{"accessLevel": "public", "bureauCode": ["020:00"], "contactPoint": {"fn": "Scott Huling", "hasEmail": "mailto:huling.scott@epa.gov"}, "description": "Reaction intermediates formed during the ultra-violet (UV) activation of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (UV-AHP) and persulfate (S2O82-) (UV-APS) include hydroxyl (\u2022OH) and sulfate radicals (SO4\u2022-), respectively. These radicals, used in oxidation treatment systems to degrade a broad spectrum of environmental contaminants, may also react with non-target chemical species (scavengers) that limit treatment efficiency. UV-AHP and UV-APS treatment systems were amended with solid phase alumina to assess scavenging by solid surfaces. The relative rates of reaction between the target compound, rhodamine B dye (RhB), and aqueous and solid phase scavengers was used to assess treatment performance. The overall rate of reaction and rate of radical scavenging was greater for \u2022OH than SO4\u2022-. Scavenging by dissolved constituents was dominated by the oxidant used (H2O2, S2O82-); and the rate of radical scavenging by alumina was greater than the rate of RhB oxidation in all cases. Treatment efficiency was lower in the UV-AHP than in the UV-APS treatment system and was attributed to greater aqueous and solid phase scavenging rates. The cost of commercially available H2O2 ($0.031 mol-1) and PS ($0.24 mol-1) was used in conjunction with the overall treatment efficiency to assess specific cost of treatment. The specific cost to treat the probe compound with UV-AHP was greater than UV-APS and was attributed to the much lower treatment efficiency with UV-AHP. The much-desired high reaction rate constants between \u2022OH and environmental contaminants, relative to SO4\u2022-, comes at the cost of greater combined scavenging rates, and consequently lower treatment efficiency. \n\nThis dataset is associated with the following publication:\nRusevova Crincoli, K., and S.G. Huling. Contrasting hydrogen peroxide- and persulfate-driven oxidation systems: Impact of radical scavenging on treatment efficiency and cost.   Chemical Engineering Journal. Elsevier BV, AMSTERDAM,  NETHERLANDS, 404: 1-6, (2021).", "distribution": [{"downloadURL": "https://pasteur.epa.gov/uploads/10.23719/1518483/Science%20Hub_data%20set%20message.xlsx", "mediaType": "application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet", "title": "Science Hub_data set message.xlsx"}], "identifier": "https://doi.org/10.23719/1518483", "keyword": ["Hydroxyl Radicals", "Sulfate Radicals", "Scavenging", "kinetics", "treatment efficiency", "Mineral Surfaces"], "license": "https://pasteur.epa.gov/license/sciencehub-license.html", "modified": "2020-03-26", "programCode": ["020:097"], "publisher": {"name": "U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD)", "subOrganizationOf": {"name": "U.S. Environmental Protection Agency", "subOrganizationOf": {"name": "U.S. Government"}}}, "references": ["https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.126404"], "rights": null, "title": "Contrasting radical activity"}