scholarly journals Ultrafiltration, a cost-effective solution for treating surface water to potable standard

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 426-436
Author(s):  
Mariela Cuartucci

Abstract Ultrafiltration is increasingly popular in many types of water and effluent treatment, and has been developed substantially since the turn of the century, especially for waters that are difficult to treat – e.g. surface-, waste- and sea-waters, among others. This paper is a case of study of the San Juan Reservoir Water Treatment Plant in Chongon, Ecuador, which uses ultrafiltration for water treatment. The treatment process is described with special focus on the use of ultrafiltration as a cost-effective surface water treatment. San Juan Reservoir suffers from high bacterial loads, turbidity levels and color, and the seasonal presence of algae (cyanobacteria). The advantages of ultrafiltration over conventional treatment are highlighted, as well as the technology's potential for micro-plastics removal. Micro-plastics are an emerging pollutant that has recently gained importance in drinking water treatment.

Author(s):  
Nguyet Thi-Minh Dao ◽  
The-Anh Nguyen ◽  
Viet-Anh Nguyen ◽  
Mitsuharu Terashima ◽  
Hidenari Yasui

The occurrence of pesticides even at low concentrations in drinking water sources might induce potential risks to public health. This study aimed to investigate the removal mechanisms of eight pesticides by the nitrifying expanded-bed filter using biological activated carbon media at the pretreatment of a drinking water plant. The field analysis demonstrated that four pesticides Flutolanil, Buprofezin, Chlorpyrifos, and Fenobucard, were removed at 82%, 55%, 54%, and 52% respectively, while others were not significantly removed. Under controlled laboratory conditions with continuous and batch experiments, the adsorption onto the biological activated carbon media was demonstrated to be the main removal pathway of the pesticides. The contribution of microorganisms to the pesticide removals was rather limited. The pesticide removals observed in the field reactor was speculated to be the adsorption on the suspended solids presented in the influent water. The obtained results highlighted the need to apply a more efficient and cost-effective technology to remove the pesticide in the drinking water treatment process. Keywords: biological activated carbon; drinking water treatment; nitrifying expanded-bed filter; pesticide removal.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Waddell ◽  
Nathalie Grassineau ◽  
James Brakeley ◽  
Kevin Clemitshaw

<p>Inadequate management of plastic waste has resulted in its ubiquity within the environment, and presents a risk to living organisms. Harm caused by large plastics is well documented, but progressive understanding of microplastics (< 5mm) reveals an ever more unsettling issue. Microplastics contamination is considered an emerging global multidisciplinary issue that would be aided by further research on sources, distribution, abundance, and transport mechanisms. Landfills are a suspected source of such, but research at these sites is insufficient. Although the risks surrounding microplastics are still inconclusive, there is concern over their accumulation in organisms, leaching constituents, and hydrophobic nature. Studying microplastics in the environment, let alone landfill, is challenging as standard and accepted methodologies are presently non-existent.</p><p>Here, microplastics (1mm to 25µm) were evaluated at one particular and long-running UK landfill after first developing a simple, replicable, efficient, and cost effective sampling and analysis approach. Concentrations and types of microplastics were quantified in raw leachate, treated leachate, waste water, groundwater, and surface water, to characterise abundance, distribution, and released loads to the environment. Samples were filtered in-situ, with subsequent purification at the laboratory by Fenton’s reagent. Analysis relied heavily on microscopic sorting and counting, but use of Scanning Electron Microscopy – Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy enabled instrumental interrogation of particles suspected to be plastic. Many factors investigated here appear novel to the literature, and comprehensively explore: temporal variation of microplastics in raw leachate across different landfill phases and waste ages; their abundance in local groundwater, and surface water discharge; microplastics distribution within a leachate treatment plant; and their subsequent release to the environment from a waste water treatment facility. The results build upon the small collection of existing work, but also offer new insights into microplastics’ occurrence in, around, and released from a landfill site.</p><p>In total, 62 samples were taken, and particles considered microplastics (MP) were most abundant in groundwater, followed by raw leachate > waste water > treated leachate > surface water. Average concentration in groundwater was 105.1±104.3 MP L<sup>-1</sup>, raw leachate 3.3±1.7 MP L<sup>-1</sup>, and waste water was 1.8±0.73 MP L<sup>-1</sup>. Consistent with other research, fibres were most dominant, but blank samples highlight the great potential for secondary contamination. Imaging of suspect particles revealed the extreme nature and conditions of landfill sites in their generation of microplastics. Analogous to waste water treatment, leachate treatment is shown to be reducing microplastics in the discharge by 58.1%, and it is expected that microplastics are retained in the treatment plant sludge. Daily loads from leachate treatment were 142,558±67,744 MP day<sup>-1</sup>, but from waste water this was approximately 45.2±18.3 million MP day<sup>-1</sup>. Ultimately, the landfill is not a final sink of microplastics but a source, for those >25 µm, to the environment: yet, it is unlikely to be a significant one. Results highlighted the need for reduction strategies at waste water treatment plants and in the site’s groundwater boreholes, as well as further investigation to determine the source of abundant fibres in the surface water.</p>


2001 ◽  
Vol 1 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 377-380
Author(s):  
G. Hagmeyer ◽  
O. Kiepke ◽  
W. Dautzenberg ◽  
R. Gimbel

In the first step of the project funded by the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) three UF pilot systems (about 10 m3/h) were evaluated for drinking water treatment of reservoir water. In the second step a 150 m3/h pilot plant with 12 6 m long pressure vessels was installed in the waterworks of Roetgen. One of the unique features of the pilot is, that the inlet and outlet flows of every pressure vessel are monitored. Further on a particle counter is installed. With this particle counter the filtrate of every pressure vessel can be monitored automatically by switching magnetic valves.


Water ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1821
Author(s):  
Sandhya Rao Poleneni ◽  
Enos Inniss ◽  
Honglan Shi ◽  
John Yang ◽  
Bin Hua ◽  
...  

Inefficient removal of total organic carbon (TOC) leads to the formation of carcinogenic disinfection by-products (DBPs) when a disinfectant is added. This study is performed in an effort to develop a simple, non-invasive, and cost-effective technology that will effectively lower organic precursors by having water utilities reuse their treatment residual solids. Jar tests are used to simulate drinking water treatment processes with coagulants—aluminum sulfate (alum), poly-aluminum chloride (PACl), and ferric chloride and their residual solids. Ten coagulant-to-residual (C/R) ratios are tested with water from the Missouri River at Coopers Landing in Columbia, MO versus alluvial ground waters. This treatment results in heavier floc formation and leads to improved sedimentation of organics and additional removal of aluminum and iron. An average of 21%, 28%, and 33% additional TOC removal can be achieved with C/R ratios <1 with alum, PACl, and ferric chloride, respectively.


Water ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Haas ◽  
Ruediger Opitz ◽  
Thomas Grischek ◽  
Philipp Otter

Natural water treatment techniques combined with engineered solutions were investigated at demonstration sites in Europe within the AquaNES project. Ultrafiltration is well-established in water treatment, but is not feasible for many water utilities due to its high operational costs compared to conventional treatment. These differences in cost are caused by membrane fouling and the associated cleaning required. This study aims to assess the economic and energetic operation factors based on studies of an out/in ultrafiltration treatment plant for river water and bank filtrate. The fouling potential of both raw water sources was investigated as well as the quality of the resulting water. In addition, the results show the potential utility of a combined approach utilizing bank filtration followed by ultrafiltration in drinking water treatment. In a separate consideration of the treatment process, the water quality does not fulfill the requirements of the German drinking water ordinance. A new method for the removal of dissolved manganese from the bank filtrate is presented by inline electrolysis. While this improves water quality, this also has a significant influence on fouling potential and, thus, on operating costs of ultrafiltration. These aspects lead to a fundamental decision for operators to choose between more costly ultrafiltration with enhanced microbiological safety compared to cost-effective but less stringent drinking water treatment via open filtration.


2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 233-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Cromphout ◽  
W. Rougge

In Harelbeke a Water Treatment Plant with a capacity of 15,000 m3/day, using Schelde river water has been in operation since April 1995. The treatment process comprises nitrification, dephosphatation by direct filtration, storage into a reservoir, direct filtration, granular activated carbon filtration and disinfection. The design of the three-layer direct filters was based on pilot experiments. The performance of the plant during the five years of operation is discussed. It was found that the removal of atrazin by activated carbon depends on the water temperature.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document