Table 4.

Comparison of this work at the applied test conditions with those reported in literature for the efficiency of AOPs in eliminating caffeine and TOC. The UV source in this work and that of Afonso-Olivares et al., [13] was a low-pressure Hg lamp at 254 nm, and the one used in the work of Carotenuto et al., [16] was a solar lamp. Note that no data are available in the cited literature for the extent of carbon mineralization.

Process	Experimental conditions					Removal (%)		Source
	C0 (mg L−1)	H2O2 (mg L−1)	TiO2 (mg L−1)	pH	Freq (kHz)	Caffeine	TOC
US/H2O2	5.0	10		4.07.0	577	8496	9624.3	This work
UV-H2O2	5.01.4	10 15 25				100 88a 87a	47.1 -	This work [13], [13]
UV/TiO2	5.0		0.10	4.0	577	100	60.9	This work
US/UV/TiO2	5.0		0.10 0.25 0.50	4.0	577	100 66 100	100 82.2 78.6	This work This work This work
UV-H2O2/ TiO2	5.0	10	0.10	4.0		100	75.5	This work
US/UV-H2O2	5.0	10 25		4.0	577	100 100	21.7 38.7	This work This work
US/UV-H2O2/TiO2	5.0	10	0.10 0.25	4.0	577	100 100	63.6 70.5	This work This work
UV/TiO2	5.0		0.10			70b	–	[16]
	8.0		0.15			80c	–	[16]

^at = 75 min

^bt = 15 min

^ct = 5 min