Cargando…
Hybrid Process of Adsorption/Coagulation/Ceramic MF for Removing Pesticides in Drinking Water Treatment—Inline vs. Contact Tank PAC Dosing
Two pilot trials of powdered activated carbon (PAC)/(coagulation)/ceramic microfiltration were conducted to compare continuous 10–12 mg/L PAC inline dosing with 8–10 mg/L dosing to a 2 h-contact tank. Two low turbidity/low natural organic matter (NOM, total organic carbon <2 mg C/L) surface water...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7909294/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33498247 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020072 |
_version_ | 1783655902198366208 |
---|---|
author | Viegas, Rui M. C. Campinas, Margarida Coelho, Rosário Lucas, Helena Rosa, Maria João |
author_facet | Viegas, Rui M. C. Campinas, Margarida Coelho, Rosário Lucas, Helena Rosa, Maria João |
author_sort | Viegas, Rui M. C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Two pilot trials of powdered activated carbon (PAC)/(coagulation)/ceramic microfiltration were conducted to compare continuous 10–12 mg/L PAC inline dosing with 8–10 mg/L dosing to a 2 h-contact tank. Two low turbidity/low natural organic matter (NOM, total organic carbon <2 mg C/L) surface waters spiked with 7.2–10.3 µg/L total-pesticides were tested and the dosing options were compared towards operational performance, average removal of pesticides and NOM and costs. Removal differences between the two PAC dosing options depended on pesticides’ amenability to adsorption and NOM characteristics (254 nm absorbance, A254). Waters containing low A254-absorbing NOM and only pesticides amenable to adsorption showed very high removals (all pesticides ≥93%) and no significant differences between the two PAC dosing options. Waters containing higher A254-absorbing NOM and high loads of pesticides less amenable to adsorption (dimethoate, bentazone) required higher inline PAC dose. Those or more severe conditions may require PAC doses higher than tested to comply with the Drinking Water Directive limits for pesticides. Cost analysis showed PAC inline dosing is more cost-effective than PAC dosing to the contact tank when identical PAC dose is sufficient or when the doses are low, even if 50% higher for inline dosing, and the plant is small. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7909294 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79092942021-02-27 Hybrid Process of Adsorption/Coagulation/Ceramic MF for Removing Pesticides in Drinking Water Treatment—Inline vs. Contact Tank PAC Dosing Viegas, Rui M. C. Campinas, Margarida Coelho, Rosário Lucas, Helena Rosa, Maria João Membranes (Basel) Article Two pilot trials of powdered activated carbon (PAC)/(coagulation)/ceramic microfiltration were conducted to compare continuous 10–12 mg/L PAC inline dosing with 8–10 mg/L dosing to a 2 h-contact tank. Two low turbidity/low natural organic matter (NOM, total organic carbon <2 mg C/L) surface waters spiked with 7.2–10.3 µg/L total-pesticides were tested and the dosing options were compared towards operational performance, average removal of pesticides and NOM and costs. Removal differences between the two PAC dosing options depended on pesticides’ amenability to adsorption and NOM characteristics (254 nm absorbance, A254). Waters containing low A254-absorbing NOM and only pesticides amenable to adsorption showed very high removals (all pesticides ≥93%) and no significant differences between the two PAC dosing options. Waters containing higher A254-absorbing NOM and high loads of pesticides less amenable to adsorption (dimethoate, bentazone) required higher inline PAC dose. Those or more severe conditions may require PAC doses higher than tested to comply with the Drinking Water Directive limits for pesticides. Cost analysis showed PAC inline dosing is more cost-effective than PAC dosing to the contact tank when identical PAC dose is sufficient or when the doses are low, even if 50% higher for inline dosing, and the plant is small. MDPI 2021-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7909294/ /pubmed/33498247 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020072 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Viegas, Rui M. C. Campinas, Margarida Coelho, Rosário Lucas, Helena Rosa, Maria João Hybrid Process of Adsorption/Coagulation/Ceramic MF for Removing Pesticides in Drinking Water Treatment—Inline vs. Contact Tank PAC Dosing |
title | Hybrid Process of Adsorption/Coagulation/Ceramic MF for Removing Pesticides in Drinking Water Treatment—Inline vs. Contact Tank PAC Dosing |
title_full | Hybrid Process of Adsorption/Coagulation/Ceramic MF for Removing Pesticides in Drinking Water Treatment—Inline vs. Contact Tank PAC Dosing |
title_fullStr | Hybrid Process of Adsorption/Coagulation/Ceramic MF for Removing Pesticides in Drinking Water Treatment—Inline vs. Contact Tank PAC Dosing |
title_full_unstemmed | Hybrid Process of Adsorption/Coagulation/Ceramic MF for Removing Pesticides in Drinking Water Treatment—Inline vs. Contact Tank PAC Dosing |
title_short | Hybrid Process of Adsorption/Coagulation/Ceramic MF for Removing Pesticides in Drinking Water Treatment—Inline vs. Contact Tank PAC Dosing |
title_sort | hybrid process of adsorption/coagulation/ceramic mf for removing pesticides in drinking water treatment—inline vs. contact tank pac dosing |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7909294/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33498247 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11020072 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT viegasruimc hybridprocessofadsorptioncoagulationceramicmfforremovingpesticidesindrinkingwatertreatmentinlinevscontacttankpacdosing AT campinasmargarida hybridprocessofadsorptioncoagulationceramicmfforremovingpesticidesindrinkingwatertreatmentinlinevscontacttankpacdosing AT coelhorosario hybridprocessofadsorptioncoagulationceramicmfforremovingpesticidesindrinkingwatertreatmentinlinevscontacttankpacdosing AT lucashelena hybridprocessofadsorptioncoagulationceramicmfforremovingpesticidesindrinkingwatertreatmentinlinevscontacttankpacdosing AT rosamariajoao hybridprocessofadsorptioncoagulationceramicmfforremovingpesticidesindrinkingwatertreatmentinlinevscontacttankpacdosing |