The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Advanced Reduction Processes: A New Class of Treatment Processes
Open accessAbstract
A new class of treatment processes called advanced reduction processes (ARPs) is proposed. ARPs combine activation methods and reducing agents to form highly reactive reducing radicals that degrade oxidized contaminants. Batch screening experiments were conducted to identify effective ARPs by applying several combinations of activation methods (ultraviolet light, ultrasound, electron beam, and microwaves) and reducing agents (dithionite, sulfite, ferrous iron, and sulfide) to degradation of four target contaminants (perchlorate, nitrate, perfluorooctanoic acid, and 2,4 dichlorophenol) at three pH-levels (2.4, 7.0, and 11.2). These experiments identified the combination of sulfite activated by ultraviolet light produced by a low-pressure mercury vapor lamp (UV-L) as an effective ARP. More detailed kinetic experiments were conducted with nitrate and perchlorate as target compounds, and nitrate was found to degrade more rapidly than perchlorate. Effectiveness of the UV-L/sulfite treatment process improved with increasing pH for both perchlorate and nitrate. We present the theory behind ARPs, identify potential ARPs, demonstrate their effectiveness against a wide range of contaminants, and provide basic experimental evidence in support of the fundamental hypothesis for ARP, namely, that activation methods can be applied to reductants to form reducing radicals that degrade oxidized contaminants. This article provides an introduction to ARPs along with sufficient data to identify potentially effective ARPs and the target compounds these ARPs will be most effective in destroying. Further research will provide a detailed analysis of degradation kinetics and the mechanisms of contaminant destruction in an ARP.
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
Buxton, G. V., Greenstock, C. L., Helman, W. P., & Ross, A. B. (1988) · Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data · doi:10.1063/1.555805 · Cited by 12,332
Cited by
Cui, J., Gao, P., & Deng, Y. (2020) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b05565 · Cited by 742
Sulfite-based advanced oxidation and reduction processes for water treatment
Wu, S., Shen, L., Lin, Y., Yin, K., & Yang, C. (2021) · Chemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.cej.2021.128872 · Cited by 382
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
Physico-Chemical Processes for the Treatment of Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS): A review
Nzeribe, B. N., Crimi, M., Mededovic Thagard, S., & Holsen, T. M. (2019) · Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology · doi:10.1080/10643389.2018.1542916 · Cited by 314
Lu, 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
Metadata
- Authors
- Vellanki, B. P., Batchelor, B., & Abdel-Wahab, A.
- Venue
- Environmental Engineering Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-05
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 264-271
- ISSN
- 1092-8758 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-9018
- OpenAlex
- W1971600558
- Cited by
- 221
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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.