Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 2203–2227 | Cite as

As(III) and Cr(VI) oxyanion removal from water by advanced oxidation/reduction processes—a review

  • Belisa A. MarinhoEmail author
  • Raquel O. Cristóvão
  • Rui A. R. Boaventura
  • Vítor J. P. VilarEmail author
Review Article
  • 200 Downloads

Abstract

Water pollution by human activities is a global environmental problem that requires innovative solutions. Arsenic and chromium oxyanions are toxic compounds, introduced in the environment by both natural and anthropogenic activities. In this review, the speciation diagrams of arsenic and chromium oxyanions in aqueous solutions and the analytical methods used for their detection and quantification are presented. Current and potential treatment methods for As and Cr removal, such as adsorption, coagulation/flocculation, electrochemical, ion exchange, membrane separation, phyto- and bioremediation, biosorption, biofiltration, and oxidative/reductive processes, are presented with discussion of their advantages, drawbacks, and the main recent achievements. In the last years, advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) have been acquiring high relevance for the treatment of water contaminated with organic compounds. However, these processes are also able to deal with inorganic contaminants, mainly by changing metal/metalloid oxidation state, turning these compounds less toxic or soluble. An overview of advanced oxidation/reduction processes (AO/RPs) used for As and Cr removal was carried out, focusing mainly on H2O2/UVC, iron-based and heterogeneous photocatalytic processes. Some aspects related to AO/RP experimental conditions, comparison criteria, redox mechanisms, catalyst immobilization, and process intensification through implementation of innovative reactors designs are also discussed. Nevertheless, further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of those processes in order to improve some existing limitations. On the other hand, the validation of those treatment methods needs to be deepened, namely with the use of real wastewaters for their future full-scale application.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Inorganic pollutants treatment Iron-based processes UVC/H2O2 Heterogeneous photocatalysis Photocatalyst immobilization Process intensification 

Notes

Acknowledgments

V.J.P. Vilar acknowledges the FCT Investigator 2013 Programme (IF/00273/2013). B.A. Marinho acknowledges Capes for her scholarship (BEX-0983-13-6). R.O. Cristóvão thanks FCT for her Post-doc Scholarship (SFRH/BPD/101456/2014).

Funding information

This work was financially supported by Project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006984—Associate Laboratory LSRE-LCM funded by FEDER funds through COMPETE2020 - Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalização (POCI)—and by national funds through FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia.

References

  1. Abrahamson HB, Rezvani AB, Brushmiller JG (1994) Photochemical and spectroscopic studies of complexes, of iron(III) with citric acid and other carboxylic acids. Inorg Chim Acta 226:117–127Google Scholar
  2. Akbal F, Camcı S (2011) Copper, chromium and nickel removal from metal plating wastewater by electrocoagulation. Desalination 269:214–222Google Scholar
  3. Akhter M, Tasleem M, Mumtaz Alam M, Ali S (2017) In silico approach for bioremediation of arsenic by structure prediction and docking studies of arsenite oxidase from Pseudomonas stutzeri TS44. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 122:82–91Google Scholar
  4. Akkan Ş, Altın İ, Koç M, Sökmen M (2015) TiO2 immobilized PCL for photocatalytic removal of hexavalent chromium from water. Desalin Water Treat 56:2522–2531Google Scholar
  5. Ananpattarachai J, Kajitvichyanukul P (2016) Enhancement of chromium removal efficiency on adsorption and photocatalytic reduction using a bio-catalyst, titania-impregnated chitosan/xylan hybrid film. J Clean Prod 130:126–136Google Scholar
  6. Anawar HM (2012) Arsenic speciation in environmental samples by hydride generation and electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry. Talanta 88:30–42Google Scholar
  7. ATSDR (2017) ATSDR’s Substance Priority ListGoogle Scholar
  8. Ávila P, Sánchez B, Cardona AI, Rebollar M, Candal R (2002) Influence of the methods of TiO2 incorporation in monolithic catalysts for the photocatalytic destruction of chlorinated hydrocarbons in gas phase. Catal Today 76:271–278Google Scholar
  9. Baig U, Rao RAK, Khan AA, Sanagi MM, Gondal MA (2015) Removal of carcinogenic hexavalent chromium from aqueous solutions using newly synthesized and characterized polypyrrole–titanium(IV)phosphate nanocomposite. Chem Eng J 280:494–504Google Scholar
  10. Barthe PJ, Letourneur DH, Themont JP, Woehl P (2004): Method and microfluidic reactor for photocatalysis. Google PatentsGoogle Scholar
  11. Bissen M, Vieillard-Baron M-M, Schindelin AJ, Frimmel FH (2001) TiO2-catalyzed photooxidation of arsenite to arsenate in aqueous samples. Chemosphere 44:751–757Google Scholar
  12. Bora AJ, Gogoi S, Baruah G, Dutta RK (2016) Utilization of co-existing iron in arsenic removal from groundwater by oxidation-coagulation at optimized pH. J Environ Chem Eng 4:2683–2691Google Scholar
  13. Boutorabi L, Rajabi M, Bazregar M, Asghari A (2017) Selective determination of chromium(VI) ions using in-tube electro-membrane extraction followed by flame atomic absorption spectrometry. Microchem J 132:378–384Google Scholar
  14. Boyjoo Y, Ang M, Pareek V (2013) Some aspects of photocatalytic reactor modeling using computational fluid dynamics. Chem Eng Sci 101:764–784Google Scholar
  15. Braham RJ, Harris AT (2009) Review of major design and scale-up considerations for solar photocatalytic reactors. Ind Eng Chem Res 48:8890–8905Google Scholar
  16. Bundschuh J, Litter MI, Parvez F, Román-Ross G, Nicolli HB, Jean JS, Liu CW, López D, Armienta MA, Guilherme LRG, Cuevas AG, Cornejo L, Cumbal L, Toujaguez R (2012) One century of arsenic exposure in Latin America: a review of history and occurrence from 14 countries. Sci Total Environ 429:2–35Google Scholar
  17. Cappelletti G, Bianchi CL, Ardizzone S (2008) Nano-titania assisted photoreduction of Cr(VI): the role of the different TiO2 polymorphs. Appl Catal B Environ 78:193–201Google Scholar
  18. Cardona AI, Candal R, Sánchez B, Ávila P, Rebollar M (2004) TiO2 on magnesium silicate monolith: effects of different preparation techniques on the photocatalytic oxidation of chlorinated hydrocarbons. Energy 29:845–852Google Scholar
  19. Cassano AE, Alfano OM (2000) Reaction engineering of suspended solid heterogeneous photocatalytic reactors. Catal Today 58:167–197Google Scholar
  20. Catalani S, Fostinelli J, Gilberti ME, Apostoli P (2015) Application of a metal free high performance liquid chromatography with inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (HPLC–ICP-MS) for the determination of chromium species in drinking and tap water. Int J Mass Spectrom 387:31–37Google Scholar
  21. Celebi M, Yurderi M, Bulut A, Kaya M, Zahmakiran M (2016) Palladium nanoparticles supported on amine-functionalized SiO2 for the catalytic hexavalent chromium reduction. Appl Catal B Environ 180:53–64Google Scholar
  22. Chakrabarti S, Chaudhuri B, Bhattacharjee S, Ray AK, Dutta BK (2009) Photo-reduction of hexavalent chromium in aqueous solution in the presence of zinc oxide as semiconductor catalyst. Chem Eng J 153:86–93Google Scholar
  23. Chen D, Li F, Ray AK (2001) External and internal mass transfer effect on photocatalytic degradation. Catal Today 66:475–485Google Scholar
  24. Choi W, Yeo J, Ryu J, Tachikawa T, Majima T (2010) s. Environ Sci Technol 44:9099–9104Google Scholar
  25. Chooto P, Muakthong D, Innuphat C, Wararattananurak P (2016) Determination of inorganic arsenic species by hydride generation–inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry. Sci Asia 42:275–282Google Scholar
  26. Choppala G, Bolan N, Park JH (2013): Chapter two—chromium contamination and its risk management in complex environmental settings. In: Donald LS (ed) Advances in agronomy, vol Volume 120. Academic Press, pp 129-172Google Scholar
  27. Chowdhury S, Mazumder MAJ, Al-Attas O, Husain T (2016) Heavy metals in drinking water: occurrences, implications, and future needs in developing countries. Sci Total Environ 569–570:476–488Google Scholar
  28. Ciambelli P, Sannino D, Palma V, Vaiano V, Mazzei RS (2009) Improved performances of a fluidized bed photoreactor by a microscale illumination system. Int J Photoenergy 2009:7Google Scholar
  29. CL:AIRE (2007) Treatment of chromium contamination and chromium ore processing residue, Technical Bulletin (TB 14). http://www.claire.co.uk
  30. Clarizia L, Russo D, Di Somma I, Marotta R, Andreozzi R (2017) Homogeneous photo-Fenton processes at near neutral pH: a review. Appl Catal B Environ 209:358–371Google Scholar
  31. Clesceri LS, Greenberg AE, Eaton AD (1999): Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 20 edn. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment FederationGoogle Scholar
  32. Corrales I, Barceló J, Bech J, Poschenrieder C (2014) Antimony accumulation and toxicity tolerance mechanisms in Trifolium species. J Geochem Explor 147(Part B):167–172Google Scholar
  33. da Costa Filho BM, Araujo ALP, Silva GV, Boaventura RAR, Dias MM, Lopes JCB, Vilar VJP (2017) Intensification of heterogeneous TiO2 photocatalysis using an innovative micro-meso-structured-photoreactor for n-decane oxidation at gas phase. Chem Eng J 310:331–341Google Scholar
  34. Daniel WL, Han MS, Lee J-S, Mirkin CA (2009) Colorimetric nitrite and nitrate detection with gold nanoparticle probes and kinetic end points. J Am Chem Soc 131:6362–6363Google Scholar
  35. De Luca A, Dantas RF, Esplugas S (2014) Assessment of iron chelates efficiency for photo-Fenton at neutral pH. Water Res 61:232–242Google Scholar
  36. Díez AM, Moreira FC, Marinho BA, Espíndola JCA, Paulista LO, Sanromán MA, Pazos M, Boaventura RAR, Vilar VJP (2018) A step forward in heterogeneous photocatalysis: process intensification by using a static mixer as catalyst support. Chem Eng J 343:597–606Google Scholar
  37. Ding Z, Hu X, Yue PL, Lu GQ, Greenfield PF (2001) Synthesis of anatase TiO2 supported on porous solids by chemical vapor deposition. Catal Today 68:173–182Google Scholar
  38. Dittert IM et al (2014) Integrated reduction/oxidation reactions and sorption processes for Cr(VI) removal from aqueous solutions using Laminaria digitata macro-algae. Chem Eng J 237:443–454Google Scholar
  39. Dittert IM, Vilar VJP, da Silva EAB, de Souza SMAGU, de Souza AAU, Botelho CMS, Boaventura RAR (2012) Adding value to marine macro-algae Laminaria digitata through its use in the separation and recovery of trivalent chromium ions from aqueous solution. Chem Eng J 193–194:348–357Google Scholar
  40. Dobrowolski R, Pawlowska-Kapusta I, Dobrzynska J (2012) Chromium determination in food by slurry sampling graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry using classical and permanent modifiers. Food Chem 132:597–602Google Scholar
  41. Doudrick K, Yang T, Hristovski K, Westerhoff P (2013) Photocatalytic nitrate reduction in water: managing the hole scavenger and reaction by-product selectivity. Appl Catal B Environ 136–137:40–47Google Scholar
  42. Dutta PK, Pehkonen SO, Sharma VK, Ray AK (2005) Photocatalytic oxidation of arsenic(III): evidence of hydroxyl radicals. Environ Sci Technol 39:1827–1834Google Scholar
  43. Ferguson MA, Hering JG (2006) TiO2-photocatalyzed As(III) oxidation in a fixed-bed, flow-through reactor. Environ Sci Technol 40:4261–4267Google Scholar
  44. Ferguson MA, Hoffmann MR, Hering JG (2005) TiO2-photocatalyzed As(III) oxidation in aqueous suspensions: reaction kinetics and effects of adsorption. Environ Sci Technol 39:1880–1886Google Scholar
  45. Fernández-Ibáñez P, Blanco J, Malato S, Nieves FJD (2003) Application of the colloidal stability of TiO2 particles for recovery and reuse in solar photocatalysis. Water Res 37:3180–3188Google Scholar
  46. Forouzan F, Richards TC, Bard AJ (1996) Photoinduced reaction at TiO2 particles Photodeposition from NiII solutions with oxalate. J Phys Chem 100:18123–18127Google Scholar
  47. Frois SR, Tadeu Grassi M, de Campos MS, Abate G (2012) Determination of Cr(vi) in water samples by ICP-OES after separation of Cr(III) by montmorillonite. Anal Methods 4:4389–4394Google Scholar
  48. Gaikwad MS, Balomajumder C (2017) Simultaneous rejection of chromium(VI) and fluoride [Cr(VI) and F] by nanofiltration: membranes characterizations and estimations of membrane transport parameters by CFSK model. J Environ Chem Eng 5:45–53Google Scholar
  49. Gernjak W, Fuerhacker M, Fernández-Ibañez P, Blanco J, Malato S (2006) Solar photo-Fenton treatment—process parameters and process control. Appl Catal B Environ 64:121–130Google Scholar
  50. Giannakas AE, Antonopoulou M, Deligiannakis Y, Konstantinou I (2013) Preparation, characterization of N–I co-doped TiO2 and catalytic performance toward simultaneous Cr(VI) reduction and benzoic acid oxidation. Appl Catal B Environ 140:636–645Google Scholar
  51. Golbaz S, Jafari AJ, Rafiee M, Kalantary RR (2014) Separate and simultaneous removal of phenol, chromium, and cyanide from aqueous solution by coagulation/precipitation: mechanisms and theory. Chem Eng J 253:251–257Google Scholar
  52. Gonzalez AR, Ndung’u K, Flegal AR (2005) Natural occurrence of hexavalent chromium in the aromas Red Sands Aquifer, California. Environ Sci Technol 39:5505–5511Google Scholar
  53. Gorges R, Meyer S, Kreisel G (2004) Photocatalysis in microreactors. J Photochem Photobiol A Chem 167:95–99Google Scholar
  54. Guan X, Du J, Meng X, Sun Y, Sun B, Hu Q (2012) Application of titanium dioxide in arsenic removal from water: a review. J Hazard Mater 215–216:1–16Google Scholar
  55. Gürkan R, Ulusoy Hİ, Akçay M (2017) Simultaneous determination of dissolved inorganic chromium species in wastewater/natural waters by surfactant sensitized catalytic kinetic spectrophotometry. Arab J Chem 10(Supplement 1):S450–S460Google Scholar
  56. Hackbarth FV, Maass D, de Souza AAU, Vilar VJP, de Souza SMAGU (2016) Removal of hexavalent chromium from electroplating wastewaters using marine macroalga Pelvetia canaliculata as natural electron donor. Chem Eng J 290:477–489Google Scholar
  57. Hamdan SS, El-Naas MH (2014) Characterization of the removal of chromium(VI) from groundwater by electrocoagulation. J Ind Eng Chem 20:2775–2781Google Scholar
  58. Han Z, Chang VWC, Zhang L, Tse MS, Tan OK, Hildemann LM (2012) Preparation of TiO2-coated polyester fiber filter by spray-coating and its photocatalytic degradation of gaseous formaldehyde. Aerosol Air Qual Res 12:1327–1335Google Scholar
  59. Hashim MA, Mukhopadhyay S, Sahu JN, Sengupta B (2011) Remediation technologies for heavy metal contaminated groundwater. J Environ Manag 92:2355–2388Google Scholar
  60. He X, Pelaez M, Westrick JA, O’Shea KE, Hiskia A, Triantis T, Kaloudis T, Stefan MI, de la Cruz AA, Dionysiou DD (2012) Efficient removal of microcystin-LR by UV-C/H2O2 in synthetic and natural water samples. Water Res 46:1501–1510Google Scholar
  61. Hérissan A, Meichtry JM, Remita H, Colbeau-Justin C, Litter MI (2017) Reduction of nitrate by heterogeneous photocatalysis over pure and radiolytically modified TiO2 samples in the presence of formic acid. Catal Today 281(Part 1):101–108Google Scholar
  62. Hernández-Alonso MD, Tejedor-Tejedor I, Coronado JM, Soria J, Anderson MA (2006) Sol–gel preparation of TiO2–ZrO2 thin films supported on glass rings: influence of phase composition on photocatalytic activity. Thin Solid Films 502:125–131Google Scholar
  63. Hir ZAM, Moradihamedani P, Abdullah AH, Mohamed MA (2017) Immobilization of TiO2 into polyethersulfone matrix as hybrid film photocatalyst for effective degradation of methyl orange dye. Mater Sci Semicond Process 57:157–165Google Scholar
  64. Hosseini SS, Nazif A, Alaei Shahmirzadi MA, Ortiz I (2017) Fabrication, tuning and optimization of poly (acrilonitryle) nanofiltration membranes for effective nickel and chromium removal from electroplating wastewater. Sep Purif Technol 187:46–59Google Scholar
  65. Hug SJ, Canonica L, Wegelin M, Gechter D, von Gunten U (2001) Solar oxidation and removal of arsenic at circumneutral pH in iron containing waters. Environ Sci Technol 35:2114–2121Google Scholar
  66. Hug SJ, Laubscher H-U, James BR (1997) Iron(III) catalyzed photochemical reduction of chromium(VI) by oxalate and citrate in aqueous solutions. Environ Sci Technol 31:160–170Google Scholar
  67. Imoberdorf GE, Cassano AE, Alfano OM, Irazoqui HA (2006) Modeling of a multiannular photocatalytic reactor for perchloroethylene degradation in air. AICHE J 52:1814–1823Google Scholar
  68. Jabłońska-Czapla M, Szopa S, Grygoyć K, Łyko A, Michalski R (2014) Development and validation of HPLC–ICP-MS method for the determination inorganic Cr, As and Sb speciation forms and its application for Pławniowice reservoir (Poland) water and bottom sediments variability study. Talanta 120:475–483Google Scholar
  69. Johansson CL, Paul NA, de Nys R, Roberts DA (2016) Simultaneous biosorption of selenium, arsenic and molybdenum with modified algal-based biochars. J Environ Manag 165:117–123Google Scholar
  70. Joshi KM, Shrivastava VS (2011) Photocatalytic degradation of chromium (VI) from wastewater using nanomaterials like TiO2, ZnO, and CdS. Appl Nanosci 1:147–155Google Scholar
  71. Kahu SS, Shekhawat A, Saravanan D, Jugade RM (2016) Two fold modified chitosan for enhanced adsorption of hexavalent chromium from simulated wastewater and industrial effluents. Carbohydr Polym 146:264–273Google Scholar
  72. Khan FH, Ambreen K, Fatima G, Kumar S (2012) Assessment of health risks with reference to oxidative stress and DNA damage in chromium exposed population. Sci Total Environ 430:68–74Google Scholar
  73. Khlifi R, Olmedo P, Gil F, Hammami B, Chakroun A, Rebai A, Hamza-Chaffai A (2013) Arsenic, cadmium, chromium and nickel in cancerous and healthy tissues from patients with head and neck cancer. Sci Total Environ 452–453:58–67Google Scholar
  74. Kim D-H, Bokare AD, Koo MS, Choi W (2015) Heterogeneous catalytic oxidation of As(III) on nonferrous metal oxides in the presence of H2O2. Environ Sci Technol 49:3506–3513Google Scholar
  75. Kononova ON, Bryuzgina GL, Apchitaeva OV, Kononov YS (2015) Ion exchange recovery of chromium (VI) and manganese (II) from aqueous solutions. Arab J Chem. In Press, Corrected ProofGoogle Scholar
  76. Kotaś J, Stasicka Z (2000) Chromium occurrence in the environment and methods of its speciation. Environ Pollut 107:263–283Google Scholar
  77. Krishna MVB, Chandrasekaran K, Karunasagar D, Arunachalam J (2001) A combined treatment approach using Fenton’s reagent and zero valent iron for the removal of arsenic from drinking water. J Hazard Mater 84:229–240Google Scholar
  78. Kumar ASK, Jiang S-J (2016) Chitosan-functionalized graphene oxide: a novel adsorbent an efficient adsorption of arsenic from aqueous solution. J Environ Chem Eng 4:1698–1713Google Scholar
  79. Lee C-G, Alvarez PJJ, Nam A, Park S-J, Do T, Choi U-S, Lee S-H (2017) Arsenic(V) removal using an amine-doped acrylic ion exchange fiber: kinetic, equilibrium, and regeneration studies. J Hazard Mater 325:223–229Google Scholar
  80. Lee H, Choi W (2002) Photocatalytic oxidation of arsenite in TiO2 suspension: kinetics and mechanisms. Environ Sci Technol 36:3872–3878Google Scholar
  81. Lescano M, Zalazar C, Cassano A, Brandi R (2012) Kinetic modeling of arsenic (III) oxidation in water employing the UV/H2O2 process. Chem Eng J 211–212:360–368Google Scholar
  82. Lescano MR, Zalazar CS, Cassano AE, Brandi RJ (2011) Arsenic (iii) oxidation of water applying a combination of hydrogen peroxide and UVC radiation. Photochem Photobiol Sci 10:1797–1803Google Scholar
  83. Li D, Li J, Jia X, Han Y, Wang E (2012) Electrochemical determination of arsenic(III) on mercaptoethylamine modified Au electrode in neutral media. Anal Chim Acta 733:23–27Google Scholar
  84. Li D, Xiong K, Yang Z, Liu C, Feng X, Lu X (2011) Process intensification of heterogeneous photocatalysis with static mixer: enhanced mass transfer of reactive species. Catal Today 175:322–327Google Scholar
  85. Lin H, Valsaraj KT (2005) Development of an optical fiber monolith reactor for photocatalytic wastewater treatment. J Appl Electrochem 35:699–708Google Scholar
  86. Litter MI (2017) Last advances on TiO2-photocatalytic removal of chromium, uranium and arsenic. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable. Chemistry 6:150–158Google Scholar
  87. Litter MI, Morgada ME, Bundschuh J (2010) Possible treatments for arsenic removal in Latin American waters for human consumption. Environ Pollut 158:1105–1118Google Scholar
  88. Liu R, Zhang P, Li H, Zhang C (2016) Lab-on-cloth integrated with gravity/capillary flow chemiluminescence (GCF-CL): towards simple, inexpensive, portable, flow system for measuring trivalent chromium in water. Sensors Actuators B Chem 236:35–43Google Scholar
  89. Liu R, Zhao J, Huang Z, Zhang L, Zou M, Shi B, Zhao S (2017) Nitrogen and phosphorus co-doped graphene quantum dots as a nano-sensor for highly sensitive and selective imaging detection of nitrite in live cell. Sensors Actuators B Chem 240:604–612Google Scholar
  90. Liu Y, Deng L, Chen Y, Wu F, Deng N (2007) Simultaneous photocatalytic reduction of Cr(VI) and oxidation of bisphenol A induced by Fe(III)–OH complexes in water. J Hazard Mater 139:399–402Google Scholar
  91. Lopes FVS et al (2013a) Perchloroethylene gas-phase degradation over titania-coated transparent monoliths. Appl Catal B Environ 140-141:444–456Google Scholar
  92. Lopes JCB, Dos Santos Da Costa Laranjeira PEM, Dias MMGQ, Martins AAA (2013b): Network mixer and related mixing process. Google PatentsGoogle Scholar
  93. López-García I, Rivas RE, Hernández-Córdoba M (2011) Use of carbon nanotubes and electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry for the speciation of very low amounts of arsenic and antimony in waters. Talanta 86:52–57Google Scholar
  94. Magu MM, Govender PP, Ngila JC (2016) Geochemical modelling and speciation studies of metal pollutants present in selected water systems in South Africa. Physics Chem Earth, Parts A/B/C 92:44–51Google Scholar
  95. Malato S, Fernández-Ibáñez P, Maldonado MI, Blanco J, Gernjak W (2009) Decontamination and disinfection of water by solar photocatalysis: recent overview and trends. Catal Today 147:1–59Google Scholar
  96. Malato S, Maldonado MI, Fernández-Ibáñez P, Oller I, Polo I, Sánchez-Moreno R (2016) Decontamination and disinfection of water by solar photocatalysis: the pilot plants of the Plataforma Solar de Almeria. Mater Sci Semicond Process 42:15–23Google Scholar
  97. Marinho BA, Cristóvão RO, Djellabi R, Caseiro A, Miranda SM, Loureiro JM, Boaventura RAR, Dias MM, Lopes JCB, Vilar VJP (2018a) Strategies to reduce mass and photons transfer limitations in heterogeneous photocatalytic processes: hexavalent chromium reduction studies. J Environ Manag 217:555–564Google Scholar
  98. Marinho BA, Cristóvão RO, Djellabi R, Loureiro JM, Boaventura RAR, Vilar VJP (2017a) Photocatalytic reduction of Cr(VI) over TiO2-coated cellulose acetate monolithic structures using solar light. Appl Catal B Environ 203:18–30Google Scholar
  99. Marinho BA, Cristóvão RO, Loureiro JM, Boaventura RAR, Vilar VJP (2016) Solar photocatalytic reduction of Cr(VI) over Fe(III) in the presence of organic sacrificial agents. Appl Catal B Environ 192:208–219Google Scholar
  100. Marinho BA et al (2017b) Intensification of heterogeneous TiO2 photocatalysis using an innovative micro–meso-structured-reactor for Cr(VI) reduction under simulated solar light. Chem Eng J 318:76–88Google Scholar
  101. Marinho BA et al. (2018b): Application of a micro-meso-structured reactor (NETmix) to promote photochemical UVC/H2O2 processes—oxidation of As(III) to As(V). Photochem Photobiol SciGoogle Scholar
  102. Matsushita Y, Ohba N, Kumada S, Sakeda K, Suzuki T, Ichimura T (2008) Photocatalytic reactions in microreactors. Chem Eng J 135(Supplement 1):S303–S308Google Scholar
  103. Mazur LP, Pozdniakova TA, Mayer DA, de Souza SMAGU, Boaventura RAR, Vilar VJP (2017) Cation exchange prediction model for copper binding onto raw brown marine macro-algae Ascophyllum nodosum: batch and fixed-bed studies. Chem Eng J 316:255–276Google Scholar
  104. Mazurova I, Khvaschevskaya A, Guseva N (2015) The choice of conditions for the determination of vanadium, chromium and arsenic concentration in waters by ICP-MS using collision mode. Procedia Chemistry 15:201–205Google Scholar
  105. Meichtry JM, Brusa M, Mailhot G, Grela MA, Litter MI (2007) Heterogeneous photocatalysis of Cr(VI) in the presence of citric acid over TiO2 particles: relevance of Cr(V)–citrate complexes. Appl Catal B Environ 71:101–107Google Scholar
  106. Meichtry JM, Colbeau-Justin C, Custo G, Litter MI (2014a) Preservation of the photocatalytic activity of TiO2 by EDTA in the reductive transformation of Cr(VI). Studies by Time Resolved Microwave Conductivity Catalysis. Today 224:236–243Google Scholar
  107. Meichtry JM, Colbeau-Justin C, Custo G, Litter MI (2014b) TiO2-photocatalytic transformation of Cr(VI) in the presence of EDTA: comparison of different commercial photocatalysts and studies by time resolved microwave conductivity. Appl Catal B Environ 144:189–195Google Scholar
  108. Meichtry JM, Quici N, Mailhot G, Litter MI (2011) Heterogeneous photocatalytic degradation of citric acid over TiO2: II. Mechanism of citric acid degradation. Appl Catal B Environ 102:555–562Google Scholar
  109. Minero C (1999) Kinetic analysis of photoinduced reactions at the water semiconductor interface. Catal Today 54:205–216Google Scholar
  110. Mólgora CC, Domínguez AM, Avila EM, Drogui P, Buelna G (2013) Removal of arsenic from drinking water: a comparative study between electrocoagulation-microfiltration and chemical coagulation-microfiltration processes. Sep Purif Technol 118:645–651Google Scholar
  111. Monteiro RAR, Miranda SM, Rodrigues-Silva C, Faria JL, Silva AMT, Boaventura RAR, Vilar VJP (2015) Gas phase oxidation of n-decane and PCE by photocatalysis using an annular photoreactor packed with a monolithic catalytic bed coated with P25 and PC500. Appl Catal B Environ 165:306–315Google Scholar
  112. Mukherjee PS, Ray AK (1999) Major challenges in the design of a large-scale photocatalytic reactor for water treatment. Chem Eng Technol 22:253–260Google Scholar
  113. Multani RS, Feldmann T, Demopoulos GP (2016) Antimony in the metallurgical industry: a review of its chemistry and environmental stabilization options. Hydrometallurgy 164:141–153Google Scholar
  114. Nansheng D, Feng W, Fan L, Mei X (1998) Ferric citrate-induced photodegradation of dyes in aqueous solutions. Chemosphere 36:3101–3112Google Scholar
  115. Nidheesh PV, Singh TSA (2017) Arsenic removal by electrocoagulation process: recent trends and removal mechanism. Chemosphere 181:418–432Google Scholar
  116. Niedzielski P, Siepak M (2003) Analytical methods for determining arsenic, antimony and selenium in environmental samples. Pol J Environ Stud 12:14Google Scholar
  117. Omidvar Borna M, Pirsaheb M, Vosoughi Niri M, Khosravi Mashizie R, Kakavandi B, Zare MR, Asadi A (2016) Batch and column studies for the adsorption of chromium(VI) on low-cost Hibiscus cannabinus kenaf, a green adsorbent. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 68:80–89Google Scholar
  118. Oppenländer T (2007): AOPs and AOTs. In: Photochemical purification of water and air. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, pp 5–17Google Scholar
  119. Ortega A, Oliva I, Contreras KE, González I, Cruz-Díaz MR, Rivero EP (2017) Arsenic removal from water by hybrid electro-regenerated anion exchange resin/electrodialysis process. Sep Purif Technol 184:319–326Google Scholar
  120. Padoin N, Soares C (2017) An explicit correlation for optimal TiO2 film thickness in immobilized photocatalytic reaction systems. Chem Eng J 310(Part 2):381–388Google Scholar
  121. Papaevangelou VA, Gikas GD, Tsihrintzis VA (2017) Chromium removal from wastewater using HSF and VF pilot-scale constructed wetlands: overall performance, and fate and distribution of this element within the wetland environment. Chemosphere 168:716–730Google Scholar
  122. Parga JR et al (2005) Arsenic removal via electrocoagulation from heavy metal contaminated groundwater in La Comarca Lagunera México. J Hazard Mater 124:247–254Google Scholar
  123. Pecchi G, Reyes P, Sanhueza P, Villaseñor J (2001) Photocatalytic degradation of pentachlorophenol on TiO2 sol–gel catalysts. Chemosphere 43:141–146Google Scholar
  124. Pinho LX et al (2015) Oxidation of microcystin-LR and cylindrospermopsin by heterogeneous photocatalysis using a tubular photoreactor packed with different TiO2 coated supports. Chem Eng J 266:100–111Google Scholar
  125. Rahman KZ, Wiessner A, Kuschk P, van Afferden M, Mattusch J, Müller RA (2014) Removal and fate of arsenic in the rhizosphere of Juncus effusus treating artificial wastewater in laboratory-scale constructed wetlands. Ecol Eng 69:93–105Google Scholar
  126. Ramasundaram S, Seid MG, Choe JW, Kim EJ, Chung YC, Cho K, Lee C, Hong SW (2016) Highly reusable TiO2 nanoparticle photocatalyst by direct immobilization on steel mesh via PVDF coating, electrospraying, and thermal fixation. Chem Eng J 306:344–351Google Scholar
  127. Raupp GB, Alexiadis A, Hossain MM, Changrani R (2001) First-principles modeling, scaling laws and design of structured photocatalytic oxidation reactors for air purification. Catal Today 69:41–49Google Scholar
  128. Rebelo FM, Caldas ED (2016) Arsenic, lead, mercury and cadmium: toxicity, levels in breast milk and the risks for breastfed infants. Environ Res 151:671–688Google Scholar
  129. Rodríguez M, Malato S, Pulgarin C, Contreras S, Curcó D, Giménez J, Esplugas S (2005) Optimizing the solar photo-Fenton process in the treatment of contaminated water. Determination of intrinsic kinetic constants for scale-up. Sol Energy 79:360–368Google Scholar
  130. Rosario-Ortiz FL, Wert EC, Snyder SA (2010) Evaluation of UV/H2O2 treatment for the oxidation of pharmaceuticals in wastewater. Water Res 44:1440–1448Google Scholar
  131. Sagawe G, Lehnard A, Lübber M, Bahnemann D (2001) The insulated solar Fenton hybrid process: fundamental investigations. Helvetica Chimica Acta 84:3742–3759Google Scholar
  132. Sahabi DM, Takeda M, Suzuki I, Koizumi J-I (2009) Adsorption and abiotic oxidation of arsenic by aged biofilter media: equilibrium and kinetics. J Hazard Mater 168:1310–1318Google Scholar
  133. Saitua H, Gil R, Padilla AP (2011) Experimental investigation on arsenic removal with a nanofiltration pilot plant from naturally contaminated groundwater. Desalination 274:1–6Google Scholar
  134. Sandana Mala JG, Sujatha D, Rose C (2015) Inducible chromate reductase exhibiting extracellular activity in Bacillus methylotrophicus for chromium bioremediation. Microbiol Res 170:235–241Google Scholar
  135. Sarkar A, Paul B (2016) The global menace of arsenic and its conventional remediation—a critical review. Chemosphere 158:37–49Google Scholar
  136. Sarwar N et al (2017) Phytoremediation strategies for soils contaminated with heavy metals: modifications and future perspectives. Chemosphere 171:710–721Google Scholar
  137. Sathvika T, Manasi, Rajesh V, Rajesh N (2016) Adsorption of chromium supported with various column modelling studies through the synergistic influence of Aspergillus and cellulose. J Environ Chem Eng 4:3193–3204Google Scholar
  138. Sauer ML, Ollis DF (1994) Acetone oxidation in a photocatalytic monolith reactor. J Catal 149:81–91Google Scholar
  139. Schrank SG, José HJ, Moreira RFPM (2002) Simultaneous photocatalytic Cr(VI) reduction and dye oxidation in a TiO2 slurry reactor. J Photochem Photobiol A Chem 147:71–76Google Scholar
  140. Shamsipur M, Fattahi N, Assadi Y, Sadeghi M, Sharafi K (2014) Speciation of As(III) and As(V) in water samples by graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry after solid phase extraction combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on the solidification of floating organic drop. Talanta 130:26–32Google Scholar
  141. Shephard GS, Stockenström S, de Villiers D, Engelbrecht WJ, Wessels GFS (2002) Degradation of microcystin toxins in a falling film photocatalytic reactor with immobilized titanium dioxide catalyst. Water Res 36:140–146Google Scholar
  142. Siavash Moakhar R, Goh GKL, Dolati A, Ghorbani M (2017) Sunlight-driven photoelectrochemical sensor for direct determination of hexavalent chromium based on Au decorated rutile TiO2 nanorods. Appl Catal B Environ 201:411–418Google Scholar
  143. Singh M, Singh AK, Swati SN, Singh S, Chowdhary AK (2010) Arsenic mobility in fluvial environment of the Ganga Plain, northern India. Environ Earth Sci 59:1703–1715Google Scholar
  144. Skoog DA, West DM, Holler FJ, Crouch SR (2004) Fundamentals of analytical chemitry. Brooks/Cole, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  145. Smedley PL, Kinniburgh DG (2002) A review of the source, behaviour and distribution of arsenic in natural waters. Appl Geochem 17:517–568Google Scholar
  146. Soares PA, Batalha M, Souza SMAGU, Boaventura RAR, Vilar VJP (2015) Enhancement of a solar photo-Fenton reaction with ferric-organic ligands for the treatment of acrylic-textile dyeing wastewater. J Environ Manag 152:120–131Google Scholar
  147. Sonawane RS, Hegde SG, Dongare MK (2003) Preparation of titanium(IV) oxide thin film photocatalyst by sol–gel dip coating. Mater Chem Phys 77:744–750Google Scholar
  148. Song P, Yang Z, Zeng G, Yang X, Xu H, Wang L, Xu R, Xiong W, Ahmad K (2017) Electrocoagulation treatment of arsenic in wastewaters: a comprehensive review. Chem Eng J 317:707–725Google Scholar
  149. Song S, Gallegos-Garcia M (2014): Chapter 11—arsenic removal from water by the coagulation process A2 - Fanun, Monzer. In: The role of colloidal systems in environmental protection. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 261–277Google Scholar
  150. Su Y, Talla A, Hessel V, Noël T (2015) Controlled photocatalytic aerobic oxidation of thiols to disulfides in an energy-efficient photomicroreactor. Chem Eng Technol 38:1733–1742Google Scholar
  151. Subrahmanyam M, Boule P, Durga Kumari V, Naveen Kumar D, Sancelme M, Rachel A (2008) Pumice stone supported titanium dioxide for removal of pathogen in drinking water and recalcitrant in wastewater. Sol Energy 82:1099–1106Google Scholar
  152. Suresh Kumar P, Flores RQ, Sjöstedt C, Önnby L (2016) Arsenic adsorption by iron–aluminium hydroxide coated onto macroporous supports: insights from X-ray absorption spectroscopy and comparison with granular ferric hydroxides. J Hazard Mater 302:166–174Google Scholar
  153. Takada T, Hirata M, Kokubu S, Toorisaka E, Ozaki M, Hano T (2008) Kinetic study on biological reduction of selenium compounds. Process Biochem 43:1304–1307Google Scholar
  154. Tan LC, Nancharaiah YV, van Hullebusch ED, Lens PNL (2016) Selenium: environmental significance, pollution, and biological treatment technologies. Biotechnol Adv 34:886–907Google Scholar
  155. Testa JJ, Grela MA, Litter MI (2004) Heterogeneous photocatalytic reduction of chromium(VI) over TiO2 particles in the presence of oxalate: involvement of Cr(V) species. Environ Sci Technol 38:1589–1594Google Scholar
  156. Tezcan Un U, Onpeker SE, Ozel E (2017) The treatment of chromium containing wastewater using electrocoagulation and the production of ceramic pigments from the resulting sludge. J Environ Manag 200:196–203Google Scholar
  157. Tsang S, Phu F, Baum MM, Poskrebyshev GA (2007) Determination of phosphate/arsenate by a modified molybdenum blue method and reduction of arsenate by S2O4 2−. Talanta 71:1560–1568Google Scholar
  158. Ulusoy Hİ, Akçay M, Ulusoy S, Gürkan R (2011) Determination of ultra trace arsenic species in water samples by hydride generation atomic absorption spectrometry after cloud point extraction. Anal Chim Acta 703:137–144Google Scholar
  159. Urbano BF, Rivas BL, Martinez F, Alexandratos SD (2012) Water-insoluble polymer–clay nanocomposite ion exchange resin based on N-methyl-d-glucamine ligand groups for arsenic removal. React Funct Polym 72:642–649Google Scholar
  160. Van Gerven T, Mul G, Moulijn J, Stankiewicz A (2007) A review of intensification of photocatalytic processes. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 46:781–789Google Scholar
  161. van Grieken R, Marugán J, Sordo C, Martínez P, Pablos C (2009) Photocatalytic inactivation of bacteria in water using suspended and immobilized silver-TiO2. Appl Catal B Environ 93:112–118Google Scholar
  162. Vasudevan S, Lakshmi J, Sozhan G (2010) Studies on the removal of arsenate by electrochemical coagulation using aluminum alloy anode CLEAN – Soil, Air. Water 38:506–515Google Scholar
  163. Vella G, Imoberdorf GE, Sclafani A, Cassano AE, Alfano OM, Rizzuti L (2010) Modeling of a TiO2-coated quartz wool packed bed photocatalytic reactor. Appl Catal B Environ 96:399–407Google Scholar
  164. Vera ML, Traid HD, Henrikson ER, Ares AE, Litter MI (2018) Heterogeneous photocatalytic Cr(VI) reduction with short and long nanotubular TiO2 coatings prepared by anodic oxidation. Mater Res Bull 97:150–157Google Scholar
  165. Wang S, Wang Z, Zhuang Q (1992) Photocatalytic reduction of the environmental pollutant CrVI over a cadmium sulphide powder under visible light illumination. Appl Catal B Environ 1:257–270Google Scholar
  166. Wang W, Ku Y (2003) Photocatalytic degradation of gaseous benzene in air streams by using an optical fiber photoreactor. J Photochem Photobiol A Chem 159:47–59Google Scholar
  167. Wang X, Pehkonen SO, Ray AK (2004) Removal of aqueous Cr(VI) by a combination of photocatalytic reduction and coprecipitation. Ind Eng Chem Res 43:1665–1672Google Scholar
  168. Wang Z, Bush RT, Liu J (2013) Arsenic(III) and iron(II) co-oxidation by oxygen and hydrogen peroxide: divergent reactions in the presence of organic ligands. Chemosphere 93:1936–1941Google Scholar
  169. Wei S, Li J, Liu L, Shi J, Shao Z (2014) Photocatalytic effect of iron corrosion products on reduction of hexavalent chromium by organic acids. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 45:2659–2663Google Scholar
  170. Wu Q, Zhao J, Qin G, Wang C, Tong X, Xue S (2013) Photocatalytic reduction of Cr(VI) with TiO2 film under visible light. Appl Catal B Environ 142:142–148Google Scholar
  171. Wu Y, Ming Z, Yang S, Fan Y, Fang P, Sha H, Cha L (2017) Adsorption of hexavalent chromium onto bamboo charcoal grafted by Cu2+-N-aminopropylsilane complexes: optimization, kinetic, and isotherm studies. J Ind Eng Chem 46:222–233Google Scholar
  172. Xiong Y, Tong Q, Shan W, Xing Z, Wang Y, Wen S, Lou Z (2017) Arsenic transformation and adsorption by iron hydroxide/manganese dioxide doped straw activated carbon. Appl Surf Sci 416:618–627Google Scholar
  173. Yamamura S, Amachi S (2014) Microbiology of inorganic arsenic: from metabolism to bioremediation. J Biosci Bioeng 118:1–9Google Scholar
  174. Yang L, Li X, Chu Z, Ren Y, Zhang J (2014) Distribution and genetic diversity of the microorganisms in the biofilter for the simultaneous removal of arsenic, iron and manganese from simulated groundwater. Bioresour Technol 156:384–388Google Scholar
  175. Yazdani M, Tuutijärvi T, Bhatnagar A, Vahala R (2016) Adsorptive removal of arsenic(V) from aqueous phase by feldspars: kinetics, mechanism, and thermodynamic aspects of adsorption. J Mol Liq 214:149–156Google Scholar
  176. Yoon S-H, Oh S-E, Yang JE, Lee JH, Lee M, Yu S, Pak D (2009) TiO2 photocatalytic oxidation mechanism of As(III). Environ Sci Technol 43:864–869Google Scholar
  177. Yoshihisa M, Shinji K, Kazuhito W, Kosaku S, Teijiro I (2006) Photocatalytic reduction in microreactors. Chem Lett 35:410–411Google Scholar
  178. Zhang P, Yao W, Yuan S (2017) Citrate-enhanced release of arsenic during pyrite oxidation at circumneutral conditions. Water Res 109:245–252Google Scholar
  179. Zheng F, Lin X, Yu H, Li S, Huang X (2016) Visible-light photoreduction, adsorption, matrix conversion and membrane separation for ultrasensitive chromium determination in natural water by X-ray fluorescence. Sensors Actuators B Chem 226:500–505Google Scholar
  180. Zhou J, Wang Y, Wang J, Qiao W, Long D, Ling L (2016) Effective removal of hexavalent chromium from aqueous solutions by adsorption on mesoporous carbon microspheres. J Colloid Interface Sci 462:200–207Google Scholar
  181. Zhu N, Yan T, Qiao J, Cao H (2016) Adsorption of arsenic, phosphorus and chromium by bismuth impregnated biochar: adsorption mechanism and depleted adsorbent utilization. Chemosphere 164:32–40Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Separation and Reaction Engineering - Laboratory of Catalysis and Materials (LSRE-LCM), Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.CAPES FoundationMinistry of Education of BrazilBrasíliaBrazil

Personalised recommendations