Next Article in Journal
Field and Modeling Study on Saving Mineral Fertilizers, Increasing Farm Income and Improving Soil Fertility Using Bio-Irrigation with Drainage Water from Fish Farms
Next Article in Special Issue
Oxidation of Selected Trace Organic Compounds through the Combination of Inline Electro-Chlorination with UV Radiation (UV/ECl2) as Alternative AOP for Decentralized Drinking Water Treatment
Previous Article in Journal
Uptake and Effects of Cylindrospermopsin: Biochemical, Physiological and Biometric Responses in The Submerged Macrophyte Egeria densa Planch
Previous Article in Special Issue
Heterogeneous Fenton-Like Catalytic Degradation of 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid by Nano-Scale Zero-Valent Iron Assembled on Magnetite Nanoparticles
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Degradation of Ketamine and Methamphetamine by the UV/H2O2 System: Kinetics, Mechanisms and Comparison

1
Center for Environmental Health Risk Assessment and Research, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China
2
School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Submission received: 31 August 2020 / Revised: 21 October 2020 / Accepted: 22 October 2020 / Published: 26 October 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Oxidation Processes for Water and Wastewater Treatment)

Abstract

:
The illegal use and low biodegradability of psychoactive substances has led to their introduction to the natural water environment, causing potential harm to ecosystems and human health. This paper compared the reaction kinetics and degradation mechanisms of ketamine (KET) and methamphetamine (METH) by UV/H2O2. Results indicated that the degradation of KET and METH using UV or H2O2 alone was negligible. UV/H2O2 had a strong synergizing effect, which could effectively remove 99% of KET and METH (100 μg/L) within 120 and 60 min, respectively. Their degradation was fully consistent with pseudo-first-order reaction kinetics (R2 > 0.99). Based on competition kinetics, the rate constants of the hydroxyl radical with KET and METH were calculated to be 4.43 × 109 and 7.91 × 109 M−1·s−1, respectively. The apparent rate constants of KET and METH increased respectively from 0.001 to 0.027 and 0.049 min−1 with the initial H2O2 dosage ranging from 0 to 1000 μM at pH 7. Their degradation was significantly inhibited by HCO3, Cl, NO3 and humic acid, with Cl having relatively little effect on the degradation of KET. Ultraperformance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry was used to identify the reaction intermediates, based on which the possible degradation pathways were proposed. These promising results clearly demonstrated the potential of the UV/H2O2 process for the effective removal of KET and METH from contaminated wastewater.

1. Introduction

Illicit drugs are nonprescribed or psychostimulant substances which cannot be completely removed by conventional wastewater treatment, resulting in their widespread occurrence in aquatic environments [1,2]. Ketamine (KET) and methamphetamine (METH) were detected most frequently, with concentration levels up to 275 ng/L for KET and 239 ng/L for METH, in surface waters in China [3]. METH removal at most wastewater treatment plants was more than 80%, while the elimination of KET was less than 50% or even negative [4]. It was confirmed that chronic environmental concentrations of METH can lead to health issues in aquatic organisms [5]. Liao et al. [6] also reported that blood circulation and incubation time in medaka fish embryos could be significantly delayed at environmental concentration levels (0.004–40 μM) of KET and METH, which altered the swimming behavior of medaka fish larvae. Thus, there is an urgent need to explore new, efficient methods for eliminating these emerging contaminants in water.
Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) have been employed to destroy illicit drugs due to their high efficiency and lower environmental impact [7,8]. The UV/H2O2 process is one of the AOPs and generates the strong, oxidizing hydroxyl radical (OH, E0 = 2.72 V), which attacks the organic compounds with rate constants ranging from 108 to 1010 M−1 s−1 [9]. Benzoylecgonine (BE), a metabolite of cocaine, was effectively removed by UV/H2O2 from different matrices [10]. The degradation of KET and METH was investigated using various AOPs, but no available report, so far, has addressed OH assisted by UV/H2O2 treatment. After 3 min, 100 μg/L of METH that had been added to deionized water was completely eliminated by TiO2 photocatalysis under UV365nm irradiation [11]. Wei et al. [12] studied the synthesis of a novel sonocatalyst Er3+:YAlO3/Nb2O5 and its application for METH degradation. Gu et al. [13] observed that complete removal of KET was achieved by UV/persulfate, and possible transformation pathways were proposed.
To the best of our knowledge, there is little information about the theoretical calculation of the reactivity of KET and METH by radical attack using the UV/H2O2 process. Water constituents in actual wastewater could affect the degradation efficacy; therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the degradation of KET and METH using the UV/H2O2 system is needed. The aim of this study was to investigate the degradation kinetics and mechanisms of KET and METH during the UV/H2O2 process. The influence of various parameters on KET and METH removal was evaluated, including initial H2O2 dosage, pH and water background components. The degradation products were analyzed by ultraperformance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS), and possible transformation paths were proposed.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

The KET and METH were obtained from Cerilliant Corporation (Round Rock, TX); detailed information is listed in Table 1. HPLC grade acetonitrile (ACN) and methanol (MeOH) were purchased from Fisher Scientific (Poole, UK). Formic acid (FA, ≥98%) and benzoic acid (BA) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Bellefonte, USA). Analytical grade H2O2 (30%, v/v), NaHCO3 (≥99.7%), NaCl (≥99.0%), NaNO3 (≥99.5%), NaOH (≥99.5%), humic acid (HA) and H2SO4 (≥98%) were obtained from Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd. (Beijing, China). All reaction solutions were configured with Milli-Q water produced by an ultrapure water system (Millipore, MA, USA).

2.2. Experimental Section

The experiments were operated in the quartz tubes (25 mm in diameter and 175 mm in length), which were placed in a photochemical reactor (Figure 1, XPA-7, Xujiang Machinery Factory, Nanjing, China). A low-pressure mercury lamp (11 W, emission at 254 nm, Philips Co., Zhuhai, China) was placed in the quartz sleeve. The UV lamp was preheated for 30 min to ensure irradiation stability. The UV fluence rate of 0.1 mW cm−2 was determined using three different methods [14]. The newly configured KET/METH and H2O2 stock solutions were supplemented with appropriate volumes to achieve a 50 mL reaction solution, which was then stirred thoroughly at 300 rpm with electromagnetic stirrers. Upon UV irradiation, the reaction started at pH 7.0 and room temperature. Specific samples were immediately quenched using a catalase and passed through 0.22 μm nylon filter before further analysis.

2.3. Analytical Methods

The concentrations of KET and METH were quantified by UPLC-MS/MS equipped with a Waters Acquity liquid chromatography system and an Xevo T_QS triple quadrupole mass spectrometer (Waters Co., Milford, MA, USA). The analytes were separated by a reverse phase column (Acquity UPLC BEH C18, 1.7 μm, 50 × 2.1 mm, Waters, MA, USA). The mobile phases A and B, with a flow rate of 450 μL min−1, were 0.1% FA in Milli-Q water and ACN, respectively. Ten percent of phase B was kept for 0.5 min at the initial proportion, linearly increased to 45% at 1.8 min, then increased to 95% within 0.1 min, held for 1.0 min, reverted to 10% at 3.0 min and held for 1.5 min. The injection volume was 5 μL with the column temperature at 40 °C. The chromatograms were recorded in the positive ion multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. Nitrogen was used as the desolvation and nebulizing gas. The capillary voltage was set at 0.5 kV, and the desolvation temperature was 400 °C. Optimized UPLC-MS/MS parameters are given in Table 2.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Degradation Kinetics of KET and METH

Figure 2 shows the degradation of KET and METH under different treatment processes. UV or H2O2 alone exhibited negligible effects on their degradation, suggesting that treatment by UV or H2O2 alone was unable to destroy KET and METH. However, nearly complete removal of KET and METH was achieved within 120 and 60 min, respectively, when treated with the combination of UV/H2O2. Similar results were reported regarding ofloxacin degradation, which was drastically increased due to the large amount of hydroxyl radicals (OH) generated via the breakage of the H2O2 bond (Equation (1)) [15]. The degradation of KET and METH was consistent with the pseudo-first-order reaction kinetics. The apparent degradation rate constants (kobs) of KET and METH by UV/H2O2 were 0.027 and 0.049 min−1, respectively.
H - O - O - H + h v 2 O H

3.2. Determination of Bimolecular Reaction Rate

The generation of OH in the UV/H2O2 system was proved by the photoluminescence (PL) technique using a probe molecule with terephthalic acid, which tends to react with OH to form 2-hydroxyterephthalic acid, a highly fluorescent product [16]. The PL intensity of 2-hydroxyterephtalic acid is proportional to the amount of OH radicals produced in water [17]. Figure 3 shows the PL spectral changes in the 5 × 10−4 M terephthalic acid solution with a concentration of 2 × 10−3 M NaOH (excitation at 315 nm), as described by Yu et al. [17]. Similar fluorescence intensity was found in the reaction systems with initial concentrations of 100 and 1000 μM of H2O2, suggesting a constant concentration of OH with the initial H2O2 dosage ranging from 100 to 1000 μM. The PL signal at 425 nm increased with the irradiation time, which was attributed to the reaction of terephthalic acid with OH generated in the UV/H2O2 system.
The bimolecular reaction rates of KET and METH reacting with OH were determined through the competition experiments at pH 7 (phosphate buffer solution, 5 mM). BA was used as the reference compound, with which the constant reaction rate of OH is known to be 5.9 × 109 M−1 s−1 [18]. It is important to note that the degradation of KET, METH and BA using UV alone was negligible at less than 9%. Equations (2) and (3) describe the competing kinetics of KET and METH with OH in the UV/H2O2 oxidation process, through which the bimolecular reaction rates of KET and METH reacting with OH were 4.43 × 109 and 7.91 × 109 M−1 s−1, respectively (Figure 4).
ln ( KET ) 0 ( KET ) t = k O H K E T k O H B A ln ( BA ) 0 ( BA ) t
ln ( METH ) 0 ( METH ) t = k OH METH k O H BA ln ( BA ) 0 ( BA ) t
where (KET)0, (METH)0 and (BA)0 are the initial concentrations (μmol/L) of target compounds. (KET)t, (METH)t and (BA)t are the concentrations (μmol/L) at time t (min). kOH-KET, kOH-METH and kOH-BA are the bimolecular reaction rates of KET, METH and BA reacting with OH, respectively.

3.3. Effect of H2O2 Dosage

The KET and METH degradation under different initial H2O2 dosages were consistent with the pseudo-first-order reaction model (R2 > 0.99, Figure 5). The kobs of KET and METH increased dramatically from 0.001 min−1 to 0.027 and 0.049 min−1 with the initial H2O2 dosage ranging from 0 to 1000 μM. The reason for this phenomenon is that the production of OH increased with the initial H2O2 dosage ranging from 0 to 1000 μM, thus accelerating the degradation rate of target compounds [19]. However, the kobs of METH decreased slightly with the initial concentration of H2O2 increased to 2000 μM. A similar phenomenon was observed in a previous report that indicated that the degradation rates of cyclophosphamide and 5-fluorouracil were proportional to the H2O2 dosage and slightly decreased with excess H2O2 [20]. An excessive amount of H2O2 would cause the self-scavenging effect of OH to form HO2• and O2• (Equations (4) and (5)) [21], the low reactivity of which could reduce the degradation rate. Similar results were obtained concerning the degradation of ofloxacin [15] and chloramphenicol [22]. Moreover, large amounts of OH were dimerized to H2O2, and the generated HO2• and O2• subsequently participated in other reactions (Equations (6)–(9)) [23]. This negative effect was not observed in this study, probably because the maximum H2O2 dosage (2000 μM) was not high enough to inhibit the KET degradation.
H 2 O 2 + OH HO 2 + H 2 O
H 2 O 2 + OH O 2 + H + + H 2 O
OH + OH H 2 O 2
HO 2 + H 2 O 2 O H + H 2 O + O 2
HO 2 + OH H 2 O + O 2
O 2 + H 2 O 2 OH + OH + O 2

3.4. Effect of Initial pH

Figure 6 illustrates the KET and METH destruction at different initial pHs, which were adjusted with an H2SO4 or NaOH solution (0.1 M). No buffer was used due to its inhibiting effect on the decomposition of organics [24]. The KET and METH degradation at different initial pHs followed the pseudo-first-order reaction model well. The kobs of KET and METH reached the highest levels in a neutral environment at 0.027 and 0.085 min−1, respectively. Due to the greater stability of H2O2 at pH 5 and 7, the degradation rates of KET and METH under acidic and neutral conditions were obviously better than those under alkaline conditions. Under alkaline conditions, OH could be quenched by the HO2 produced by H2O2 dissociation, thus reducing the yield of OH in the system.

3.5. Effect of Water Background Components on Degradation Efficiency of Target Compounds

There are many different substrates in natural water, including different kinds of anions, cations and organic matter. These ions could react with free radicals in advanced oxidation processes, thus inhibiting or promoting the reaction and affecting the overall oxidation effect. Therefore, it is of great significance to study the influence of different ion types and contents on the practical application of advanced oxidation technology.

3.5.1. Effect of HCO3

The decomposition of KET and METH was significantly inhibited with the addition of HCO3 at different initial dosages in the UV/H2O2 oxidation process (Figure 7). When the initial dosage of HCO3 ranged from 0 to 10 mM, the reaction rate of KET and METH decreased from 0.027 and 0.049 min−1 to 0.008 and 0.011 min−1, respectively. The reason for this experimental phenomenon was that HCO3 was the quenching agent for OH which was also consumed by the competing reaction of ionized CO32 (Equations (10)–(13)). Therefore, the inhibitory effect of KET and METH degradation was more obvious with the increase of the HCO3 concentration.
CO 3 2 + O H CO 3 + OH
HCO 3 + O H HCO 3 + OH
HCO 3 CO 3 + H +
CO 3 + H 2 O 2 HCO 3 + HO 2

3.5.2. Effect of Cl

With the initial concentration of Cl ranging from 0 to 10 mM, the destruction of KET was dramatically inhibited with the rate constant of KET decreased from 0.027 to 0.018 min−1 (Figure 8), which could be due to the elimination of OH by Cl according to Equations (14)–(16) [25]. The degradation reaction rate changed slightly as more Cl was added. However, the METH degradation was less affected by Cl, with the reaction rate remaining basically unchanged (0.0446–0.0485 min−1).

3.5.3. Effect of NO3

O H + Cl Cl + OH
Cl + Cl Cl 2
Cl + Cl Cl 2
The influence of NO3 on the decomposition of KET and METH is illustrated in Figure 9. With the initial concentration of NO3 ranging from 0 to 10 mM, the degradation of both target compounds was obviously inhibited. The reaction rate of KET and METH decreased from 0.027 and 0.049 min−1 to 0.007 and 0.012 min−1, respectively. The above experimental phenomena were attributed to the following: First, a large amount of OH could be produced from NO3 under UV irradiation (Equations (17)–(18)), which is an important source of OH in natural water [26]. Second, as a photosensitizer, NO3 has a strong absorption in the ultraviolet range, which results in the formation of an internal filter that prevents the effective light transmittance and leads to the decline of OH production in the UV/H2O2 system [27]. The latter was found to be dominant after the degradation effect of the reaction was analyzed.
NO 3 + h v NO 2 + O
O + H 2 O O H + OH

3.5.4. Effect of HA

Due to its complex structure, HA may have uncontrollable effects on the destruction of target compounds. As illustrated in Figure 10, KET and METH degradation was dramatically inhibited once HA was added with different dosages in the UV/H2O2 system. As more HA (0–0.1 mM) was added, the reaction rate of KET and METH declined from 0.027 and 0.049 min−1 to 0.001 and 0.008 min−1, respectively, while the degradation reaction rate changed slightly with the continued addition of the HA. UV irradiation was absorbed by HA, creating an inner filter (Figure 11) and significantly inhibiting the UV transmittance for UV photons, thus limiting the generation of OH in the UV/H2O2 process [28]. Moreover, the degradation of target compounds can be inhibited by the competing reaction of HA with the active radicals [29].

3.6. Degradation Products and Mechanism

Degradation intermediates and products of METH produced in the UV/H2O2 oxidation process were determined by using UPLC/MS/MS under full scans and product ion scans. During the whole METH degradation process, the mass spectra were compared to identify the intermediates. The structure of the transformation products was analyzed with the specific molecular ions and fragmentation patterns rather than direct comparison with corresponding standards. Figure 12 illustrates the mass spectra and possible structures of the degradation intermediates, based on which the possible transformation pathways of METH during UV/H2O2 are shown in Figure 13. The proposed degradation mechanisms of METH degradation involved in the UV/H2O2 system include hydrogenation, hydroxylation and electrophilic substitution.
With the molecular weight of 149, intermediate product 2 (P2, m/z = 150) was formed as a result of hydrogenation of METH. P1 (m/z = 91) with a stable structure was generated from the fracture of the C-C bond of the branched chain. Intermediates P3 (m/z = 110) and P4 (m/z = 73) were formed by electrophilic substitution of hydroxyl. METH was hydroxylated to form ephedrine (m/z = 165), of which the C-C bond of branched chain was fractured to form intermediate product P5 (m/z = 57). The hydroxylation of ephedrine induced the formation of intermediate P6 (m/z = 181) which was then achieved to form intermediate P7 (m/z = 89) after further hydroxylation. The mineralization of KET and METH was characterized by removal of total organic carbon (TOC), which achieved 41% and 57% within 60 min under UV/H2O2 treatment (Figure 14). The intermediate products were further degraded as the reaction continued.

4. Conclusions

The degradation kinetics and mechanisms of KET and METH using the UV/H2O2 process were investigated in this study. Their degradation in UV photolysis or H2O2 oxidation alone was negligible. However, 99% of KET and METH (100 μg/L) were effectively eliminated by the combination of UV and H2O2 within 120 and 60 min, respectively. According to the competition kinetics, the rate constants of OH with KET and METH at pH 7 were calculated to be 4.43 × 109 and 7.91 × 109 M−1·s−1, respectively. The apparent rate constants of KET and METH reached the highest levels in a neutral environment. The degradation of KET and METH was significantly inhibited by HCO3, Cl, NO3 and HA; however, Cl had little influence on the METH degradation. Seven reaction intermediates of METH in the UV/H2O2 system were identified by UPLC-MS/MS. Possible transformation mechanisms involved in the KET and METH degradation by UV/H2O2 oxidation system included hydrogenation, hydroxylation and electrophilic substitution. Results demonstrated that UV/H2O2 was an effective technique to remove KET and METH, providing a promising application for the decomposition of trace organic pollutants in natural water.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.-M.G. and C.-S.G.; methodology, D.-M.G., C.-S.G., Q.-Y.F. and J.X.; software, D.-M.G., C.-S.G. and H.Z.; validation, D.-M.G., Q.-Y.F. and J.X.; formal analysis, D.-M.G. and H.Z.; resources, C.-S.G., Q.-Y.F. and J.X.; data curation, D.-M.G. and H.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, D.-M.G.; writing—review and editing, D.-M.G., C.-S.G., Q.-Y.F., H.Z. and J.X.; visualization, D.-M.G. and H.Z.; supervision, D.-M.G., Q.-Y.F. and J.X.; funding acquisition, C.-S.G. and J.X. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, 41673120) and Beijing Natural Science Foundation (8173058).

Acknowledgments

This study was carried out as part of the NSFC project, managed by the Jian Xu and supported by Center for Environmental Health Risk Assessment and Research, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences. We thank Wenli Qiu for her help in operating HPLC-MS. Reviewers are also thanked for the time dedicated and their comments.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baker, D.R.; Kasprzyk-Hordern, B. Spatial and temporal occurrence of pharmaceuticals and illicit drugs in the aqueous environment and during wastewater treatment: New developments. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 454–455, 442–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Bijlsma, L.; Serrano, R.; Ferrer, C.; Tormos, I.; Hernández, F. Occurrence and behavior of illicit drugs and metabolites in sewage water from the Spanish Mediterranean coast (Valencia region). Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 487, 703–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Wang, Z.; Xu, Z.; Li, X. Biodegradation of methamphetamine and ketamine in aquatic ecosystem and associated shift in bacterial community. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018, 359, 356–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Du, P.; Li, K.; Li, J.; Xu, Z.; Fu, X.; Yang, J.; Zhang, H.; Li, X. Methamphetamine and ketamine use in major Chinese cities, a nationwide reconnaissance through sewage-based epidemiology. Water Res. 2015, 84, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Santos, M.E.S.; Grabicová, K.; Steinbach, C.; Schmidt-Posthaus, H.; Randák, T. Environmental concentration of methamphetamine induces pathological changes in brown trout (Salmo trutta fario). Chemosphere 2020, 254, 126882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Liao, P.H.; Hwang, C.C.; Chen, T.H.; Chen, P.J. Developmental exposures to waterborne abused drugs alter physiological function and larval locomotion in early life stages of medaka fish. Aquat. Toxicol. 2015, 165, 84–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Awual, M.R.; Hasan, M.M. A ligand based innovative composite material for selective lead(II) capturing from wastewater. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 294, 111679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Awual Rabiul, M. A novel facial composite adsorbent for enhanced copper(II) detection and removal from wastewater. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 266, 368–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Neta, P.; Huie, R.E.; Ross, A.B. Rate Constants for Reactions of Inorganic Radicals in Aqueous Solution. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 1988, 17, 1027–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Russo, D.; Spasiano, D.; Vaccaro, M.; Cochran, K.H.; Richardson, S.D.; Andreozzi, R.; Puma, G.L.; Reis, N.M.; Marotta, R. Investigation on the removal of the major cocaine metabolite (benzoylecgonine) in water matrices by UV254/H2O2 process by using a flow microcapillary film array photoreactor as an efficient experimental tool. Water Res. 2015, 89, 375–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Kuo, C.; Lin, C.; Hong, P.A.K. Photocatalytic degradation of methamphetamine by UV/TiO2—Kinetics, intermediates, and products. Water Res. 2015, 74, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Wei, C.; Yi, K.; Sun, G.; Wang, J. Synthesis of novel sonocatalyst Er3+:YAlO3/Nb2O5 and its application for sonocatalytic degradation of methamphetamine hydrochloride. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 42, 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Gu, D.; Guo, C.; Hou, S.; Lv, J.; Zhang, Y.; Feng, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, J. Kinetic and mechanistic investigation on the decomposition of ketamine by UV-254 nm activated persulfate. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 370, 19–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. He, X.; Pelaez, M.; Westrick, J.A.; O’Shea, K.E.; Hiskia, A.; Triantis, T.; Kaloudis, T.; Stefan, M.I.; Armah, A.; Dionysiou, D.D. Efficient removal of microcystin-LR by UV-C/H2O2 in synthetic and natural water samples. Water Res. 2012, 46, 1501–1510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Lin, C.C.; Lin, H.Y.; Hsu, L.J. Degradation of ofloxacin using UV/H2O2 process in a large photoreactor. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2016, 168, 57–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Cheng, B.; Le, Y.; Yu, J. Preparation and enhanced photocatalytic activity of Ag@TiO2 core-shell nanocomposite nanowires. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 177, 971–977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yu, X.; Liu, S.; Yu, J. Superparamagnetic γ-Fe2O3@SiO2@TiO2 composite microspheres with superior photocatalytic properties. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2011, 104, 12–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ismail, L.; Ferronato, C.; Fine, L.; Jaber, F.; Chovelon, J.M. Elimination of sulfaclozine from water with SO4 radicals: Evaluation of different persulfate activation methods. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2016, 201, 573–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Znad, H.; Abbas, K.; Hena, S.; Awual, M.R. Synthesis a novel multilamellar mesoporous TiO 2 /ZSM-5 for photo-catalytic degradation of methyl orange dye in aqueous media. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2018, 6, 218–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lutterbeck, C.A.; Wilde, M.L.; Baginska, E.; Leder, C.; Machado, Ê.L.; Kümmerer, K. Degradation of cyclophosphamide and 5-fluorouracil by UV and simulated sunlight treatments: Assessment of the enhancement of the biodegradability and toxicity. Environ. Pollut. 2016, 208 Pt B, 467–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kwon, M.; Kim, S.; Yoon, Y.; Jung, Y.; Hwang, T.M.; Lee, J.; Kang, J.W. Comparative evaluation of ibuprofen removal by UV/H2O2 and UV/S2O82− processes for wastewater treatment. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 269, 379–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zuorro, A.; Fidaleo, M.; Fidaleo, M.; Lavecchia, R. Degradation and antibiotic activity reduction of chloramphenicol in aqueous solution by UV/H2O2 process. J. Environ. Manag. 2014, 133, 302–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Qiu, W.; Zheng, M.; Sun, J.; Tian, Y.; Fang, M.; Zheng, Y.; Zhang, T.; Zheng, C. Photolysis of enrofloxacin, pefloxacin and sulfaquinoxaline in aqueous solution by UV/H2O2, UV/Fe(II), and UV/H2O2/Fe(II) and the toxicity of the final reaction solutions on zebrafish embryos. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 651, 1457–1468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Sánchez-Polo, M.; Daiem, M.M.A.; Ocampo-Pérez, R.; Rivera-Utrilla, J.; Mota, A.J. Comparative study of the photodegradation of bisphenol A by HO·, SO4· and CO3·/HCO3· radicals in aqueous phase. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 463–464, 423–431. [Google Scholar]
  25. Zhang, Y.; Xiao, Y.; Zhong, Y.; Lim, T. Comparison of amoxicillin photodegradation in the UV/H2O2 and UV/persulfate systems: Reaction kinetics, degradation pathways, and antibacterial activity. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 372, 420–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Yin, K.; Deng, L.; Luo, J.; Crittenden, J.; Liu, C.; Wei, Y.; Wang, L. Destruction of phenicol antibiotics using the UV/H2O2 process: Kinetics, byproducts, toxicity evaluation and trichloromethane formation potential. Chem. Eng. J. 2018, 351, 867–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Moon, B.R.; Kim, T.K.; Kim, M.K.; Choi, J.; Zoh, K.D. Degradation mechanisms of Microcystin-LR during UV-B photolysis and UV/H2O2 processes: Byproducts and pathways. Chemosphere 2017, 185, 1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Oh, B.T.; Seo, Y.S.; Sudhakar, D.; Choe, J.H.; Lee, S.M.; Park, Y.J.; Cho, M. Oxidative degradation of endotoxin by advanced oxidation process (O3/H2O2 & UV/H2O2). J. Hazard. Mater. 2014, 279, 105–110. [Google Scholar]
  29. Lutze, H.V.; Bircher, S.; Rapp, I.; Kerlin, N.; Bakkour, R.; Geisler, M.; von Sonntag, C.; Schmidt, T.C. Degradation of chlorotriazine pesticides by sulfate radicals and the influence of organic matter. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 1673–1680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. The schematic diagram of the experiment setup: (1) low-pressure Hg UV lamp, (2) quartz tube, (3) cooling water, (4) photoreactor, (5) magnetic stirrer, (6) magnetic stirrer apparatus, (7) thermostat.
Figure 1. The schematic diagram of the experiment setup: (1) low-pressure Hg UV lamp, (2) quartz tube, (3) cooling water, (4) photoreactor, (5) magnetic stirrer, (6) magnetic stirrer apparatus, (7) thermostat.
Water 12 02999 g001
Figure 2. Degradation kinetics of ketamine (KET) (a) and methamphetamine (METH) (b) by different treatments. Conditions: Initial concentrations of KET and METH = 100 μg/L, Initial concentration of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, Temperature (T) = 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 2. Degradation kinetics of ketamine (KET) (a) and methamphetamine (METH) (b) by different treatments. Conditions: Initial concentrations of KET and METH = 100 μg/L, Initial concentration of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, Temperature (T) = 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g002
Figure 3. Photoluminescence (PL) spectral changes observed in the UV/H2O2 system in a 5 × 10−4 M basic solution of terephthalic acid (excitation at 315 nm).
Figure 3. Photoluminescence (PL) spectral changes observed in the UV/H2O2 system in a 5 × 10−4 M basic solution of terephthalic acid (excitation at 315 nm).
Water 12 02999 g003
Figure 4. (a) The reaction rate constant of KET with OH. Conditions: (KET)0 = (BA)0 = 0.42 μM, (H2O2)0 = 1 mM, pH = 7, T = 25 ± 1 °C. (b) The reaction rate constant of METH with OH. Conditions: (METH)0 = (BA)0 = 0.67 μM, (H2O2)0 = 1 mM, pH = 7, temperature = 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 4. (a) The reaction rate constant of KET with OH. Conditions: (KET)0 = (BA)0 = 0.42 μM, (H2O2)0 = 1 mM, pH = 7, T = 25 ± 1 °C. (b) The reaction rate constant of METH with OH. Conditions: (METH)0 = (BA)0 = 0.67 μM, (H2O2)0 = 1 mM, pH = 7, temperature = 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g004
Figure 5. Effect of H2O2 dosage on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 0–2000 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 5. Effect of H2O2 dosage on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 0–2000 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g005
Figure 6. Effects of different initial pHs on the degradation of KET (a) and METH (b) in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 3–11, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 6. Effects of different initial pHs on the degradation of KET (a) and METH (b) in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 3–11, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g006
Figure 7. Effect of HCO3 on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 7. Effect of HCO3 on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g007
Figure 8. Effect of Cl on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 8. Effect of Cl on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g008
Figure 9. Effect of NO3 on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 9. Effect of NO3 on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g009
Figure 10. Effect of HA on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 10. Effect of HA on KET (a) and METH (b) degradation in the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7.0, T = 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g010
Figure 11. The ultraviolet–visible spectroscopy of reaction solutions at different concentrations of HA.
Figure 11. The ultraviolet–visible spectroscopy of reaction solutions at different concentrations of HA.
Water 12 02999 g011
Figure 12. Mass spectra of the intermediate products of METH in the UV/PS system.
Figure 12. Mass spectra of the intermediate products of METH in the UV/PS system.
Water 12 02999 g012aWater 12 02999 g012b
Figure 13. Tentative transformation of METH pathways in the UV/H2O2 system.
Figure 13. Tentative transformation of METH pathways in the UV/H2O2 system.
Water 12 02999 g013
Figure 14. The mineralization of KET and METH during the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7, T= 25 ± 1 °C.
Figure 14. The mineralization of KET and METH during the UV/H2O2 system. Conditions: (KET)0 = (METH)0 = 100 μg/L, (H2O2)0 = 500 μM, pH0 = 7, T= 25 ± 1 °C.
Water 12 02999 g014
Table 1. Chemical structures and properties of ketamine and methamphetamine.
Table 1. Chemical structures and properties of ketamine and methamphetamine.
CompoundChemical FormulaStructureCAS NumberpKaLog Kow
KetamineC13H16ClNO Water 12 02999 i0016740-88-17.52.18
MethamphetamineC10H15N Water 12 02999 i0024846-07-59.92.07
Table 2. Detailed ultraperformance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) parameters for ketamine and methamphetamine.
Table 2. Detailed ultraperformance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) parameters for ketamine and methamphetamine.
CompoundParent Ion
(m/z)
Retention Time (min)Production
(m/z)
Cone
Voltage (V)
Collision
Voltage (V)
Ketamine2381.311251624
1791616
Methamphetamine1501.11912216
1192210
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gu, D.-M.; Guo, C.-S.; Feng, Q.-Y.; Zhang, H.; Xu, J. Degradation of Ketamine and Methamphetamine by the UV/H2O2 System: Kinetics, Mechanisms and Comparison. Water 2020, 12, 2999. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w12112999

AMA Style

Gu D-M, Guo C-S, Feng Q-Y, Zhang H, Xu J. Degradation of Ketamine and Methamphetamine by the UV/H2O2 System: Kinetics, Mechanisms and Comparison. Water. 2020; 12(11):2999. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w12112999

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gu, De-Ming, Chang-Sheng Guo, Qi-Yan Feng, Heng Zhang, and Jian Xu. 2020. "Degradation of Ketamine and Methamphetamine by the UV/H2O2 System: Kinetics, Mechanisms and Comparison" Water 12, no. 11: 2999. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w12112999

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop