Institutional Repository
Technical University of Crete
Technical University of Crete
EN
|
EL
| URI: | http://purl.tuc.gr/dl/dias/B06900AA-DF08-4D1A-A06E-E84AB38B1482 | ||
| Year | 2004 | ||
| Type of Item | Peer-Reviewed Journal Publication | ||
| License |
|
||
| Bibliographic Citation | E. Psillakis, D. Mantzavinos and N. Kalogerakis, "Monitoring the sonochemical degradation of phthalate esters in water using solid phase microextraction, " Chem., vol. 54, no.7, pp. 849–857, Feb. 2004. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2003.09.039 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2003.09.039 | ||
| Appears in Collections |
The sonochemical degradation of aqueous solutions containing low concentrations of six phthalate esters at anultrasonic frequency of 80 kHz has been investigated. Ultrasonic treatment was found capable of removing the fourhigher molecular mass phthalates (di-n-butyl phthalate, butylbenzyl phthalate, di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and di-noctylphthalate) within 30–60 min of irradiation. The rest (dimethyl phthalate and diethyl phthalate) were more recalcitrantand nearly complete removal could be achieved only after prolonged irradiation times. The relative reactivityof phthalates was explained in terms of their hydrophobicity. Experiments were carried out at an overall initialphthalate concentration of 240 lg l1, values of electric power of 75 and 150 W, temperatures of 21 and 50 C and in thepresence of NaCl to study the effect of various operating conditions on degradation. Solid-phase microextraction(SPME) coupled with GC–MS proved to be a powerful analytical tool to monitor the sonochemical degradation ofphthalate esters at low lg l1 concentration levels, minimising the risk of secondary contamination during samplepreparation, a major parameter to consider during phthalates analysis. The advantages as well as disadvantages ofusing SPME are also highlighted.
Copyright © DIAS 2013
