Table 7.
Comparison of treatment costs for the processes used in the present study.
| Treatment Process | US amplitude | Power, kW | Time, h | C0,Mol L−1 | C, Mol L−1 | EE0 kWh L−1order−1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reactor (850 kHz) | sonication | 75% | 0.024 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 1.1*10−5 | 211.0312 |
| Sono-catalytic | 75% | 0.024 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 1.1*10−5 | 211.0312 | |
| photocatalytic | – | 0.0934 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 2.4*10−5 | 1854.558 | |
| Sono-photocatalytic (continous mode) | 75% | 0.1174 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 4.4*10−6 | 599.7074 | |
| Sono-photocatalytic (pulse mode 1:5) | 75% | 0.09624 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 2.5*10−5 | 2183.268 | |
| Sono-photocatalytic (pulse mode 5:1) | 75% | 0.0991 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 1.9*10−5 | 1469.271 | |
| Probe (20 kHz) | sonication | 20% | 0.03 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 3.1*10−5 | 1455.693 |
| Sono-catalytic | 20% | 0.03 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 3.04*10−5 | 1398.903 | |
| photocatalytic | – | 0.0934 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 2.4*10−5 | 2472.744 | |
| Sono-photocatalytic | 20% | 0.1234 | 1 | 4.2*10−5 | 1.5*10−5 | 1784.821 | |