Table 1.
Comparison of pollutants degradation over different techniques
| Technique | Light source | [Pollutants] (mg L−1) | [Catalyst] (g L−1) | Removal (%) | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Photo | Xe300W | Congred, 50 | 0.2 | ~ 90 (1 h) | [7] |
| Photo | 40 W UV | Congred, 30 | 0.5 | 78 (2 h) | [9] |
| Photo | Visible300 | RhodamineB, 10 | 0.5 | ~ 97 (2 h) | [10] |
| Photo | two EDMLs | RhodamineB, 10 | 1 | ~ 90 (1 h) | [11] |
| Fenton | – | 4-nitrophenol, 10 | – | 91 (1 h) | [20] |
| Fenton | – | Orange II, 30 | – | 90 (20 min) | [21] |
| Fenton | – | Phenol, 30 | – | 80 (50 min) | [22] |
| Photo-Fenton | – | Phenol, 30 | 1 | 90 (50 min) | [22] |
| Photo-Fenton | Xe350W | Methylene B, 30 | 1 L | 88 (50 min) | [23] |
| Photo-Fenton | Xe350W | Ibuprofen, 20 | 0.5 | 90 (60 min) | [24] |
| Photo-Fenton | Xe300W | Tetracycline, 20 DB, | 0.4 | 62.7 (40 min) | [25] |
| TENG-photo | Xe300W | 20 BG, 5 | 0.5 | 89.5 (1.5 h) | This work |
| Visible500W | 88.26 (40 min) | This work |