Electrochemical degradation of 5-FU using a flow reactor with BDD electrode: Comparison of two electrochemical systems
A. S. Ochoa-Chavez , Aleksandra Pieczyńska , Agnieszka Fiszka-Borzyszkowska , P. J. Espinoza-Montero , Ewa Maria Siedlecka
AbstractIn this study, the electrochemical degradation process of 5- fl uorouracil (5-FU) in aqueous media was performed using a continuous fl ow reactor in an undivided cell (system I), and in a divided cell with a cationic membrane (Na fi on ® 424) (system II). In system I , 75% of 5-FU degradation was achieved (50 mg L 1 ) with a applied current density j app ¼ 150 A m 2 , volumetric fl ow rate qv ¼ 13 L h 1 , after 6 h of electrolysis (k app ¼ 0.004 min 1 ). The removal ef fi ciency of 5-FU was higher (95%) when the con- centration was 5 mg L 1 under the same conditions. Nitrates (22% of initial amount of N), fl uorides (27%) and ammonium (10%) were quanti fi ed after 6 h of electrolysis. System II , 77% of 5-FU degradation was achieved (50 mg L 1 ) after 6 h of electrolysis (k app ¼ 0.004 min 1 ). The degradation rate of 5-FU was complete when the concentration was 5 mg L 1 under the same conditions. Nitrates (29% of initial amount of N), fl uorides (25%) and ammonium (5%) were quanti fi ed after 6 h of electrolysis. In addition, the main organic byproducts identi fi ed by mass spectroscopy were aliphatic compound with carbonyl and carboxyl functionalities. Due to, the mineralization of 5-FU with acceptable ef fi ciency of 88% found in system II ( j app of 200 A m 2 ), this system seems to be more promising in the cytostatic drug removal. Moreover the ef fi ciency of 5-FU removal in diluted solutions is better in system II than in system I.
|Journal series||Chemosphere, ISSN 0045-6535, (A 35 pkt)|
|Publication size in sheets||0.5|
|Keywords in English||cytostatic drug, 5-fluorouracil, electrochemical oxidation, flow reactor, BDD anode|
|ASJC Classification||; ;|
|Score|| = 35.0, ArticleFromJournal|
= 35.0, ArticleFromJournal
|Publication indicators||= 0; : 2016 = 1.606; : 2017 = 4.427 (2) - 2017=4.551 (5)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.