Data on removal kinetics of pharmaceutical compounds, artificial sweeteners, and perfluoroalkyl substances from water using a passive treatment system containing zero-valent iron and biochar.

The data presented in this paper relate to the research paper "Removal of pharmaceutical compounds, artificial sweeteners, and perfluoroalkyl substances from water using a passive treatment system containing zero-valent iron and biochar" [1]. Four columns packed with different ratios of reactive media, including silica sand (SS), zero-valent iron (ZVI), and biochar (BC), were evaluated for simultaneous removal of 14 emerging contaminants from water. The target emerging contaminants included eight pharmaceuticals (carbamazepine, caffeine, sulfamethoxazole, 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, ibuprofen, gemfibrozil, and naproxen), four artificial sweeteners (acesulfame-K, sucralose, saccharin, and cyclamate), and two perfluoroalkyl substances (perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid). The samples for target contaminant analysis were collected from the influent, effluent, and profile (along the flow direction) ports of each column. The removal data (concentration vs. residence time) for each target contaminant were fitted to the first-order (exponential decay equation) or zero-order (linear equation) model using SigmaPlot. The removal rate, removal rate constant (k obs ), mass normalized rate constant (k M ), surface area normalized rate constant (k SA , specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t 0.5 ) of target contaminants in Columns ZVI, BC, and (ZVI + BC) were calculated and summarized in this dataset.

Data

The dataset showed the removal kinetic parameters, including removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t), for 14 target emerging contaminants in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). The kinetic parameters for each contaminant are summarized in separate tables (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10, Table 11, Table 12, Table 13, Table 14). The raw data (concentration vs. residence time) of each contaminant can be found in the related research article [1].

Table 1

First-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of pharmaceutical in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the carbamazepine concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,d−1	kM,L g−1 d−1	kSA,L m−2 d−1	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	1.1E+01 × C	1.1E+01	2.6E-03	2.8E-04	0.06	0.999
		13	4.9 × C	4.9	1.1E-03	1.2E-04	0.14	0.975
		25	4.4 × C	4.4	1.0E-03	1.1E-04	0.16	0.965
	2	53	1.2 × C	1.2	2.9E-04	3.0E-05	0.56	0.931
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	5.4 × C	5.4	1.2E-02	1.8E-04	0.19	0.998
		13	2.5 × C	2.5	5.3E-03	8.2E-05	0.28	0.998
		25	1.9 × C	1.9	4.2E-03	6.4E-05	0.36	0.996
	2	53	0.7 × C	0.7	1.5E-03	2.3E-05	1.0	0.970
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	8.2 × C	8.2	7.2E-03	2.1E-04	0.09	0.999
		13	4.5 × C	4.5	3.9E-03	1.2E-04	0.16	0.966
		25	4.0 × C	4.0	3.5E-03	1.0E-04	0.17	0.970
	2	53	1.3 × C	1.3	1.1E-03	3.3E-05	0.55	0.992

Table 2

First-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of pharmaceutical in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the caffeine concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ, μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,d−1	kM,L g−1 d−1	kSA,L m−2 d−1	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	1.6E+01 × C	1.6E+01	3.7E-03	3.9E-04	0.04	0.999
		13	7.2 × C	7.2	1.7E-03	1.8E-04	0.10	0.998
		25	5.1 × C	5.1	1.2E-03	1.2E-04	0.14	0.982
	2	53	1.5 × C	1.5	3.5E-04	3.6E-05	0.47	0.961
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	4.8 × C	4.8	1.0E-02	1.6E-04	0.14	0.999
		13	2.8 × C	2.8	6.0E-03	9.4E-05	0.25	0.999
		25	2.2 × C	2.2	4.8E-03	7.4E-05	0.31	0.996
	2	53	1.0 × C	1.0	2.1E-03	3.3E-05	0.70	0.973
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	6.9 × C	6.9	6.0E-03	1.8E-04	0.10	0.996
		13	5.5 × C	5.5	4.8E-03	1.4E-04	0.13	0.989
		25	4.5 × C	4.5	3.9E-03	1.2E-04	0.15	0.973
	2	53	1.7 × C	1.7	1.5E-03	4.5E-05	0.40	0.996

Table 3

First-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of pharmaceutical in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the sulfamethoxazole concentration. “–” represents not applicable.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,d−1	kM,L g−1 d−1	kSA,L m−2 d−1	t0.5,d	R2
Column 1 (Control)	1	25	0.2 × C	0.2	–	–	3.6	0.877
	2	53	0.4 × C	0.4	–	–	1.8	0.984
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	4.5E+02 × C	4.5E+02	1.1E-01	1.1E-02	0.002	1.000
		13	4.7E+02 × C	4.7E+02	1.1E-01	1.1E-02	0.001	1.000
		25	4.6E+02 × C	4.6E+02	1.1E-01	1.1E-02	0.001	1.000
	2	53	1.5E+02 × C	1.5E+02	3.5E-02	3.7E-03	0.005	1.000
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.6 × C	1.6	3.5E-03	5.4E-05	0.43	0.999
		13	1.2 × C	1.2	2.5E-03	3.8E-05	0.60	0.999
		25	1.1 × C	1.1	2.4E-03	3.8E-05	0.61	0.993
	2	53	0.5 × C	0.5	1.1E-03	1.7E-05	1.4	0.991
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	4.5E+02 × C	4.5E+02	4.0E-01	1.2E-02	0.002	1.000
		13	4.7E+02 × C	4.7E+02	4.1E-01	1.2E-02	0.001	1.000
		25	4.6E+02 × C	4.6E+02	4.1E-01	1.2E-02	0.001	1.000
	2	53	1.5E+02 × C	1.5E+02	1.3E-01	3.9E-03	0.005	1.000

Table 4

First-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of pharmaceutical in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the MDA concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,d−1	kM,L g−1 d−1	kSA,L m−2 d−1	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	1.9E+02 × C	1.9E+02	4.3E-02	4.6E-03	0.004	1.000
		13	1.3E+01 × C	1.3E+01	3.0E-03	3.1E-04	0.06	0.999
		25	7.8 × C	7.8	1.8E-03	1.9E-04	0.09	0.998
	2	53	2.4 × C	2.4	5.5E-04	5.8E-05	0.29	0.996
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.1E+01 × C	1.1E+01	2.4E-02	3.7E-04	0.06	0.999
		13	8.1 × C	8.1	1.7E-02	2.7E-04	0.09	0.997
		25	5.1 × C	5.1	1.1E-02	1.7E-04	0.14	0.998
	2	53	3.2 × C	3.2	6.8E-03	1.1E-04	0.22	0.997
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	2.0E+01 × C	2.0E+01	1.8E-02	5.3E-04	0.03	1.000
		13	1.2E+01 × C	1.2E+01	1.0E-02	3.0E-04	0.06	0.999
		25	8.7 × C	8.7	7.6E-03	2.3E-04	0.08	0.999
	2	53	3.9 × C	3.9	3.4E-03	1.0E-04	0.18	0.999

Table 5

First-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of pharmaceutical 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA)in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the MDMA concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,d−1	kM,L g−1 d−1	kSA,L m−2 d−1	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	3.0E+02 × C	3.0E+02	6.9E-02	7.3E-03	0.002	1.000
		13	3.5E+02 × C	3.5E+02	8.2E-02	8.7E-03	0.002	1.000
		25	1.4E+01 × C	1.4E+01	3.2E-03	3.4E-04	0.05	1.000
	2	53	4.0 × C	4.0	9.3E-04	9.8E-05	0.17	1.000
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.1E+01 × C	1.1E+01	2.3E-02	3.6E-04	0.07	0.999
		13	7.7 × C	7.7	1.7E-02	2.6E-04	0.09	0.998
		25	5.2 × C	5.2	1.1E-02	1.7E-04	0.13	0.997
	2	53	3.1 × C	3.1	6.7E-03	1.0E-04	0.22	0.997
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	2.5E+01 × C	2.5E+01	2.2E-02	6.6E-04	0.03	1.000
		13	1.6E+01 × C	1.6E+01	1.4E-02	4.1E-04	0.04	1.000
		25	1.0E+01 × C	1.0E+01	9.0E-03	2.7E-04	0.07	0.999
	2	53	4.3 × C	4.3	3.8E-03	1.1E-04	0.16	1.000

Table 6

First-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of pharmaceutical in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the ibuprofen concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,d−1	kM,L g−1 d−1	kSA,L m−2 d−1	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	2.6 × C	2.6	6.0E-04	6.3E-05	0.27	0.943
		13	1.2 × C	1.2	2.9E-04	3.0E-05	0.56	0.926
		25	0.9 × C	0.9	2.2E-04	2.3E-05	0.74	0.932
	2	53	0.2 × C	0.2	4.7E-05	4.9E-06	3.5	0.864
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.9 × C	1.9	4.2E-03	6.5E-05	0.36	0.992
		13	1.2 × C	1.2	2.6E-03	4.0E-05	0.57	0.997
		25	1.1 × C	1.1	2.4E-03	3.7E-05	0.63	0.996
	2	53	0.4 × C	0.4	8.9E-04	1.4E-05	1.7	0.992
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	2.9 × C	2.9	2.5E-03	7.6E-05	0.24	0.978
		13	1.7 × C	1.7	1.5E-03	4.5E-05	0.41	0.958
		25	1.6 × C	1.6	1.4E-03	4.1E-05	0.44	0.952
	2	53	0.5 × C	0.5	4.0E-04	1.2E-05	1.5	0.941

Table 7

First-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of pharmaceutical in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the gemfibrozil concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,d−1	kM,L g−1 d−1	kSA,L m−2 d−1	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	9.3 × C	9.3	2.2E-03	2.3E-04	0.07	0.999
		13	4.6 × C	4.6	1.1E-03	1.1E-04	0.15	0.969
		25	3.5 × C	3.5	8.2E-04	8.6E-05	0.20	0.954
	2	53	1.0 × C	1.0	2.4E-04	2.5E-05	0.67	0.927
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	4.5 × C	4.5	9.7E-03	1.5E-04	0.15	0.997
		13	2.4 × C	2.4	5.1E-03	8.0E-05	0.29	0.995
		25	1.8 × C	1.8	3.8E-03	5.9E-05	0.39	0.996
	2	53	0.6 × C	0.6	1.4E-03	2.1E-05	1.1	0.981
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	5.9 × C	5.9	5.1E-03	1.5E-04	0.12	0.990
		13	3.5 × C	3.5	3.1E-03	9.2E-05	0.20	0.967
		25	2.8 × C	2.8	2.5E-03	7.4E-05	0.24	0.935
	2	53	0.9 × C	0.9	7.6E-04	2.3E-05	0.80	0.989

Table 8

First-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of pharmaceutical in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the naproxen concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,d−1	kM,L g−1 d−1	kSA,L m−2 d−1	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	5.7 × C	5.7	1.3E-03	1.4E-04	0.12	0.988
		13	3.1 × C	3.1	7.2E-04	7.6E-05	0.22	0.908
		25	2.8 × C	2.8	6.4E-04	6.8E-05	0.25	0.949
	2	53	0.6 × C	0.6	1.4E-04	1.5E-05	1.2	0.941
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	3.7 × C	3.7	8.0E-03	1.2E-04	0.19	0.999
		13	2.0 × C	2.0	4.2E-03	6.6E-05	0.35	0.996
		25	1.7 × C	1.7	3.6E-03	5.6E-05	0.41	0.999
	2	53	0.6 × C	0.6	1.4E-03	2.2E-05	1.1	0.985
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	4.7 × C	4.7	4.1E-03	1.2E-04	0.15	0.978
		13	3.0 × C	3.0	2.6E-03	7.7E-05	0.23	0.959
		25	2.6 × C	2.6	2.2E-03	6.7E-05	0.27	0.977
	2	53	0.7 × C	0.7	6.5E-04	1.9E-05	0.94	0.980

Table 9

Zero- or first-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of artificial sweetener in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). Removal rate constant k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the acesulfame-K concentration. “–” represents no removal of acesulfame-K was observed.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1(μg L−1 d−1)	kobs	kM	kSA	t0.5,	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	2.3E-01 × Ca	2.3E-01a	5.3E-05a	5.6E-06a	3.1	0.749
		13	1.0E-01 × Ca	1.0E-01a	2.4E-05a	2.6E-06a	6.6	0.906
		25	9.8E-02 × Ca	9.8E-02a	2.3E-05a	2.4E-06a	7.0	0.874
	2	53	1.1E-01 × Ca	1.1E-01a	2.7E-05a	2.8E-06a	6.1	0.870
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.6 E+01b	1.6 E+01b	3.4E-02b	5.3E-04b	3.2	0.864
		13	–	–	–	–	–	–
		25	–	–	–	–	–	–
	2	53	–	–	–	–	–	–
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	5.9b	5.8b	5.1E-03b	1.5E-04b	8.3	0.976
		13	4.2b	4.2b	3.7E-03b	1.1E-04b	12	0.634
		25	4.9b	4.9b	4.3E-03b	1.3E-04b	10	0.835
	2	53	3.2b	3.2b	2.8E-03b	8.3E-05b	17	0.866

Removal of acesulfame-K followed a first-order reaction rate, unit of k is d−1, unit of k is L g−1 d−1, unit of k is L m−2 d−1.

Removal of acesulfame-K followed a zero-order reaction rate, unit of k is μmol acesulfame-K L−1 d−1 (μg acesulfame-K L−1 d−1), unit of k is μmol acesulfame-K d−1 g −1 (μg acesulfame-K d−1 g −1), unit of k is μmol acesulfame-K d−1 m−2 (μg acesulfame-K d−1 m−2).

Table 10

Zero-order removal rate constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of artificial sweetener in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). Removal rate constant k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. “–” represents no removal of cyclamate was observed.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rate,μmol L−1 d−1 (μg L−1 d−1)	kobs,μmol L−1 d−1 (μg L−1 d−1)	kM,μmol g−1 d−1 (μg g−1 d−1)	kSA,μmol m−2 d−1 (μg m−2 d−1)	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	1.5E+01	1.5E+01	3.6E-03	3.8E-04	3.3	0.697
		13	–	–	–	–	–	–
		25	–	–	–	–	–	–
	2	53	–	–	–	–	–	–
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	8.4	8.4	1.8E-02	2.8E-04	5.8	0.839
		13	–	–	–	–	–	–
		25	–	–	–	–	–	–
	2	53	–	–	–	–	–	–
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	2.0	2.0	1.8E-03	5.2E-05	23	0.624
		13	–	–	–	–	–	–
		25	–	–	–	–	–	–
	2	53	–	–	–	–	–	–

Note: The poor R values at 1 PV in this table are likely due to little removal of cyclamate in the three treatment columns.

Table 11

Zero- or first-order removal constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of artificial sweetener in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). Removal rate constant k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the saccharin concentration. “–” represents no removal of saccharin was observed.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1 (μg L−1 d−1)	kobs	kM	kSA	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	3.5E+01b	3.5E+01b	8.1E-03b	8.6E-04b	1.5	0.898
		13	4.7b	4.7b	1.1E-03b	1.2E-04b	9.3	0.804
		25	–	–	–	–	–	–
	2	53	1.7b	1.7b	3.9E-04b	4.1E-05b	32	0.583
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.0 × Ca	1.0a	2.2E-03a	3.4E-05a	0.7	0.978
		13	0.5 × Ca	0.5a	9.8E-04a	1.5E-05a	1.5	0.981
		25	2.4E+01b	2.4E+01b	5.2E-02b	8.0E-04b	2.2	0.983
	2	53	2.6b	2.6b	5.6E-03b	8.6E-05b	21	0.828
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	3.4E+01b	3.4E+01b	3.0E-02b	8.9E-04b	1.3	0.969
		13	1.4E+01b	1.4E+01b	1.2E-02b	3.6E-04b	3.1	0.960
		25	1.1E+01b	1.1E+01b	9.4E-03b	2.8E-04b	4.9	0.845
	2	53	2.1b	2.1b	1.9E-03b	5.6E-05b	25	0.701

Removal of saccharin followed a first-order reaction rate, unit of k is d−1, unit of k is L g−1 d−1, unit of k is L m−2 d−1.

Removal of saccharin followed a zero-order reaction rate, unit of k is μmol saccharin L−1 d−1 (μg saccharin L−1 d−1), unit of k is μmol saccharin d−1 g −1 (μg saccharin d−1 g −1), unit of k is μmol saccharin d−1 m−2 (μg saccharin d−1 m−2).

Table 12

Zero- or first-order removal constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of artificial sweetener in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). Removal rate constant k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the sucralose concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1 (μg L−1 d−1)	kobs	kM	kSA	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	2.1 × Ca	2.1a	4.8E-04a	5.1E-05a	0.3	0.922
		13	1.0 × Ca	1.0a	2.4E-04a	2.5E-05a	0.7	0.927
		25	4.4E+01b	4.4E+01b	1.0E-02b	1.1E-03b	1.4	0.963
	2	53	1.2E+01b	1.2E+01b	2.8E-03b	2.9E-04b	4.9	0.995
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.3 × Ca	1.3a	2.7E-03a	4.2E-05a	0.5	0.999
		13	0.9 × Ca	0.9a	1.9E-03a	2.9E-05a	0.8	0.983
		25	0.7 × Ca	0.7a	1.4E-03a	2.2E-05a	1.1	0.983
	2	53	0.2 × Ca	0.2a	4.3E-04a	6.6E-06a	3.5	0.981
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	1.6 × Ca	1.6a	1.4E-03a	4.2E-05a	0.4	0.948
		13	0.9 × Ca	0.9a	8.1E-04a	2.4E-05a	0.8	0.961
		25	0.7 × Ca	0.7a	6.4E-04a	1.9E-05a	1.0	0.942
	2	53	0.2 × Ca	0.2a	1.6E-04a	4.7E-06a	3.9	0.995

Removal of sucralose followed a first-order reaction rate, unit of k is d−1, unit of k is L g−1 d−1, unit of k is L m−2 d−1.

Removal of sucralose followed a zero-order reaction rate, unit of k is μmol sucralose L−1 d−1 (μg sucralose L−1 d−1), unit of k is μmol sucralose d−1 g −1 (μg sucralose d−1 g −1), unit of k is μmol sucralose d−1 m−2 (μg sucralose d−1 m−2).

Table 13

Zero- or first-order removal constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). Removal rate constant k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the PFOA concentration. “–” represents no removal of PFOA was observed.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1 (μg L−1 d−1)	kobs	kM	kSA	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	2.2E+01b	2.2E+01b	5.2E-03b	5.5E-04b	1.3	0.821
		13	–	–	–	–	–	–
		25	–	–	–	–	–	–
	2	53	–	–	–	–	–	–
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.0 × Ca	1.0a	2.1E-03a	3.3E-05a	0.7	0.980
		13	0.5 × Ca	0.5a	1.1E-03a	1.8E-05a	1.3	0.987
		25	1.2E+01b	1.2E+01b	2.5E-02b	3.9E-04b	2.3	0.956
	2	53	0.9b	0.9b	1.9E-03b	3.0E-05b	25	0.780
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	2.0E+01b	2.0E+01b	1.8E-02b	5.3E-04b	1.3	0.935
		13	7.7b	7.7b	6.7E-03b	2.0E-04b	3.3	0.933
		25	2.0b	2.0b	1.7E-03b	5.1E-05b	13	0.725
	2	53	–	–	–	–	–	–

Removal of PFOA followed a first-order reaction rate, unit of k is d−1, unit of k is L g−1 d−1, unit of k is L m−2 d−1.

Removal of PFOA followed a zero-order reaction rate, unit of k is μmol PFOA L−1 d−1 (μg PFOA L−1 d−1), unit of k is μmol PFOA d−1 g −1 (μg PFOA d−1 g −1), unit of k is μmol PFOA d−1 m−2 (μg PFOA d−1 m−2).

Table 14

Zero- or first-order removal constant (k), mass normalized rate constant (k), surface area normalized rate constant (k, specific reaction rate constant), and half-life (t) of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS)in Column ZVI, Column BC, and Column (ZVI + BC). Removal rate constant k is calculated using least-squares regression during two experimental stages. ƚC is the PFOS concentration.

Column	Stage	PV	Removal rateƚ,μmol L−1 d−1 (μg L−1 d−1)	kobs	kM	kSA	t0.5,d	R2
Column 2 (ZVI)	1	1	2.0 × Ca	2.0a	4.6E-04a	4.9E-05a	0.4	0.911
		13	0.9 × Ca	0.9a	2.1E-04a	2.3E-05a	0.8	0.834
		25	2.2E+01b	2.2E+01b	5.1E-03b	5.4E-04b	1.5	0.929
	2	53	2.6b	2.6b	6.2E-04b	6.5E-05b	16	0.734
Column 3 (BC)	1	1	1.8 × Ca	1.8a	3.9E-03a	6.0E-05a	0.4	0.989
		13	0.5 × Ca	0.5a	1.2E-03a	1.8E-05a	1.3	0.511
		25	0.9 × Ca	0.9a	1.8E-03a	2.8E-05a	0.8	0.961
	2	53	0.2 × Ca	0.2a	4.6E-04a	7.2E-06a	3.2	0.967
Column 4 (ZVI + BC)	1	1	2.2 × Ca	2.2a	1.9E-03a	5.7E-05a	0.3	0.974
		13	0.7 × Ca	0.7a	5.8E-04a	1.7E-05a	1.1	0.881
		25	1.1 × Ca	1.1a	9.6E-04a	2.9E-05a	0.6	0.962
	2	53	7.0b	7.0E+01b	6.1E-03b	1.8E-04b	5.9	0.966

Removal of PFOS followed a first-order reaction rate, unit of k is d−1, unit of k is L g−1 d−1, unit of k is L m−2 d−1.

Removal of PFOS followed a zero-order reaction rate, unit of k is μmol PFOS L−1 d−1 (μg PFOS L−1 d−1), unit of k is μmol PFOS d−1 g −1 (μg PFOS d−1 g −1), unit of k is μmol PFOS d−1 m−2 (μg PFOS d−1 m−2).

Experimental design, materials, and methods

Materials

The native analyte compounds carbamazepine (CBZ), caffeine (CAF), sulfamethoxazole (SMX), ibuprofen (IBU), gemfibrozil (GEM), naproxen (NAP), cyclamate (CYC), and saccharin (SAC) for calibration standards and input stock solution were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (Oakville, ON, Canada). The isotope-labeled standards CBZ-d10, CAF-d3, IBU-d3, GEM-d6, and [13C]-NAP were obtained from Cambridge Isotope Laboratory Inc. (Tewksbury, MA, USA). The native analytes acesulfame-K (ACE-K), sucralose (SCL), and the isotope-labeled standards SMX-d4, CYC-d11, SAC-13C6, ACE-K-d4, and SCL-d6 were obtained from Toronto Research Chemicals Inc. (Toronto, ON, Canada). The native analytes 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), and isotope-labeled MDA-d5 and MDMA-d5 were obtained from Cerilliant Corporation (Round Rock, TX, USA). The native analytes perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), and their isotope-labeled standards [13C]-PFOA and [13C]-PFOS were obtained from Wellington Laboratories Inc. (Guelph, ON, Canada). The analytes PFOA and PFOS as dry powder for preparation of the input stock solution were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich, Canada. The silica sand (SS; 0.6–0.8 mm) was obtained from US Silica Company Inc. (Ottawa, IL, USA). The granular zero-valent iron (ZVI; 0.25–1.19 mm) was obtained from Connelly-GPM Inc. (Chicago, IL, USA). The biochar (BC; oak hard wood; 0.50–2.36 mm) was obtained from Cowboy Charcoal Co. (Brentwood, TN, USA).

Column experimental design

Four acrylic columns were used, each column was 30 cm in length and 5 cm inner diameter. Influent and effluent ports were installed on the bottom and top of each column, respectively, for introducing input solution and discharging effluent. Seven sampling ports were installed along the length of each column at 3.75-cm intervals for profile sampling. Column Control was packed with 100% SS. Column ZVI and Column BC were packed with 50% (vol%) of ZVI and BC, respectively, and balanced with SS. Column (ZVI + BC) was packed with 10% (vol%) of ZVI, 40% (vol%) of BC, and balanced with SS.

Input solution contained 10 μg L−1 of pharmaceuticals CBZ, CAF, SMX, MDA, MDMA, IBU, GEM, and NAP; 100 μg L−1 of artificial sweeteners ACE-K, CYC, SAC, and SCL; and 50 μg L−1 of PFOA and 20–100 μg L−1 of PFOS. The input solution was pumped through four columns from bottom to top at a flow rate of 0.3 pore volume (PV) d−1 before 50 PV during the first stage of the experiment; the flow rate was decreased to 0.1 PV d−1 after 50 PV during the second stage of the experiment. Three profile samplings (along the length of the columns) were performed during the first stage of the experiment after 1, 13, and 25 PV of flow through the columns; one profile sampling was conducted during the second stage of the experiment after 53 PV of flow.

All the emerging contaminant samples were spiked with isotopically-labeled internal standards before analysis. The pharmaceutical, PFOA, and PFOS samples were then concentrated through a solid phase extraction (SPE) process; their concentrations were determined using liquid chromatography (LC) followed by tandem mass spectrometry (MS). The concentrations of artificial sweeteners were directly analyzed by ion chromatography (IC) followed by MS without SPE. Detailed information on column experimental setup and analytical procedures for target emerging contaminants are summarized by Liu et al. [1].

Removal kinetics of target emerging contaminants by ZVI, BC, and (ZVI + BC)

The removal rates (k) for target emerging contaminants during two experimental stages were calculated using least-squares regression in SigmaPlot. The removal of target pharmaceuticals within Columns ZVI, BC, and (ZVI+BC) followed a first-order rate model reported by Liu et al. [1] that can be described by equation (1). k and k were calculated according to equations (2), (3) which are defined by Johnson et al. [2]. The half-life (t0.5) of the first-order rate for target pharmaceuticals was calculated following equation (4).where C is the contaminant concentration (μmol L−1 or μg L−1), k is the first-order removal rate constant (d−1), k is the mass normalized first-order rate constant (L g−1 d−1), k is the specific first-order reaction rate constant or surface area normalized first-order rate constant (L m−2 d−1), ρ is the mass concentration of reactive media (g L−1 of solution), ρ is the surface area concentration of reactive media (m2 L−1 of solution), a is the specific surface area of reactive media (m2 g−1), and t0.5 is the half-life of contaminant (d). The specific surface areas of the reactive media ZVI, BC, and (ZVI + BC) used are 9.5, 64.5, and 33.6 m2 g−1 which are reported previously [3,4].

The removal of artificial sweeteners, PFOA, and PFOS within three treatment columns followed a first- or zero-order rate model or followed a first-order rate in the early stage of the experiment followed by a zero-order rate in the late stage of the experiment [1]. The k, k, k, and t0.5 for the first-order rate of artificial sweeteners, PFOA, and PFOS were calculated following the equations (1)–(4). The zero-order rate model can be described by equation (5). k and k for the zero-order reaction can also be calculated according to equations (2), (3). However, the half-life (t0.5) of the zero-order reaction for target artificial sweeteners, PFOA, and PFOS was calculated following equation (6).where C is the initial contaminant concentration (μmol L−1 or μg L−1). The units of k, k, and k for the zero-order rate were different from that for the first order rate. For the zero-order rate, the unit of k is μmol contaminant L−1 d−1 (μg contaminant L−1 d−1), the unit of k is μmol contaminant d−1 g −1 (μg contaminant d−1 g −1), and the unit of k is μmol contaminant d−1 m−2 (μg contaminant d−1 m−2).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this article.

Specifications Table

Subject	Chemistry
Specific subject area	Organic chemistry, removal kinetics
Type of data	Table
How data were acquired	Software SigmaPlot
Data format	Analyzed
Parameters for data collection	The first-order kinetic data were obtained through the exponential decay fitting in the Regression Wizard in SigmaPlot; the zero-order kinetic data were obtained through the linear fitting in Regression Wizard in SigmaPlot.
Description of data collection	The removal kinetic data were collected through the data analysis (Regression Wizard) in SigmaPlot.
Data source location	University of Waterloo,Waterloo, OntarioCanada
Data accessibility	Data are available in this article
Related research article	YingYing Liu, David W. Blowes, Carol J. Ptacek, and Laura G. GrozaRemoval of pharmaceutical compounds, artificial sweeteners, and perfluoroalkyl substances from water using a passive treatment system containing zero-valent iron and biocharScience of the Total Environmenthttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.450

Value of the Data• The data in this article provide important information on degradation kinetics such as removal rates and half-lives for 14 emerging contaminants treated by zero-valent iron (ZVI) and biochar (BC). • Researchers working in the field of remediation of emerging contaminants in water can benefit from the data in this article. • The data present in this article can provide useful information and guidelines for selecting the appropriate types of reactive media to remove specific emerging contaminants. • The removal kinetic data (removal rate and half-life) can be used to design reactors or permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) for future large-scale field applications.