Skip to main content
. 2024 Feb 15;4(3):748–757. doi: 10.1021/acsestengg.3c00462

Figure 2.

Figure 2

(a) Comparison of PFOA photodegradation in the presence of (i) ferric ions, (ii) iron oxide nanoparticles, and (iii) BEA35 and (iv) 1.26 Fe-BEA35. C0,PFOA = 48 μM, C0,Fe3+ = 200 μM, Ciron(III) oxide = 0.1 g L–1, and CFe-BEA35 = 1 g L–1, where applied, pH0 = 5.0 or 3.0; (b) formation of short-chain PFCA intermediates and fluoride, (c) fluorine mass balance during photochemical degradation of PFOA; (d) kinetics of photodegradation of PFOA using Fe-BEA35 at two different initial PFOA concentrations; and (e) first-order-kinetics plots of PFOA degradation with linear regression for the period up to 95% turnover. 1 g L–1 1.26 Fe-BEA35, pH0 = 5, C0,PFOA = 0.48 or 48 μM (0.2 or 20 mg L–1). Error ranges stand for the standard deviations of the results from triplicate assays in (a), (b), and (d). The cumulative error is shown in (b). Lines in (a–d) serve as guides for the eye.