The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effect of Flux (Transmembrane Pressure) and Membrane Properties on Fouling and Rejection of Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Membranes Treating Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Containing Wastewater
Abstract
Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) is an emergent contaminant of substantial environmental concerns. In this study, reverse osmosis (RO) and nanofiltration (NF) membranes were used to remove this toxic and persistent compound from PFOS-containing wastewater. Five RO membranes and three NF membranes were tested at a feed concentration of 10 ppm PFOS over 4 days, and the PFOS rejection and permeate flux performances were systematically investigated. PFOS rejection was well correlated to sodium chloride rejection. The rejection efficiencies for the RO membranes were > 99%, and those for the NF membranes ranged from 90-99%. Improvement in PFOS rejection, together with mild flux reduction (< 16%), was observed at longer filtration time. Such shifts in rejection and flux performance were probably due to the increased PFOS accumulation at longer duration, as shown by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and liquid chromatograph and tandem mass spectrometry results. A fraction of PFOS molecules might be entrapped in the polyamide layer of the composite membranes, which hindered the further passage of both water and other PFOS molecules. In a similar fashion, PFOS rejection and fouling were enhanced for greater initial flux and/or applied pressure, where PFOS accumulation was promoted probably due to increased hydrodynamic permeate drag. Flux reduction was also shown to correlate to membrane roughness, with the rougher membranes tend to experience more flux reduction than the smoother ones.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Global Distribution of Perfluorooctane Sulfonate in Wildlife
Giesy, J. P., & Kannan, K. (2001) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es001834k · Cited by 2,750
Cited by
Rahman, M. F., Peldszus, S., & Anderson, W. B. (2014) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2013.10.045 · Cited by 1,022
Li, F., Duan, J., Tian, S., Ji, H., Zhu, Y., Wei, Z., & Zhao, D. (2020) · Chemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.cej.2019.122506 · Cited by 707
PFAS Molecules: A Major Concern for the Human Health and the Environment
Panieri, E., Baralic, K., Djukic-Cosic, D., Buha Djordjevic, A., & Saso, L. (2022) · Toxics · doi:10.3390/toxics10020044 · Cited by 651
Mani, D., & Kumar, C. (2014) · International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology · doi:10.1007/s13762-013-0299-8 · Cited by 615
Novel treatment technologies for PFAS compounds: A critical review
Kucharzyk, K. H., Darlington, R., Benotti, M., Deeb, R., & Hawley, E. (2017) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.08.016 · Cited by 562
Rayne, S., & Forest, K. (2009) · Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A · doi:10.1080/10934520903139811 · Cited by 475
Review on the occurrence, fate and removal of perfluorinated compounds during wastewater treatment
Arvaniti, O. S., & Stasinakis, A. S. (2015) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.023 · Cited by 422
Crone, B. C., Speth, T. F., Wahman, D. G., Smith, S. J., Abulikemu, G., Kleiner, E. J., & Pressman, J. G. (2019) · Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology · doi:10.1080/10643389.2019.1614848 · Cited by 408
GracePavithra, K., Jaikumar, V., Kumar, P. S., & SundarRajan, P. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.117 · Cited by 361
Boo, C., Wang, Y., Zucker, I., Choo, Y., Osuji, C. O., & Elimelech, M. (2018) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.8b01040 · Cited by 357
Degradation and Removal Methods for Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Water
Merino, N., Qu, Y., Deeb, R. A., Hawley, E. L., Hoffmann, M. R., & Mahendra, S. (2016) · Environmental Engineering Science · doi:10.1089/ees.2016.0233 · Cited by 349
Effect of solution chemistry on the adsorption of perfluorooctane sulfonate onto mineral surfaces
Tang, C. Y., Shiang Fu, Q., Gao, D., Criddle, C. S., & Leckie, J. O. (2010) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2010.01.038 · Cited by 284
Self-citationLu, D., Sha, S., Luo, J., Huang, Z., & Zhang Jackie, X. (2020) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121963 · Cited by 275
Arias Espana, V. A., Mallavarapu, M., & Naidu, R. (2015) · Environmental Technology & Innovation · doi:10.1016/j.eti.2015.06.001 · Cited by 256
Chen, X., Xia, X., Wang, X., Qiao, J., & Chen, H. (2011) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.04.018 · Cited by 247
Cousins, I. T., Vestergren, R., Wang, Z., Scheringer, M., & McLachlan, M. S. (2016) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2016.04.044 · Cited by 225
Flores, C., Ventura, F., Martin-Alonso, J., & Caixach, J. (2013) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.05.026 · Cited by 221
Liu, C., Zhao, X., Faria, A. F., Deliz Quiñones, K. Y., Zhang, C., He, Q., Ma, J., Shen, Y., & Zhi, Y. (2022) · Separation and Purification Technology · doi:10.1016/j.seppur.2022.122161 · Cited by 178
Franke, V., McCleaf, P., Lindegren, K., & Ahrens, L. (2019) · Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology · doi:10.1039/c9ew00286c · Cited by 174
Franke, V., Ullberg, M., McCleaf, P., Wålinder, M., Köhler, S. J., & Ahrens, L. (2021) · ACS ES&T Water · doi:10.1021/acsestwater.0c00141 · Cited by 154
Managing and treating per‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in membrane concentrates
Tow, E. W., Ersan, M. S., Kum, S., Lee, T., Speth, T. F., Owen, C., Bellona, C., Nadagouda, M. N., Mikelonis, A. M., Westerhoff, P., et al. (2021) · AWWA Water Science · doi:10.1002/aws2.1233 · Cited by 146
“…generally above 90% (Appleman et al., 2014; Busch et al., 2010; Flores et al., 2013; Lipp et al., 2010; Quiñones & Snyder, 2009; Steinle-Darling et al., 2010; Steinle-Darling & Reinhard, 2008; Tang et al., 2006; Tang et al., 2007; Thompson et al., 2011; Yan et al., 2015; Zeng et al., 2017).”
BackgroundInfluentialRemediation of water from per-/poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)–Challenges and perspectives
Garg, S., Wang, J., Kumar, P., Mishra, V., Arafat, H., Sharma, R. S., & Dumée, L. F. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jece.2021.105784 · Cited by 139
Jeong, N., Park, S., Mahajan, S., Zhou, J., Blotevogel, J., Li, Y., Tong, T., & Chen, Y. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-55320-9 · Cited by 98
Arslan, M., & Gamal El-Din, M. (2021) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149570 · Cited by 73
Aziz, Z. S., Jazza, S. H., Dageem, H. N., Banoon, S. R., Balboul, B. A., & Abdelzaher, M. A. (2024) · Results in Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2024.102083 · Cited by 70
In situ remediation method for enhanced sorption of perfluoro-alkyl substances onto Ottawa sand
Aly, Y. H., Liu, C., McInnis, D. P., Lyon, B. A., Hatton, J., McCarty, M., Arnold, W. A., Pennell, K. D., & Simcik, M. F. (2018) · Journal of Environmental Engineering · doi:10.1061/(asce)ee.1943-7870.0001418 · Cited by 52
Page, D., Vanderzalm, J., Kumar, A., Cheng, K. Y., Kaksonen, A. H., & Simpson, S. (2019) · Water · doi:10.3390/w11081737 · Cited by 43
Machine Learning Models for PFAS Tracking, Detection and Remediation: A Review
Andraju, N., Curtzwiler, G., Ji, Y., Kozliak, E., & Ranganathan, P. (2023) · 2023 IEEE International Conference on Electro Information Technology (eIT) · doi:10.1109/eit57321.2023.10187291 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Tang, C. Y., Fu, Q. S., Criddle, C. S., & Leckie, J. O.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2007-02-15
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2008-2014
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2085509557
- Cited by
- 418
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
