Next Article in Journal
Swift Removal of the Heavy Metals Cadmium and Lead from an Aqueous Solution by a CAN-Zeolite Synthesized from Natural Clay
Previous Article in Journal
Flow Analysis and Structural Optimization of Double-Chamber Parallel Flexible Valve Micropumps
Previous Article in Special Issue
Synthesis and Application of MnO-Fe2O3 Nanocomposites for the Removal of 137Cs and 60Co Radionuclides from Artificial Radioactive Aqueous Waste
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
ChemEngineering
Volume 7
Issue 6
10.3390/chemengineering7060112
ChemEngineering-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Integrated Process for High Phenol Removal from Wastewater Employing a ZnO Nanocatalyst in an Ozonation Reaction in a Packed Bubble Column Reactor

by
Adnan K. Majhool
1,
Khalid A. Sukkar
1,*,
May A. Alsaffar
1 and
Hasan Shakir Majdi
2
1
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Technology-Iraq, Al-Sanna St., Baghdad 19006, Iraq
2
Chemical and Petroleum Industries Engineering Department, Al-Mustaqbal University, Babylon 51015, Iraq
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
ChemEngineering 2023, 7(6), 112; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/chemengineering7060112
Submission received: 27 August 2023 / Revised: 9 October 2023 / Accepted: 3 November 2023 / Published: 28 November 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Chemical Engineering in Wastewater Treatment)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The use of an ozonized bubble column reactor (OBCR) in wastewater treatment is advantageous due to its efficient mixing and mass transfer characteristics. Among all high-performance features, the ozonation reaction in a BCR undergoes a low dissolution of O3 in the reactor with a limited reaction rate. In this study, the ozonation reaction of phenol in an OBCR was tested using a ZnO nanocatalyst and alumina balls as packing material. Three concentrations of O3 were evaluated (i.e., 10, 15, and 20 ppm), and 20 ppm was found to be the optimum concentration for phenol degradation. Also, two doses (i.e., 0.05 and 0.1 g/L) of ZnO nanocatalysts were applied in the reaction mixture, with the optimal dose found to be 0.1 g/L. Accordingly, three phenol concentrations were investigated in the OBCR (i.e., 15, 20, and 25 ppm) using four treatment methods (i.e., O3 alone, O3/Al2O3, O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, and O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst). At a contact time of 60 min and phenol concentration of 15 ppm, the removal rate was 66.2, 73.1, 74.5, and 86.8% for each treatment method, respectively. The treatment experiment that applied the O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst produced the highest phenol conversion into CO2 and H2O in the shortest contact time for all phenol concentrations. Thus, the OBCR employed with a ZnO nanocatalyst plus packing material is a promising technology for the rapid and active removal of phenol because it enhances the number of hydroxyl radicals (•OH) generated, which ultimately increases the oxidation activity in the OBCR. Also, the results showed efficient flow characteristics in the OBCR, with channeling problems averted due to appropriate gas movement resulting from the use of packing materials. Finally, it was found that the ozonation process in an OBCR is an efficient method for phenol conversion with good economic feasibility.

1. Introduction

Phenol is the most significant and prevalent organic water contaminant that appears in water resources. Surface water, drinking water, subsurface water, and landfills all include some traces of phenol [1]. Phenol is generally present in the effluents of many kinds of industries, including the petroleum industry (6–500 ppm), petrochemical industry (3–1220 ppm), and coal industry (10–6800 ppm) [2,3,4,5]. Discharge of phenol without removal poses serious health dangers to humans and the aquatic environment [6]. The toxic limit of phenol lies between 9 and 25 ppm for both human health and the standard aquatic system [7,8,9,10]. Exposing the human body to a high dose of phenol over a long time produces problems in breathing, the presence of tremors, muscle destruction, and many skin diseases [4,8]. Thus, the efficient removal of phenol from wastewater is critical for the safety and health of humans and the environment [11,12,13,14].
Phenol removal from polluted wastewater is achieved using various techniques, such as liquid–liquid extraction, air oxidation, catalytic wet air oxidation, and biological processes [7]. Moreover, some advanced techniques may be used to treat phenol, including catalytic photooxidation, Fenton mechanisms, membrane technology, electrochemical techniques, and ozonation processes [15,16,17,18]. The ozonation method has been used extensively in the treatment of wastewater. In this process, hydrocarbons are broken down into carbon dioxide and water. However, the ozonation process undergoes limited ozone gas utilization efficiency, and some harmful by-products may be generated during ozonation reactions [19,20,21,22,23,24,25]. This problem can be partially solved using the catalytic ozonation process. Then, management and control of a number of variables (i.e., a suitable amount of ozone, catalyst type, and reaction time) and the design and operation of the reactor can deliver high-performance phenol removal [8,20,26].
The ozonation reaction can be achieved in many types of reactors, including membrane reactors, stirred tanks, and fixed-bed, trickle-bed, fluidized-bed, and bubble column reactors [27,28,29,30,31,32]. Among all types of multiphase reactors, the bubble column reactor (BCR) has the ability to operate efficiently by providing the maximum contact between the gaseous phase and the polluted water (i.e., liquid phase) [33,34,35]. Moreover, the BCR can be improved by using packing material to increase the contact surface area between the reaction phases [36]. Such packing material provides a high diffusion rate in the system by enhancing the interfacial area. Also, BCRs are usually characterized by their economic operation because they do not include moving or stirring parts [32,37]. Furthermore, in comparison with other multiphase reactors, the BCR is distinguished by its high heat transfer with efficient operation [9,12]. Quan et al. [38], Zheng et al. [39], and Yang et al. [40] have pointed out the importance of the hydrodynamic parameters of the BCR in governing the reactor’s performance. They demonstrated that the gas holdup, superficial gas velocity, flow regimes, pressure drop, reactor dimensions, and gas distribution type play a key role in determining the final efficiency of the reactor.
To enhance the removal of phenol or organic compounds and increase the dissolution of ozone gas, the ozonation system was developed by a number of researchers, some of whose work will be described below. Iboukhoulef et al. [41] studied the treatment of phenolic compounds from wastewater using an ozonation method in the presence of BiFeO3 as a nanocatalyst. They found that the nanocatalyst operated efficiently for the degradation process in alkaline media, with a rate of phenolic compound degradation of ~83% and chemical oxygen demand (COD) reduction of 98%. Qiao et al. [42] evaluated the degradation of nitrobenzene using ozone and persulfate in a rotating packed-bed reactor, noting that the degradation efficiencies were 69.44 and 27.14% for the reaction in the presence of ozone gas alone and persulfate, respectively. Moreover, the result showed a degradation efficiency of 90.59% when using ozone/persulfate. Barlak et al. [43] developed a treatment process for micropollutant abatement in landfill leachate by employing an ozonation reaction in a BCR, using lava rock and expanded clay in the treatment method. They observed that both natural materials provided new technical approaches to enhance the treatment process. Wang et al. [44] studied the degradation of heavy oil from wastewater effluent from refineries via catalytic ozonation using CuO-activated carbon as a heterogeneous catalyst. The catalyst worked efficiently to improve the ozonation reaction with a low cost and high activity. Cao et al. [45] applied a micro-packed bed reactor with ozone to improve the dissolution rate of ozone and achieve high degradation of organic pollutants, noting that the phenol and COD removal recorded values of 100 and 86.4%, respectively, at optimal operating conditions. Yang et al. [46] evaluated the feasibility of the application of packed bubble columns in actual biotreated landfill leachate treatment, providing new information about the transformation of organic matter in leachates during ozonation. For example, their study demonstrated that a packed bubble column increased the removal and decreased the energy use when treating landfill leachate, thus promoting the application of ozonation. Alattar et al. [47] designed a packed BCR (PBCR) to enhance the diffusion and the reaction rate of phenol removal from wastewater with ozone gas and a TiO2 nanocatalyst. They observed that the highest phenol removal (~100%) was achieved at a reaction time of 30 min using a TiO2 nanocatalyst and glass packing material with ozone.
Ozonation undergoes a limited reaction rate due to the low mass transfer process in a BCR. Accordingly, it is necessary to enhance the mineralization performance by increasing the solubility of ozone in the mixture inside the reactor [48,49,50,51,52]. Therefore, the main objective of the present work was to increase the mineralization of phenol by enhancing mass transfer using alumina balls as packing material while also improving the reaction rate using a ZnO nanocatalyst.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Chemicals

The experimental investigations were carried out in a bubble column reactor (BCR) using many chemicals, such as phenol (99.6% purity, Gryfskand Co., Ltd., Gryfino, Poland), with sulfuric acid (99.55% purity), sodium thiosulfate (99.9% purity), and potassium iodide (99.5% purity, Fluka Co., Ltd., Buchs, Switzerland). Moreover, zinc oxide nanoparticles (99.85% purity, Sadhika Co., Ltd., Haryana, India) were applied as a nanocatalyst in the reaction system. Furthermore, alumina balls (Al2O3, 99.1% purity, QS-Advanced Materials Inc., New York, NY, USA) were employed as packing material in the BCR.

2.2. Experimental Apparatus

The phenol removal was conducted in a BCR operating in semi-batch mode. Figure 1 illustrates the schematic representation of the reaction system. The reactor was constructed from QF glass with a height of 150 cm and a diameter of 8 cm. The ozonation reaction was achieved using O3 as a gas phase and wastewater polluted by phenol (i.e., simulated wastewater) as the liquid phase in the reactor. An ozone generator device (OZ-30, Carl Roth, Karlsruhe, Germany) was used to supply the BCR with the required amount of O3. Alumina balls (Al2O3 of 19 mm in diameter) were utilized as a packing media in the BCR. The packing material was arranged in the reactor up to a height of 100 cm from the reactor bottom. Moreover, ZnO nanoparticles were employed as an active nanocatalyst in the reaction system. The ZnO nanocatalyst characterizations were analyzed and described in reference [11]. Accordingly, the phenol removal was carried out using four treatment methods (i.e., O3 alone, O3/Al2O3, O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, and O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst). Figure 2 summarizes the four phenol removal methods, with Figure 3 presenting photographs of the four applied experimental methods. Additionally, a stainless steel gas distributor was fixed in the bottom zone of the reactor, containing 52 holes, each one 0.5 mm in diameter. Moreover, the O3 flow rate input into the reactor was managed using an accurate gas flow meter.
Actually, the volume of phenol solution without Al2O3 packing was 4.5 L, while with Al2O3 packing at a height of 100 cm, it was 3.25 L. Accordingly, in both cases, the concentration of phenol in the solution was kept constant at the required concentration (in mg/L).

2.3. Experimental Procedure

Three concentrations of phenol were tested (i.e., 15, 20, and 25 ppm), to simulate the industrial limitations in petroleum refineries [26,34,37]. Moreover, three concentrations of O3 were evaluated in the reaction system (i.e., 10, 15, and 20 ppm). The phenol removal in each treatment method was achieved at various reaction times from 10 to 100 min. A sample of treated wastewater at each reaction time was drawn from the sampling valve fixed at a height of 25 cm from the reactor top. Before being used in the reactor, the ZnO nanocatalyst was mixed with polluted wastewater and subjected to a sonication process for 15 min to ensure high nanoparticle distribution in the reaction mixture. Two doses (i.e., 0.05 and 0.1 g/L) of the ZnO nanocatalyst were applied in the reaction mixture. It is important to mention here that the pH value was kept constant at 7 ± 0.2 in order to apply a real neutral pH limit of industrial wastewater in the petroleum industry.

2.4. Measurement Methods

Moreover, the phenol concentration measurements were determined based on measuring the total organic carbon (TOC) in the wastewater samples. The TOC measurements were achieved by employing a TOC-L-CSH E200 device (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). The operating mode of the TOC analyzer was based on the combustion of the organic carbon in the sample to produce carbon dioxide. The measurements depended on the standard test method (ASTM D7573) using an NDIR detector for the produced CO2 gas. In this method, the nitrogen gas was used as a carrier gas. Moreover, the phenol removal efficiency was calculated using the following formula:
Removal efficiency % = 1 − [TOC(t)/TOC(IN)] × 100
where TOC(IN) is the TOC concentration measured in mg/L at zero time (initial concentration), and TOC(t) is the TOC concentration measured in mg/L at any period of time.
Additionally, the ozone gas analysis was achieved using the Indigo method [51]. In this method, the concentration of unreacted ozone was calculated using a potassium iodide (KI) solution. Actually, the produced gas from the ozone generator was passed through two containers, each one containing a concentration of 2% potassium iodide (KI) solution of 250 mL volume for 10 min. About 200 mL of KI solution was removed after ozonized gas had been in the air for 10 min. Then, 10 mL of H2SO4 was added to the mixture and titrated with sodium thiosulfate of 0.005 N until the iodine’s yellow hue was no longer discernible in the mixture. Then, two drops of starch were added as an indication. Once the blue tint had vanished, the titration was repeated, and the total amount of sodium thiosulfate consumed was determined. Accordingly, the concentration (ppm) of unreacted ozone gas can be determined using the following formula [6,51]:
Unreacted ozone (ppm) = [(A1 + A2) + N + 24]/t
where A1: Amount of Na2S2O3 used in the first KI container; A2: Amount of Na2S2O3 used in the second KI container; N: Na2S2O3 normality; t: Ozonation reaction time (min).
To ensure the validity of the resulting experimental values, all samples were measured twice. Accordingly, an error evaluation process was achieved for the ozone gas flow, phenol removal, pressure drop, and contact time using statistical evaluation methods. The uncertainty calculations were applied to the reaction parameters. All experiments were performed in triplicate. Then, the standard deviation of the experimental results fell in a range from 0.005 to 8.16%. The measurements were achieved using the SPSS Statistics Analysis program (version 2023). In addition, all experimental instruments were calibrated to reduce the experimental error values. Table 1 illustrates the estimated values of the experimental uncertainties.
On the other hand, the flow channeling problem across the alumina packing material in the OBCR was evaluated by employing an imaging analysis method of raising gas bubbles. This method was achieved by taking a series of photographs using a high-resolution camera with a video recorder system (Canon, model-RF-S18, Tokyo, Japan). All photographs were taken in a specified section at a height of 100 cm from the gas distributor. Accordingly, image processing software (MATLAB, 9.10-R2021a) was applied to enhance the images of the bubble size and alumina balls in the reactor.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Effect of the Ozone Concentration on the Phenol Conversion

The ozone gas concentration is the primary factor in the ozonation process, as it typically provides the main requirements for the oxidation reaction. Figure 4 demonstrates the effect of the ozone gas concentration on the rate of phenol elimination at different reaction times, at a phenol concentration of 15 ppm with a ZnO nanocatalyst (0.1 g/L). Three concentrations of ozone were evaluated in the packed bubble column reactor (PBCR) (i.e., 10, 15, and 20 ppm). As displayed in Figure 4, the 20 ppm ozone concentration showed the highest phenol removal rates at all contact times. For example, at a treatment time of 80 min, the phenol removal was 87.4, 94.3, and 100% at ozone concentrations of 10, 15, and 20 ppm, respectively. Therefore, it was decided to apply an ozone concentration of 20 ppm for all of the following experimental runs.
Mukherjee et al. [16] and John et al. [23] have pointed out that the limited selectivity of the ozonation reaction and the low solubility of ozone in the liquid phase reduce the utilization capacity of ozone gas in the reaction mixture. Accordingly, the oxidation process in the presence of ozone gas alone could not completely convert phenol to CO2 and H2O. Hence, a nanocatalyst and packing material were used in the reactor and enhanced the catalytic ozonation reaction by decomposing the ozone gas and generating more active hydroxyl radicals in the reaction mixture. The main characteristic of the ozonation reaction is the formation of a large number of hydroxyl radicals (•OH) in the reactor. These radicals have a higher value of oxidation potential (~2.80 V) in comparison with ozone gas alone (2.08 V). Therefore, the oxidation process can achieve a high phenol degradation rate [25,31,36].

3.2. Effect of the ZnO Nanocatalyst Dose

A ZnO nanocatalyst was employed as a catalytic material to improve the phenol degradation reaction in the BCR. Accordingly, to establish the appropriate nanocatalyst dose required for the reaction, two doses of the ZnO nanocatalyst were applied (i.e., 0.05 and 0.1 g/L) in the presence of alumina balls in the reactor. Figure 5 shows the effect of the catalyst dose on the phenol degradation rate at various contact times. The results indicated that the amount of ZnO nanocatalyst considerably influenced the rate of phenol decomposition. At a treatment time of 70 min, the phenol removal was 83.6% and 87.2% for nanocatalyst doses of 0.05 g/L and 0.1 g/L, respectively. This occurred because the presence of the ZnO nanocatalyst in the reaction mixture enhanced the ozonation process by converting more ozone into hydroxyl radicals. Moreover, the large surface area of the nanocatalyst (215 m2/g) provided additional active sites that also supported the formation of more hydroxyl radicals. All of these factors improved the phenol degradation reaction and mass transfer rates in the reaction system. Yang et al. [3], Lian et al. [33], and Alattar et al. [47] have indicated that the mass of the catalyst highly influences the reaction mechanism and also the process of conversion of hydrocarbons into carbon dioxide and water. However, limited work has focused on the influence of nanocatalysts on the ozonation process. It is commonly understood that the ozonation reaction in aqueous solutions is a very complicated task and that there is a lack of effective nanocatalysts needed to provide an adequate number of active sites [27,32]. The number of active sites on the nanocatalyst was the predominant parameter affecting the outcome, so the higher the catalyst dose, the more active sites, which thereby increased the reaction’s performance. Thus, the catalyst positively impacted the phenol conversion in the ozonation system. Also, the catalytic reaction of phenol in the ozonation process in the presence of the ZnO nanocatalyst comprised the heterogeneous reaction of a three-phase system (i.e., ozone, wastewater, and nanocatalyst), in which the nanocatalyst was a crucial factor in determining the phenol-removing mechanism [28,43].

3.3. Evaluation of the Channeling Flow Problem

The gas flow through the packing materials usually undergoes what is called a channeling problem. This occurs when the gas flow is much higher in some zones than in others [21,47]. From a fluid flow perspective, this is undesirable, as it substantially reduces the interfacial surface area, which then retards the mass transfer process in the reactor. Such a loading point in the reactor occurs when the velocity of the gas records high values that restrict the flow of liquid in the multiphase reactor [28]. In the present work, no channeling problem was observed as a result of the gas bubble distribution and the void (40%) between the packing materials (alumina balls). Figure 6 represents the ozone gas flow over the packing materials at different superficial gas velocities. The gas and liquid movements were stable over time, and a high contact area was available for an effective reaction performance.
Yang et al. [3], Sukkar et al. [13], and Manjrekar and Dudukovic [24] have indicated that the channeling problem must be avoided because after this point of high velocity, the pressure drops will provide a higher rate that will carry off all liquid, creating a flooding point. Moreover, Cao et al. [45] reported that channeling appears along with low fluid flow, which produces dry zones due to a maldistribution of the packing materials. These dry zones over packing reduce the gas–liquid contact activity. Therefore, in this study, alumina balls were chosen deliberately to serve as the structural packing material in the reactor to produce a uniform gas flow distribution, as shown in Figure 6. Further, these packings were regularly arranged to avoid a channeling problem by applying steady ozone gas velocity in the BCR (i.e., a homogenous flow regime).
From the present experimental investigations, it was observed that the applied hydrodynamic parameters in the OBCR, such as superficial gas velocity and gas distributor design, as well as gas holdup, were selected and managed carefully to provide the highest performance. The main advantages presented by an OBCR involve high liquid phase treatment, efficient mass transfer operation at low consumed energy, high reaction selectivity, an efficient control system, and simple catalyst and packing load. Moreover, the low maintenance cost of this reactor type provides specialized criteria in comparison with other multiphase reactors. The same observations were confirmed by many authors such as Majhool et al. [11], Liu et al. [14], and Yang et al. [46].

3.4. Influence of the Initial Phenol Concentrations on the Removal Rate

The four applied treatment methods (i.e., O3 alone, O3/Al2O3, O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, and O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst) were evaluated experimentally in a BCR at different phenol concentrations. The goal of the evaluation process was to determine the optimal treatment method that removed phenol at the highest rate and in the shortest contact time. Accordingly, three phenol concentrations were tested (i.e., 15, 20, and 25 ppm). Figure 7 shows the results of the phenol removal at various contact times in the BCR at a phenol concentration of 15 ppm. The result indicated that the phenol removal was directly proportional to the contact time. Then, as the contact time increased, the degradation of phenol into carbon dioxide and water also increased. The same results were noted in the work of Zheng et al. [39] and Wang et al. [44].
For a selected random contact time of 60 min, the phenol removal was 66.2, 73.1, 74.5, and 86.8% for each treatment method of O3 alone, O3/Al2O3, O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, and O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, respectively. A comparison of the results with the four treatment methods showed that the treatment using the O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst provided the highest phenol degradation performance, which attained the complete conversion of phenol (100%) at a contact time of 80 min. Moreover, the treatment method using the O3/ZnO nanocatalyst achieved complete conversion at a contact time of 90 min, while the O3/Al2O3 required 100 min of contact time to accomplish the complete conversion.
Figure 8 shows the influence of the applied treatment method on the amount of phenol removal using an initial phenol concentration of 20 ppm. As the phenol concentration increased from 15 ppm (Figure 7) to 20 ppm, more contact time was required to achieve high levels of phenol removal. The phenol removal results for the reaction with O3 gas alone, O3/ZnO, O3/Al2O3 nanocatalyst, and O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst at the contact time of 60 min recorded removal percentages of 61.5, 76.3, 78.1 and 80.8%, respectively. Also, the results indicated a complete phenol removal of ~100% at a contact time of 90 min using the O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst. Moreover, the use of either the O3/ZnO nanocatalyst or O3/Al2O3 produced a complete conversion of phenol at 100 min of contact time. Similarly, Lima et al. [17], Zou et al. [19], and Yaqoob et al. [35] have shown that a higher concentration of phenol or any organic compound required a longer time to be removed by ozonation technology. The conversion of these organic compounds into intermediate ones is usually a complicated process and thus requires more time.
Additionally, the results showed that the contact between the gas and liquid needed more reaction time to achieve the required removal of phenol due to the high concentration of phenol in the wastewater. Quan et al. [38] and Wang et al. [44] have indicated that the economic feasibility of any wastewater treatment process is highly dependent on the initial concentration of organic compounds in the polluted wastewater. Then, the reduction in the pollutant concentration with reaction time normally includes the generation of intermediate components due to the inactive oxidation process in some applied treatment technologies. Moreover, the use of ozonation technology in the present ZnO nanocatalyst and alumina balls combination enhanced the ozonation process in the BCR to achieve high phenol conversion in a shorter reaction time. As can be seen, the presence of the alumina balls supported the formation of a thin film over the outer surface of these packing materials. This thin film worked to improve the mass transfer mechanism and then enhanced the conversion of phenol in the ozonation process by providing more hydroxyl radicals (•OH). As stated previously, these hydroxyl radicals are the main variable responsible for converting phenol into carbon dioxide and water [1,21].
Figure 9 illustrates the removal rates of phenol at the highest concentration (25 ppm) using the four treatment methods. As in the previous cases, the same trend of removal efficiency was noted (see Figure 7 and Figure 8), but in this case, even more contact time was needed. As a result, the phenol removal efficiency decreased due to the increase in the phenol concentration. At a contact time of 60 min, the phenol removal was 54.7, 60.1, 62, and 72.8% for the four treatment methods of O3 alone, O3/Al2O3, O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, and O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, respectively. The complete removal of phenol occurred at a reaction time of 100 min using the O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst.
Finally, a high and stable phenol removal rate was the main criterion for the operation of the OBCR in this work. The results of the present technique that used ZnO nanocatalyst and alumina balls as packing media were compared with the results of other authors who applied different techniques for phenol removal. In the present study, among all used treatment methods of O3 alone, O3/Al2O3, O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, and O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, it can be seen from Figure 7 that the O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst provided the highest phenol degradation efficiency, which achieved the complete conversion of phenol (100%) at a shorter contact time of 80 min. The enhancement in the degradation reaction was caused by the high mass transfer process as well as the highly dispersed nanocatalyst. Many authors have applied different approaches and reactors for phenol removal, such as Wu et al. [7], Lima et al. [15], Cheng et al. [36], and Alattar et al. [47]. They demonstrate the combined disadvantages of these reactors: the catalyst charging, limited phenol removal, and high operating cost are significant aspects that negatively influence the phenol degradation rate [1,45,49]. Table 2 illustrates the comparison between the results of the present study with the results of various studies on different operating techniques and parameters. From this table, it was observed that the results of the phenol degradation rate (of 100%) are higher than the corresponding removal rates of other reaction techniques.

3.5. Reaction Mechanism of the Ozonation Reaction

Building a complete understanding of phenol degradation in the OBCR is needed to manage the main stages in the ozonation reaction. Figure 10 represents a schematic diagram detailing the reaction mechanism of the ozonation reaction in the OBCR in the presence of alumina balls as packing and the ZnO nanocatalyst. The nanocatalyst improved the catalytic ozonation process and degraded more phenol in the reactor. This was achieved by enhancing the formation of more hydroxyl radicals (•OH) in the OBCR. These radicals are strong oxidizing agents in the reaction mixture that improve the phenol degradation into CO2 and H2O [31,36]. As a result of the hydroxyl radicals’ activities in the catalytic ozonation process, more phenol could be converted within a shorter contact time. Further, the main ozonation reaction was achieved at the reactor bottom, which was full of Al2O3 balls. The reaction in the presence of the alumina balls provided an efficient and high contact area between the gas and liquid phases. Accordingly, more hydroxyl radicals were formed. Then, the mass transfer process and reaction rate increased in the OBCR.
Additionally, the presence of a ZnO nanocatalyst in the reaction mixture of the three-phase system provided an efficient and active catalytic surface area for the ozonation reaction. Also, this step generated extra hydroxyl radicals, which supported the removal efficiency in the reactor. The ZnO nanocatalyst, which operates according to heterogeneous catalyst principles, was applied to increase the mass transfer between the ozone gas and polluted wastewater (i.e., liquid phase). The total surface morphology of the nanocatalyst enhanced the phenol degradation reaction due to the highly active sites within the catalyst pores. Thus, excellent reaction activity, selectivity, and stability were achieved in the OBCR for all contact times. Notably, the ZnO nanocatalyst has structural features that inherently provide plentiful and ordered pore specifications and adsorption sites [8,19]. All of these factors play a constant role in the formation of additional free radicals for the phenol oxidation process, and then, an improved mass transfer operation and reaction rate can occur [3,47].

4. Conclusions

The low rate of mineralization of phenol pollutants from wastewater was increased by using alumina balls as packing media as well as a ZnO nanocatalyst. The results showed that the optimal O3 gas concentration and ZnO nanocatalyst dose were 20 ppm and 0.1 g/L, respectively. Moreover, among the four experimental methods used in the mineralization process, it was found that the O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst method provided the highest phenol degradation performance (100%) at a contact time of 80 min for an initial phenol concentration of 15 ppm. Furthermore, the flow evaluation study indicated that no channeling problem was observed as a result of the gas bubble movement via the alumina balls due to the appropriate gas void fraction of 0.4. Also, it was noted that the presence of ZnO nanocatalyst improved the catalytic ozonation process due to the highly active sites within the catalyst pores. Additionally, the ZnO nanocatalyst and alumina balls enhanced the ozonation reaction to form more hydroxyl radicals (•OH) in the OBCR. These strong oxidizing radicals increased the phenol degradation mechanism into CO2 and H2O. From a mass transfer point of view, the formation of a thin layer over the alumina balls contributed to enhancing the reaction rate, fostering high phenol removal. A review of the literature found no previous studies that have investigated the phenol ozonation process combined with ZnO nanocatalysts in the presence of alumina balls as a packing material in an OBCR. Accordingly, the suggested reaction mechanism in the present work provides more understanding of the ozonation process in order to convert phenol in wastewater within a shorter reaction time. Finally, the reaction of phenol along the packed OBCR height was considered as the chief factor in supporting the reaction mechanism.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.A.S.; methodology, A.K.M.; formal analysis, M.A.A.; investigation, K.A.S. and A.K.M.; data curation, M.A.A. and A.K.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.K.M.; writing—review and editing, K.A.S.; visualization, M.A.A.; supervision, K.A.S. and H.S.M.; project administration, K.A.S. and H.S.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the Chemical Engineering, University of Technology-Iraq and Al-Mustaqbal University, Babylon, Iraq for their administrative and scientific support of this work.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zhang, J.; Shao, S.; Ding, X.; Li, Z.; Jing, J.; Jiao, W.; Liu, Y. Removal of phenol from wastewater by high-gravity intensified heterogeneous catalytic ozonation with activated carbon. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 29, 34830–34840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Miao, F.; Zhang, S.; Sun, X.; Li, Y.; Shang, R.; Wu, W.; Jiao, W.; Liu, Y. Degradation of phenol with Mn-CoOX/γ-Al2O3 catalytic ozonation enhanced by high gravity technology. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2023, 280, 119036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Yang, X.; Liu, Z.; Manhaeghe, D.; Yang, Y.; Hogie, J.; Demeestere, K.; Van Hulle, S. Intensified ozonation in packed bubble columns for water treatment: Focus on mass transfer and humic acids removal. Chemosphere 2021, 283, 131217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhou, L.; Wang, S.; Zheng, M.; Han, J.; Liu, R.; Lewis, A.; Huang, Y.; Yun, J. Efficient mineralization of organic pollutants in water via a phenol-responsive catalytic ozonation process. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 2023, 145, 104804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wei, X.; Shao, S.; Ding, X.; Jiao, W.; Liu, Y. Degradation of phenol with heterogeneous catalytic ozonation enhanced by high gravity technology. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 248, 119179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Nguyen, H.M.; Vo, T.C.; Alawi, N.M.; Pham, P.T.V. Microwave-assisted degradation of organic compounds in municipal wastewater over Fe2O3 catalyst. AIP Conf. Proc. 2022, 2443, 030036. [Google Scholar]
  7. Wu, C.; Li, P.; Xia, S.; Wang, S.; Wang, Y.; Hu, J.; Liu, Z.; Yu, S. The role of interface in microbubble ozonation of aromatic compounds. Chemosphere 2019, 220, 1067–1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Broccoli, F.; Paparo, R.; Iesce, M.R.; Di Serio, M.; Russo, V. Heterogeneous photodegradation reaction of phenol promoted by TiO2: A kinetic study. Chemengineering 2023, 7, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Patel, S.; Majumder, S.; Ghosh, P. Ozonation of diclofenac in a laboratory scale bubble column: Intermediates, mechanism, and mass transfer study. J. Water Process. Eng. 2021, 44, 102325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Paździor, K.; Wrębiak, J.; Klepacz-Smółka, A.; Gmurek, M.; Bilińska, L.; Kos, L.; Sójka-Ledakowicz, J.; Ledakowicz, S. Influence of ozonation and biodegradation on toxicity of industrial textile wastewater. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 195, 166–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Majhool, A.; Sukkar, K.; Alsaffar, M. Combining α-Al2O3 packing material and a ZnO nanocatalyst in an ozonized bubble column reactor to increase the phenol degradation from wastewater. Processes 2023, 11, 2416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Levanov, A.; Isaikina, O.; Lunin, V. Mathematical Modeling of the Kinetics of Molecular Chlorine Release during the Ozonation of Chlorides in a Bubble Column Reactor. Russ. J. Phys. Chem. A 2020, 94, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Sukkar, K.; Al-Zuhairi, F.; Dawood, E. Evaluating the influence of temperature and flow rate on biogas production from wood waste via a packed-bed bioreactor. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2021, 46, 6167–6175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Liu, Z.; Yang, X.; Demeestere, K.; Van Hulle, S. Insights into a packed bubble column for removal of several ozone persistent TrOCs by ozonation: Removal kinetics, energy efficiency and elimination prediction. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 275, 119170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lima, V.; Rodrigues, C.; Madeira, L. Application of the Fenton’s process in a bubble column reactor for hydroquinone degradation. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 25, 34851–34862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Mukherjee, A.; Avisar, D.; Roy, A. Recent trends in ozonation technology: Theory and application. In Sustainable Water Treatment: Advances and Technological Interventions; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022; pp. 117–170. [Google Scholar]
  17. Lima, V.; Rodrigues, C.; Borges, R.; Madeira, L. Gaseous and liquid effluents treatment in bubble column reactors by advanced oxidation processes: A review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 48, 949–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Awad, E.S.; Sabirova, T.M.; Tretyakova, N.A.; Alsalhy, Q.F.; Figoli, A.; Salih, I.K. A mini-review of enhancing ultrafiltration membranes (UF) for wastewater treatment: Performance and stability. Chemengineering 2021, 5, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zou, J.; Liu, Y.; Han, Q.; Tian, Y.; Shen, F.; Kang, L.; Feng, L.; Ma, J.; Zhang, L.; Du, Z. Importance of Chain Length in Propagation Reaction on •OH Formation during Ozonation of Wastewater Effluent. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Dong, J.; Yao, J.; Tao, J.; Shi, X.; Wei, F. Degradation of Methyl Orange by ozone microbubble process with packing in the bubble column reactor. Environ. Technol. 2023, 44, 2512–2524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lan, B.; Nigmatullin, R.; Puma, G. Ozonation kinetics of cork-processing water in a bubble column reactor. Water Res. 2008, 42, 2473–2482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Alsaedi, S.S.; Mohammed, S.S.; Mahdi, A.E.; Shnain, Z.Y.; Majdi, H.S.; AbdulRazak, A.A.; Alwasiti, A.A. Modeling spinel oxide based-photocatalytic degradation of organic pollutants from industrial wastewater. Chem. Eng. Commun. 2023, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Alsaffar, M.A.; Ghany, M.A.R.A.; Mageed, A.K.; AbdulRazak, A.A.; Ali, J.M.; Sukkar, K.A.; Ayodele, B.V. Effect of textural properties on the degradation of bisphenol from industrial wastewater effluent in a photocatalytic reactor: A modeling approach. Appl. Sci. Res. 2023, 13, 8966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Manjrekar, O.; Dudukovic, M. Identification of flow regime in a bubble column reactor with a combination of optical probe data and machine learning technique. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2019, 2, 100023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lara-Ramos, J.; Diaz-Angulo, J.; Machuca-Martínez, F. Use of modified flotation cell as ozonation reactor to minimize mass transfer limitations. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 405, 126978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Al-Timimi, D.A.H.; Alsalhy, Q.F.; AbdulRazak, A.A. Polyethersulfone/amine grafted silica nanoparticles mixed matrix membrane: A comparative study for mebeverine hydrochloride wastewater treatment. Alex. Eng. J. 2023, 66, 167–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Jaber, T.N.; Sukkar, K.A.; Karamalluh, A.A. Specifications of heavy diesel lubricating oil improved by MWCNTs and CuO as nano-additives. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 579, 012014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Malik, S.N.; Ghosh, P.C.; Vaidya, A.N.; Mudliar, S.N. Hybrid ozonation process for industrial wastewater treatment: Principles and applications: A review. J. Water Proc. Eng. 2020, 35, 101193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Khader, E.H.; Mohammed, T.J.; Albayati, T.M.; Harharah, H.N.; Amari, A.; Saady, N.M.C.; Zendehboudi, S. Current trends for wastewater treatment technologies with typical configurations of photocatalytic membrane reactor hybrid systems: A review. Chem. Eng. Process. Process. Intensif. 2023, 192, 109503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Matheswaran, M.; Moon, I.S. Influence parameters in the ozonation of phenol wastewater treatment using bubble column reactor under continuous circulation. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2021, 15, 287–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lucas, M.; Peres, J.; Puma, G. Treatment of winery wastewater by ozone-based advanced oxidation processes (O3, O3/UV and O3/UV/H2O2) in a pilot-scale bubble column reactor and process economics. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2010, 72, 235–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Al-Rubaiey, N.A.; Al-Barazanjy, M.G. Ultrasonic technique in treating wastewater by electrocoagulation. Eng. Technol. J. 2018, 36, 54–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Lian, B.; Jiang, Q.; Garg, S.; Wang, Y.; Yuan, Y.; Waite, T.D. Analysis of ozonation processes using coupled modeling of fluid dynamics, mass transfer, and chemical reaction kinetics. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 4377–4385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Ali, N.S.; Harharah, H.N.; Salih, I.K.; Cata Saady, N.M.; Zendehboudi, S.; Albayati, T.M. Applying MCM-48 mesoporous material, equilibrium, isotherm, and mechanism for the effective adsorption of 4-nitroaniline from wastewater. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 9837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Yaqoob, A.; Parveen, T.; Umar, K.; Mohamad Ibrahim, M. Role of nanomaterials in the treatment of wastewater: A review. Water 2020, 12, 495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Cheng, W.; Quan, X.; Li, R.; Wu, J.; Zhao, Q. Ozonation of phenol-containing wastewater using O3/Ca(OH)2 system in a microbubble gas-liquid reactor. Ozone Sci. Eng. 2018, 40, 173–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kadhim, R.J.; Al-Ani, F.H.; Al-Shaeli, M.; Alsalhy, Q.F.; Figoli, A. Removal of dyes using graphene oxide (GO) mixed matrix membranes. Membranes 2020, 10, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Quan, X.; Luo, D.; Wu, J.; Li, R.; Cheng, W. Ozonation of acid red 18 wastewater using O3/Ca(OH)2 system in a microbubble gas-liquid reactor. J. Environ. Eng. 2017, 5, 283–291. [Google Scholar]
  39. Zheng, T.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, T.; Shi, Z.; Tian, Y.; Shi, S.; Smale, N.; Wang, J. Microbubble enhanced ozonation process for advanced treatment of wastewater produced in acrylic fiber manufacturing industry. J. Hazard. Mater. 2015, 287, 412–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yang, X.; Chen, C.; Zhang, T.; Tian, X.; Zhang, R.; Manhaeghe, D.; Zhao, Y.; Song, S.; Demeestere, K.; Van Hulle, S. Low-cost mineral packing materials improve DOM and micropollutants removal from landfill leachate in ozonation bubble columns: Insights into the enhancement mechanisms and applicability of surrogate-based monitoring. Chem. Eng. J. 2023, 458, 141461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Iboukhoulef, H.; Douani, R.; Amrane, A.; Chaouchi, A.; Elias, A. Heterogeneous Fenton like degradation of olive Mill wastewater using ozone in the presence of BiFeO3 photocatalyst. J. Photochem. Photobiol. A Chem. 2019, 383, 112012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Qiao, J.; Luo, S.; Yang, P.; Jiao, W.; Liu, Y. Degradation of nitrobenzene-containing wastewater by ozone/persulfate oxidation process in a rotating packed bed. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 2019, 99, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Barlak, M.; Değermenci, N.; Cengiz, I.; Özel, H.; Yildiz, E. Comparison of phenol removal with ozonation in jet loop reactor and bubble column. J. Environ. Eng. 2020, 8, 104402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Wang, W.; Yao, H.; Yue, L. Supported catalyst CuO/AC with reduced cost and enhanced activity for the degradation of heavy oil refinery wastewater by catalytic ozonation process. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 27, 7199–7210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Cao, Q.; Sang, L.; Tu, J.; Xiao, Y.; Liu, N.; Wu, L.; Zhang, J. Rapid degradation of refractory organic pollutants by continuous ozonation in a micro-packed bed reactor. Chemosphere 2021, 270, 128621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Yang, X.; De Buyck, P.; Zhang, R.; Manhaeghe, D.; Wang, H.; Chen, L.; Zhao, Y.; Demeestere, K.; Van Hulle, S.W. Enhanced removal of refractory humic-and fulvic-like organics from biotreated landfill leachate by ozonation in packed bubble columns. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 807, 150762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Alattar, S.; Sukkar, K.; Alsaffar, M. The role of TiO2 NPs catalyst and packing material in removal of phenol from wastewater using an ozonized bubble column reactor. Acta Innov. 2023, 46, 90–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Pandis, P.K.; Kalogirou, C.; Kanellou, E.; Vaitsis, C.; Savvidou, M.G.; Sourkouni, G.; Zorpas, A.A.; Argirusis, C. Key points of advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) for wastewater, organic pollutants and pharmaceutical waste treatment: A mini review. Chemengineering 2022, 6, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ma, J.; Li, D.; Yong, X.; Zhang, X.; Yan, S.; Liu, J.; Zhou, J. An ozone catalytic oxidation system for the degradation of organic compounds in secondary wastewater from refining and chemical processes. Environ. Technol. 2022, 44, 4060–4070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Paucar, N.E.; Kim, I.; Tanaka, H.; Sato, C. Effect of O3 dose on the O3/UV treatment process for the removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in secondary effluent. Chemengineering 2019, 3, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Prasetyaningrum, A.; Arum Kusumaningtyas, D.; Suseno, P.; Jos, B.; Ratnawati, R. Effect of pH and gas flow rate on ozone mass transfer of Κ-carrageenan solution in bubble column reactor. Reaktor 2018, 18, 177–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Alzamily, A.N.; Sultan, A.J.; Abdulrahman, A.A.; Majdi, H.S. Study of the impact of tube configurations on the local heat transfer coefficient in mimicked Fischer-Tropsch bubble column reactor. Processes 2022, 10, 976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Chemengineering 07 00112 g001
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the BCR system for phenol removal from wastewater.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the BCR system for phenol removal from wastewater.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g001
Chemengineering 07 00112 g002
Figure 2. Four experimental methods of phenol removal by ozonation reaction in a BCR.
Figure 2. Four experimental methods of phenol removal by ozonation reaction in a BCR.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g002
Chemengineering 07 00112 g003
Figure 3. Photos of the reaction apparatus of the BCR applying the four experimental methods: (a) O3 gas alone, (b) O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, (c) O3/Al2O3, and (d) O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst.
Figure 3. Photos of the reaction apparatus of the BCR applying the four experimental methods: (a) O3 gas alone, (b) O3/ZnO nanocatalyst, (c) O3/Al2O3, and (d) O3/Al2O3/ZnO nanocatalyst.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g003
Chemengineering 07 00112 g004
Figure 4. Effect of the ozone concentration on the phenol removal rates in a PBCR.
Figure 4. Effect of the ozone concentration on the phenol removal rates in a PBCR.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g004
Chemengineering 07 00112 g005
Figure 5. Impact of the ZnO nanocatalyst dose on the ozonation reaction in a PBCR.
Figure 5. Impact of the ZnO nanocatalyst dose on the ozonation reaction in a PBCR.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g005
Chemengineering 07 00112 g006
Figure 6. Photographs showing the monitoring of the ozone flow across the alumina balls in the ozonation process to evaluate the channeling problem in a BCR at different superficial ozone velocities of 1.5, 2, and 2.5 cm/s (at the middle and upper zones).
Figure 6. Photographs showing the monitoring of the ozone flow across the alumina balls in the ozonation process to evaluate the channeling problem in a BCR at different superficial ozone velocities of 1.5, 2, and 2.5 cm/s (at the middle and upper zones).
Chemengineering 07 00112 g006
Chemengineering 07 00112 g007
Figure 7. Conversion of phenol in the ozonation process in a BCR using the four treatment methods at a phenol concentration of 15 ppm.
Figure 7. Conversion of phenol in the ozonation process in a BCR using the four treatment methods at a phenol concentration of 15 ppm.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g007
Chemengineering 07 00112 g008
Figure 8. Conversion of phenol in the ozonation process in a BCR using the four treatment methods at a phenol concentration of 20 ppm.
Figure 8. Conversion of phenol in the ozonation process in a BCR using the four treatment methods at a phenol concentration of 20 ppm.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g008
Chemengineering 07 00112 g009
Figure 9. Conversion of phenol in the ozonation process in a BCR using the four treatment methods at a phenol concentration of 25 ppm.
Figure 9. Conversion of phenol in the ozonation process in a BCR using the four treatment methods at a phenol concentration of 25 ppm.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g009
Chemengineering 07 00112 g010
Figure 10. Schematic diagram representing the phenol conversion mechanism using ozone, alumina balls, and ZnO nanocatalysts in the OBCR.
Figure 10. Schematic diagram representing the phenol conversion mechanism using ozone, alumina balls, and ZnO nanocatalysts in the OBCR.
Chemengineering 07 00112 g010
Table 1. Measured values of the experimental uncertainties.
Table 1. Measured values of the experimental uncertainties.
VariableUnitsUncertainty (%)
Ozone Flow Ratem/s±0.006
Gas Holdup[-]±1.042
Pressure DropPa±3.310
Contact Timemin±0.371
pH (Constant at value of 7)-±0.200
TOC Measurements%±8.160
Table 2. Comparison of phenol and organic pollutants degradation rate achieved by various studies using different treatment technologies.
Table 2. Comparison of phenol and organic pollutants degradation rate achieved by various studies using different treatment technologies.
AuthorsPollutantsTechnologyRemoval Rate
Wu et al. [7] Phenol and nitrobenzene degradationApplying microbubble technique (>50 μm)Ozone mass transfer rates were 1.3–1.5 times higher than those of conventional bubble aeration.
Lima et al. [15]Hydroquinone Using H2O2 as an oxidizing agent in Fenton’s technique in a bubble column reactor Hydroquinone degradation was achieved at 39% of total of TOC
Alsaffar et al. [23] Bisphenol Photocatalytic degradation technology using Er-Fe/TiO2 modified catalyst 90% removal of Bisphenol
Qiao et al. [42]NitrobenzeneDegradation process in rotating ozonized packed bed reactor using Na2S2O8 as persulfate oxidizing agent90.59% degradation efficiency
Alattar et al. [47]Phenol concentration of 15 ppmGlass beads and TiO2 nanocatalyst in bubble column rector 100% at 105 min in presence of TiO2 nanocatalyst
The present workPhenol concentration of 15 ppmBubble column rector utilizing alumina balls and ZnO nanocatalyst100% at 80 min
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Majhool, A.K.; Sukkar, K.A.; Alsaffar, M.A.; Majdi, H.S. Integrated Process for High Phenol Removal from Wastewater Employing a ZnO Nanocatalyst in an Ozonation Reaction in a Packed Bubble Column Reactor. ChemEngineering 2023, 7, 112. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/chemengineering7060112

AMA Style

Majhool AK, Sukkar KA, Alsaffar MA, Majdi HS. Integrated Process for High Phenol Removal from Wastewater Employing a ZnO Nanocatalyst in an Ozonation Reaction in a Packed Bubble Column Reactor. ChemEngineering. 2023; 7(6):112. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/chemengineering7060112

Chicago/Turabian Style

Majhool, Adnan K., Khalid A. Sukkar, May A. Alsaffar, and Hasan Shakir Majdi. 2023. "Integrated Process for High Phenol Removal from Wastewater Employing a ZnO Nanocatalyst in an Ozonation Reaction in a Packed Bubble Column Reactor" ChemEngineering 7, no. 6: 112. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/chemengineering7060112

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop