCI
8.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Chemical Engineering Journal (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Major Science and Technology Program for Water Pollution Control and Treatment
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Advanced oxidation water treatment
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Environmental remediation with nanomaterials
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Organic Chemistry › Sulfur-Based Synthesis Techniques
Keywords
biochar, activated carbon, persulfate, sulfamethoxazole, sulfate radicals, hydroxyl radicals, antibiotic wastewater treatment, adsorption, density functional theory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review