| Home | E-Submission | Sitemap | Contact Us |  
Environ Eng Res > Volume 30(2); 2025 > Article
Zhang and Sui: Progress of persulfate-based advanced oxidation process (PS-AOPs) coupled with ultrafiltration membrane to alleviate membrane fouling: A review

Abstract

Membrane fouling significantly hampers the extensive deployment of ultrafiltration membranes in treating drinking water. To mitigate fouling and improve filtration effectiveness, advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) have been considered as a potent approach, particularly the activation of AOPs by persulfate (PS-AOPs). Establishing a membrane system based on PS-AOPs is a promising approach to addressing membrane fouling. This article reviews the homogeneous and heterogeneous activation methods of PS. Recent research on the degradation of sulfamethoxazole by various activation methods are summarized, their mechanisms are discussed, and their advantages and disadvantages are compared. The integration of PS-AOPs with UF membranes to control fouling is highlighted, with evidence showing a significant reduction in membrane fouling. The article emphasizes the improvements and limitations of the PS-AOPs coupled with membrane system, especially in heterogeneous systems. Heterogeneous catalysts are doped into membrane materials to form catalytic membranes that can not only participate in membrane filtration but also undergo advanced oxidation upon PS introduction. Finally, the article looks ahead to future research paths and challenges for the PS-AOPs coupled UF membrane system. Based on metal-carbon catalytic membranes, the exploration of materials suitable for activating persulfate is discussed to promote further development of the technology.

Graphical Abstract

/upload/thumbnails/eer-2024-244f1.gif

1. Introduction

UF is a highly effective method for advanced water purification [1], serving as an efficient barrier against suspended particles, colloids and high molecular weight natural organic matter (NOM) based on size exclusion principles [2]. Nonetheless, membrane fouling frequently occurs due to the build-up of waterborne pollutants within the pores or on the surfaces of the membrane, markedly degrading its permeability, functionality, and lifespan [3]. This fouling is a consequence of processes including pore adsorption, pore blocking, and filter cake layer contamination, and it is affected by complex physical and chemical interactions between pollutants and the membrane materials, as well as among the pollutants themselves. Among various membrane pollutants, organic matter is one of the most problematic pollutants because it is ubiquitous in natural water [4] and may lead to severe and irreversible pollution [5]. Waterborne inorganic ions, like calcium, can speed up membrane fouling caused by organic substances [6].
Membrane fouling is categorized into reversible and irreversible fouling. Reversible fouling is induced by contaminants that deposit on the membrane surface, temporarily blocking the pores or physically adsorbing onto the membrane [7]. This type of fouling typically does not lead to significant scaling and can be removed through physical methods like backwashing, without lasting effects on the membrane’s performance. Conversely, irreversible fouling results from the penetration of NOM, particularly colloidal substances, humic substances, and biopolymers in the 3–20 nm range. This leads to changes in the membrane’s pore structure, causing severe hydraulic scaling, and potentially resulting in chemical irreversible scaling [5]. Physical methods are usually insufficient to remove this type of fouling. More aggressive cleaning methods, such as chemical cleaning, are required, which may potentially damage the membrane material [8]. Membrane fouling diminishes both the performance and water quality stability of filters [6]. To maintain the required flux level, adjustments to operating conditions, including pressure adjustments, more frequent backwashing, and chemical cleaning, are essential. Such measures can lead to higher energy use and operational expenses in the long run. Severe fouling necessitates frequent membrane cleaning, which may easily cause damage to the membrane material and reduce its lifespan [9], thereby increasing maintenance and replacement costs for equipment. It is essential to effectively alleviate membrane fouling issues to improve efficiency and stability of the filter, as well as for lowering costs and complexity. Pretreatment, membrane modification, and regular cleaning can mitigate membrane pollution. This paper concentrates on the most extensively studied pretreatment methods currently available.
The method for mitigating organic-induced membrane fouling is to adopt pretreatment, including coagulation, adsorption and oxidation [10]. Among them, coagulation selectively removes high molecular weight biopolymers and larger substances but is less effective for small hydrophilic and neutral organics [1113]. This can result in cake buildup, enhanced membrane fouling, and solid waste generation. Furthermore, the requirement for precise dosing and the potential for exacerbating fouling makes the application of coagulation challenging [14]. The effect of adsorption on removing colloidal substances is limited. As for the mitigating effect of adsorption pretreatment on membrane contamination, it is still widely debated [15]. Organic fouling is affected by the amount and properties of organics, attributable to their varied chemical makeup and structural heterogeneity [16]. Under conventional chemical oxidation, the mineralisation rate of organics is relatively low, usually less than 20%, at dosages and contact times commonly used in water treatment [17, 18]. Compared with conventional chemical oxidation, AOPs have a relatively high mineralization rate due to the in-situ generation of free radicals with high redox potential and strong activity. AOPs can achieve significant micropollutant degradation and organic mineralization, not to mention better mitigation of organic pollution [19, 20].
Persulfate-based Advanced Oxidation Processes (PS-AOPs) entail the production of sulfate radicals ( SO4·-) by triggering peroxymonosulfate (PMS) or perodisulfate (PDS) via catalysts—such as transition metal ions or heterogeneous catalysts—or through exposure to radiation, including heat or light, as shown in Fig. S1. Compared to hydroxyl radical AOPs, PS-AOPs mainly acts as SO4·-. They exhibit greater stability, simpler storage requirements, and a more potent oxidation ability. However, they are still in the research stage and have limited practical applications, lacking the maturity of ·OH-AOPs. The formation of SO4·- can trigger a series of reactions that include the creation of additional reactive species, notably ·OH. SO4·- is recognized as a potent oxidizing agent due to its substantial standard redox potential (E0 =2.5–3.1 eV), which is similar in magnitude to that of ·OH (E0 =1.9–2.7 eV) [21]. Owing to its electron transfer capabilities, SO4·- possesses a longer half-life and exhibits greater reactivity selectivity towards organic compounds compared to ·OH [22]. Consequently, PS-AOPs are capable of efficiently decomposing a wide array of organic pollutants with less dependency on the water matrix composition. Given the strong oxidative nature of SO4·-, PS-AOPs, as a cutting-edge class of AOPs, may potentially enhance membrane functionality by mitigating the concentration of contaminants that afflict membranes. The integration of PS-AOPs pretreatment with UF membranes to simultaneously control membrane contamination and produced water quality has been widely investigated in recent years.
This paper offers a comprehensive overview of PS-AOPs and their activation mechanisms. It covers the diverse methods of PS activation via both homogeneous and heterogeneous routes, encompassing techniques like heat, ultraviolet radiation, transition metal ions and compounds, carbon-based materials, as well as photocatalysis, among others. It also systematically describes the advancements of membrane fouling mitigation and organic pollutant removal in UF process by coupling PS-AOPs. Additionally, it concludes with insights into future directions.

2. PS Activation Methods

In this paper, the two major systems of homogenous and heterogeneous catalysis activating PS are introduced. To quantitatively evaluate the efficacy of various activation techniques, a specific organic compound was chosen for analysis, focusing on its removal rate. By exposing the same pollutants to different activation methods, variations in efficiency were observed. Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) has been extensively studied due to its prevalence in surface waters, wastewater effluents, and drinking water sources, posing challenges for traditional treatment approaches. SMX was selected as the target compound for PS degradation activation. Table 1 offered a comprehensive summary of PS activation methods employed in SMX degradation, detailing their corresponding reaction conditions. Through quantitative assessment of SMX removal efficiency, insights into the performance and effectiveness of different activation methods can be obtained. The principle, benefits, and drawbacks of each activation method will be elucidated in conjunction with Table 1.

2.1. Homogeneous Activated PS

In homogeneous systems, PS is activated to produce SO4·-. The activation efficiency is enhanced in homogeneous systems compared to heterogeneous ones, which is attributable to the more complete contact between PS and the activator in the former. Common activation methods fall into three types: UV, heat and transition metal ion activation.

2.1.1. UV/PS

UV serves as a clean alternative for activating PS without chemical release and sludge increase. The UV/PS process has demonstrated its efficacy in breaking down a wide range of novel organic pollutants present in water. UV radiation directly breaks the chemical bonds of contaminants, decomposes NOM and inactivates microorganisms. Consequently, it is frequently employed in pretreatment to reduce membrane fouling [23]. Generally, a wavelength of 254 nm is utilized for UV activation. UV activates PS by providing energy to break the O-O bond, thereby producing by the mechanism as shown in Eq. (1), (2).
(1)
UV+S2O82-2SO4·-
(2)
UV+HSO5-SO4·-+·OH
The O-O bond energy in PDS is 144 kJ/mol, and the bond energy in PMS is 370 kJ/mol. The PDS bond energy is lower, making it more readily activated by UV [24]. UV/PDS has been demonstrated to be more effective, as shown in Table 1. UV/PS is an effective technology for pollutant degradation. It works by creating free radicals that act on organic compounds, and also directly breaks down the structure of organic substances via UV.
Being environmentally friendly, UV/PS does not produce waste. During operation, just switching on the UV lamp is sufficient without any operational complexity. However, this activation method requires ensuring the presence of additional UV equipment, necessitates continuous application of UV, and takes a longer time to achieve a good degradation effect, leading to high energy consumption. In addition, UV/PS is insufficient for highly chromatic raw water. This is because suspended matter in the water absorbs or scatters UV light, making it difficult to penetrate.

2.1.2. Heat/PS

Direct activation of PS by heating is an early and simple method. 140 – 213 kJ/mol of thermal energy breaks the O-O bond of PS to produce SO4·-. The mechanism is depicted in Eq. (3), (4).
(3)
heat+S2O82-2SO4·-
(4)
heat+HSO5-SO4·-+·OH
High temperatures speed up the activation of PS, which leads to an increase in the active substance and a faster reaction rate. As observed in Table 1, rising temperatures result in significantly reduced reaction times and a marked improvement in degradation efficiency.
Heating is a proven method for activating PS, offering simplicity and absence of secondary pollution. However, it comes with the drawback of requiring energy-intensive heating equipment, which leads to high operational costs. Not to mention, the reactor and materials must be capable of withstanding high temperatures. Recent studies have focused more on harnessing waste heat from industrial operations to activate PS, thereby addressing the energy consumption challenge [25].

2.1.3. Transition metal ion/PS

Transition metal elements have a valence electron layer structure characterized by (n-1)d1–10 ns1–2. Their central atoms have both filled and vacant d orbitals, which confer both electrophilic and nucleophilic properties to these metal centers. This dual nature significantly reduces the activation energy for the reaction between PS and pollutants and acts as a catalyst [26]. The activation of PS using transition metal ions (such as Fe2+, Ag+, Mn2+, Co2+, Cu2+, etc.) represents a practical approach for the field application of PS oxidation technology [27]. This paper focuses on ferrous iron (Fe(II)) as a representative transition metal ion. Ferrous iron’s (Fe(II)) widespread use as a metal activator in PS can be attributed to its natural abundance, high reactivity, and eco-friendliness [28]. It is a safer and more cost-effective option compared to cobalt (Co2+), which is carcinogenic, and copper (Cu2+), which is pricier. The Fe(II)/PS reagent comprises a transition metal and an oxidizing agent, thus sharing similarities with the Fenton system. The electron transfer-mediated activation of PS by Fe(II) results in the production of SO4·-, and the underlying mechanism is illustrated in Eq. (5), (6). As suggested by Eq. (1), (3), (5), the heating and UV activation of PDS yields two sulfate radicals, whereas only one radical is typically obtained through transition metal ion activation. Fe(II) activation is not as effective as heat and UV.
(5)
Fe2++S2O82-Fe3++SO42-+SO4·-
(6)
Fe2++HSO5-Fe3++SO4·-+HO ·
Homogeneous catalysis based on transition metal ions can typically be carried out at ambient temperatures and pressures without the need for external energy inputs. Transition metal ions exist in a simple form and directly activate the PS. They are also easily synthesized and relatively low in cost. However, there are still three key challenges for the Fe(II)/PS system: 1. It is significantly influenced by pH, necessitating the use of strongly acidic conditions for the activation of Fe(II). Table 1 showed that to achieve higher SMX degradation rates, the controlled pH is very low. Fe(II) is more stable and effective as an activator under acidic conditions. 2. Additionally, the control of metal ions in the solution can be challenging, leading to secondary pollution. 3. The recycling of Fe(III) back to Fe(II) is also sluggish, and the accumulation of iron oxide sludge due to hydrolytic precipitation can pose further issues. To mitigate these challenges, it’s crucial to employ chelating agents, reductants, and methods like UV radiation and electrochemistry to speed up the production of active substance and the conversion of Fe(III) to Fe(II) [28]. These enhancements help to optimize the reactivity and effectiveness of the Fe(II)/PS system, thereby diminishing the operational and environmental impacts associated with its use.

2.2. Heterogeneous Activated PS

In contrast to homogeneous systems, the activation of PS in heterogeneous systems results in the production of a more diverse spectrum of free radicals, including, ·OH, ·O2, and 1O2 [29]. In homogeneous systems, UV and heat activation require external energy inputs, and the activation of transition metal ions is often constrained by pH conditions. In contrast, heterogeneous catalysts offer advantages such as stability, reusability, and a broader pH range of applicability [30]. Current heterogeneous PS activation methods primarily include activation by transition metal compounds, carbon materials, and photocatalysis.

2.2.1. Transition metal compounds/PS

Oxides of Co, Fe, Mn, and Ti, which are part of the d-block of transition metals, along with Cu oxides from the ds-block, exhibit PS catalytic activity. The interaction between multiple transition metals can enhance the Mn+ to M(n+1)+ redox cycle and expedite the PS activation process. The mechanism by which heterogeneous transition metal compounds activate PS is analogous to that of homogeneous transition metal ions. They activate PS to generate free radicals through electron transfer, and the activation mechanism is shown in Fig. S2.
The development of transition metal compound catalysts and the evaluation of their effectiveness in catalyzing PS degradation of organic pollutants and emerging contaminants have been the recent research focus. Various transition metal oxide materials have been developed for the activation of PMS and PDS, including Co3O4 [31, 32], Fe2O3 [33], MnO2 [34], and CuO [35], and so on. Among them, cobalt oxides show the strongest activation ability for PMS [36]. Wang et al. [37] prepared Co3O4 nanorods by hydrothermal method to activate PMS to degrade phenol. The degradation of phenol with a concentration of 20 mg/L reached over 90% after 90 min. It should be noted that in homogeneous catalytic systems, reactants and catalyst molecules are uniformly mixed within the solution, facilitating close interaction between the reactant molecules and the active sites. However, in heterogeneous catalytic systems, the active sites are often masked by the internal structure of the catalyst, leading to that not all particles can effectively participate in the reaction. Moreover, the different physical forms of the catalyst and reactants introduce mass transfer limitations. As a result, heterogeneous catalysis typically exhibits a lower number of active sites and lower catalytic efficiency compared to homogeneous catalysis. These monometallic heterogeneous catalysts require increased dosage, higher oxidant concentration, and prolonged reaction time to achieve effects comparable to homogeneous catalysis [26]. Binary composite catalyst makes up for the shortcomings of traditional monobasic catalyst, such as low catalytic efficiency and difficult recovery. They consist of two transition metals at the core and exhibit significantly higher catalytic effects than single-element catalysts. This was confirmed by the research in Table 1. Feng et al. [38] used nano CuFeO2 prepared by modified hydrothermal method to catalyze PMS, and sulfadiazine could be completely removed in 20 min. The preparation process of binary catalysts is more complicated than that of monobasic catalyst. Binary catalysts with a spinel structure, such as CuFe2O4 and CoMn2O4, need to provide higher energy to combine the two metal elements into bonds when forming crystal nuclei [26]. Therefore, it needs to be carried out at high temperature and high pressure. This significantly raises the use cost of the catalyst.
Transition metal compounds have a broader pH range of applications. Monobasic heterogeneous catalysts, despite their low catalytic efficiency and the same difficulty in recovery as transition metal ions, can have their drawbacks mitigated by binary catalysts. In the study of binary catalysts, the first step is to identify two or more metals that can act synergistically, such as Cu with Fe, Cu with Co, Fe with Co, etc., to enhance the rate of free radical production. Next, the optimal ratio of metals is determined based on the specific amount of PS and catalyst loading. Lastly, it is necessary to verify the reusability of metal catalysts. The stability of catalysts is contingent upon preventing metal leaching. Feng et al. [39] revealed that after four cycles, the performance of α-Fe2O3/Cu2O significantly degrades due to Cu(I) leaching. Robustness is a critical consideration for the broad adoption of binary catalysts in the future. However, these catalysts require careful consideration due to their complex synthesis and high costs.

2.2.2. Carbon materials/PS

Carbon materials exhibit distinctive characteristics such as a large specific surface area, well-structured pores, superior adsorption capabilities and electrical conductivity, along with a diverse spectrum of surface functional groups (e.g., -OH, -C=O, and -COOH) [40]. They also boast significant mechanical robustness and cost-efficiency, positioning them as attractive candidates for the development of PS activation [41]. Ye et al. [42] demonstrated that hybridization within the carbon backbone and the use of sp2 carbon materials can boost the catalytic activity of PS activation. Carbon materials can donate electrons to PS, resulting in the formation of reactive radicals as described in Eq. (7), (8). The specific pathway for reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation is depicted in Fig. S3.
(7)
S2O82-+e-SO42-+SO4·-
(8)
HSO5-e-+SO4·-+HO ·
Carbon materials degrade pollutants through two mechanisms: radicals such as SO4·- and ·OH, and non-radicals like 1O2. Table 1 illustrated the degradation efficiency of unmodified carbon materials and upgraded carbon materials, which incorporate heteroatoms, against SMX. Preliminarily, it can be observed that the unmodified carbon materials exhibit the least effective degradation. The limitation is primarily a result of the decreased number of reactive sites within carbon materials, their vulnerability to deactivation following PS activation, and the propensity of carbon materials to agglomerate, collectively affecting mass transfer efficiency [43]. Researchers have primarily focused on upgrading carbon materials by integrating heteroatoms, such as nitrogen or metal oxides, into their structures [44]. This modification of the carbon’s electronic framework through doping procedures serves to augment PS activation, resulting in the generation of highly oxidative active species and significantly boosting the catalytic performance of carbon materials. Each type of doping exerts distinct catalytic effects. Ye et al. [42] developed biochar-derived catalysts via a process encompassing graphitization and nitrogen doping, which triggered a multiphase catalytic reaction with PMS, resulting in a sevenfold increase in degradation rate compared to unaltered biochar. Sun et al. [45] synthesized nitrogen-modified carbon nanotubes (N-CNTs), which exhibited a 7.8-fold enhancement in catalytic activity for PMS phenol oxidation compared to unmodified carbon nanotubes. Wang et al. [44] demonstrated that nitrogen-doped porous carbon outperformed nitrogen-free porous carbon and even surpassed the efficiency of the most effective homogeneous Co2+/PMS activator. The nitrogen-doped porous carbon/PMS system exhibited excellent performance across a wide pH range (3.3–9.6) with notable reusability. Liu et al. [43] developed Co3O4@CNTs nanocomposites, achieving a 94.8% degradation efficiency of norfloxacin within 60 min with a catalyst dosage of 120 mg/L and PMS addition of 0.5 mM, surpassing the removal rate of CNTs alone on norfloxacin, which stood at 41.7%.
In metal-doped carbon materials, the embedding of metals enhances carbon stability. Additionally, the carbon matrix acts as a carrier to minimize metal leaching. The combination of metal and carbon materials functions synergistically. Yan et al. [46] prepared Fe0/Fe3O4@porous carbon as an activator of PMS. After five times of recycling, the Fe content still remained 99.73%. Similarly, Nguyen et al. [47] developed a hybrid CoO-3D ordered mesoporous carbon nitride catalyst. It effectively activated PMS, and no Co2+ leaching was observed over five cycles. Additionally, the data from Table 1 indicated that the efficiency of heterogeneous catalysts decreases in the order of: metal-doped carbon materials, binary catalysts, and monobasic catalysts. Similarly, when comparing carbon materials, the order is: metal-doped carbon materials, nitrogen- doped carbon materials, and unmodified carbon materials.
Carbon materials provide several benefits, such as cost-effectiveness [48], absence of environmental concerns related to toxic metal leaching [49], and unique catalytic capabilities for PS activation when compared to heterogeneous metal compound catalysts. While carbon materials can serve as both adsorbents and catalysts, their catalytic stability is often insufficient, and the active sites are susceptible to deactivation. Enhancements in the structure, composition, and functional groups of carbon-based materials are necessary to address these limitations. Doping serves as an efficient way to compensate for their defects in carbon materials. Carbon materials, when doped with metals, are widely studied and can be used to synthesize various catalysts, leveraging the advantages of both components. Additionally, the complexity of the carbon structure, combined with the functionalization of heteroatom-doped groups, leads to a more intricate activation mechanism of PS, necessitating further investigation.

2.2.3. Photocatalysis/PS

Photocatalysis has emerged as a sustainable and economical strategy for activating PS, presenting a viable path for the generation of SO4·- [50]. Solar energy, especially visible light—comprising approximately half of the solar spectrum—acts as the principal source of energy for photocatalytic processes [51, 52]. Visible light waves are longer and carry less energy than UV rays, making them too weak to directly activate PS. To overcome this limitation, the catalyst that can harness visible light energy and effectively convey it to PS is necessary. Under sunlight exposure, the photocatalysts absorb light, promoting electrons to its conduction band while leaving holes in its valence band, thus generating electron-hole pairs [53]. The generation and isolation of electron-hole pairs are the basis of photocatalytic activity, facilitating the transformation of light energy into chemical energy. However, when electrons and holes recombine, they reduce the effectiveness of photocatalysis. Electrons (e) and holes (h+), along with PS, further react to generate SO4·-, ·OH. This process not only avoids the recombination of electrons and holes but also raises the quantity of reactive free radicals. The mechanism is described in Eq. (7), (8), (9), (10).
(9)
Photocatalsts+hve-+h+
(10)
h++H2O·OH+H+
In recent years, traditional semiconductor materials, graphite carbon nitride and Fenton-like catalysts have been widely used as photocatalysts. Many advanced visible light photocatalysts are synthesized by modifying titanium dioxide and carbon nitride doped with metal oxides such as Fe, Bi, Co and Cu. For instance, reduced graphene oxide/TiO2 [54], TiO2@CuFe2O4 [55], Co-TiO2 [56] and Co-C3N5 [57] have been developed and utilized as activators for PS. The combination of PS and photocatalysis has demonstrated significant synergistic effects [58]. Zhang et al. [59] demonstrated that the hollow-CuWO4/PDS system was highly effective in decomposing 98% of SMX under visible light irradiation. In the absence of light, however, only 15% of SMX was degraded. Golshan et al. [55] found that the TiO2@CuFe2O4/PMS system had achieved a good degradation rate of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, which was 88.9%, but it was further improved to 94.9% under the action of UV. Zhang et al. [60] developed a CN/BiOBr heterojunction. Under the illumination of 420nm, CN/BiOBr/PMS removed 98% of tetracycline (TC) in 10 minutes. After 8 cycles, the activity kept good, with a final TC removal rate of 77.7%. In contrast, without light, the TC removal rate after the same number of cycles was only 5.9%. This highlighted the significant role of visible light in the self-cleaning efficacy of the system. Tian et al. [61] meticulously reviewed the photocatalytic activity of Ti, Fe, Bi, Cu, Co, Mn, Mo, MOF, and carbon nitride-based catalysts in the activation of PS. This review did not duplicate their findings. In addition, Table 1 summarizes the research on photocatalytic activation and degradation of SMX by PS. Compared with other PS-AOPs, it proves that the system is unexpectedly efficient.
Photocatalytic technology is extensively used for pollutant degradation because of its mild and environmentally friendly conditions. It combines the dual advantages of thermal catalysis and catalysts. By utilizing ultraviolet or visible light as a driving force, photocatalytic technology not only expands the range of light sources but also enriches the variety and quantity of active substances, significantly enhancing catalytic efficiency. Additionally, photocatalytic materials demonstrate good stability over a wide pH range (3.01 to 9.03) [60], making them more adaptable in practical applications. However, to further enhance the performance of photocatalytic PS activation, current research is gradually transitioning from single transition metal oxides and carbon materials to multi-metal oxides and metal-doped carbon materials. This developmental trend not only increases the complexity of catalysts but also raises requirements for material selection and design. The design of photocatalysts needs to consider their sensitivity to light, light absorption capacity, and synergistic interaction with light to achieve optimal photocatalytic performance. Despite these advancements, photocatalytic technology still faces some challenges. For example, metal-based catalysts may experience metal leaching issues, while carbon materials generally have weak absorption capabilities for visible light, limiting their application in photocatalysis. Moreover, the process of modifying catalysts is intricate and expensive, and the recovery and regeneration of these catalysts are urgent issues that need resolution. These challenges emphasize that in developing new photocatalysts, besides considering their performance, attention should also be given to their environmental friendliness, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability.
Based on the introduction and discussion of PS-AOPs in this section, we summarized the advantages and disadvantages of homogeneous and heterogeneous catalytic PS activation methods, as shown in Table 2.

3. Effect of PS-AOPs on UF Membrane Fouling

Membrane separation technology is a physical separation method. Organic pollutants are not directly degraded by the membrane but instead accumulate on its surface, leading to membrane fouling that may not be reversed through conventional cleaning methods. This significantly shortens the lifespan of the membrane. To address this issue, PS-AOPs have demonstrated unique advantages in effectively removing organic pollutants, especially in treating complex organic mixtures and water rich in algae. UF membranes are widely used in such water treatment scenarios, and the integration of PS-AOPs enhances their efficiency as an auxiliary method. Recently, researchers have been eager to explore the combination of PS-AOPs with membrane technology to develop novel self-cleaning UF membranes. This integration is expected to improve the membrane’s processing efficiency, reduce fouling, and extend its lifespan.
The second part of the paper discussed the advantages and limitations of PS-AOPs. This section delved into the real-world application of the combined PS-AOPs and UF membrane system in water treatment. We anticipate gaining new insights from this integration, which could lead to advancements in UF technology and improved water treatment outcomes.
In the review, we quantitatively analyze the performance of PS-AOPs in controlling membrane fouling. On one hand, the study focuses on the effects of PS-AOPs pre-oxidation on water quality parameters, including dissolved organic carbon (DOC), ultraviolet absorbance (UV254), recalcitrant organic compounds, and molecular weight distribution. On the other hand, we assess fouling control performance through normalized flux (J/J0), transmembrane pressure (TMP), and fouling resistance analysis. DOC and UV254 are used to represent the levels of total dissolved organic material and those with aromatic structures or unsaturated bonds (mainly humic), respectively [62]. The decrease of DOC and UV254 absorbance indirectly indicates that the concentration of organic compounds decreases. This decrease is considered an indicator of organic matter being removed. The normalized flux (J/J0) is the ratio of the final flux to the initial water flux [63]. This ratio serves as an assessment of the flux recovery, which reflects how well the membrane’s flux is preserved over time in the presence of fouling. A higher J/J0 suggests better flux recovery and less fouling accumulation.

3.1. Homogeneous PS Catalytic UF Membrane

The application of homogeneous PS catalysis in conjunction with UF membranes primarily addresses the issue of membrane fouling. Although the integration offers benefits, it does not entirely overcome the drawbacks associated with the homogeneous PS-AOPs process.

3.1.1. UV/PS coupled with UF

Table 3 summarized the outcomes of several investigations into the fouling mitigation capabilities of UV-activated PS membranes. The data revealed that UV/PS treatment is capable of significantly breaking down and partially mineralizing organic material. It can also be seen that the effectiveness of UV/PS to antifouling is optimized with longer exposure to UV light and higher concentrations of PS. Various studies have consistently shown that fouling caused by NOM on UF membranes cannot be effectively mitigated through UV irradiation or PS oxidation alone [20]. However, the combination of UV and PS in pretreatment has been shown to significantly reduce fouling. The mechanisms behind UV/PS fouling control are twofold, as depicted in Fig. S4. First, organic matter is degraded into smaller molecules, such as DOC, which can pass through the membranes, and some components are mineralized, leading to a reduction in retained organic matter and the formation of a thinner fouling layer [64]. Second, the intense oxidation by free radicals causes the conversion of organic constituents into less adsorbable organic acids, thereby increasing the hydrophilicity of these components, and consequently, improving the reversibility or washability of the fouling [65]. It is noteworthy that some research suggests UV/PS primarily reduces reversible fouling and has little impact on irreversible fouling [66, 67]. The increased production of low-molecular-weight hydrophilic compounds, resulting from UV/PS pretreatment, is likely responsible for the accumulation within membrane pores, contributing to the observed effect. Concurrently, the pretreatment significantly reduces the filter cake layer, which is unable to retain hydrophilic components, thereby enabling more hydrophilic components to permeate into the membrane pores. Additional research indicates that this issue can be improved by increasing the PS concentration. Furthermore, numerous studies have focused on comparing the efficacy of UV/PS and UV/H2O2 in managing membrane fouling. The degradation efficiency of organic matter in UV/PS is superior because of the own advantages of SO4·-. Therefore, UV/PS is more effective than UV/H2O2 at equimolar oxidant doses [66, 68, 69].
The aforementioned research progress indicates that UV radiation can effectively activate PS to generate free radicals with high oxidation capacity, thereby reducing UF membrane fouling. However, this method comes with some drawbacks:
1. Although it offers a high degradation rate, the mineralization rate is relatively low. 2. The energy infrastructure, electricity consumption and high costs are significant considerations. 3. UV radiation diminishes in intensity as it travels, and its efficiency is greatly influenced by temperature, which limits its application effectiveness. Nevertheless, continuous direct UV irradiation can also damage UF membranes. In practical application, the UF process is separated from UV independently, and the pre-UV design is more sensible. This allows UV to activate PS for reactions while the rapid decay of UV radiation prevents damage to the UF membranes. Further research is needed to address the shortcomings of UV.

3.1.2. Heat/PS coupled with UF

Asif et al. [70] initially demonstrated the performance of heat-activated PS oxidation process for the removal of micropollutants and control of membrane fouling. The results showed that at a temperature of 40 °C, PDS achieved over 90% effective degradation of micropollutants containing strong electron-donating functional groups in the molecules. It induced a moderate breakdown of 60–80% for micropollutants having both electron-absorbing and electron-donating groups. Notably, heat/PDS significantly reduced the total organic carbon (TOC) by 70% and total nitrogen by 40%, thereby helping to lessen the fouling layer on the membrane’s surface. Table 4 presented research from other researchers on controlling membrane fouling by heat-activated PS. Among them, Ding et al. [71] evaluated the effect of factors such as solution pH and temperature on the heat/PDS fouling removal rate. pH is the critical factor for the conversion of to ·OH. At pH < 7, the dominant radical in the reaction is SO4·-. At 7 < pH < 9, both and ·OH coexist. At pH > 9, it is mainly ·OH that plays a role [30]. The simultaneous presence and co-action of both radicals provide better restoration of permeate flux and removal of fouling than when either radical is present alone. Biased alkaline condition can damage the membrane structure. Therefore, neutral condition is a good choice for controlling membrane fouling by heat/PS processes. High temperatures favor PS activation and diffusive mass transfer rates. An increasing trend of permeate flux recovery and fouling removal with increasing temperature was found within 40–80°C [71]. The process of organic matter degradation is less demanding than mineralization. Heat/PS intensifies free radical generation and boosts chemical reaction rates, thereby swiftly targeting the unsaturated constituents within NOM. By destroying their structures, their combination with high-valence cations, such as Ca2+, is hindered [26]. Thus, the formation of macromolecular deposits is reduced, and the membrane contamination is effectively reduced. Whereas the temperature of 60 – 80°C had little effect on DOC removal over a short period of time (10 min), suggesting that NOM was only structurally disrupted and not mineralized [72]. The compatibility of heating with the membrane distillation process has led to a focus on the synergistic effects of heat and PS in enhancing membrane distillation. As a result, the application of thermal activation to combat the fouling of UF membranes has been less widely investigated. Heat/PS/UF technology does have some challenges. First of all, the disadvantages of this technology are brought by Heat/PS itself, including the high cost of heat activation. Moreover, to ensure the effective operation of the system, the material of UF membrane must be able to withstand high temperature environment. The working temperature of UF membrane is usually between room temperature and 50°C, as this range preserves the membrane’s filtration efficiency and structural integrity. However, the effective temperature for heat activation needs to reach 80°C. Therefore, the research and development of UF membrane materials that can work stably at high temperatures is a key step to promote the combination of Heat/PS and UF system.
In addition, solar energy emerges as a financially viable option for heating in practical applications. By integrating solar energy with UF systems, the UV band of the solar spectrum can activate PS to generate SO4·-, which in turn degrades NOM and micropollutants before UF. The application of far-infrared radiation promotes photothermal effect, raising the solution’s temperature, thereby improving activation and speeding up the chemical reaction rate. In a study by Guo et al [73], the solar-activated PDS pretreatment significantly mitigated membrane fouling. The solar light intensity was kept at 1 kW/m2, and the temperature was elevated to 70°C. Under solar light exposure, the greatest reductions in TMP were approximately 69.6%, UV254 absorbance by 60.40%, DOC by 47.04%, in reversible fouling by 87.6%, and in irreversible fouling by 87.1%. Notably, the micropollutant atrazine (ATZ) was completely degraded. In this study, the solar simulator is used to simulate sunlight conditions, crucial for understanding reactions under real solar exposure. Although there are some technical obstacles in direct heat activation using solar energy, which leads to less relevant research so far, this method shows great potential in reducing the cost of thermal activation.

3.1.3. Transition metal ion/PS coupled with UF

The application of Fe(II)/PS was investigated for its efficacy in controlling membrane fouling, as illustrated in Table 5. Commonly, UF and coagulation-UF processes fall short in removing certain micropollutants, such as ATZ [74], sulfamethazine (SMT) [75], and p-chloronitrobenzene (p-CNB) [67]. However, the incorporation of Fe(II)/PMS into UF significantly enhances removal rates. The study highlighted that the molar ratio of Fe(II) to PMS plays a pivotal role in membrane contamination. An excessive amount of either Fe(II) or PMS would result in unnecessary reagent consumption. The optimum molar ratio of Fe(II) to PMS, which shown to be 1:1, was identified as the most effective for managing membrane fouling and removing organic matter. Fe(II)/PMS serves as a powerful pretreatment to enhance the performance of UF membranes. It markedly diminishes both reversible and irreversible membrane fouling, emerging as a reliable method for managing membrane fouling and eliminating micropollutants. The versatile Fe(II)/PMS functions as both an oxidizing and flocculating agent in the prevention and control of membrane fouling. The activation of PS by Fe(II) not only generates Fe(III) but also SO4·-. In neutral conditions, iron hydroxide is formed through hydrolysis, while the facilitates the production of reactive species such as ·OH. The in situ formed Fe(III) functions as a flocculant [76], and the along with ·OH oxides the organic matter adsorbed on particle surfaces. This process alters the zeta potential of the particles, thereby bolstering coagulation efficiency [77]. Consequently, the shift in the membrane contamination mechanism from typical film buildup to cake filtration is prolonged [78], thereby delaying the onset of membrane fouling.
The Fe(II)/PS/UF system operates effectively at a neutral pH, unlike the Fe(II)/PS system, which requires more acidic conditions. This system exhibits a unique in-situ coagulation function. However, it faces a significant challenge in the low recoverability of Fe(II), which tends to leak out with the effluent and requires separate collection and separation processes. Moreover, the conversion of Fe(III) to Fe(II) is comparatively difficult, thus affecting the system’s overall performance. Researches have shown that UV radiation is commonly employed to expedite the regeneration of Fe(II). The synergistic interaction between UV and Fe(II) during the activation of PS significantly enhances the system’s ability to mitigate membrane fouling. Cheng et al.’ research [67] showcased the advantages of UV irradiation for enhancing the Fe(II)/PMS system’s effectiveness. Treatment with 720 mJ/cm2 of UV irradiation, when applied to a solution containing 0.1 mM Fe(II) and 0.2 mM PMS, resulted in the most significant increase in membrane flux. The normalized flux, denoted by J/J0, rose to 0.81, a figure that is higher than the Fe(II)/PMS system of 0.70.

3.2. Heterogeneous PS Catalytic UF Membrane

In heterogeneous systems, membrane technology combined with PS-AOPs primarily focuses on immobilizing catalysts on membranes through membrane modification methods, such as blending, in-situ growth, vacuum-assisted filtration [79]. This approach enables the development of novel catalytic membranes featuring two-fold use: filtration and advanced oxidation. UF membrane can act as both a filter medium and a carrier for the catalyst. This setup facilitates the recovery and reuse of catalysts, enhances mass transfer efficiency, and optimizes catalytic activity. It also improves the membrane’s hydrophilicity and other properties [79]. Meanwhile, the reactive species generated by PS-AOPs on the membrane’s surface are effective in breaking down pollutants and reducing membrane fouling.

3.2.1. Transition metal compounds/PS coupled with UF

As the carrier of the system, the introduction of membrane can increase the interaction between the functional groups on the transition metal catalyst and the carrier, which is beneficial to the dispersion of the catalyst and the exposure of more active sites, thus enhancing the catalytic activity. Wang et al. [35] successfully developed CuO-coated ceramic hollow fiber membranes with dual functionalities of membrane filtration and PMS activation. The catalytic activity remained stable after 5 cycles, with the Bisphenol A (BPA) degradation rate and TOC removal rate maintained at 90% and 50%, respectively, surpassing the efficiency of homogeneous catalysis membrane. Guo et al. [80] demonstrated that a composite membrane decorated with CoCu layered double hydroxide nanoparticles could effectively eliminate a variety of emerging organic compounds in water. The mineralization efficiencies for SMX, sulfacetamide, lomefloxacin, and carbamazepine were 72.5%, 65.3%, 69.3%, and 56.0%, respectively.
The development and deployment of heterogeneous metal-based catalytic membranes have garnered significant interest in current research. However, there is a lack of comprehensive investigation into membrane fouling control strategies. Despite this, the potential value and future development prospects of these membranes are highly appealing and warrant further in-depth exploration and study. Table 6 summarized the scholarly efforts on the activation of PS using transition metal compounds for membrane fouling control. The data indicate that heterogeneous catalysis combined with membranes exhibits superior PS activation capability, stability, and effectiveness in preventing and controlling membrane fouling. Numerous studies have developed diverse catalytic membranes incorporating transition metal compounds, such as Co@GAC/ceramic membrane (CM) [81], MeOx/polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) (Me representing Mn, Cu, and Co) membranes [82], CoFe2O4/polyethersulfone (PES) membranes [83], CuO@CuS/PVDF membranes [84], Mn2O3/Al2O3 membranes [85], and Co3O4-Bi2O3-Ti membranes [86]. The activation properties of these catalytic membranes vary significantly based on the material composition. Among these, Cheng et al. [82] compared the effectiveness of PMS and MnO2/PMS alone with CuO/PMS and Co3O4/PMS, revealing that the latter two significantly reduced both reversible and irreversible fouling compared to the former two, which were only effective in mitigating reversible fouling. It was also observed that the oxidation capacity of MeOx/PMS was influenced by the type of MeOx, with Co3O4>CuO>MnO2 in terms of effectiveness. MeOx/PMS delayed the transition of fouling mechanisms from standard clogging to cake filtration to varying degrees, showing promise in controlling membrane fouling in practical applications.
The mechanisms of membrane fouling control through PS activation by monolithic and binary metal compounds are illustrated in Fig. S5. The reaction activated by transition metal compounds mainly occurs on the catalytic membrane surface, generating free radicals that oxidatively degrade pollutants through the valency alteration of metal ions on the membrane surface. Fig. S5(a, b) demonstrates that transition metal compounds remove pollutants through two pathways: attacking pollutants in non-radical form (1O2) with high selectivity and low oxidative capacity [35] and attacking pollutants with SO4·-, ·OH -based radicals with high oxidative capacity and low selectivity [87]. Fig. S5(c) depicts the construction of catalytic membranes by coating different binary layered metal compounds. Surface-bound radicals and 1O2 are the primary ROS in the system. NOM undergoes rapid degradation upon contact with ROS, diminishing its molecular weight. This augments the repulsive forces and boosts the normalized flux, thereby significantly mitigating membrane fouling. The water quality of permeate water from catalytic ceramic membranes is also enhanced due to efficient in situ oxidation [88]. The fouling mechanism throughout the filtration process is predominantly characterized by standard and complete blockage without cake filtration [89].
Compared with uncoupled membrane and homogeneous metal ion catalytic membrane, heterogeneous metal-complexed catalytic membrane shows better stability and reusability. The metal catalyst is fixed on the carrier, which effectively avoids the loss of metal ions in the reaction process. However, it also has disadvantages. Transition metal oxide-activated PS have already been discussed in terms of their defects. When integrated with the membrane, the following issues predominate:
  1. The carcinogenicity of Co2+ to the human body is a significant concern. The use of an UF membrane as a carrier significantly diminishes cobalt leaching. Nevertheless, the intricate nature of water composition introduces potential safety hazards when employing cobalt-based catalysts.

  2. The high cost associated with the synthesis of the catalyst is still a drawback.

  3. The system is not stable and reusable enough. Some transition metal compounds may undergo structural changes or become inactive during the course of the reaction [80] and need to be replaced periodically.

  4. The mechanism of activation of PS by transition metal compounds is more complex, which increases the difficulty of understanding and optimising the reaction process.

3.2.2. Carbon materials/PS coupled with UF

Table 7 collated research efforts focused on the activation of PS with carbon materials for the control of UF membrane fouling. The comparison highlights that the efficacy of unmodified carbon materials/PS in addressing membrane fouling is limited. Modifying carbon materials substantially boosts their catalytic activity. On this basis, the catalyst membranes show a significant improvement in performance and possess relatively excellent reusability. Carbon materials and membrane filtration show synergistic and complementary effects on the activation of PS. According to Ma et al.’s [90] research, the removal rates of 2,4-dichlorophenol in nitrogen-doped carbon (NC)/PMS and Fe@NC/PMS systems were 22.54% and 96.15% respectively within 17 min. Notably, their performance significantly improved after being fabricated into catalytic membranes. The NC/PVDF/PMS system removed 84.54% of 2,4-dichlorophenol in 2.297 s, whereas the Fe@NC/PVDF/PMS system achieved 99.74% removal in only 0.867 s. The Fe@NC/PVDF/PMS system also demonstrated a higher TOC removal efficiency of 67.55% compared to the Fe@NC/PMS system’s 55.52%. The developed Fe@NC exhibited excellent PMS catalytic activity, and the catalytic membrane configuration maximized its catalytic potential. Additionally, TMP barely increased in the Fe@NC/PVDF/PMS system within 10 minutes, whereas it significantly rose in the pure PVDF membrane, indicating that the catalytic membrane effectively controlled membrane fouling. Cheng et al. [89] observed that pretreatment with carbon nanofibers (CNFs)/PMS led to a slight enhancement in permeate flux and a minor addition in irreversible fouling. In contrast, pretreatment with CuO@CNFs/PMS effectively slowed the decline in flux, with J/J0 reaching 0.61 (versus 0.25 without pretreatment), and markedly lessened both reversible and irreversible fouling. Liu et al. [91] developed a catalytic membrane composed of nitrogen-doped multi-walled carbon nanotubes (N-MWCNTs). The N-MWCNTs/PVDF membrane removed phenol at a rate of 83.67% within 2 minutes, which was significantly higher than that of MWCNTs/PVDF (41%) and N-MWCNT powders (41.42%). The reusability of the membrane was assessed, with the degradation rate of phenol maintaining 100% in the first three cycles. However, the degradation rate decreased gradually in cycles 4, 5, and 6, reaching 90%, 75%, and 68% respectively. The amassing of pollutants and intermediate products on the membrane surface covered the active sites on the catalytic membrane, hindering the reaction between PMS and N-MWCNTs, thereby reducing the removal efficiency of pollutants. Ma et al. [92] developed a CNT@NC/Al2O3 membrane that, when combined with PMS activation, forms a MFPA system. The MFPA system demonstrated a higher J/J0 value of 0.75 compared to 0.36 without PMS. After three cycles, the SMX removal rate of the MFPA system decreased to 40.0%. However, after heat treatment, the CNT@NC/Al2O3 membrane regained its initial removal rate of 65.0%, indicating excellent regenerative properties of the membrane.
The catalytic efficiency of a catalyst-loaded membrane far exceeds that of an equivalent amount of powdered catalyst [92]. One reason for this is that the carrier membrane provides a more consistent distribution of active sites for the adsorption and degradation of pollutants. Additionally, membrane filtration, aided by applied pressure, accelerates the accumulation of pollutants and PS on the membrane surface, thereby enhancing their mass transfer to the catalyst’s surface. Both of these factors potentiate the activation of PS, leading to more effective improvement of catalytic efficiency and the production of reactive species with strong oxidative capabilities. Meanwhile, the enhanced interactions of the hybridized carbon materials led to the development of catalysts less prone to agglomeration, featuring larger active centers and enhanced adsorption capacity. The hybridized carbon-based PS catalytic membrane effectively reduces the organic zeta potential, facilitating increased opportunities for particle collision and agglomeration. This enrichment of organic matter on the membrane surface forms a porous fouling layer that is more easily degraded through radical and non-radical oxidation pathways, aiding in fouling reduction [93].
The integration of carbon materials with UF membranes constitutes a novel class of membranes. They play a synergistic and complementary role in activating PS. The catalysts remove pollutants from the membrane surface in situ. The membranes enable carbon material catalysts to reach their full potential. Carbon materials/PS coupled with UF membranes exhibit enhanced performance, addressing the limitations of carbon materials/PS in terms of catalytic stability and the number of active sites. Research on carbon-based catalytic membranes remains relatively scarce, with their performance and mechanism yet to be fully developed and explored. Nitrogen-doped carbon-based catalytic membranes offer a metal-free alternative, although the reaction time for organic removal is longer. The introduction of metals can expedite the reaction time, but this must be balanced with the risk of metal leaching.

3.2.3. Photocatalysis/PS coupled with UF

Challenges exist in the photocatalytic activation of PS, including the tendency for undesirable agglomeration among nanoscale catalysts, leading to limited active sites and reduced mass transfer efficiency [94]. The reunification of photo-induced electrons and holes on the interfaces of solitary-component catalysts leads to a reduction of charge carrier density, which subsequently diminishes the photocatalytic efficacy [95]. Additionally, the recyclability and reusability of most catalysts are problematic [96]. To address these challenges, researchers have developed catalytic membranes by immobilizing photocatalysts on membrane surfaces [97]. The self-cleaning properties of these catalytic membranes significantly alleviate membrane fouling [98]. The stable activity and large accessible surface area of photocatalysts on the membrane surface help overcome issues of agglomeration and recycling difficulties [99]. In recent years, photocatalytic membranes have garnered significant attention in the field of water treatment, owing to their distinct characteristics. Studies on these membranes have yielded rich results in terms of fabrication, characterization, and photocatalytic performance. Kusworo et al. [100] provided a comprehensive overview of membranes equipped with various photocatalysts such as semiconductor metal oxides, multi-hybrid metal oxides, and doped modified carbon materials and so on. Additionally, the integration of membrane separation and PS-AOPs enhances the mass transfer efficiency of catalytic membranes and the removal rate of pollutants [101]. As a result, the coupling of photocatalytic activated PS technology and UF membrane separation is a novel, robust, and environmentally friendly water treatment method that has recently emerged.
Wang et al. [102] developed a novel class of metal-free perylene imine carbon nitride (PI-g-C3N4) membrane. Irradiating with visible light with wavelength greater than 420nm, the photocatalytic activity of PMS was enhanced, manifesting as remarkable degradation efficiency against organic pollutants. The study revealed that the system achieved complete removal of BPA within 30 min. At the end of the third cycle can still degrade 98% BPA. Reduction-capable electrons can activate PS to generate ·O2, 1O2, and ·OH, while holes and radicals can participate in pollutant degradation, as illustrated in Fig. S6(a). Subsequently, Lumbaque et al. [103] explored the utilization of UF tubular ceramic membrane as a carrier, in conjunction with UV and TiO2-P25, to enhance the efficiency of PDS activation, as depicted in Fig. S6 (b). The UVC/membrane coated with TiO2-P25/PDS system effectively eliminated model drugs from wastewater, obliterating 42.6% of paracetamol. In contrast, the non-catalytic membrane system (UVC/PDS) removed 32.4% whereas the TiO2/PDS and UVC/TiO2 systems achieved removals of only 6% and 11.1%, respectively. Leichtweis et al. [104] incorporated NiFe2O4/carbon composite particles into PES membrane, creating the M–5NFO/C membrane. This was operated under the specified conditions: 50 ppm TC, pH 5, 5 mmol/L PDS, < 1 W visible light, and 3 cm2 active area. The removal efficiencies for TC were 5% in the vis/membrane system, 30% in the membrane/PDS system, and 45% in the vis/membrane/PDS system. Photocatalysis/PDS combined with membrane showed the best performance. NiFe2O4 served as the active site. However, due to continuous Ni leaching over four cycles, the removal efficiency for organic matter progressively decreased. Li et al. [105] synthesized biomimetic polydopamine and zeolitic imidazolite framework-67 decorated polypropylene (PDA/ZIF-67@PP) membrane that markedly increased hydrophilicity by 47.3% and permeability by 150.0%. In the visible light PDA/ZIF-67@PP/PMS system, the dyes methyl blue and methyl orange achieved degradation rates of 92.3% and 99.5%, respectively, surpassing the removal efficiencies of PMS or visible light alone. The main active species involved in the reaction were determined to be and ·O2. Moreover, the membrane fouling was successfully reduced by photocatalytic PMS activation. The recovery of J/J0 exceeded 0.935, compared to the original J/J0 of 0.55, showcasing the outstanding self-cleaning performance of the PDA/ZIF-67@PP membrane. This approach significantly alleviated membrane contamination, offering superior advantages over the hydrophilic modified membrane’s anti-sorption properties. Despite the burgeoning interest in photocatalytic activation of PS-catalyzed membranes for combating fouling, the corpus of research in this area remains limited, necessitating immediate and substantial expansion.
Photocatalysis/PS-UF membrane presents vast potentials for water treatment applications, but it also has its shortcomings.
  1. The efficacy of these membranes heavily relies on the presence of highly active photocatalysts. Therefore, the practical implementation of nanomaterials in photocatalysts may be hindered by their demanding, costly, and intricate fabrication processes [106].

  2. The distribution of most catalysts on the membrane surface is typically achieved through surface modification, leaving many pore walls unoccupied [107]. Particularly, colored substances within the solution often impede the passage of light [108], failing to fully utilize the active sites’ potential [105]. The integration of photocatalysis with transition metal compounds and carbon materials can significantly enhance the utilization of active sites on membranes, which further raises the high requirements for photocatalyst.

  3. In practical applications, UF membrane modules are typically housed within membrane shells. Because of their structural design, light has a hard time passing through the membrane, so it is difficult for the photocatalyst fixed on the UF membrane to play its role effectively. To address this, photocatalysts are commonly secured on suitable carriers, which are then positioned within photocatalytic reactors preceding UF systems.

  4. When choosing the driving mode of photocatalytic reaction, the photocatalytic membranes activated by visible light or sunlight are generally considered as an ideal choice because it is more environmentally friendly and sustainable. However, compared with the driving mode relying on UV, the efficacy of photocatalytic membranes driven by visible light is often limited. Therefore, to widely implement this technology, it’s essential to create efficient photocatalytic UF membranes that can be effectively driven by visible light.

  5. Current research focuses extensively on photocatalytic membranes and the study of photocatalytic activation of PS. However, integrated research that combines all three aspects—photocatalysis, membrane technology, and PS activation—is relatively scarce. Furthermore, studies dedicated to controlling membrane fouling, a critical issue in membrane applications, are even less common. The scarcity of such research can be attributed to several factors: The interplay between photocatalysis, membrane separation, and PS activation is complex. This complexity makes research design and execution more challenging. There was less commercial interest in this integrated system compared to other systems, which reduces investment in research and development.

3.3. Other Methods

In addition to the aforementioned PS activation methods, recent studies have delved into electrochemical activation for controlling membrane fouling. It has become a particularly compelling approach. With the aid of electricity, membrane flux experiences a substantial increase, and selectivity is notably enhanced, even when the contaminant pore size is smaller than that of the membrane pores. This enhancement can be attributed to electrochemically enhanced adsorption, electrostatic repulsion, and electrochemical degradation [109]. Liu et al. [110] introduced a PS system for membrane cathodic filtration, which effectively mitigated membrane fouling. When PMS and PDS were utilized as electrolytes, the effluent J/J0 decreased to 0.93 and 0.84 within 60 min, respectively. The decrease in humic acid (HA) deposition can be attributed to the oxidation of HA by the applied electric field and the modification of pollutant interactions at the membrane surface due to the presence of active substances. The mitigation of membrane fouling stemmed from the efficient oxidation of ·OH, SO4·-, and 1O2 generated by the activation of the membrane cathode by PS in the system.
In addition, single-atom catalysts are emerging as a novel force in the realm of electrochemical catalysis. Single-atom catalysts harness a single atom as their active site, with nearly all atoms participating in the catalytic reaction. This unique design integrates the benefits of both homogeneous and heterogeneous catalysis, resulting in enhanced catalytic efficiency, selectivity, and stability [111]. The catalyst structures are distinguished by their homogeneity and simplicity, which are pivotal in elucidating the mechanisms that boost reactivity and mitigate membrane fouling [112]. Nonetheless, there is a pressing need for ongoing research and advancement to facilitate the broad implementation of single-atom catalysts. This involves refining synthetic methodologies, delving into novel catalytic reactions, and tackling the issue of long-term catalyst stability.

4. Conclusion and Outlook

The coupling of PS-AOPs pretreatment with UF membrane technology provides a dual benefit of improving water quality and managing membrane fouling. We begin by reviewing the homogeneous and heterogeneous activation methods of PS-AOPs, discussing their mechanisms and comparing their advantages and disadvantages. We then summarize recent research on the degradation of SMX by PS-AOPs, meticulously listing operational conditions, dosages of pollutants and oxidants, pH, reaction times, and removal efficiencies. Quantitative assessments of these data offer a comprehensive view of the different activation methods’ performance and efficacy. Homogeneous activation, involving UV, heat, and transition metal ions, is effective in PS activation, yet it demands substantial investment. UV and heat activation break bonds, while transition metal ions activate PS through electron transfer. This process generates ROS, such as SO4·-, ·OH, which react with pollutants. In contrast, heterogeneous activation, using transition metal compounds, carbon materials, and photocatalysis, faces mass transfer limitations and insufficient active sites. However, it offers greater stability and recyclability. Heterogeneous activation of PS involves the transfer of electrons, leading to the generation of a variety of active substances. This includes ROS, non-free radicals, and surface-bound reactive species. Additionally, photocatalysis/PS can generate h+.
Secondly, the impact of PS-AOPs on UF membrane fouling is a key focus. The study examines changes in water quality parameters under various PS activation mechanisms, including DOC, UV254 absorbance, and the removal efficiency of refractory organic compounds. In addition, a detailed analysis of a range of parameters related to membrane fouling is conducted, including normalized flux, TMP, and membrane fouling resistance. Synthesizing these findings, it is abundantly clear that pretreatment with PS-AOPs can significantly slow the pace of membrane fouling, thereby substantially extending the service life of UF membranes. Nevertheless, despite the theoretical and technological appeal of PS-AOPs-UF, practical implementation is still challenged by several obstacles.
  1. PS-AOPs, having been developed over an extended period, have yielded abundant research results for the removal of organic matter. These systems, when combined with UF membranes, predominantly demonstrate their advantages in the field of water treatment. They are particularly effective in the elimination of high concentrations of organic compounds from wastewater, the removal of micropollution, odorous pollutants, and algae from drinking water, thereby enhancing the quality of the produced water. Simultaneously, they effectively control membrane fouling, reduce the intensity of backwashing and chemical cleaning, mitigate damage to the membranes, and extend their lifespan. As such, they have garnered interest and widespread attention from researchers. However, the studies on how the integration of PS-AOPs with UF functions to control membrane fouling are still in their infancy, representing an emerging field of research.

  2. The combination of PS-AOPs with UF membrane in a homogeneous system has addressed the challenge of membrane fouling. However, it has not significantly improved the performance of homogeneous PS-AOPs, leaving the inherent drawbacks intact. The operational costs of UV and heat are high, and there’s a risk of metal leakage from transition metal ions. Nonetheless, the usage conditions have become more relaxed after integration with the membrane, without strict pH limitations. The integration of heterogeneous PS-AOPs with UF membranes offers a complementary synergy, creating a novel catalytic membrane with dual functions of filtration and advanced oxidation. The UF membrane, as a carrier, boasts a large specific surface area, well-developed pore structures, and excellent adsorption capabilities. Catalysts are uniformly dispersed on the membrane surface, which increases the number of active sites and boosting catalytic potential. This addresses the mass transfer limitations and insufficient active sites in heterogeneous systems. However, it also raises the complexity of the system, making the preparation more intricate and expensive. Metal-based catalytic membranes are prone to metal leaching, while carbon-based ones eliminate this risk but are more prone to deactivation and require longer reaction times. Metal-carbon catalytic membranes mitigate the drawbacks of both, proving to be superior. Photocatalytic membranes can be developed based on metal-carbon catalytic membranes. Currently, research on activating PS with photocatalytic membranes is limited, imposing various restrictions. Future efforts should focus on synthesizing metal-carbon catalytic membranes to create novel self-cleaning membranes with advanced oxidation capabilities. An immediate priority is to delve into the optimal reaction conditions and parameter configurations for the PS-AOPs-UF system to maximize its efficiency and effectiveness.

  3. Heterogeneous PS catalyst membranes offer distinct advantages over the combination of homogeneous PS and UF membranes. In these heterogeneous systems, the catalyst is synthesized within the membrane material, creating a monolithic catalytic membrane that prevents catalyst loss and facilitates easy separation and retrieve. In contrast, homogeneous systems involve the simple addition of activating agents to the membrane, resulting in a simpler two-part assembly. Ideally, catalytic membranes should be reusable with stable activity. However, despite the ability to degrade organic matter, complete mineralization of pollutants is challenging. Oxidative intermediate products have a tendency to build up on the membrane surface, resulting in fouling and a decrease in catalytic activity. Research into the stability and regenerability of catalytic membranes is necessary. The goal is to develop membranes that can be recycled multiple times or operate for extended periods without any treatment; and can be regenerated through simple processes such as solvent washing (with H2O2, NaClO, etc.) or other methods to restore their initial performance and be reused. The development of novel materials is essential to fabricate catalytic membranes that showcase high efficiency, eco-friendliness, stability, and ease of recycling.

  4. Current research indicates that the performance of PS-AOPs-UF systems in natural water bodies is noticeably inferior to that in pure water conditions. This is attributed to the complexity of natural water matrices, which contain a variety of inorganic anions and other water quality constituents. These components compete with the active species, thereby diminishing the efficacy of PS-AOPs-UF. Concomitant with these developments, practical application tests in real water treatment settings and protracted operational trials are indispensable to ascertain the efficacy and viability of the coupled process under authentic conditions.

  5. PS is stable chemically, making it easy to store. Its dosage and reaction conditions are relatively simple to control. PS/AOPs are effective in a broad pH range for degrading recalcitrant organic matter, micro-pollutants, and high concentrations of NOM. However, the need for continuous addition of PS can impact the economic viability of the system. Additionally, the introduction of PS raises the potential for secondary pollution. Due to the strong oxidizing nature of sulfate ions ( SO4·-), they can readily react with halide anions (such as Cl, Br) in water to produce reactive halogens (like HClO, HBrO). These reactive species can then interact with natural organic matters in surface waters, producing halogenated organic by-products, including trihalomethanes [113]. This process can result in secondary pollution, posing risks to human health [114]. Subsequent research should focus on the by-products formed by PS in catalytic membrane system. Optimize membrane materials and reaction conditions to minimize the production of by-products.

Supplementary Information

Acknowledgments

This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 2019YFC0408801).

Notes

Author Contributions

F.Z. (M.S. student) summarized the relevant literature and wrote the manuscript. M. S. (Professor) revised the manuscript.

Conflict-of-interest Statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

1. Li L, Wang Z, Rietveld LC, et al. Comparison of the Effects of Extracellular and Intracellular Organic Matter Extracted From Microcystis aeruginosa on Ultrafiltration Membrane Fouling: Dynamics and Mechanisms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014;48(24)14549–14557. https://doi.org/10.1021/es5035365
crossref pmid

2. Ma B, Xue W, Li W, Hu C, Liu H, Qu J. Integrated Fe-based floc-membrane process for alleviating ultrafiltration membrane fouling by humic acid and reservoir water. J. Membr. Sci. 2018;563:873–881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2018.06.049
crossref

3. Huang J, Luo J, Chen X, Feng S, Wan Y. How Do Chemical Cleaning Agents Act on Polyamide Nanofiltration Membrane and Fouling Layer? Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2020;59(40)17653–17670. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.0c03365
crossref

4. Liu B, Liang H, Qu F, et al. Comparison of evaluation methods for Microcystis cell breakage based on dissolved organic carbon release, potassium release and flow cytometry. Chem. Eng. J. 2015;281:174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.06.072
crossref

5. Oh H, Yu M, Takizawa S, Ohgaki S. Evaluation of PAC behavior and fouling formation in an integrated PAC–UF membrane for surface water treatment. Desalination. 2006;192(1)54–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.07.034
crossref

6. Li H, Ding H, Wang H, Qu X, Li L, Li J. Research progress in ultrafiltration membrane pollution of wastewater treatment. Ind. Water Treat. 2012;32(11)6–9. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1005-829X.2012.11.002
crossref

7. Li CW, Chen YS. Fouling of UF membrane by humic substance: Effects of molecular weight and powder-activated carbon (PAC) pre-treatment. Desalination. 2004;170(1)59–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.03.015
crossref

8. Stoquart C, Servais P, Bérubé PR, Barbeau B. Hybrid Membrane Processes using activated carbon treatment for drinking water: A review. J Membr Sci. 2012;411–412:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2012.04.012
crossref

9. Ban F, Yang S. Research Progress of Ultrafiltration Membrane Fouling and Its Countermeasures in Water Treatment. Technol. Water Treat. 2021;47(4)15–19. https://doi.org/10.16796/j.cnki.1000-3770.2021.04.003
crossref

10. Yin W, Liu Y, Du P, et al. Fouling control of pre-ozonation on a submerged ultrafiltration system: Characteristics and mechanisms. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2020;20:101–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2020.101124
crossref

11. Zhang X, Fan L, Roddick FA. Feedwater coagulation to mitigate the fouling of a ceramic MF membrane caused by soluble algal organic matter. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2014;133:221–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2014.06.053
crossref

12. Wei D, Tao Y, Zhang Z, Liu L, Zhang X. Effect of in-situ ozonation on ceramic UF membrane fouling mitigation in algal-rich water treatment. J. Membr. Sci. 2016;498:116–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2015.09.063
crossref

13. Carroll T, King S, Gray SR, Bolto BA, Booker NA. The fouling of microfiltration membranes by NOM after coagulation treatment. Water Res. 2000;34(11)2861–2868. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(00)00051-8
crossref

14. Huang H, Schwab K, Jacangelo JG. Pretreatment for Low Pressure Membranes in Water Treatment: A Review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009;43(9)3011–3019. https://doi.org/10.1021/es802473r
crossref pmid

15. Kim J, Cai Z, Benjamin MM. Effects of adsorbents on membrane fouling by natural organic matter. J. Membr. Sci. 2008;310(1)356–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2007.11.007
crossref

16. Ly QV, Hur J. Further insight into the roles of the chemical composition of dissolved organic matter (DOM) on ultrafiltration membranes as revealed by multiple advanced DOM characterization tools. Chemosphere. 2018;201:168–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.02.181
crossref pmid

17. Song J, Zhang Z, Tang S, Tan Y, Zhang X. Does pre-ozonation or in-situ ozonation really mitigate the protein-based ceramic membrane fouling in the integrated process of ozonation coupled with ceramic membrane filtration? J. Membr. Sci. 2018;548:254–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2017.11.031
crossref

18. Yu W, Zhang D, Graham NJD. Membrane fouling by extracellular polymeric substances after ozone pre-treatment: Variation of nano-particles size. Water Res. 2017;120:146–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.04.080
crossref pmid

19. Zhang X, Fan L, Roddick FA. Effect of feedwater pre-treatment using UV/H2O2 for mitigating the fouling of a ceramic MF membrane caused by soluble algal organic matter. J. Membr. Sci. 2015;493:683–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2015.07.024
crossref

20. Tian J, Wu C, Yu H, et al. Applying ultraviolet/persulfate (UV/PS) pre-oxidation for controlling ultrafiltration membrane fouling by natural organic matter (NOM) in surface water. Water Res. 2018;132:190–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.01.005
crossref pmid

21. Luo C, Ma J, Jiang J, et al. Simulation and comparative study on the oxidation kinetics of atrazine by UV/H2O2, UV/HSO5– and UV/S2O82–. Water Res. 2015;80:99–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.05.019
crossref pmid

22. Ji Y, Ferronato C, Salvador A, Yang X, Chovelon JM. Degradation of ciprofloxacin and sulfamethoxazole by ferrous-activated persulfate: Implications for remediation of groundwater contaminated by antibiotics. Sci. Total Environ. 2014;472:800–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.11.008
crossref pmid

23. Yu W, Campos LC, Graham N. Application of pulsed UV-irradiation and pre-coagulation to control ultrafiltration membrane fouling in the treatment of micro-polluted surface water. Water Res. 2016;107:83–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.10.058
crossref pmid

24. Wu Z, Gong S, Liu J, Shi J, Deng H. Progress and problems of water treatment based on UV/persulfate oxidation process for degradation of emerging contaminants: A review. J. Water Process. Eng. 2024;58:104870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2024.104870
crossref

25. Ike IA, Orbell JD, Duke M. Activation of Persulfate at Waste Heat Temperatures for Humic Acid Degradation. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2018;6(3)4345–4353. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b04840
crossref

26. Li C, Peng W, Fang Z, Liu J. Water Pollutants Oxidation Degradation Through the Activation of Peroxymonosulfate (PMS) Heterogeneously Catalyzedby Transition Metal Oxide: a Review. Mater. Rep. 2018;2(13)2223–2229. https://doi.org/10.11896/j.issn.1005-023X.2018.13.013
crossref

27. Zhao D, Liao X, Yan X, Huling SG, Chai T, Tao H. Effect and mechanism of persulfate activated by different methods for PAHs removal in soil. J Hazard Mater. 2013;254–255:228–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.03.056
crossref pmid

28. Zou J, Ma J, Chen L, et al. Rapid Acceleration of Ferrous Iron/Peroxymonosulfate Oxidation of Organic Pollutants by Promoting Fe(III)/Fe(II) Cycle with Hydroxylamine. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013;47(20)11685–11691. https://doi.org/10.1021/es4019145
crossref pmid

29. Wacławek S, Lutze HV, Grübel K, Padil V, Černík M, Dionysiou DD. Chemistry of persulfates in water and wastewater treatment: A review. Chem. Eng. J. 2017;330:44–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2017.07.132
crossref

30. Liu L, Gao Z, Deng Z, Jiang L. Activation of persulfate and its mechanism and application in oxidative degradation of antibiotics in water. Environ. Chem. 2022;41(5)1702–1717. http://doi.org/10.7524/j.issn.0254-6108.2021010601
crossref

31. Anipsitakis GP, Stathatos E, Dionysiou DD. Heterogeneous Activation of Oxone Using Co3O4. J. Phys. Chem. B. 2005;109(27)13052–13055. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp052166y
crossref pmid

32. Hu P, Long M. Cobalt-catalyzed sulfate radical-based advanced oxidation: A review on heterogeneous catalysts and applications. Appl. Catal. B. 2016;181:103–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2015.07.024
crossref

33. Ji F, Li C, Wei X, Yu J. Efficient performance of porous Fe2O3 in heterogeneous activation of peroxymonosulfate for decolorization of Rhodamine B. Chem. Eng. J. 2013;231:434–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2013.07.053
crossref

34. Wang Y, Indrawirawan S, Duan X, et al. New insights into heterogeneous generation and evolution processes of sulfate radicals for phenol degradation over one-dimensional α-MnO2 nanostructures. Chem. Eng. J. 2015;266:12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2014.12.066
crossref

35. Wang S, Tian J, Wang Q, et al. Development of CuO coated ceramic hollow fiber membrane for peroxymonosulfate activation: a highly efficient singlet oxygen-dominated oxidation process for bisphenol a degradation. Appl. Catal. B. 2019;256:117783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2019.117783
crossref

36. Anipsitakis GP, Dionysiou DD. Radical Generation by the Interaction of Transition Metals with Common Oxidants. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004;38(13)3705–3712. https://doi.org/10.1021/es035121o
crossref pmid

37. Wang Y, Zhou L, Duan X, et al. Photochemical degradation of phenol solutions on Co3O4 nanorods with sulfate radicals. Catal. Today. 2015;258:576–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2014.12.020
crossref

38. Feng Y, Wu D, Deng Y, Zhang T, Shih K. Sulfate Radical-Mediated Degradation of Sulfadiazine by CuFeO2 Rhombohedral Crystal-Catalyzed Peroxymonosulfate: Synergistic Effects and Mechanisms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016;50(6)3119–3127. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b05974
crossref pmid

39. Feng Y, Liao C, Li H, Liu C, Shih K. Cu2O-promoted degradation of sulfamethoxazole by α-Fe2O3-catalyzed peroxymonosulfate under circumneutral conditions: synergistic effect, Cu/Fe ratios, and mechanisms. Environ. Technol. 2018;39(1)1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2017.1293164
crossref pmid

40. Ren X, Chen C, Nagatsu M, Wang X. Carbon nanotubes as adsorbents in environmental pollution management: A review. Chem. Eng. J. 2011;170(2)395–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2010.08.045
crossref

41. Yang D, Cheng C, Bao M, Chen L, Bao Y, Xue C. The pervaporative membrane with vertically aligned carbon nanotube nanochannel for enhancing butanol recovery. J. Membr. Sci. 2019;577:51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.01.032
crossref

42. Ye S, Zeng G, Tan X, et al. Nitrogen-doped biochar fiber with graphitization from Boehmeria nivea for promoted peroxymonosulfate activation and non-radical degradation pathways with enhancing electron transfer. Appl. Catal. B. 2020;269:118850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2020.118850
crossref

43. Liu B, Song W, Wu H, et al. Degradation of norfloxacin with peroxymonosulfate activated by nanoconfinement Co3O4@CNT nanocomposite. Chem. Eng. J. 2020;398:125498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.125498
crossref

44. Wang G, Chen S, Quan X, Yu H, Zhang Y. Enhanced activation of peroxymonosulfate by nitrogen doped porous carbon for effective removal of organic pollutants. Carbon. 2017;115:730–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2017.01.060
crossref

45. Sun H, Kwan C, Suvorova A, Ang HM, Tadé MO, Wang S. Catalytic oxidation of organic pollutants on pristine and surface nitrogen-modified carbon nanotubes with sulfate radicals. Appl Catal B. 2014;154–155:134–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2014.02.012
crossref

46. Yan Y, Zhang H, Wang W, Li W, Ren Y, Li X. Synthesis of Fe0/Fe3O4@porous carbon through a facile heat treatment of iron-containing candle soots for peroxymonosulfate activation and efficient degradation of sulfamethoxazole. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021;411:124952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124952
crossref pmid

47. Nguyen TB, Huang CP, Doong R-a, Chen CW, Dong CD. CoO-3D ordered mesoporous carbon nitride (CoO@mpgCN) composite as peroxymonosulfate activator for the degradation of sulfamethoxazole in water. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021;401:123326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123326
crossref pmid

48. Li JC, Hou PX, Liu C. Heteroatom-Doped Carbon Nanotube and Graphene-Based Electrocatalysts for Oxygen Reduction Reaction. Small. 2017;13(45)1702002. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201702002
crossref pmid

49. Rathinavel S, Priyadharshini K, Panda D. A review on carbon nanotube: An overview of synthesis, properties, functionalization, characterization, and the application. Mater. Sci. Eng. B. 2021;268:115095. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mseb.2021.115095
crossref

50. Ghanbari F, Moradi M. Application of peroxymonosulfate and its activation methods for degradation of environmental organic pollutants: Review. Chem. Eng. J. 2017;310:41–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.10.064
crossref

51. Bora LV, Mewada RK. Visible/solar light active photocatalysts for organic effluent treatment: Fundamentals, mechanisms and parametric review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2017;76:1393–1421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.130
crossref

52. Li B, Liu S, Lai C, et al. Unravelling the interfacial charge migration pathway at atomic level in 2D/2D interfacial Schottky heterojunction for visible-light-driven molecular oxygen activation. Appl. Catal. B. 2020;266:118650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2020.118650
crossref

53. Liu B, Qiao M, Wang Y, et al. Persulfate enhanced photocatalytic degradation of bisphenol A by g-C3N4 nanosheets under visible light irradiation. Chemosphere. 2017;189:115–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.08.169
crossref pmid

54. Sun H, Liu S, Liu S, Wang S. A comparative study of reduced graphene oxide modified TiO2, ZnO and Ta2O5 in visible light photocatalytic/photochemical oxidation of methylene blue. Appl. Catal. B. 2014;146:162–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2013.03.027
crossref

55. Golshan M, Kakavandi B, Ahmadi M, Azizi M. Photocatalytic activation of peroxymonosulfate by TiO2 anchored on cupper ferrite (TiO2@CuFe2O4) into 2,4-D degradation: Process feasibility, mechanism and pathway. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018;359:325–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.06.069
crossref pmid

56. Chen Q, Ji F, Guo Q, Fan J, Xu X. Combination of heterogeneous Fenton-like reaction and photocatalysis using Co–TiO2 nanocatalyst for activation of KHSO5 with visible light irradiation at ambient conditions. J. Environ. Sci. 2014;26(12)2440–2450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2014.03.003
crossref pmid

57. He P, Gu C, Tang B, Zhou Y, Gan M, Zhu J. Expeditious degradation of SMX by high-valent cobalt-oxo species derived from cobalt-doped C3N5-activated peroxymonosulfate with the assistance of visible light. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022;301:122009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.122009
crossref

58. Yadav MSP, Neghi N, Kumar M, Varghese GK. Photocatalytic-oxidation and photo-persulfate-oxidation of sulfadiazine in a laboratory-scale reactor: Analysis of catalyst support, oxidant dosage, removal-rate and degradation pathway. J Environ Manage. 2018;222:164–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.05.052
crossref pmid

59. Zhang M, He J, Chen Y, Liao PY, Liu ZQ, Zhu M. Visible light-assisted peroxydisulfate activation via hollow copper tungstate spheres for removal of antibiotic sulfamethoxazole. Chin. Chem. Lett. 2020;31(10)2721–2724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2020.05.001
crossref

60. Zhang B-B, Bai CW, Chen XJ, Sun YJ, Yang Q, Chen F. 2D/2D heterojunctions for rapid and self-cleaning removal of antibiotics via visible light-assisted peroxymonosulfate activation: Efficiency, synergistic effects, and applications. J. Hazard. Mater. 2024;468:133816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.133816
crossref pmid

61. Tian D, Zhou H, Zhang H, et al. Heterogeneous photocatalyst-driven persulfate activation process under visible light irradiation: From basic catalyst design principles to novel enhancement strategies. Chem. Eng. J. 2022;428:131166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2021.131166
crossref

62. Leenheer JA, Croué JP. Peer Reviewed: Characterizing Aquatic Dissolved Organic Matter. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003;37(1)18A–26A. https://doi.org/10.1021/es032333c
crossref pmid

63. Li M, Wen Q, Chen Z, Tang Y, Yang B. Comparison of ozonation and UV based oxidation as pre-treatment process for ultrafiltration in wastewater reuse: Simultaneous water risks reduction and membrane fouling mitigation. Chemosphere. 2020;244:125449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.125449
crossref pmid

64. Chen J, Zhang M, Li F, et al. Membrane fouling in a membrane bioreactor: High filtration resistance of gel layer and its underlying mechanism. Water Res. 2016;102:82–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.06.028
crossref pmid

65. Song W, Ravindran V, Koel BE, Pirbazari M. Nanofiltration of natural organic matter with H2O2/UV pretreatment: fouling mitigation and membrane surface characterization. J. Membr. Sci. 2004;241(1)143–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.04.034
crossref

66. Wan Y, Xie P, Wang Z, et al. Comparative study on the pretreatment of algae-laden water by UV/persulfate, UV/chlorine, and UV/H2O2: Variation of characteristics and alleviation of ultrafiltration membrane fouling. Water Res. 2019;158:213–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.04.034
crossref pmid

67. Cheng X, Wu D, Liang H, et al. Effect of sulfate radical-based oxidation pretreatments for mitigating ceramic UF membrane fouling caused by algal extracellular organic matter. Water Res. 2018;145:39–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.08.018
crossref pmid

68. Chen Z, Li M, Wen Q, Ren N. Evolution of molecular weight and fluorescence of effluent organic matter (EfOM) during oxidation processes revealed by advanced spectrographic and chromatographic tools. Water Res. 2017;124:566–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.08.006
crossref pmid

69. Qu F, Yang Z, Li X, et al. Membrane fouling control by UV/persulfate in tertiary wastewater treatment with ultrafiltration: A comparison with UV/hydroperoxide and role of free radicals. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021;257:117877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.117877
crossref

70. Asif MB, Fida Z, Tufail A, et al. Persulfate oxidation-assisted membrane distillation process for micropollutant degradation and membrane fouling control. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2019;222:321–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2019.04.035
crossref

71. Ding J, Xiao H, Huang X, et al. Application of heat-activated peroxydisulfate process for the chemical cleaning of fouled ultrafiltration membranes. Chin. Chem. Lett. 2023;34(10)108316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2023.108316
crossref

72. Guo Y, Liang H, Bai L, et al. Application of heat-activated peroxydisulfate pre-oxidation for degrading contaminants and mitigating ultrafiltration membrane fouling in the natural surface water treatment. Water Res. 2020;179:115905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.115905
crossref pmid

73. Guo Y, Liang H, Li G, et al. A solar photo-thermochemical hybrid system using peroxydisulfate for organic matters removal and improving ultrafiltration membrane performance in surface water treatment. Water Res. 2021;188:116–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.116482
crossref pmid

74. Cheng X, Liang H, Ding A, et al. Ferrous iron/peroxymonosulfate oxidation as a pretreatment for ceramic ultrafiltration membrane: Control of natural organic matter fouling and degradation of atrazine. Water Res. 2017;113:32–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.01.055
crossref pmid

75. Cheng X, Liang H, Ding A, et al. Application of Fe(II)/peroxymonosulfate for improving ultrafiltration membrane performance in surface water treatment: Comparison with coagulation and ozonation. Water Res. 2017;124:298–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.07.062
crossref pmid

76. Guan X, Dong H, Ma J, Jiang L. Removal of arsenic from water: Effects of competing anions on As(III) removal in KMnO4–Fe(II) process. Water Res. 2009;43(15)3891–3899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2009.06.008
crossref pmid

77. Xie P, Chen Y, Ma J, Zhang X, Zou J, Wang Z. A mini review of preoxidation to improve coagulation. Chemosphere. 2016;155:550–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.04.003
crossref pmid

78. Liu B, Qu F, Yu H, et al. Membrane Fouling and Rejection of Organics during Algae-Laden Water Treatment Using Ultrafiltration: A Comparison between in Situ Pretreatment with Fe(II)/Persulfate and Ozone. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018;52(2)765–774. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b03819
crossref pmid

79. Zhou M, Chen J, Yu S, et al. The coupling of persulfate activation and membrane separation for the effective pollutant degradation and membrane fouling alleviation. Chem. Eng. J. 2023;451:139009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.139009
crossref

80. Guo R, Li Y, Chen Y, et al. Efficient degradation of sulfamethoxazole by CoCu LDH composite membrane activating peroxymonosulfate with decreased metal ion leaching. Chem. Eng. J. 2021;417:127887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.127887
crossref

81. Wang S, Wu Q, Yan B, et al. A novel integrated process of ceramic membrane filtration coupled with peroxymonosulfate activation and adsorption for water treatment. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022;291:120874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.120874
crossref

82. Cheng X, Li P, Liu W, et al. Activation of peroxymonosulfate by metal oxide nanoparticles for mitigating organic membrane fouling in surface water treatment. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2020;246:116935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.116935
crossref

83. Wang T, de Vos WM, de Grooth J. CoFe2O4-peroxymonosulfate based catalytic UF and NF polymeric membranes for naproxen removal: The role of residence time. J. Membr. Sci. 2022;646:120209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2021.120209
crossref

84. Liu Y, Guo R, Shen G, et al. Construction of CuO@CuS/PVDF composite membrane and its superiority for degradation of antibiotics by activation of persulfate. Chem. Eng. J. 2021;405:126990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.126990
crossref

85. Chen L, Maqbool T, Nazir G, et al. Developing the large-area manganese-based catalytic ceramic membrane for peroxymonosulfate activation: Applications in degradation of endocrine disrupting compounds in drinking water. J. Membr. Sci. 2022;655:120602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2022.120602
crossref

86. Wang L, Wang L, Shi Y, et al. Fabrication of Co3O4-Bi2O3-Ti catalytic membrane for efficient degradation of organic pollutants in water by peroxymonosulfate activation. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2022;607:451–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2021.08.086
crossref pmid

87. Zhao Y, Lu D, Xu C, et al. Synergistic oxidation - filtration process analysis of catalytic CuFe2O4 - Tailored ceramic membrane filtration via peroxymonosulfate activation for humic acid treatment. Water Res. 2020;171:115387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.115387
crossref pmid

88. Bai Z, Gao S, Yu H, Liu X, Tian J. Layered metal oxides loaded ceramic membrane activating peroxymonosulfate for mitigation of NOM membrane fouling. Water Res. 2022;222:118928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.118928
crossref pmid

89. Cheng X, Liu Y, Zheng L, et al. CuO@carbon nanofiber as an efficient peroxymonosulfate catalyst for mitigation of organic matter fouling in the ultrafiltration process. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2022;626:1028–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2022.07.002
crossref pmid

90. Ma T, Ren H, Liu M, Zhou R. Nanoconfined catalytic membrane assembled by nitrogen-doped carbon encapsulating Fe-based nanoparticles for rapid removal of 2,4-dichlorophenol in wastewater by peroxymonosulfate activation. J. Hazard. Mater. 2024;466:133523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.133523
crossref pmid

91. Liu Y, Lin Q, Guo Y, et al. The nitrogen-doped multi-walled carbon nanotubes modified membrane activated peroxymonosulfate for enhanced degradation of organics and membrane fouling mitigation in natural waters treatment. Water Res. 2022;209:117960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2021.117960
crossref pmid

92. Ma H, Wang G, Miao Z, Dong X, Zhang X. Integration of membrane filtration and peroxymonosulfate activation on CNT@nitrogen doped carbon/Al2O3 membrane for enhanced water treatment: Insight into the synergistic mechanism. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2020;252:117479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.117479
crossref

93. Fan Q, Cheng X, Zhu X, et al. Secondary wastewater treatment using peroxymonosulfate activated by a carbon nanofiber supported Co3O4 (Co3O4@CNF) catalyst combined with ultrafiltration. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022;287:120579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.120579
crossref

94. Ghosh S, Kouamé NA, Ramos L, et al. Conducting polymer nanostructures for photocatalysis under visible light. Nat. Mater. 2015;14(5)505–511. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat4220
crossref pmid

95. Jiang L, Yuan X, Pan Y, et al. Doping of graphitic carbon nitride for photocatalysis: A review. Appl. Catal. B. 2017;217:388–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2017.06.003
crossref

96. Li N, Tian Y, Zhao J, et al. Z-scheme 2D/3D g-C3N4@ZnO with enhanced photocatalytic activity for cephalexin oxidation under solar light. Chem. Eng. J. 2018;352:412–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.07.038
crossref

97. Xie R, Luo F, Zhang L, et al. A Novel Thermoresponsive Catalytic Membrane with Multiscale Pores Prepared via Vapor-Induced Phase Separation. Small. 2018;14(18)1703650. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201703650
crossref pmid

98. Liu L, Liu Z, Bai H, Sun D. Concurrent filtration and solar photocatalytic disinfection/degradation using high-performance Ag/TiO2 nanofiber membrane. Water Res. 2012;46(4)1101–1112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.12.009
crossref pmid

99. Hatat-Fraile M, Liang R, Arlos MJ, et al. Concurrent photocatalytic and filtration processes using doped TiO2 coated quartz fiber membranes in a photocatalytic membrane reactor. Chem. Eng. J. 2017;330:531–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2017.07.141
crossref

100. Kusworo TD, Budiyono , Kumoro AC, Utomo DP. Photocatalytic nanohybrid membranes for highly efficient wastewater treatment: A comprehensive review. J. Environ. Manage. 2022;317:115357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115357
crossref pmid

101. Wang G, Wang D, Dong X, Zhang X, Ma H. Sodium persulfate based PVDF membrane for concurrent advanced oxidation and ultrafiltration of ofloxacin in water. Chem. Eng. J. 2017;315:509–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2017.01.059
crossref

102. Wang Y, Wang H, Li J, Zhao X. Facile synthesis of metal free perylene imide-carbon nitride membranes for efficient photocatalytic degradation of organic pollutants in the presence of peroxymonosulfate. Appl. Catal. B. 2020;278:118981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2020.118981
crossref

103. Lumbaque EC, Lüdtke DS, Dionysiou DD, Vilar V, Sirtori C. Tube-in-tube membrane photoreactor as a new technology to boost sulfate radical advanced oxidation processes. Water Res. 2021;191:116815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2021.116815
crossref pmid

104. Leichtweis J, Vieira Y, Carissimi E, Ulbricht M, Fischer L. Photocatalytic and persulfate-facilitated tetracycline degradation using NiFe2O4/carbon/polymer membranes: Activity and stability during flow-through. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2024;669:160603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2024.160603
crossref

105. Li N, Chen G, Zhao J, et al. Self-cleaning PDA/ZIF-67@PP membrane for dye wastewater remediation with peroxymonosulfate and visible light activation. J. Membr. Sci. 2019;591:117341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117341
crossref

106. Yang L, Xu L, Bai X, Jin P. Enhanced visible-light activation of persulfate by Ti3+ self-doped TiO2/graphene nanocomposite for the rapid and efficient degradation of micropollutants in water. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019;365:107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.10.090
crossref pmid

107. Gao P, Liu Z, Tai M, Sun DD, Ng W. Multifunctional graphene oxide–TiO2 microsphere hierarchical membrane for clean water production. Appl Catal B. 2013;138–139:17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2013.01.014
crossref

108. Tang C, Bai H, Liu L, et al. A green approach assembled multifunctional Ag/AgBr/TNF membrane for clean water production & disinfection of bacteria through utilizing visible light. Appl. Catal. B. 2016;196:57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2016.05.023
crossref

109. Yang Y, Qiao S, Zheng M, Zhou J, Quan X. Enhanced permeability, contaminants removal and antifouling ability of CNTs-based hollow fiber membranes under electrochemical assistance. J. Membr. Sci. 2019;582:335–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.04.026
crossref

110. Liu Y, Xu Q, Song Z, Liu S, Zhao C. Degradation emerging contaminants and mitigation membrane fouling by electrochemical activation of persulfate. China Environ. Sci. 2023;43(11)5757–5764. https://doi.org/10.19674/j.cnki.issn1000-6923.2023.0200
crossref

111. Chen Y, Ji S, Chen C, Peng Q, Wang D, Li Y. Single-Atom Catalysts: Synthetic Strategies and Electrochemical Applications. Joule. 2018;2(7)1242–1264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2018.06.019
crossref

112. Zhang M, Lai C, Li B, et al. MXenes as Superexcellent Support for Confining Single Atom: Properties, Synthesis, and Electrocatalytic Applications. Small. 2021;17(29)2007113. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.202007113
crossref pmid

113. Fang C, Wang Z, Feng M, Huang Y, Yang F, Liu J. Trace bromide ion impurity leads to formation of chlorobromoaromatic by-products in peroxymonosulfate-based oxidation of chlorophenols. Chemosphere. 2017;182:624–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.05.065
crossref pmid

114. Guo Y. Effectiveness and mechanism of photothermal activated peroxodisulfate and photocatalytic pre-oxidation to control ultrafiltration membrane fouling [dissertation]. Harbin Inst. Technol. 2021.


115. Yang Y, Lu X, Jiang J, et al. Degradation of sulfamethoxazole by UV, UV/H2O2 and UV/persulfate (PDS): Formation of oxidation products and effect of bicarbonate. Water Res. 2017;118:196–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.03.054
crossref pmid

116. Ao X, Liu W. Degradation of sulfamethoxazole by medium pressure UV and oxidants: Peroxymonosulfate, persulfate, and hydrogen peroxide. Chem. Eng. J. 2017;313:629–637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.12.089
crossref

117. Ji Y, Fan Y, Liu K, Kong D, Lu J. Thermo activated persulfate oxidation of antibiotic sulfamethoxazole and structurally related compounds. Water Res. 2015;87:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.09.005
crossref pmid

118. Milh H, Cabooter D, Dewil R. Role of process parameters in the degradation of sulfamethoxazole by heat-activated peroxymonosulfate oxidation: Radical identification and elucidation of the degradation mechanism. Chem. Eng. J. 2021;422:130457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2021.130457
crossref

119. Luo T, Wan J, Ma Y, Wang Y, Wan Y. Sulfamethoxazole degradation by an Fe(ii)-activated persulfate process: insight into the reactive sites, product identification and degradation pathways. Environ. Sci.: Process. Impacts. 2019;21(9)1560–1569. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9EM00254E
crossref pmid

120. Wu Y, Shi Y, Chen H, Zhao J, Dong W. Activation of persulfate by magnetite: Implications for the degradation of low concentration sulfamethoxazole. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2018;116:468–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2018.03.020
crossref

121. Li Y, Zhu W, Guo Q, et al. Highly efficient degradation of sulfamethoxazole (SMX) by activating peroxymonosulfate (PMS) with CoFe2O4 in a wide pH range. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021;276:119403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.119403
crossref

122. Guo R, Nengzi L-c, Chen Y, Li Y, Zhang X, Cheng X. Efficient degradation of sulfamethoxazole by CuCo LDH and LDH@fibers composite membrane activating peroxymonosulfate. Chem. Eng. J. 2020;398:125676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.125676
crossref

123. Wang X, Zhou Y, Ndayiragije S, Wang N, Tang H, Zhu L. Advanced oxidative degradation of sulfamethoxazole by using bowl-like FeCuS@Cu2S@Fe0 catalyst to efficiently activate peroxymonosulfate. J. Environ. Sci. 2023;126:348–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2022.03.044
crossref pmid

124. Guan C, Jiang J, Pang S, Ma J, Chen X, Lim T-T. Nonradical transformation of sulfamethoxazole by carbon nanotube activated peroxydisulfate: Kinetics, mechanism and product toxicity. Chem. Eng. J. 2019;378:122147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.122147
crossref

125. Liang J, Xu X, Hu X, et al. Different mechanisms between biochar and activated carbon for the persulfate catalytic degradation of sulfamethoxazole: Roles of radicals in solution or solid phase. Chem. Eng. J. 2019;375:121908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.121908
crossref

126. Chen H, Carroll KC. Metal-free catalysis of persulfate activation and organic-pollutant degradation by nitrogen-doped graphene and aminated graphene. Environ. Pollut. 2016;215:96–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.04.088
crossref pmid

127. Li Y, Li J, Pan Y, et al. Peroxymonosulfate activation on FeCo2S4 modified g-C3N4 (FeCo2S4-CN): Mechanism of singlet oxygen evolution for nonradical efficient degradation of sulfamethoxazole. Chem. Eng. J. 2020;384:123361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.123361
crossref

128. Wang S, Wang J. Degradation of sulfamethoxazole using peroxymonosulfate activated by cobalt embedded into N, O co-doped carbon nanotubes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021;277:119457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.119457
crossref

129. Zhang J, Zhai C, Zhao W, et al. Insight into combining visible-light photocatalysis with transformation of dual metal ions for enhancing peroxymonosulfate activation over dibismuth copper oxide. Chem. Eng. J. 2020;390:124582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.124582
crossref

130. Li J, Jiang X, Guan H, et al. Visible-light-driven peroxymonosulfate activation by robust TiO2-base nanoparticles for efficient removal of sulfamethoxazole. Environ. Pollut. 2023;334:122150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.122150
crossref pmid

131. Park S, Choi N, Kim TH, Lee DH, Park Y, Hwang Y. Exploiting calcinated CoFe-layered double hydroxide for the photo-persulfate catalytic degradation of sulfamethoxazole. J. Mol. Liq. 2024;408:125285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2024.125285
crossref

132. Jia Y, Li H, Duan L, et al. Activation of persulfate by β-PDI/MIL-101(Fe) photocatalyst under visible light toward efficient degradation of sulfamethoxazole. Chem. Eng. J. 2024;481:148588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2024.148588
crossref

133. Ntelane TS, Feleni U, Mthombeni NH, Kuvarega AT. CuFeS2 supported on dendritic mesoporous silica-titania for persulfate-assisted degradation of sulfamethoxazole under visible light. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2024;654:660–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2023.10.077
crossref pmid

134. Wang Z, Wan Y, Xie P, et al. Ultraviolet/persulfate (UV/PS) pretreatment of typical natural organic matter (NOM): Variation of characteristics and control of membrane fouling. Chemosphere. 2019;214:136–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.09.049
crossref pmid

135. Qiu Y, Luo Y, Zhang T, et al. Comparison between permanganate pre-oxidation and persulfate/iron(II) enhanced coagulation as pretreatment for ceramic membrane ultrafiltration of surface water contaminated with manganese and algae. Environ. Res. 2021;196:110942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.110942
crossref pmid

136. Bai Z, Gao S, Liu X, Huang R, Tian J. Ceramic membrane with double catalytic layer for efficient peroxymonosulfate activation and dissolved organic matter (DOM) membrane fouling control. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2023;318:123999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2023.123999
crossref

137. Sun X, Zheng H, Jiang S, et al. Fabrication of FeOCl/MoS2 catalytic membranes for pollutant degradation and alleviating membrane fouling with peroxymonosulfate activation. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2022;10(3)107717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2022.107717
crossref

138. Cheng X, Li P, Zhou W, et al. Effect of peroxymonosulfate oxidation activated by powdered activated carbon for mitigating ultrafiltration membrane fouling caused by different natural organic matter fractions. Chemosphere. 2019;221:812–823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.01.081
crossref pmid

139. Yun L, Gao Z, Cheng X, et al. Effect of peroxydisulfate oxidation catalyzed with ordered mesoporous carbons on controlling ultrafiltration membrane fouling by algal organic matter. Chemosphere. 2022;303:135037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135037
crossref pmid

140. Zhang C, Wang G, Gao Y, Ma H, Dong X, Zhang X. Surface and pore co-functionalized ceramic membrane with nitrogen doped carbon for enhanced water treatment through coupling peroxymonosulfate activation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022;292:120998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.120998
crossref

141. Cheng X, Li P, Zhu X, et al. Role of different dimensional carbon nanoparticles in catalytic oxidation of organic pollutants and alleviating membrane fouling during ultrafiltration of surface water. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021;270:118804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.118804
crossref

Table 1
Different modes of activation trigger persulfate to degrade SMX
Activation method Operation conditions Feed water SMX concentration PS concentration pH Reaction time Removal rate Reactive Oxygen Species Ref
UV λ: 254 nm; Surface irradiance :8.69 × 10−7 Einsteins L−1 s−1 Deionized water 0.02 mmol/L 1 mmol/L PDS 8.0 120 min 100% ·OH and SO4·- [115]
λ: 200–300 nm; Dose: 200 mJ/cm Milli-Q water 0.2369 mmol/L 1 mmol/L PMS 11.0 Not mentioned 97.5% ·OH and SO4·- [116]
Heat 50°C Milli-Q water 0.03 mmol/L 2 mmol/L PDS 7.0 600 min 80% SO4·- [117]
70°C Milli-Q water 10 mg/L 0.4 mmol/L PMS 9.5 60 min 95% ·OH, SO4·- [118]
Transition metal ion 0.6 mmol/L Fe2+ Milli-Q water 0.03 mmol/L 0.6 mmol/L PDS 6.0 240 min 95.8% ·OH, SO4·- [22]
2.5 mmol/L Fe2+ Deionized water 20 mg/L 25 mmol/L PDS 3.3 240 min 100% ·OH, SO4·- [119]
Transition metal compounds 1.0 g/L Fe3O4 Milli-Q water 0.3 mg/L 1 mmol/L PDS 6.5 120 min 58.3% SO4·-, ·OH, ·O2 [120]
0.4 g/L α-Fe2O3 (CT2.5%Cu2O) Ultrapure water 1.6 mg/L 40 mg/L PMS 6.8 180 min 100% SO4·-, ·OH [39]
0.1 mg/L CoFe2O4 Deionized water 10 mg/L 0.4 mg/L PMS 9.0 10 min 91% 1O2, SO4·-, ·OH [121]
60 mg/L Cu1Co1 LDH (layered double hydroxides) Deionized water 10 mg/L 0.24 mmol/L PMS 5.77 30 min 95.2% SO4·-, ·OH, · O2, 1O2 and H2 O2 [122]
0.15 g/L FeCuS@Cu2S@Fe0 Double-dis tilled water 12 mg/L 0.2 g/L PMS 6 5 min 100% ·OH, SO4·-, · O2, 1O2 [123]
100 mg/L CNT Milli-Q water 0.01 mmol/L 0.5 mmol/L PDS 7.0 60 min 68.8% Non-radical [124]
Carbon materials 0.10 g/L Active carbon (AC) Deionized water 0.5 mg/L 0.50 mmol/L PDS 7.2 150 min 91.2% SO4·-, ·OH, and surface-bound reactive species [125]
0.05 g/L N-GP (nitrogen-doped graphene) Deionized water 5 mg/L 1 mmol/L PDS 6.0 180 min 99.9% Non-radical [126]
Metal doped carbon materials 20 mg/L FeCo2S4-C3N4 Deionized water 0.0197 mmol/L 0.15 mmol PMS 6.5 15 min 91.9% SO4·-, ·OH, 1O2 [127]
0.1 g/L CoO@mpgCN (mesoporous carbon nitride) Milli-Q water 0.05 mol/L 10 mmol/L PMS 7.0 15 min 99% SO4·-, and ·OH [47]
0.2 g/L Co@N-O-CNTs Deionized water 0.04 mmol/L 0.8 mmol/L PMS 3.0 60 min 100% SO4·-, ·OH, 1O2 and surface-bound reactive species [128]
0.2 g/L Fe0/Fe3O4@PC (porous carbon) Deionized water 10 mg/L 0.5 mmol/L 5.0 10 min 100% SO4·-, ·OH, · O2, 1O2 [46]
Photocatal ysis λ>420 nm 0.5 g/L Vis/CuBi2O4 Deionized water 5 mg/L 0.125 g/L PMS 5.0 90 min 78.6% 1O2 and h+ [129]
λ>420 nm 0.1 g/L Vis/Co-Mo-TiO2 Deionized water 10 mg/L 1 mmol/L PMS 5.3 30 min 100% SO4·-, ·OH, h+ [130]
λ:360 nm 0.1 g/L UV/CoFe-LDO (CoFe-layered double hydroxide) Deionized water 0.1 mg/L 5 mmol/L PDS 6.0 60 min 98% SO4·-, ·OH, h+, ·O2, 1O2 [131]
λ: 420 nm 0.5 g/L Vis/MP50[MIL-101(Fe)/β-PDI(β-alanine modified perylene diimide derivative)] Ultrapure water 5 mg/L 1 mmol/L PDS 7.0 6 min 99.7% h+, O+2·−, SO4·--, ·OH and 1O2 [132]
λ > 400 nm 1.2 g/L Vis/CuFeS2-DMST (dendritic mesoporous silica-titania) Deionized water 10 mg/L 0.8 mmol/L PDS 7.0 140 min 88.9% O2·−, h+, SO4·--, and 1O2 [133]
λ > 400 nm 0.5 g/L Vis/Cobalt-doped C3N5 Ultrapure water 10 mg/L 1 mmol/L PMS 11.04 20 min 99.57% high-valent cobalt oxide (Co(IV)) species, SO4·-, ·OH, h+, ·O2, 1O2 [57]

Not mentioned: Reaction time =Dose/average UV irradiance (the latter value is not clear)

Table 2
The advantages and disadvantages of homogeneous and heterogeneous PS activation methods
Type Homogeneous PS-AOPs Heterogeneous PS-AOPs
Advantages Obvious effect, multiple active sites and simple operation. Wide pH application range, low leaching amount of metal ions., metal-free sludge, the majority can be recycled, safe operation, no additional energy input, low operation cost, high stability and unrestricted by complex background
Disadvantages Limited pH range, harsh operating conditions, need for continuous external investment, high energy consumption, difficult to reuse, metal leaching problems and secondary pollution of metal sludge. Mass transfer limitation, low efficiency, complicated preparation and high preparation cost.
Table 3
UV activated PS used to control membrane fouling
Feed water Membrane type Fouling exposure time (min) UV dose (mJ/cm2) PS concentration Organic matter removal rate Effects on UF flux, TMP and fouling resistances ref
Milli-Q water PES Algal organic matter (AOM) 20 5.60×104 1.0 mmol/L PDS DOC:42.5% J/J0:0.81(vs 0.26 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 98.9% [66]
Milli-Q water CM AOM 60 720 0.2 mmol/L PMS UV254:28%; DOC:11%; ATZ:64%; SMT:94%; p-CNB:28% J/J0:0.42(vs 0.30 without pretreatment) [67]
Milli-Q water Polysulfone NOM 20 4.20×103 100 mg/L PDS UV254:46.5%; No decrease in DOC J/J0:0.75(vs 0.14 without pretreatment) [134]
Songhua River water in Harbin PVDF NOM 120 1.10×105 0.4 mmol/L PDS UV254:77%; DOC:28%; Low molecular weight fraction > 92% TMP<20kPa, decreased by 73%; Rir decreased by 75% [20]
Domestic wastewater PVDF Effluent organic matter (EfOM) 10 2.89×103 0.6 mmol/L PDS DOC:46.7% J/J0:0.57(vs 0.20 without pretreatment) [63]
Lijiao secondary effluent PES EfOM 30 2.36×103 1.0 mmol/L PDS UV254:67%; DOC:39%; Low molecular weight fraction: 72% J/J0:0.55(vs 0.21 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 77.5%; Rir decreased by 92.2% [69]

All UV wavelengths in the experiments are 254nm.

Rir- irreversible membrane fouling resistance; Rr- reversible membrane fouling resistance

Table 4
Heat activated PS used to control membrane fouling
Feed water Membrane type Fouling T/°C pH PS concentration Reaction time Organic matter removal rate Effects on UF flux, TMP and fouling resistances ref
Songhua River water in Harbin PES NOM 80 7.7 0.4 mmol/L PDS UV254:58%; DOC:32% J/J0:0.54(vs 0.25 without pretreatment) [72]
Songhua River water in Harbin PES NOM 80 7.7 0.6 mmol/L PDS 60 min UV254:71%; DOC:52% J/J0:0.72 (vs 0.31 without pretreatment) [114]
Songhua River water in Harbin PES NOM 70 7.5 0.4 mmol/L PDS UV254:34.29%; DOC:26.01%; ATZ:41.36% TMP:22.1kPa, decreased by 68.8%; Rr decreased by 45.4%; Rir decreased by 88.0% [73]
Table 5
Fe(II) activated PS used to control membrane fouling
Feed water Membrane type Fouling concentration (mmol/L) PS concentration pH Organic matter removal rate Effects on UF flux, and fouling resistances ref
Milli-Q water CM NOM 0.05 0.05 mmol/L PMS 7.0 UV254:96%; DOC:93%; ATZ:98% J/J0:0.79(vs 0.15 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 83.5%; Rir decreased by 96.5% [74]
Milli-Q water CM AOM 0.1 0.2 mmol/L PMS 7.0 UV254>30%; DOC:40%; ATZ:71%; SMT:90%; p-CNB:25% J/J0:0.70(vs 0.30 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 82.8%; Rir decreased by 91.4% [67]
Milli-Q water PVDF AOM 0.4 0.4 mmol/L PMS 7.5 DOC:69%; 2-MIB:69% J/J0:0.70(vs 0.049 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 49.6%; Rir decreased by 78.6% [78]
Tap water CM AOM 0.20 0.20 mmol/L PMS 8.1 UV254>90% J/J0:0.96(vs 0.80 without pretreatment) [135]
Songhua River water in Harbin CM NOM 0.05 0.05 mmol/L PMS 6.8– 7.3 UV254:52%; DOC:33%; ATZ:40%; SMT:82%; p-CNB:19% J/J0:0.83(vs 0.58 without pretreatment); Total fouling resistance decreased by 69% [75]
Table 6
Transition metal compound activated PS used to control membrane fouling
Feed water Membrane type Fouling Metal compound Synthetic method PS concentration Organic matter removal rate Effects on UF flux and fouling resistances ref
Milli-Q water CM NOM 0.6 g CuFe2O4 In-situ growth 0.4 g/L PMS TOC:76.2%; HA:80.1% J/J0:0.50(vs 0.34 without pretreatment); Rir decreased by 48.0% [87]
Milli-Q water CM DOM CoAly, y=10,30,50 mg Vacuum- assisted filtration 1.0 mmol/L PMS TOC:87.47% J/J0:0.79(vs 0.35 without pretreatment) [136]
Milli-Q water PVDF NOM 0.3 g/L FeOCl/MoS2 Vacuum- assisted filtration 0.3 mmol/L PMS Rhodamine B:96.9% J/J0:0.98(vs 0.55 without pretreatment) [137]
Yellow in River Queshan reservoir PES NOM 100 mg/L CuO Vacuum- assisted filtration 0.5 mmol/L PMS UV254:15.2%; DOC:7.8% J/J0:0.35(vs 0.25 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 89.6%; Rir decreased by 36.4% [89]
Secondary effluent of Jinan sewage plant CM EfOM 100mg/L Co3O4 In-situ growth 0.5 mmol/L PMS UV254:26.0% J/J0:0.49(vs 0.35 without pretreatment) [93]
Table 7
Carbon material activated PS used to control membrane fouling
Feed water Membrane type Fouling Carbon material Synthetic method PS concentration Organic matter removal rate Effects on UF flux, and fouling resistances ref
Milli-Q water PES NOM Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) / 1.5 mmol/ L PMS DOC:31.4% J/J0:0.86(vs 0.19 without pretreatment) [13]
Milli-Q water PES; PVDF AOM 50 mg/L hexagonally ordered mesoporous carbons(CMK-3) / 1 mmol/L PDS UV254:90.1%; DOC:74.1% PES-J/J0:0.74(vs 0.31 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 83.2%; Rir decreased by 73.0% PVDF-J/J0:0.36(vs 0.13 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 59.5%; Rir decreased by 71.7% [139]
Ultrapure water CM HA Nitrogen doped carbon(NC) Dip-coating + Pyrolysis 0.65 mmol/ L PMS Phenol:100%; BPA:100%; 4-chlorophenol:65%; p-nitrophenol:67% Rr decreased by 87.2%; Rir decreased by 40.4% [140]
Milli-Q water PVDF HA 0.1mg/cm2 MWCNTs Vacuumassisted filtration 5 mmol/ L PMS Phenol:45% J/J0:0.72 (vs 0.63 without pretreatment); Total fouling resistance decreased by 11.8% [91]
Milli-Q water PVDF HA 0.1mg/cm2 nitrogen-doped multi-walled carbon nanotubes (N-MWCNTs) Vacuumassisted filtration 5 mmol/ L PMS Phenol:100% J/J0:0.88 (vs 0.63 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 79.4%; Rir decreased by 88.8% [91]
Songhua River water in Harbin PVDF NOM 0.1mg/cm2 N-MWCNTs Vacuumassisted filtration 5 mmol/ L PMS / J/J0:0.65 (vs 0.31 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 32.6% [91]
Eutrophic lake water in Jinan PES NOM 100 mg/L CNFs / 0.5 mmol/ L PMS UV254:30.8%; DOC:16.4% Rr decreased by 38.0%; Rir decreased by 33.9% [141]
Yellow River in Queshan reservoir PES NOM 100 mg/L CNFs Vacuumassisted filtration 0.5 mmol/ L PMS UV254:12.1%; DOC:5.3% J/J0:0.34(vs 0.25 without pretreatment) [89]
Secondary effluent of Jinan sewage plant CM EfOM 100 mg/L CNFs In-situ growth 0.5 mmol/ L PMS UV254:22.1% J/J0:0.45(vs 0.35 without pretreatment) [93]
Yellow River in Queshan reservoir PES NOM 100 mg/L CuO@CNFs Vacuum-as sisted filtration 0.5 mmol/ L PMS UV254:42.4%; DOC:20.4% J/J0:0.61(vs 0.25 without pretreatment); Rr decreased by 89.6%; Rir decreased by 36.4% [89]
Secondary effluent of Jinan sewage plant PES; CM EfOM 100 mg/L Co3O4@CNFs In-situ growth 0.5 mmol/ L PMS UV254:58.4%; DOC:46.5% PES-J/J0:0.65(vs 0.42 without pretreatment); Rir decreased by 65.6% CM-J/J0:0.62(vs 0.35 without pretreatment); Rir decreased by 83.9% [93]
TOOLS
PDF Links  PDF Links
PubReader  PubReader
Full text via DOI  Full text via DOI
Download Citation  Download Citation
Supplement  Supplement
  Print
Share:      
METRICS
0
Crossref
0
Scopus
1,694
View
235
Download
Editorial Office
464 Cheongpa-ro, #726, Jung-gu, Seoul 04510, Republic of Korea
FAX : +82-2-383-9654   E-mail : eer@kosenv.or.kr

Copyright© Korean Society of Environmental Engineers.        Developed in M2PI
About |  Browse Articles |  Current Issue |  For Authors and Reviewers