See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/340725280

Laundry wastewater treatment by peroxi-coagulation

Article  in  Desalination and Water Treatment · January 2020

DOI: 10.5004/dwt.2020.25188

CITATIONS READS

4 125

5 authors, including:

Tülin Yılmaz Nayır Ozge Dinc

Gebze Technical University University of Cincinnati
13 PUBLICATIONS   62 CITATIONS    40 PUBLICATIONS   575 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Serdar Kara Abdurrahman Akyol

Gebze Technical University Gebze Technical University
35 PUBLICATIONS   950 CITATIONS    31 PUBLICATIONS   1,668 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

HIGH PERFORMANCE FORWARD OSMOSIS MEMBRANE MANUFACTURING AND DETERMINATION OF THEIR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PERFORMANCE View project

Separate, Combined and Hybrid Electrochemical Treatment Research for IBC waste water View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abdurrahman Akyol on 23 June 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108
April
www.deswater.com
doi: 10.5004/dwt.2020.25188

Laundry wastewater treatment by peroxi-coagulation

Tulin Yilmaz Nayira,*, Ozge Dincb, Serdar Karaa, Abdurrahman Akyola, Anatoli Dimogloc
a
Department of Environmental Engineering, Gebze Technical University, 41400 Gebze, Kocaeli, Turkey,
email: [email protected] (T.Y. Nayir)
b
Institute of Health Science, Department of Biotechnology, The University of Health Science, 34668 Istanbul, Turkey
c
Department of Environmental Engineering, Duzce University, Konuralp Yerleşkesi, 81620 Duzce, Turkey

Received 16 May 2019; Accepted 15 November 2019

abstract
Peroxi-coagulation (PC) process was developed with iron anodes and carbon-polytetrafluoroeth-
ylene cathodes for the treatment of laundry wastewater (LWW). The effect of operating conditions
as pH, current density and temperature were investigated by response surface modeling. Whereas
temperature change did not affect the reaction, pH change dominated it especially between pH 5–7
causing an effective coagulation process. The model was devoted to maximizing the removal of
chemical oxygen demand (COD), methylene blue substances (MBAS) and total phosphorus (TP) and
to minimizing total residual iron (TFe) concentration in the treated wastewater. Complete TP removal
and high removal efficiencies in terms of COD and MBAS were provided at optimal operation con-
ditions (pH 7, current density 45 mA/cm2 and temperature: 25°C). During the PC process H2O2 and
S2O82– production was observed. According to the results, H2O2 concentration was stable during the
process after a certain increment; however, persulfate production reached maximum value when
surfactant (namely: linear alkylbenzene sulfonate) concentration was almost minimum in the bulk.
In the PC process, both the oxidation with possibly formed radicals (i.e. •OH and SO4–•) and the coag-
ulation with iron precipitation are responsible for the LWW treatment.
Keywords: Peroxi coagulation; Laundry wastewater; Response surface modeling; Surfactant; Persulfate

1. Introduction 1,024 mg/L [2–6]. Wastewater quantity differs depending on

the dosage of detergents, bleach and cleaning aids, which
Industrial laundries discharge a significant amount
may vary depending on whether the contaminated articles
of wastewater as a result of washing tons of dirty clothes.
originate from homes, hotels or hospitals. Moreover, surfac-
Laundry wastewater (LWW) is composed of organic and
tants as the main surface-active reagents of the detergents
inorganic compounds such as greases, surfactants, oils,
are important pollutants in the LWWs.
pesticides, phenols as organic content and pH, sulfur, chlo-
Previous studies have been conducted for either specific
rides, alkalinity, toxic compounds as inorganic content [1].
surfactant removal or LWW treatment such as biological
Most of the organic and inorganic compounds were below
treatment [7,8], electrocoagulation/electroflotation [9], ozo-
the maximum limits in accordance with the environmen-
nation [10], coagulation and membrane filtration [11,12] and
tal legislation that pH, chemical oxygen demand (COD),
electro-peroxone process [3]. Among those processes, elec-
total phosphorus (TP) and surfactant concentrations were
trochemical treatment techniques have been drawn atten-
mostly analyzed. The LWW contains COD concentration
tion with their easy operation and less sludge production
between 275–4,800 mg/L, phosphate concentration between
properties. In electrocoagulation process while the anode
0.4–95 mg/L and surfactant concentration between 1 and

* Corresponding author.

1944-3994/1944-3986 © 2020 Desalination Publications. All rights reserved.

 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108 99

electrode (iron or aluminum) is producing ions for floccula- and electron transfer between transition metals methods are
tion, the cathode electrode generates hydrogen gas for flo- used for persulfate activation [28]. In the transition metals
tation of contaminants. In case of electrooxidation, insoluble method, persulfate can be activated through one-electron
electrodes are used to oxidize pollutants directly by active transfer using metals such as silver, copper, iron, zinc, cobalt,
oxygen like hydroxyl radicals (•OH) and/or indirectly in the and manganese. Among these metals, iron has been used
existence of chlorine ions. In this context, peroxi-coagulation effectively in the activation of persulfate ion, since it is rel-
(PC) is one of the electrochemical treatment processes that atively non-toxic, environmentally, friendly and more cost-­
work like a combination of electrocoagulation and electro­ effective metal than other transition metals [29]. Activation
oxidation in the same reactor simultaneously. of persulfate ion occurs according to reaction (7). To get
Although the first studies on the PC process have been ferrous ion more than sufficient concentration for reaction
started a few decades ago [13,14], there are limited studies with persulfate causes scavenging the sulfate radical through
for environmental applications. These studies can be given reaction (8) [28,29].
such as composite wastewater treatment with iron electrodes
and externally added H2O2 [15], phenol treatment with steel S 2 O82 − + Fe 2 + → SO −• + SO 24 − + Fe 3 + (7)
4
anode and graphite cathode [16], herbicides degradation
with O2-fed cathode and iron anode [17,18], acrylonitrile
removal with graphite felt cathode and iron anode [19], tex- SO −•
4
+ Fe 2 + → SO 24 − + Fe 3 + (8)
tile dye degradation with carbon-polytetrafluoroethylene
(PTFE) and iron electrodes [20–23], sodium dodecyl sulfate This study focused on the treatment of LWW by the PC
removal with iron electrodes and externally added H2O2 [24]. process equipped with carbon-PTFE cathode and iron sheet
The PC provides degradation of pollutants with electro- anode. An integrated approach was developed by an exper-
generated •OH and coagulation with Fe(OH)3 precipitate. imental design for maximizing the removal of COD, anionic
In this process, following reactions may occur [16] at the surfactant methylene blue substances (MBAS) and TP from
electrode surfaces and/or in the bulk solution. LWW while minimizing the (TFe) concentration in the bulk
At anode: solution. The effects of controlling factors of the PC process
as current density, initial pH and temperature individually
2Fe ( s ) → 2Fe 2 + ( aq ) + 4e − (1) and their interactions on LWW treatment were evaluated.
In-situ persulfate and hydrogen peroxide production were
also observed to find the effect of oxidants produced in the
2H 2 O ( l ) → O 2 ( g ) + 4H + ( aq ) + 4e − (2) PC system.

At cathode:
2. Materials and methods
8H ( aq ) + 8e → 4H 2 ( g ) (3)
+ −
2.1. LWW characterization
LWW was obtained from an industrial laundry effluent
O 2 + 2H + + 2 e− → H 2 O 2 (4) at different times and stored at 4°C. Samples were analyzed
within 24 h and characterization are given in Table 1.
In the bulk:

2Fe 2 + ( aq ) + 4OH − ( aq ) → 2Fe ( OH )2 ( s ) (5) 2.2. Experimental set-up

The PC process was performed in a plexiglass reactor
with the dimensions of 10 cm × 10 cm × 10 cm. An iron sheet
Fe 2+
( aq ) + H O ( g ) → Fe ( aq ) +
2 2
3+ •
OH + OH ( aq ) (6)
−
with 36 cm2 active area was used as an anode. Two pieces of
carbon-PTFE cathodes in same area with the anode were used
As it is seen from the well-known Fenton reaction (6),
•
OH radicals are generated in the bulk solution and ferrous
iron is oxidized to ferric iron. While ferrous iron is supplied Table 1
from the anode iron electrodes, H2O2 is produced through Characterization of laundry wastewater
reaction (4) at the cathode. The oxygen requirement for this
reaction can be provided from the reaction (2) or external Parameter Value
O2 dosage. Excess Fe3+ ions which are produced in reaction
pH 11.8–12.3
(6) precipitates as Fe(OH)3. Thus, pollutants can be removed
by a combination of coagulation with Fe(OH)3 and oxida- Electrical conductivity (mS/cm) 1.5–2.5
tion with generated •OH radicals [16,19,25]. Moreover, it is COD (mg/L) 720–1,170
known that when surfactants containing wastewaters are Anionic surfactant (mg/L) 31–75
electrolyzed, persulfates can be produced from the sulfate Turbidity (NTU) 103–117
ions which are degradation products of sodium dodecyl Suspended solids (mg/L) 75–100
sulfate [26]. Persulfate (S2O82–) is a newly emerging oxidant Sulphate (mg/L) 90–95
(E0 = 2.01 V) for water and wastewater treatment processes
Total nitrogen (mg/L) 2–5
and it can be activated to generate more powerful oxidant
Total phosphorus (mg/L) 35–60
SO4–• (E0 = 2.60 V) [27]. Heat- UV radiation, electrolysis ozone
100 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108

as cathode and the cathodes were prepared same as previ- In Eq. (9), R is the response, β0 is the intercept, β values sig-
ous study [3]. The electrodes were placed with a gap of 1 cm nify coefficients and, x values are the independent factors.
between them in an electrode holder (Fig. 1) that designed
to place electrodes, pH and H2O2 probes during the opera- R = β0 + β1x1 + β2 x2 + β3 x3 + β12 x1x2 + β13 x1x3 + β23 x2 x3 +
tions. For each run, 800 mL of laundry effluent was poured
into the reactor. When the PC process was started, the waste- β11x12 + β22 x22 + β33 x32 (9)
water in the reactor was mixed to provide both homoge-
neous reaction conditions and oxygenate the LWW. Samples The experimental design was established with the value
were taken at regular intervals during 30 min operation calculated from the average of minimum and maximum val-
time and filtered through 0.45 µm filter for further analysis. ues. Actual values of the variables for the coded values are
given in Table 2. Design expert package, version 11 (STAT-
EASE Inc., Minneapolis, USA) was used for the design of
2.3. Analytical methods
experimental parameters.
COD, MBAS and suspended solids were determined
according to the Standard Methods procedure [30]. pH/
3. Results and dıscussıon
conductivity and turbidity measurements were carried out
by multiparameter (Mettler Toledo S700, Switzerland) and 3.1. Box–Behnken design and model equation prediction
turbidimeter (Hach 2100Q, USA), respectively. Total nitro-
Box–Behnken experimental design that is given in
gen, TP and TFe were determined by using cuvette tests
Table 3 has been used for optimizing the controlling factors
(Hach Lange, Germany) LCK 138, LCK 350 and USEPA
of the PC process. COD, MBAS and TP results were stated
FerroVer method, respectively. Hydrogen peroxide con-
as a ratio of final concentration (C) at the end of the each
centration was followed during the process by using Jumo
run to the corresponding initial concentration (C0).
GmbH & Co. (Germany) analyzer. Persulfate ions were mea-
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was conducted to
sured according to the method in [31]. In this method, 2.5
define the significance of the model and significant model
N H2SO4 and 0.4 N FAS were added and allowed to react
terms. Significance of the models was determined accord-
for 40 min. Then, 0.6 N NH4SCN solutions was added and
ing to Fisher variation values (F-value), probability value
concentration was measured at 450 nm wavelength in spec-
(p-value) and adequate precision. ANOVA results (Table 4)
trophotometer (Hach Lange DR5000, Germany) through a
showed that the quadratic models were significant for each
pre-established calibration curve.

2.4. Mathematical and statistical procedures Table 2

Actual values of the variables for the coded values
Response surface modelling (RSM) combined with
Box–Behnken experimental design was used for the opti- Variables Actual values for the coded values
mization of the LWW treatment by the PC process. While
the controlling factors of the process (independent vari- –1 0 1
ables) were current density (A), pH (B) and temperature (C), Current density (mA/cm ) 15 2
30 45
dependent variables (responses) of the PC process were TP
Initial pH 3 7 11
(R1), MBAS (R2), COD (R3) and TFe (R4). A second-order
Temperature (°C) 25 35 45
polynomial model was used for the regression analysis.

Fig. 1. Designed electrode holder for experimental set-up.

 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108 101

Table 3
Experiment design and experimental responses of peroxi-coagulation process

Run A: current B: initial C: temperature °C TP (C/C0) MBAS (C/C0) COD (C/C0) TFe mg/L
density mA/cm2 pH
1 30 7 35 0.10 0.10 0.27 5.80
2 30 7 35 0.08 0.15 0.26 0.90
3 30 3 45 0.04 0.09 0.22 18.20
4 30 7 35 0.13 0.18 0.25 3.70
5 30 11 45 0.61 0.73 0.68 55.40
6 45 3 35 0.05 0.17 0.23 26.40
7 45 7 25 0.07 0.33 0.25 0.90
8 15 7 45 0.20 0.20 0.31 4.70
9 15 7 25 0.10 0.23 0.27 2.20
10 15 11 35 0.72 1.00 0.71 28.80
11 30 11 25 0.64 0.67 0.69 35.10
12 30 3 25 0.02 0.08 0.25 24.80
13 15 3 35 0.03 0.12 0.24 18.80
14 45 11 35 0.51 0.88 0.59 72.20
15 45 7 45 0.06 0.34 0.22 2.90

Table 4
ANOVA results of fitted quadratic model for TP, MBAS, COD and TFe

Source Sum of Degrees of Mean F-value p-value R2 Adj. R2

squares freedom square
Total phosphorus (TP)
Model 0.9159 9 0.1018 148.96 <0.0001
Residual 0.0034 5 0.0007
0.9963 0.9896
Lack of fit 0.0016 3 0.0005 0.6161 0.6671
Pure error 0.0018 2 0.0009
Total iron (TFe)
Model 5,995.25 9 666.14 8.39 0.0153
Residual 397.13 5 79.43
0.9379 0.8260
Lack of fit 385.04 3 128.35 21.24 0.0453
Pure error 12.09 2 6.04
Methylene blue active substances (MBAS)
Model 1.37 9 0.1521 17.87 0.0027
Residual 0.0425 5 0.0085
0.9699 0.9156
Lack of fit 0.0391 3 0.0130 7.58 0.1188
Pure error 0.0034 2 0.0017
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Model 0.5209 9 0.0579 227.33 <0.0001
Residual 0.0013 5 0.0003
0.9976 0.9932
Lack of fit 0.0012 3 0.0004 6.69 0.1328
Pure error 0.0001 2 0.0001

response. p-value of each model (<0.0001, 0.0153, 0.0027, that there was no significant difference between the mea-
<0.0001 for TP, TFe, MBAS and COD, respectively) were sured and predicted values. The correlation coefficients were
smaller than 0.05 so the models are significant at %95 confi- used to check the goodness of fit of the model. The high val-
dence level. The actual and the predicted values for TP, TFe, ues of coefficients for TP (R² = 0.996), TFe (R² = 0.937), MBAS
MBAS and COD parameters are shown in Fig. 2. It was seen (R² = 0.969) and COD (R² = 0.997) indicated that responses
102 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108

Fig. 2. Predicted vs. actual plots of each response with the application of 30 mA/cm2, at pH 7 and 25°C.

could be explained by the models. The values of adjusted at pH 3 is higher than at pH 7. This can be due to the Fe3+ ions
R² (Ra2) were also high as 0.989, 0.826, 0.915, and 0.993 for forming Fe(OH)3 flocs which can precipitate and remove the
TP, TFe, MBAS and COD, respectively. A high Ra2 value is pollutants from wastewater at alkaline pH conditions [24].
evidence of high correlation between actual and predicted In addition, H2O2 decomposes to oxygen and H2O that the
values of the responses [32]. oxidation potential of •OH reduces at neutral pH values.
Individual effects of factors on variables are shown in the So, at neutral and higher pH values the removal efficien-
perturbation plots (Fig. 3). It is obvious that for all responses, cies of COD, MBAS and TP decreased. The applied current
the initial pH (B) was the most effective parameter while density is an important parameter in EC process. As seen
temperature (C) was less effective one. The increase in initial from Fig. 3, the increase in applied current density increased
pH showed negative effect on COD, MBAS and TP removal COD and TP removal. This can be due to the high current
as seen in Figs. 3a–c. As seen from Figs. 3a–c, pH is one of density delivering more aqueous •OH radicals in the bulk
the important parameters affecting the performance of PC solution and also oxidizing ferrous iron to ferric iron [37].
process. The optimum pH value was found around 3 in elec- Furthermore, the dissolution of Fe anode increases with the
tro-Fenton oxidation processes [24]. Acidic conditions are increasing current density and dissolved Fe forms destabi-
suitable for the degradation of organic pollutants by the gen- lize and aggregate the contaminants present in the effluent
erated reagents that are formed by the conversion of hydro- [38]. But the increase in current density from 30 to 45 mA/
gen ions to hydrogen peroxide with the consumption of dis- cm2 negatively affected the MBAS removal. This can be due
solved oxygen (Eq. (4)) at pH 3 [33–36]. Also, lower-acidic to more generation of H2O2 that is a scavenger of •OH when
pH conditions are necessary to avoid Fe precipitation and the applied current density increased beyond a critical value.
maintain the kinetics of Fe2+ conversion to Fe3+ in the solution And also at high current densities hydrogen gas formation
[16]. This situation is supported by the TFe concentration on the cathode surface increases. This increment causes the
shown in Fig. 3d. As seen from the figure, TFe concentration formation of hydrogen bubbles covering electrode surface
 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108 103

Fig. 3. Perturbation plots for (a) COD, (b) MBAS, (c) TP, and (d) TFe.

and can lower the H2O2 and •OH production [39–41]. The two interactions (AB and BC) plots were presented since
decrease in the rate of oxidation of MBAS can also be due current density-temperature interactions (AC) were insignifi-
to the hydroperoxyl radicals (HO2•), produced by the excess cant statistically and showed a layer shape on the plots.
ferric ions reacting with H2O2, which have much weaker oxi- Normalized value of COD, MBAS and TP responses
dizing power than hydroxyl radicals [17]. were given to indicate removal efficiencies during LWW
TFe concentration (Fig. 3d) was most affected response treatment; however, TFe formation was given in the concen-
from the change of initial pH. Since, insoluble iron species tration unit since it was produced during the PC process.
Fe(OH)3 and Fe(OH)2 undergo precipitation between pH The COD removal ratio changed 0.71 to 0.22 as seen from
5 and 7, TFe concentration in the bulk solution decreased. Table 3 and Fig. 4a indicating that this alteration was affected
However, Fe(OH)+, Fe(OH)2 and Fe(OH)3– monomeric species by the interaction of pH-current density and pH-tempera-
are formed at higher pH values and insoluble forms dissolve ture. Low initial pH and high current density provided high
at those conditions [42,43]. Therefore, in our case, TFe con- COD removal, while temperature had no significant effect
centration increased as pH value increased after pH 7, which on the COD removal. Similarly, MBAS removal was affected
was signified as 0.000-coded unit in Fig. 3d. Moreover, TFe mostly from pH changes as seen from Fig. 4b. When pH
concentration was affected with current density because of decreased, MBAS (C/C0) also decreased dramatically at all
the increasing dissolution of the anode at higher current current density and/or temperature values. MBAS removal
densities. (C/C0) reached 0.08 stating 92% MBAS removal efficiency
(Table 3) with the application of 30 mA/cm2 current density
3.2. Effect of controlling factors on responses at pH 3 and 25°C.
It is seen from Fig. 4c, there was no significant change
A response surface plot, which shows the interaction in TP removal (C/C0) arising from the change of the cur-
effects on responses are given in Fig. 4. For each response, rent density and/or temperature at the same pH value.
104 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108

Fig. 4. Response surface plots (a) COD, (b) MBAS, (c) TP, and (d) TFe.
 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108 105

The minimum TP (C/C0) value (0.02) was obtained at pH 3, seems to be responsible for the S2O82– increment according to
30 mA/cm2 current density and 25°C temperature conditions reaction (11) [26].
while the highest TP (C/C0) conditions were obtained at the
original pH 11 of LWW as 0.72 (i.e. Run 10 in Table 3).
As another response in the model, TFe also showed
lineer alkylbenzene sulfonate → SO 24 − by •OH (10) ( )
a strong relationship with the pH (Fig. 4d). This effect is
known to be related to the precipitation behavior of iron 2SO 24 − → S 2 O82 − + 2e − (11)
depending on pH. Insoluble iron species (such as Fe(OH)2
and Fe(OH)3) occur between pH 6 and 10; outside this pH While S2O82– concentration was increasing between
range, iron species that are dissolved in the bulk solution 7–20 min of the reaction, concentration of H2O2 gave a pla-
cause increment in the iron concentration in the effluent. teau. So that, the decreasing trend in the MBAS and COD
The quadratic model equation for each model was treatment indicated that S2O82– formed electrochemically
obtained according to design matrix and the responses in dominate the oxidation of organics during LWW treat-
Table 3 and the equations were given in coded form (Table 5). ment. Barrera-Díaz et al. [47] demonstrated that •OH rad-
As an overall assessment, the interaction of current density/ icals interact with SO42− generating the sulfate radical and
pH (AB) and pH/temperature (BC) were slightly effective also the persulfate oxidant. So the presence of SO42− ions in
for all responses; however, pH change dominated the PC waste­waters helps the formation of both oxidants for the
reaction. As described before, pH affects the formation of removal of contaminants [48]. Moreover, it can be said that
reagents for the degradation of organic pollutions, maintains the decrease in S2O82– concentration after 20 min of the PC
the kinetics of Fe2+ conversion to Fe3+ ions forming Fe(OH)3 reaction depended on the scavenging effect of excess iron
flocs which can precipitate and remove the pollutants from according to reaction (8). This can be reason of minor changes
wastewater. in COD and MBAS removal after 20 min of the reaction.
The aim was to obtain optimal operating conditions for
maximum COD, MBAS and TP removal with the established
RSM model. On the other hand, dissolved iron in the LWW 1.00 MBAS 1.00
is not desired due to the formation yellowish tint on the COD
MBAS (C/C0)

clothes when the LWW is reused. In this context, Run 7 with 0.80 0.80

COD (C/C0)
the application of 45 mA/cm2 at pH 7 and 25°C resulted in 0.60 0.60
75%, 67%, and 93% COD, MBAS, and TP removal efficien-
0.40 0.40
cies, respectively. In that case, almost no (i.e. 0.90 mg/L) total
dissolved iron remained in the bulk solution. This can be due 0.20 0.20
to the H2O2 stability at neutral pH values that avoids the effi- 0.00 0.00
cient generation of •OH radicals [44]. And also at high pH 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
values dissolved Fe3+ concentration decrease and inhibits a Operation time (min)
Fe2+ generation that describes why Fe concentration in the
solution is minimum in that process conditions [45]. 400 300
350
250
300
3.3. Effect of oxidants on COD and MBAS treatment
Persulfate (mg/L)

H2O2 (mg/L)
200
250

To understand the mechanism of the PC system, for- 200 150

mation of H2O2 and S2O82– in the bulk solution during the 150
100
reaction were followed under best operation conditions (i.e. 100
PDS 50
50
Run 7). Fig. 5 shows that MBAS and COD removal simul- H2O2
0 0
taneously with S2O82– and H2O2 production. As seen from
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
the figure, S2O82– concentration increased with decreasing b
Operation time (min)
surfactant concentration and it reached to the maximum
value at 20 min of the reaction while MBAS removal was Fig. 5. (a) COD and MBAS removal corresponding with the
at minimum level. Sulfate concentration arising from lin- (b) H2O2 and S2O82– formation during the PC process (current
ear alkylbenzene sulfonate degradation in reaction (10) [46] density: 45 mA/cm2, pH 7 and 25°C).

Table 5
Model equations for the removal of MBAS, COD, TP and TFe concentration

Equations
MBAS (C/C0) 0.1429 + 0.0142 A + 0.3586 B + 0.0081 C – 0.052 AB + 0.0106 AC + 0.0138 BC + 0.1486 A² + 0.264 B² – 0.0146 C²
COD (C/C0) 0.2613–0.313 A + 0.2166 B – 0.0033 C – 0.272 AB – 0.017 AC + 0.0035 BC – 0.0071 A² + 0.1889 B² + 0.0071 C²
TP (C/C0) 0.1022 – 0.0452 A + 0.2947 B + 0.0086 C – 0.0576 AB – 0.0281 AC – 0.0116 BC + 0.0009 A² + 0.2242 B² + 0.0022 C²
TFe (mg/L) 3.47 + 5.99 A + 12.91 B + 2.28 C + 8.95 AB – 0.125 AC + 6.72 BC + 1.19 A² + 31.89 B² – 1.98 C²

A: current density, B: initial pH, and C: temperature.

106 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108

Table 6
Treatment of laundry wastewater by the different electrochemical processes

Process Anode / pH Current density Time COD Surfactant TP removal Ref.

cathode (min) removal (%) removal (%) (%)
ECa Cu/Cu 8.3 26.8 mA/cm2 6 72.7 – – [2]
EPb C-PTFE 6.3 13.3 mA/cm2 120 55 77 – [3]
ECc Al/Al 6–8 8.8 mA/cm2 90 93.2 93.5 96.7 [4]
EC/EF Al/Ti 6 24.0 mA/cm2 10 >80 >95 >95 [49]
EC/EF Al/Al 5.1 5.0 V 40 62 – – [9]
PECd Fe/Fe 5 0.50 mA/cm2 10 – 81.6 – [24]
POe – 3–3.5 – 180 59.1 >95.5 74.7 [5]
AOPf – 7 – 55 – 96 – [50]
PCg Fe/C-PTFE 7 45.0 mA/cm2 30 75 67 100 This study

Electrocoagulation, bElectroperoxone, cElectrocagulation/Electroflotation, dPeroxi-electrocoagulation, ePhotocatalytic ozonation, fAdvanced

a

oxidation process, gPeroxicoagulation

3.4. Energy and electrode consumptions the cathode surface due to carbon-PTFE. Furthermore, S2O82–
concentration was also noteworthy which is produced with
Energy and electrode consumptions are the main operat-
degradation of linear alkyl benzene sulfonate in the LWW.
ing costs of PC. Therefore, cost of PC process was calculated
When the removal efficiencies in other chemical processes
with the following equations:
are compared in Table 6, it is seen that EC process is the most
effective for LWW. COD and TP removal efficiencies in this
Uit
(
Cenergy kWh / m 3 = ) V
(12) study (PC) are as well as EC process but surfactant removal
efficiencies are not as good as EC process. But, in-situ oxidant
production in the PC process is the main advantage when
Energy consumption was calculated with Eq. (12) where compared with the EC process. So, it can be said that PC pro-
U is an average cell voltage (V), i is a current (A), t is operating cess can be used for the treatment of LWW as an alternative
time (h) and V is volume of PC reactor (m3). treatment method.

i tM w
( )
Celectrode kg / m 3 =
zFV
(13) Acknowledgment
This research is supported by the Scientific and
Electrode consumption was calculated with Eq. (13), Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [grant
where Mw is molecular weight of iron (g/mol), z is a num- number: 115Y797].
ber of electrons involved in the process (2 for Fe), and F is
Faraday constant (96,485 C/mol).
References
Unit electrical price was taken as 0.085 €/kWh for the
Turkish Market, September 2019. The iron electrode material [1] K. Sheth, M.D. Desai, M. Patel, K. Sheth, M.D. Desai, M. Patel,
price was 0.48 €/kg. As a result, the overall operating cost A study on characterization and treatment of laundry effluent,
Int. J. Innovative Res. Sci. Technol., 4 (2017) 50–55.
was found to be 2,49 Euro/m3 for the optimum conditions. [2] C. Yun, D. Kim, W. Kim, D. Son, D. Chang, J. Kim, Y. Bae, H. Bae,
Y. Sunwoo, M. Kwak, Application and assessment of enhanced
electrolytic process for laundry wastewater treatment, Int. J.
4. Conclusion Electrochem. Sci., 9 (2014) 1522–1536.
PC process was developed with carbon-PTFE and iron [3] O. Turkay, S. Barışçı, M. Sillanpää, E-peroxone process for
the treatment of laundry wastewater: a case study, J. Environ.
electrodes to determine the optimal treatment conditions for Chem. Eng., 5 (2017) 4282–4290.
LWW by using response surface methodology. Treatment [4] F. Janpoor, A. Torabian, V. Khatibikamal, Treatment of
process with PC depends on the in-situ H2O2 production laundry waste‐water by electrocoagulation, J. Chem. Technol.
by carbon-PTFE cathodes and ferrous iron generation by Biotechnol., 86 (2011) 1113–1120.
iron sheet anode. Under optimal conditions which means [5] D.I. Kern, R.d.O. Schwaickhardt, G. Mohr, E.A. Lobo, L.T. Kist,
Ê.L. Machado, Toxicity and genotoxicity of hospital laundry
maximum treatment efficiency with minimum residual wastewaters treated with photocatalytic ozonation, Sci. Total
TFe concentration: pH was 7, the applied current density Environ., 443 (2013) 566–572.
was 45 mA/cm2 and temperature was 25°C, 75% of COD, [6] J.K. Braga, M.B.A. Varesche, Commercial laundry water
67% of MBAS and nearly 100% TP removal were achieved. characterisation, Am. J. Anal. Chem., 5 (2014) 8.
Whereas the change of temperature was insignificant, pH [7] F.-J. Zhu, W.-L. Ma, T.-F. Xu, Y. Ding, X. Zhao, W.-L. Li,
L.-Y. Liu, W.-W. Song, Y.-F. Li, Z.-F. Zhang, Removal charac­
change dominated the course of the reaction. To evaluate the teristic of surfactants in typical industrial and domestic waste­
process mechanism, S2O82– and H2O2 were followed under water treatment plants in Northeast China, Ecotoxicol. Environ.
optimal conditions. H2O2 produced by oxygen reduction at Saf., 153 (2018) 84–90.
 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108 107

[8] S. Bering, J. Mazur, K. Tarnowski, M. Janus, S. Mozia, persulfate activated with FeS (mackinawite), Chem. Eng. J.,
A.W. Morawski, The application of moving bed bio-reactor 313 (2017) 498–507.
(MBBR) in commercial laundry wastewater treatment, Sci. Total [28] S. Wacławek, H.V. Lutze, K. Grübel, V.V. Padil, M. Černík,
Environ., 627 (2018) 1638–1643. D.D. Dionysiou, Chemistry of persulfates in water and
[9] C.-T. Wang, W.-L. Chou, Y.-M. Kuo, Removal of COD from wastewater treatment: a review, Chem. Eng. J., 330 (2017) 44–62.
laundry wastewater by electrocoagulation/electroflotation, [29] L.W. Matzek, K.E. Carter, Activated persulfate for organic
J. Hazard. Mater., 164 (2009) 81–86. chemical degradation: a review, Chemosphere, 151 (2016) 178–188.
[10] F.J. Beltran, J.F. Garcia-Araya, P.M. Alvarez, Sodium dode­ [30] APHA, WPCF, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
cylbenzenesulfonate removal from water and wastewater. 1. and Wastewater, 20, 1998.
Kinetics of decomposition by ozonation, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., [31] K.-C. Huang, R.A. Couttenye, G.E. Hoag, Kinetics of heat-
39 (2000) 2214–2220. assisted persulfate oxidation of methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE),
[11] S. Šostar-Turk, I. Petrinić, M. Simonič, Laundry wastewater Chemosphere, 49 (2002) 413–420.
treatment using coagulation and membrane filtration, Resour. [32] O. Turkay, S. Barisci, A. Dimoglo, Assessment of parameters
Conserv. Recycl., 44 (2005) 185–196. influencing the electro activated water character and explanation
[12] X. Shang, H.-C. Kim, J.-H. Huang, B.A. Dempsey, Coagulation of process mechanism, Process Saf. Environ., 99 (2016) 129–136.
strategies to decrease fouling and increase critical flux and [33] F. Ghanbari, M. Moradi, A comparative study of electro­
contaminant removal in microfiltration of laundry wastewater, coagulation, electrochemical Fenton, electro-Fenton, and peroxi-
Sep. Purif. Technol., 147 (2015) 44–50. coagulation for decolorization of real textile wastewater:
[13] E. Brillas, R. Sauleda, J. Casado, Peroxi‐coagulation of aniline electrical energy consumption and biodegradability improve­
in acidic medium using an oxygen diffusion cathode, J. Electro­ ment, J. Environ. Chem. Eng., 3 (2015) 499–506.
chem. Soc., 144 (1997) 2374–2379. [34] A.A. Burbano, D.D. Dionysiou, M.T. Suidan, T.L. Richardson,
[14] E. Brillas, R. Sauleda, J. Casado, Degradation of 4‐chlorophenol Oxidation kinetics and effect of pH on the degradation of
by anodic oxidation, electro‐Fenton, photoelectro‐Fenton, and MTBE with Fenton reagent, Water Res., 39 (2005) 107–118.
peroxi‐coagulation processes, J. Electrochem. Soc, 145 (1998) [35] J. Li, Z. Luan, L. Yu, Z. Ji, Pretreatment of acrylic fiber
759–765. manufacturing wastewater by the Fenton process, Desalination,
[15] A. Kumar, P. Nidheesh, M.S. Kumar, Composite wastewater 284 (2012) 62–65.
treatment by aerated electrocoagulation and modified peroxi- [36] P.V. Nidheesh, R. Gandhimathi, Trends in electro-Fenton
coagulation processes, Chemosphere, 205 (2018) 587–593. process for water and wastewater treatment: an overview,
[16] S. Vasudevan, An efficient removal of phenol from water Desalination, 299 (2012) 1–15.
by peroxi-electrocoagulation processes, J. Water Process Eng., [37] O. Turkay, Z.G. Ersoy, S. Barışçı, The application of an electro-
2 (2014) 53–57. peroxone process in water and wastewater treatment, J. Electro­
[17] E. Brillas, B. Boye, M.A. Banos, J.C. Calpe, J.A. Garrido, chem. Soc., 164 (2017) E94–E102.
Electrochemical degradation of chlorophenoxy and chloro­ [38] A.S. Fajardo, R.F. Rodrigues, R.C. Martins, L.M. Castro,
benzoic herbicides in acidic aqueous medium by the peroxi- R.M. Quinta-Ferreira, Phenolic wastewaters treatment by
coagulation method, Chemosphere, 51 (2003) 227–235. electrocoagulation process using Zn anode, Chem. Eng. J.,
[18] B. Boye, E. Brillas, M.M. Dieng, Electrochemical degradation of 275 (2015) 331e341.
the herbicide 4-chloro-2-methylphenoxyacetic acid in aqueous [39] X. Li, Y. Wang, J. Zhao, H. Wang, B. Wang, J. Huang, S. Deng,
medium by peroxi-coagulation and photoperoxi-coagulation, G. Yu, Electro-peroxone treatment of the antidepressant venla­
J. Water Process Eng., 540 (2003) 25–34. faxine: operational parameters and mechanism, J. Hazard.
[19] G. Ren, M. Zhou, P. Su, L. Liang, W. Yang, E. Mousset, Highly Mater., 300 (2015) 298–306.
energy-efficient removal of acrylonitrile by peroxi-coagulation [40] W. Yao, X. Wang, H. Yang, G. Yu, S. Deng, J. Huang, B. Wang,
with modified graphite felt cathode: Influence factors, possible Y. Wang, Removal of pharmaceuticals from secondary effluents
mechanism, J. Water Process. Eng., 343 (2018) 467–476. by an electro-peroxone process, Water Res., 88 (2016) 826–835.
[20] D. Salari, A. Niaei, A. Khataee, M. Zarei, Electrochemical [41] K. Bouzek, I. Roušar, M. Taylor, Influence of anode material
treatment of dye solution containing CI Basic Yellow 2 by the on current yield during ferrate (VI) production by anodic iron
peroxi-coagulation method and modeling of experimental dissolution Part II: current efficiency during anodic dissolution
results by artificial neural networks, J. Electroanal. Chem., of white cast iron to ferrate (VI) in concentrated alkali hydroxide
629 (2009) 117–125. solutions, J. Appl. Electrochem., 26 (1996) 925–931.
[21] M. Zarei, A. Niaei, D. Salari, A. Khataee, Application of response [42] C.A. Martínez-Hustle, E. Brillas, Decontamination of waste­
surface methodology for optimization of peroxi-coagulation of waters containing synthetic organic dyes by electrochemical
textile dye solution using carbon nanotube–PTFE cathode, J. methods: a general review, Appl. Catal., B, 87 (2009) 105–145.
Hazard. Mater., 173 (2010) 544–551. [43] T. Yılmaz Nayır, S. Kara, Container washing wastewater
[22] M. Zarei, A. Niaei, D. Salari, A.R. Khataee, Removal of four treatment by combined electrocoagulation–electrooxidation,
dyes from aqueous medium by the peroxi-coagulation method Sep. Sci. Technol., 53 (2018) 1592–1603.
using carbon nanotube–PTFE cathode and neural network [44] E.do. Vale-Júnior, D.R. da Silva, A.S. Fajardo, C.A. Martínez-
modeling, J. Electroanal. Chem., 639 (2010) 167–174. Hustle, Treatment of an azo dye effluent by peroxi-coagulation
[23] M. Zarei, D. Salari, A. Niaei, A. Khataee, Peroxi-coagulation and its comparison to traditional electrochemical advanced
degradation of CI Basic Yellow 2 based on carbon-PTFE and processes, Chemosphere, 204 (2018) 548–555.
carbon nanotube-PTFE electrodes as cathode, Electrochim. [45] A.R. Yazdanbakhsh, M.R. Massoudinegad, S. Elias, A.S. Moha­
Acta, 54 (2009) 6651–6660. mmadi, The influence of operational parameters on reducing
[24] E. Yüksel, İ.A. Şengil, M. Özacar, The removal of sodium dodecyl of azithromycin COD from wastewater using the peroxi-
sulfate in synthetic wastewater by peroxi-electrocoagulation electrocoagulation process, J. Water Process Eng., 6 (2015)
method, Chem. Eng. J., 152 (2009) 347–353. 51–57.
[25] E. Brillas, J. Casado, Aniline degradation by electro-Fenton® [46] A. Arslan, E. Topkaya, S. Veli, D. Bingöl, Optimization of
and peroxi-coagulation processes using a flow reactor for waste­ ultrasonication process for the degradation of linear alkyl benzene
water treatment, Chemosphere, 47 (2002) 241–248. sulfonic acid by response surface methodology, CLEAN–Soil,
[26] K.C.d.F. Araújo, J.P.d.P. Barreto, J.C. Cardozo, E.V. dos Santos, Air, Water, (2018), https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.201700508.
D.M. de Araújo, C.A. Martínez-Huitle, Sulfate pollution: [47] C. Barrera-Díaz, P. Cañizares, F. Fernández, R. Natividad,
evidence for electrochemical production of persulfate by oxidiz­ M. Rodrigo, Electrochemical advanced oxidation processes:
ing sulfate released by the surfactant sodium dodecyl sulfate, an overview of the current applications to actual industrial
Environ. Chem. Lett., 16 (2018) 647–652. effluents, J. Mex. Chem. Soc., 58 (2014) 256–275.
[27] H. Chen, Z. Zhang, M. Feng, W. Liu, W. Wang, Q. Yang, Y. Hu, [48] E. Brillas, C.A. Martínez-Hustle, Decontamination of waste­
Degradation of 2, 4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid in water by waters containing synthetic organic dyes by electrochemical
108 T.Y. Nayir et al. / Desalination and Water Treatment 182 (2020) 98–108

methods. An updated review, Appl. Catal., B, 166 (2015) [50] A. Arslan, E. Topkaya, D. Bingöl, S. Veli, Removal of anionic
603–643. surfactant sodium dodecyl sulfate from aqueous solutions by
[49] J. Ge, J. Qu, P. Lei, H. Liu, New bipolar electrocoagulation– O3/UV/H2O2 advanced oxidation process: process optimization
electroflotation process for the treatment of laundry wastewater, with response surface methodology approach, Sustainable
Sep. Purif. Technol., 36 (2004) 33–39. Environ. Res., 28 (2018) 65–71.

View publication stats