Basics of Wastewater and Sewage Treatment – MyronLMeters.com

Posted by 10 Jun, 2013

TweetWastewater is treated in 3 phases: primary (solid removal), secondary (bacterial decomposition), and tertiary (extra filtration). fig. 1 Origins of Sewage Sewage is generated by residential and industrial establishments. It includes household waste liquid from toilets, baths, showers, kitchens, sinks, and so forth that is disposed of via sewers. In many areas, sewage also includes […]

Wastewater is treated in 3 phases: primary (solid removal), secondary (bacterial decomposition), and tertiary (extra filtration).

fig. 1

Origins of Sewage

Sewage is generated by residential and industrial establishments. It includes household waste liquid from toilets, baths, showers, kitchens, sinks, and so forth that is disposed of via sewers. In many areas, sewage also includes liquid waste from industry and commerce. The separation and draining of household waste into greywater and blackwater is becoming more common in the developed world. Greywater is water generated from domestic activities such as laundry, dishwashing, and bathing, and can be reused more readily. Blackwater comes from toilets and contains human waste.

Sewage may include stormwater runoff. Sewerage systems capable of handling storm water are known as combined sewer systems. This design was common when urban sewerage systems were first developed, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.  Combined sewers require much larger and more expensive treatment facilities than sanitary sewers. Heavy volumes of storm runoff may overwhelm the sewage treatment system, causing a spill or overflow. Sanitary sewers are typically much smaller than combined sewers, and they are not designed to transport stormwater. Backups of raw sewage can occur if excessive infiltration/inflow (dilution by stormwater and/or groundwater) is allowed into a sanitary sewer system. Communities that have urbanized in the mid-20th century or later generally have built separate systems for sewage (sanitary sewers) and stormwater, because precipitation causes widely varying flows, reducing sewage treatment plant efficiency.

As rainfall travels over roofs and the ground, it may pick up various contaminants including soil particles and other sediment, heavy metals, organic compounds, animal waste, and oil and grease. (See urban runoff.)[5] Some jurisdictions require stormwater to receive some level of treatment before being discharged directly into waterways. Examples of treatment processes used for stormwater include retention basins, wetlands, buried vaults with various kinds of media filters, and vortex separators (to remove coarse solids).

Sewage treatment is done in three stages: primary, secondary and tertiary treatment (Figure 1).

Primary Treatment
In primary treatment, sewage is stored in a basin where solids (sludge) can settle to the bottom and oil and lighter substances can rise to the top. These layers are then removed and then the remaining liquid can be sent to secondary treatment. Sewage sludge is treated in a separate process called sludge digestion.

Secondary Treatment
Secondary treatment removes dissolved and suspended biological matter, often using microorganisms in a controlled environment. Most secondary treatment systems use aerobic bacteria, which consume the organic components of the sewage (sugar, fat, and so on). Some systems use fixed film systems, where the bacteria grow on filters, and the water passes through them. Suspended growth systems use “activated” sludge, where decomposing bacteria are mixed directly into the sewage. Because oxygen is critical to bacterial growth, the sewage is often mixed with air to facilitate decomposition.

Tertiary Treatment
Tertiary treatment (sometimes called “effluent polishing”) is used to further clean water when it is being discharged into a sensitive ecosystem. Several methods can be used to further disinfect sewage beyond primary and secondary treatment. Sand filtration, where water is passed through a sand filter, can be used to remove particulate matter. Wastewater may still have high levels of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus. These can disrupt the nutrient balance of aquatic ecosystems and cause algae blooms and excessive weed growth. Phosphorus can be removed biologically in a process called enhanced biological phosphorus removal. In this process, specific bacteria, called polyphosphate accumulate organisms that store phosphate in their tissue. When the biomass accumulated in these bacteria is separated from the treated water, these biosolids have a high fertilizer value. Nitrogen can also be removed using nitrifying bacteria. Lagooning is another method for removing nutrients and waste from sewage. Water is stored in a lagoon and native plants, bacteria, algae, and small zooplankton filter nutrients and small particles from the water.

Sludge Digestion & Disposal
Sewage sludge scraped off the bottom of the settling tank during primary treatment is treated separately from wastewater. Sludge can be disposed of in several ways. First, it can be digested using bacteria; bacterial digestion can sometimes produce methane biogas, which can be used to generate electricity. Sludge can also be incinerated, or condensed, heated to disinfect it, and reused as fertilizer.

When a liquid sludge is produced, further treatment may be required to make it suitable for final disposal. Sewage sludge scraped off the bottom of the settling tank during primary treatment is treated separately from wastewater. Sludge can be disposed of in several ways. First, it can be digested using bacteria; bacterial digestion can sometimes produce methane biogas, which can be used to generate electricity. Sludge can also be incinerated, or condensed, heated to disinfect it, and reused as fertilizer.

Typically, sludges are thickened (dewatered) to reduce the volumes transported off-site for disposal. There is no process which completely eliminates the need to dispose of biosolids. There is, however, an additional step some cities are taking to superheat sludge and convert it into small pelletized granules that are high in nitrogen and other organic materials. In New York City, for example, several sewage treatment plants have dewatering facilities that use large centrifuges along with the addition of chemicals such as polymer to further remove liquid from the sludge. The removed fluid, called “centrate,” is typically reintroduced into the wastewater process. The product which is left is called “cake,” and that is picked up by companies which turn it into fertilizer pellets. This product is then sold to local farmers and turf farms as a soil amendment or fertilizer, reducing the amount of space required to dispose of sludge in landfills. Much sludge originating from commercial or industrial areas is contaminated with toxic materials that are released into the sewers from the industrial processes. Elevated concentrations of such materials may make the sludge unsuitable for agricultural use and it may then have to be incinerated or disposed of to landfill.

Notably, throughout the development of excreta, wastewater, wastewater sludge and biosolids management – from the least developed to the most developed countries – there are in­evitable public concerns about how best to manage this “waste” that is also a resource. Putting biosolids to their best uses in each local situation is the goal of most of the programs discussed in the following reports. That is the goal of many sanitation and water quality experts. But the general public has other goals: avoiding the waste and the odors it can produce.There is a natural aversion to fecal matter and anything associated with it. Conflicts arise when experts propose recycling this “waste,” usually in a treated and tested form commonly called “biosolids,” back to soils in communities.

Managing excreta and wastewater sludge to produce recyclable biosolids involves many technical challenges. But equally significant are these social, cultural, and political challenges. Funding is required to build infrastructure – and, around the world, the public is the source of funding, either through taxes or sewer usage fees. In order for proper sanitation to be built and operated, complex community sanitation agencies with support from state, provincial, and national governments are needed.

Wastewater quality indicators are laboratory tests to assess suitability of wastewater for disposal or re-use. Tests selected and desired test results vary with the intended use or discharge location. Tests measure physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the wastewater.

Physical characteristics

Temperature
Aquatic organisms cannot survive outside of specific temperature ranges. Irrigation runoff and water cooling of power stations may elevate temperatures above the acceptable range for some species. Temperature may be measured with a calibrated thermometer.

Solids
Solid material in wastewater may be dissolved, suspended, or settleable. Total dissolved solids or TDS (sometimes called filtrable residue) is measured as the mass of residue remaining when a measured volume of filtered water is evaporated. The mass of dried solids remaining on the filter is called total suspended solids (TSS) or nonfiltrable residue. Settleable solids are measured as the visible volume accumulated at the bottom of an Imhoff cone after water has settled for one hour. Turbidity is a measure of the light scattering ability of suspended matter in the water. Salinity measures water density or conductivity changes caused by dissolved materials.

Chemical characteristics
Virtually any chemical may be found in water, but routine testing is commonly limited to a few chemical elements of unique significance.

Hydrogen
Water ionizes into hydronium (H3O) cations and hydroxyl (OH) anions. The concentration of ionized hydrogen (as protonated water) is expressed as pH.

Oxygen
Most aquatic habitats are occupied by fish or other animals requiring certain minimum dissolved oxygen concentrations to survive. Dissolved oxygen concentrations may be measured directly in wastewater, but the amount of oxygen potentially required by other chemicals in the wastewater is termed an oxygen demand. Dissolved or suspended oxidizable organic material in wastewater will be used as a food source. Finely divided material is readily available to microorganisms whose populations will increase to digest the amount of food available. Digestion of this food requires oxygen, so the oxygen content of the water will ultimately be decreased by the amount required to digest the dissolved or suspended food. Oxygen concentrations may fall below the minimum required by aquatic animals if the rate of oxygen utilization exceeds replacement by atmospheric oxygen.

The reaction for biochemical oxidation may be written as:
Oxidizable material + bacteria + nutrient + O2 → CO2 + H2O + oxidized inorganics such as NO3 or SO4
Oxygen consumption by reducing chemicals such as sulfides and nitrites is typified as follows:

S– + 2 O2 → SO4–
NO2- + ½ O2 → NO3-

Since all natural waterways contain bacteria and nutrient, almost any waste compounds introduced into such waterways will initiate biochemical reactions (such as shown above). Those biochemical reactions create what is measured in the laboratory as the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD).

Oxidizable chemicals (such as reducing chemicals) introduced into a natural water will similarly initiate chemical reactions (such as shown above). Those chemical reactions create what is measured in the laboratory as the chemical oxygen demand (COD).

Both the BOD and COD tests are a measure of the relative oxygen-depletion effect of a waste contaminant. Both have been widely adopted as a measure of pollution effect. The BOD test measures the oxygen demand of biodegradable pollutants whereas the COD test measures the oxygen demand of biogradable pollutants plus the oxygen demand of non-biodegradable oxidizable pollutants.

The so-called 5-day BOD measures the amount of oxygen consumed by biochemical oxidation of waste contaminants in a 5-day period. The total amount of oxygen consumed when the biochemical reaction is allowed to proceed to completion is called the Ultimate BOD. The Ultimate BOD is too time consuming, so the 5-day BOD has almost universally been adopted as a measure of relative pollution effect.
There are also many different COD tests. Perhaps, the most common is the 4-hour COD.

There is no generalized correlation between the 5-day BOD and the Ultimate BOD. Likewise, there is no generalized correlation between BOD and COD. It is possible to develop such correlations for a specific waste contaminant in a specific wastewater stream, but such correlations cannot be generalized for use with any other waste contaminants or wastewater streams.

The laboratory test procedures for the determining the above oxygen demands are detailed in the following sections of the “Standard Methods For the Examination Of Water and Wastewater” available at www.standardmethods.org:

5-day BOD and Ultimate BOD: Sections 5210B and 5210C
COD: Section 5220

Nitrogen
Nitrogen is an important nutrient for plant and animal growth. Atmospheric nitrogen is less biologically available than dissolved nitrogen in the form of ammonia and nitrates. Availability of dissolved nitrogen may contribute to algal blooms. Ammonia and organic forms of nitrogen are often measured as Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and analysis for inorganic forms of nitrogen may be performed for more accurate estimates of total nitrogen content.

Chlorine
Chlorine has been widely used for bleaching, as a disinfectant, and for biofouling prevention in water cooling systems. Remaining concentrations of oxidizing hypochlorous acid and hypochlorite ions may be measured as chlorine residual to estimate effectiveness of disinfection or to demonstrate safety for discharge to aquatic ecosystems.

Biological characteristics
Water may be tested by a bioassay comparing survival of an aquatic test species in the wastewater in comparison to water from some other source. Water may also be evaluated to determine the approximate biological population of the wastewater. Pathogenic micro-organisms using water as a means of moving from one host to another may be present in sewage. Coliform index measures the population of an organism commonly found in the intestines of warm-blooded animals as an indicator of the possible presence of other intestinal pathogens.

Myron L Meters is the premier online retailer of the Myron L meters preferred by water professionals, like the Ultrameter III 9PTKA.

Information shared via Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0), original material found here:

https://www.boundless.com/microbiology/industrial-microbiology/wastewater-treatment-and-water-purification/wastewater-and-sewage-treatment/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewage_treatment

http://www.iwawaterwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Articles/GLOBALATLASOFEXCRETAWASTEWATERSLUDGEANDBIOSOLIDSMANAGEMENTMOVINGFORWARDTHESUSTAINABLEANDWELCOMEUSESOFAGLOBALRESOURCE

 

Categories : Case Studies & Application Stories, Science and Industry Updates

Conductivity as alternative measurement for WWTP inflow dynamics – MyronLMeters.com

Posted by 11 Apr, 2013

Tweet Myron L Meters Myron L Meters sells the most accurate, reliable conductivity instruments in the water treatment industry.  You can find some of our most popular meters here: http://www.myronlmeters.com/SearchResults.asp?Search=conductivity&x=-1345&y=-145 Introduction Along with the development of  more and more complex integrated models for urban water systems the need of sufficient  data  bases grows as well. […]

Myron L Meters

Myron L Meters sells the most accurate, reliable conductivity instruments in the water treatment industry.  You can find some of our most popular meters here:

http://www.myronlmeters.com/SearchResults.asp?Search=conductivity&x=-1345&y=-145

Introduction

Along with the development of  more and more complex integrated models for urban water systems the need of sufficient  data  bases grows as well. It is even complicated to measure relevant parameters,e.g. dissolved nitrogen or COD, for their use in Waste Water Treatment Plants and sewer models to describe the influence of catchments to the receiving water.

This poster presents a method regarding the possibility of substituting an online ammonia measurement by conductivity measurements in the inflow of a Waste Water Treatment Plant . The aim was the description of the dynamics in wet weather flow through storm water events for modelling purposes.

The conductivity of an aqueous solution is the measure of its ability to conduct electricity. Responsible for that phenomenon are ions of dissolved salts. In natural and drinking water these are mainly carbonates, chlorides and sulphates of calcium, magnesium, sodium and potassium. Conducted experiences and measurements in combined sewers showed a relation between conductivity in Waste Water Treatment Plant inflow and the concentration of dissolved components, e.g. ammonia, in case of rainfall events. The data for different 3 Waste Water Treatment Plant are shown in Figure 1. Rainwater has nearly no ions that cause conductivity to be measured. Therefore, diluted wastewater flowing into the Waste Water Treatment Plant can be detected by a conductivity probe. The measure and quality of linear regression between ammonia concentration and conductivity can be found in Table 1 for all data from Figure 1.

Material and Methods

With this knowledge a simple regression-based inflow model for use in activated sludge modelling of Waste Water Treatment Plant was defined to use conductivity beside available composite samples as a measure for dynamics in ammonia concentration as one of the most dynamic measure.

Results and Discussion

For one of the considered Waste Water Treatment Plants (WWTP) the resulting quality for the inflow model is shown in Figure 2 for a time series of a week.

Furthermore, the inflow model was used as a source for a retention tank model at the inlet of another Waste Water Treatment Plant to describe the impact of different management strategies (storage or flow through) on receiving water and Waste Water Treatment Plant (Figure 3).

A long-term modelling of 9 storm water events was used to show the predictive capacity of the model. The regression parameters were fitted by an optimisation routine to get best fit for all concentrations (also for COD, not presented here). Figure 3 shows the fit for all events. A good prediction of dynamics and absolute values for ammonia can be seen.

The results of different Goodness-of-fit measures are summarized in Table 2 for both presented WWTP inflows. Especially the values for the modified Coefficient of Efficiency, as a well-known and used measure for model quality in hydrological sciences, show the degree of predicting of the used method and the usability of conductivity for description of influent dynamics to Waste Water Treatment Plant in storm water cases.

 Conclusions

This simple and easy-to-use method is well suited for implementation in Waste Water Treatment Plant models to describe the inflow dynamics regarding a more realistic behavior e.g. for optimization of process control.

by Markus Ahnert*, Norbert Günther*, Volker Kuehn*, University of Dresden 

References
Ahnert, M., Blumensaat, F., Langergraber, G., Alex, J., Woerner, D., Frehmann, T., Halft, N., Hobus, I., Plattes, M., Spering, V. und Winkler, S. (2007), Goodness-of-fit measures for numerical modelling in urban water management – a summary to support practical applications., paper presented at 10th IWA Specialised Conference on “Design, Operation and Economics of Large Wastewater Treatment Plants”, 9-13 September 2007, Vienna, Austria, 9-13 September 2007.

Nash, J. E. und Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970), River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I – A discussion of principles, Journal of Hydrology, 10, 282.

IWA Water Wiki (http://www.iwawaterwiki.org) / CC BY-SA 3.0

Figure 1

Table 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Table 2

 

Categories : Case Studies & Application Stories, Science and Industry Updates

Study of Physico-Chemical Characteristics of Wastewater in an Urban Agglomeration in Romania – MyronLMeters.com

Posted by 11 Feb, 2013

TweetStudy of Physico-Chemical Characteristics of Wastewater in an Urban Agglomeration in Romania Abstract This study investigates the level of wastewater pollution by analyzing its chemical characteristics at five wastewater collectors. Samples are collected before they discharge into the Danube during a monitoring campaign of two weeks. Organic and inorganic compounds, heavy metals, and biogenic compounds […]

Study of Physico-Chemical Characteristics of Wastewater in an Urban Agglomeration in Romania

Abstract

This study investigates the level of wastewater pollution by analyzing its chemical characteristics at five wastewater collectors. Samples are collected before they discharge into the Danube during a monitoring campaign of two weeks. Organic and inorganic compounds, heavy metals, and biogenic compounds have been analyzed using potentiometric and spectrophotometric methods. Experimental results show that the quality of wastewater varies from site to site and it greatly depends on the origin of the wastewater. Correlation analysis was used in order to identify possible relationships between concentrations of various analyzed parameters, which could be used in selecting the appropriate method for wastewater treatment to be implemented at wastewater plants.

1. Introduction

Sources of wastewater in the selected area are microindustries (like laundries, hotels, hospitals, etc.), macroindustries (industrial wastewater) and household activities (domestic wastewater). Wastewater is collected through sewage systems (underground sewage pipes) to one or more centralized Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs), where, ideally, the sewage water is treated. However, in cities and towns with old sewage systems treatment stations sometimes simply do not exist or, if they exist, they might not be properly equipped for an efficient treatment. Even when all establishments are connected to the sewage system, the designed capacities are often exceeded, resulting in a less efficient sewage system and occasional leaks.

Studies of water quality in various effluents revealed that anthropogenic activities have an important negative impact on water quality in the downstream sections of the major rivers. This is a result of cumulative effects from upstream development but also from inadequate wastewater treatment facilities. Water quality decay, characterized by important modifications of chemical oxygen demand (COD), total suspended solids (TSSs), total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorous (TP), iron (Fe), nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), lead (Pb), and so forth [11] are the result of wastewater discharge in rivers. Water-related environmental quality has been shown to be far from adequate due to unknown characteristics of wastewater . Thus an important element in preventing and controlling river pollution by an effective management of STP is the existence of reliable and accurate information about the concentrations of pollutants in wastewater. Studies of wastewater in Danube basins can be found, for instance, in central and eastern European countries, but we are not aware of extensive studies of wastewater quality at regional/national level in Romania.

This paper analyses the chemical composition of wastewater at several collectors/stations in an important Romanian city, Galati, before being discharged into natural receptors, which in this case are the Danube and Siret Rivers. No sewage treatment existed when the monitoring campaign took place, except the mechanical separation. The study presented here is part of a larger project aiming at establishing the best treatment technology of wastewater at each station. Presently this project is in the implementation stage at all stations. Possible relationships between concentrations of various chemical residues in wastewater and with pollution sources are also investigated. The study is based on daily measurements of chemical parameters at five city collectors in Galati, Romania, during a two-week campaign in February 2010.

2. Experimental Analysis

2.1. Location of Sampling Sites

Galati-Braila area is the second urban agglomeration in Romania after Bucharest, which is located in Romania at the confluence of three major rivers: Danube, Siret, and Prut. The wastewater average flow is about 100000 m3/day . The drainage system covers an area of 2300 ha, serving approximately 99% of the population (approximately 300000 habitants). The basic drainage system is very old, dating back to the end of the 19th century, and was extended along with the expansion of the city due to demographic and industrial evolution. There are several collectors that collect wastewater and rainwater from various areas with very different characteristics, according to the existing water-pipe drainage system. There is no treatment at any station, except for simple mechanical separation. However, industrial wastewater is pretreated before being discharged in the city system. The five wastewater collectors are denoted in the following as S 1 , S 2 , … , S 5. Four of them discharge in the Danube River and the fifth discharges in the Siret River (which is an affluent of Danube River). Figure 1 shows the distribution of the monitoring sites and highlights the type of collecting area (domestic, industrial, or mixed). For the sake of brevity, these stations will be named in the present paper as “domestic,” “mixed,” and “industrial” stations, according to the type of collected wastewater. The mixture between domestic and industrial water at the two mixed collectors is the result of changes in city planning and various transformations of small/medium enterprises.

Figure 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1: Monitoring sampling sites of wastewater from Galati city.

Technical details about each collector/station can be found in Table 1. The first station, S1, collects 10% of the total quantity of wastewater. A high percentage of the water collected at this station comes from domestic sources from the south part of the city (more than 96%). Station S2 collects 64% of the total daily flow of wastewater, out of which 30% comes from domestic sources and the rest (70%) is industrial. Most of the industrial sources in this area are food-production units (milk, braid, wine) while the domestic sources include 20 schools, 4 hospitals, and important social objectives. Station S3 is located in the old part of the city and collects 5% of the total wastewater and has domestic sources. At the fourth station, S4, 11% of the quantity of wastewater is collected from domestic (70%) and industrial (30%) sources. The last collector, S5, collects wastewater from the industrial area of the city, where the most important objectives are a shipyard, metallurgical, and mechanical plants and transport stations.

Table 1

Table 1: Characteristics of collectors S 1 , … , S 5.

2.2. Physico-Chemical Parameters and Methods of Analysis

The physico-chemical parameters which were measured are the following:(i)pH;(ii)chemical oxygen demand (COD) and dissolved oxygen (DO);(iii)nutrients such as nitrate (N-NO3) and phosphate (P-PO4) (these were included due to their impact on the eutrophication phenomenon);(iv)metals such as aluminum (Al+3), soluble iron (Fe+2), and cadmium (Cd+2).

The pH and DO were determined in situ using a portable multiparameter analyzer. Other chemical parameters such as COD, metals and nutrients were determined according to the standard analytical methods for the examination of water and wastewater .

The COD values reflect the organic and inorganic compounds oxidized by dichromate with the following exceptions: some heterocyclic compounds (e.g., pyridine), quaternary nitrogen compounds, and readily volatile hydrocarbons. The concentration of metals (Al+3, Cd+2, Fe+2) was determined as a result of their toxicity.

The value of pH was analyzed according to the Romanian Standard using a portable multiparameter analyzer, Consort C932.

COD parameter was measured using COD Vials (COD 25–1500 mg/L, Merck, Germany). The digestion process of 3 mL aliquots was carried out in the COD Vials for 2 h at 148°C. The absorbance level of the digested samples was then measured with a spectrophotometer at λ = 605 nm (Spectroquant NOVA 60, Merck, Germany), the method being analogous to EPA methods [20], US Standard Methods, and Romanian Standard Methods.

The DO parameter was analyzed according to Romanian Standard using a portable multiparameter analyzer, Consort C932.

Aluminum ions (Al+3) were determined using Al Vials (Aluminum Test 0.020–1.20 mg/L, Merck, Germany) in a way analogous to US Standard Methods. The absorbance levels of the samples were then measured with a spectrophotometer (Spectroquant NOVA 60; Merck, Germany) at λ = 550 nm. The method was based on reaction between aluminum ions and Chromazurol S, in weakly acidic-acetate buffered solution, to form a blue-violet compound that is determined spectrophotometrically. The pH of the sample must be within range 3–10. Where necessary, the pH will be adjusted with sodium hydroxide solution or sulphuric acid.

Iron concentration (Fe+2) was determined using Iron Vials (Iron Test 0.005–5.00 mg/L, Merck, Germany) and their absorbance levels were then measured using a spectrophotometer (Spectroquant NOVA 60; Merck, Germany) at λ = 565 nm. The method was based on reducing all iron ions (Fe+3) to iron ions (Fe+2). In a thioglycolate-buffered medium, these react with a triazine derivative to form a red-violet complex which is spectrophotometrically determined. The pH must be within range 3–11. Where necessary the pH was adjusted with sodium hydroxide solution or sulphuric acid.

Cadmium ions (Cd+2) were determined using Cadmium Vials (Cadmium Test 0.005–5.00 mg/L, Merck, Germany), their absorbance levels being measured with a spectrophotometer (Spectroquant NOVA 60; Merck, Germany) at λ = 525 nm. The method was based on the reaction of cadmium ions with a cadion derivative (cadion-trivial name for 1-(4-nitrophenyl)-3-(4-phenylazophenyl)triazene), in alkaline solution, to form a red complex that is determined spectrophotometrically. The pH must be within the range 3–11, and, if not, the pH will be adjusted with sodium hydroxide solution or sulphuric acid.

Nitrogen content was determined using Nitrate Vials (Nitrate Cell test in seawater 0.10–3.00 mg/L NO3-N or 0.4–13.3 mg/L N O3 −, Merck, Germany). The method being based on the reaction of nitrate ions with resorcinol, in the presence of chloride, in a strongly sulphuric acid solution, to form a red-violet indophenols dye that is determined spectrophotometrically. The absorbance levels of the samples were then measured with a spectrophotometer (Spectroquant NOVA 60; Merck, Germany) at λ = 500 nm.

Phosphorous content was determined using Phosphate Vials (Phosphate Cell Test 0.5–25.0 mg/L PO4-P or 1.5–76.7 mg/L P O4 − 3, Merck, Germany) with a method that was analogous to the US Standard Methods [17]. The method was based on the reaction of orthophosphate anions, in a sulphuric solution, with ammonium vanadate and ammonium heptamolybdate to form orange-yellow molybdo-vanado-phosphoric acid that is determined spectrophotometrically (“VM” method). The absorbance levels of the samples were then measured with a spectrophotometer (Spectroquant NOVA 60; Merck, Germany) at λ = 410 nm.

All results were compared with standardized levels for wastewater quality found in accordance with European Commission Directive [23] and Romanian law [24].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. The Acidity (pH)

The results for pH for all the investigated five collectors are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2: Daily variation of pH at all sites.

Generally, the wastewater collected at the monitored sites is slightly alkaline. The pH varies between 6.8 and 8.3—average value 7.82—thus the pH values are within the accepted range for Danube River according to the Romanian law, which is between 6.5 and 9.0. The pH variation is relatively similar at collectors S1–S4 (domestic and/or mixed domestic-industrial contribution). Lower pH values are observed at S5, which is dominated by industrial wastewater, originating from major enterprises and heavy industry. However, these values are not too low, since usually pH values for industrial wastewater are smaller than 6.5.

A significant decrease in the pH value was observed during the 8th day of the analyzed period at each station. Interestingly, a heavy snowfall took place at that particular time, thus the decrease could be attributed to the mixing between wastewater and a high quantity of low pH water, resulted from the melting of snow . One could speculate that the snowfall, which has an acidic character, might have affected the pH of the wastewater through “run off” phenomena.

No other snowfall took place during the monitoring campaign, thus no definite conclusion can be drawn for a possible relationship between pH and snowfalls.

3.2. Results for Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

Detection of COD values in each sampling site of wastewater is presented in Figure 3.

Figure 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3: Daily variation of COD at all sites.

All COD values are higher than the maximum accepted values (125 mg O2/L) of the Romanian Law . Both organic and inorganic compounds have an effect on urban wastewater’s oxidability since COD represents not only oxidation of organic compounds, but also the oxidation of reductive inorganic compounds. That means some inorganic compounds interfere with COD determination through the consumption of C r2O7 − 2. Two different behaviors can be observed, which are associated with the type of the collected wastewater as follows.(i)The first group consists of stations S2, S4 and S5 where the wastewater has an important industrial component. At these stations, COD values are approximately between 150 and 300 mg O2/L, smaller, for instance, than COD values found by in the raw wastewater produced by an industrial coffee plant where COD values were between 4000 and 4600 mg O2/L. Also, the temporal variation of COD values at all three stations is similar with no significant deviations from the average value, which is about 250 mg O2/L. Interestingly, the lowest COD level can be seen, on the average, at S5, which has the highest percentage of industrial wastewater. The second group comprises the “domestic” stations S1 and S3. The COD levels are higher, with values of 500 mg O2/L or more. Also, the variability is clearly higher than at the industrial-type stations. No clear association between the variations at the two sites can be seen. A peak in COD was measured in the 14th day of the study at site S1 (1160 mg O2/L). Since S1 is a domestic type station, it is unlikely that some major discharge led to such a high variation of COD. Unfortunately, no other information exists that might indicate a possible cause for this increase.

3.3. Results for Dissolved Oxygen (DO)

The amount of DO, which represents the concentration of chemical or biological compounds that can be oxidized and that might have pollution potential, can affect a sum of processes that include re-aeration, transport, photosynthesis, respiration, nitrification, and decay of organic matter. Low DO concentrations can lead to impaired fish development and maturation, increased fish mortality, and underwater habitat degradation . No standards are given by Romanian or European Law for DO in wastewater. The DO values for the analyzed wastewater at all five sites are shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4: Daily variation of DO at all sites.

Concentration of DO varies at all sampling sites and has values between 0.96 (at S2) and 11.33 (at S4) mg O2/L with a mean value of 6.39 mg O2/L. These are clearly higher than DO values measured, for instance, in surface natural waters in China, where the Taihu watershed had the lowest DO level (2.70 mg/L), while in other rivers DO varied from 3.14 to 3.36 mg O2/L [34]. On the other hand, such high values of DO (9.0 mg O2/L) could be found, for instance, in the Santa Cruz River , who argued that discharging industry and domestic wastewater induced serious organic pollution in rivers, since the decrease of DO was mainly caused by the decomposition of organic compounds. Extremely low DO content (DO < 2 mg O2/L) usually indicates the degradation of an aquatic system .

The DO levels vary similarly for all selected sampling sites. The DO levels cover a wide range, with a minimum value of 1.0 mg O2/L at S1 and S3 and a maximum value of 11.33 mg O2/L at S4. There is a drop in DO at all stations, observed is in the 8th day of the monitoring interval, which coincides with the day when a similar decrease in pH took place. The lowest values of DO are observed for S1, one of the two “domestic” stations. It is interesting to note that DO at S5 is low although the wastewater here comes only from industry sources.

3.4. Metals

The variation of Al+3, Fe+2, and Cd+2 concentrations in wastewater are shown in Figures 5, 6, and 7. Al+3 concentrations (Figure 5) were mostly within the 0.05–0.20 mg/L range at all the sampling sites. However, during the beginning and the end of the monitoring campaign, Al+3 concentration at station S2 is high (reaching even 0.65 mg/L), nonetheless below the limit imposed by the Romanian law, which is 5 mg/L . The fact that in the beginning of the time interval, the concentration of Al+3 is high at two neighboring stations (S1 and S2) suggests that some localized discharge affecting both runaway and waste water, might have happened in the southern part of the city, which led to the increase of Al+3concentration in the collected wastewater. This is supported by the fact that the concentration gradually decreases at S2.

 

Figure 5: Daily variation of Al at all sites.

Figure 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 6: Daily variation of Fe at all sites.

Figure 6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 7: Daily variation of Cd at all sites.

Figure 7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The variation of Fe+2 concentrations is shown in Figure 6. Fe+2 concentration is within the 0.07–0.4 mg/L interval, below 5.0 mg/L, which is the maximum accepted value of the Romanian law . Two higher values were observed at S2 and S4 (both with industrial component) during the third and fourth days of the monitoring campaign.

Besides Al+3 and Fe+2, concentrations of Cd+2 were determined and the variations at the five stations are shown in Figure 7. Cd+2 is a rare pollutant, originating from heavy industry. Leakages in the sewage systems can also lead to Cd+2. Except for two days, Cd+2 varies between 0.005 and 0.04 mg/L. The two high values of 0.11 mg/L were observed in the first and fourth days at S5, which collects industrial wastewater. However, Cd+2 concentrations do not exceed the maximum accepted values of the Romanian law [24] for the monitoring interval which is 0.2 mg/L.

3.5. Nutrients

Water systems are very vulnerable to nitrate pollution sources like septic systems, animal waste, commercial fertilizers, and decaying organic matter [37]. Important quantities of nutrients, which are impossible to be removed naturally, can be found in rivers and this leads to the eutrophication of natural water (like Danube River). As a result, an increase in the lifetime of pathogenic microorganisms is expected. Measurement of nutrient (different forms of nitrogen (N) or phosphorous (P)) variations in domestic wastewater is strongly needed in order to maintain the water quality of receptors [36]. Nitrogen by nitrate (Figure 8) and phosphorous by phosphate (Figure 9) are considered as representative for nutrients.

Figure 8: Daily variation of N-NO3 at all sites.

Figure 8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 9: Daily variation of P-PO4 at all sites.

Figure 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 8 shows that N-NO3 concentrations vary, on the average, between 0 and 5.0 mg/L.

At all four stations with a domestic component, S1, S2, S3 and S4, the concentration of N-NO3 is low (between 0 and 1.5 mg/L) and the daily variation is relatively similar at all sites. Noticeable drops of the N-NO3 concentration are observed at all stations in the 8th day of the monitoring interval, coinciding with pH (Figure 2) and DO strong variations (Figure 4). This supports the conclusion that the heavy snowfall recorded at that period had an important impact on wastewater quality most likely due to the runoff joining the sewage system.

The behavior of N-NO3 clearly differs at station S5, which collects only industrial wastewater. Significantly higher values of N-NO3, ranging from 2.0 to 5.0 mg/L, were detected. However, the mean concentration of N-NO3 remained below the maximum concentration given by the Romanian law [24]. Obviously, if treatment stations have to be set up, the priority for this particular nutrient component should concentrate on stations where industrial wastewater is collected.

Another nutrient that was analyzed for our study was orthophosphate expressed by phosphorous. The P-PO4 concentration varies, on the average, between 1.0 and 6.0 mg/L (Figure 9). For this component, concentrations are higher at domestic stations, S1 and S3, than at the other three stations. P-PO4 is expected to increase in domestic wastewater because of food, more precisely meat, processing, washing, and so forth. The lowest values were observed at S5, which has a negligible domestic component. Peaks in the P-PO4 concentration are observed at S1. Interestingly enough, P-PO4 temporal variations correlated pretty well at stations S2, S4, and S5 (which collect industrial wastewater). Unlike most of the other analyzed compounds, for which the concentrations were within the accepted ranges, the maximum level of P-PO4 is exceeded at all five collectors. Both Romanian law  and the European law  stipulate 2.0 mg/L total phosphorous for 10000–100000 habitants, and for more than 100000 habitants (as in Galati City’s case) 1.0 mg/L total phosphorus. Interestingly, domestic stations seem to require more attention with respect to the quality of water then industrial stations.

Our results regarding the variation and levels of the analyzed parameters are grouped below as the following.(1)The values of pH are within the accepted range for Danube, and their daily variations are relatively similar for both domestic and mixed wastewater. Significantly smaller pH values were measured in the wastewater with a high industrial load. A clear minimum was observed at all sites in the 8th day of the monitoring period, when a heavy snowfall took place. One could speculate that the snowfall, which has an acidic character, might have affected the pH of the wastewater through “run off” phenomena. However, a clear connection cannot be established relying on one event only.(2)The COD level clearly depends on the type of wastewater. Higher values were observed for domestic wastewater, while “pure” industrial wastewater has the lowest COD. This might be explained by the fact that industrial wastewater benefits from some treatment before being discharged into the city sewage system. However, COD does exceed the maximum accepted values according to the Romanian law [24] at all sites thus additional treatment is required at all stations.(3)Concentrations of all analysed metals, Al+3, Cd+2 and Fe+2, are within the limit of the Romanian law. No association with the type of wastewater could be inferred. Isolated peaks could not be linked with any specific polluting factors, except for Cd+2, for which accidental concentration increases are observed for pure industrial wastewater.(4)The level of P-PO4, one of the two nutrients that were analyzed, was high at all stations; however, the highest concentrations are associated with domestic loads.(5)Opposingly, the N-NO3 level is the highest, by far, in wastewater with a high industrial contribution.

3.6. Possible Relationships between Various Parameters

The experimental results have shown that some parameters might be related and that their behavior greatly depends on the type of collected wastewater. Differences between the behavior of physico-chemical parameters at the domestic sites (S1 and S3), on one hand, and at the other sites, on the other, was observed. Pearson correlation coefficients have been calculated between all parameters at all the selected five sites and corresponding significances. Although most of correlations were not significant, some interesting connections between various parameters at sites with similar characteristics were revealed. Table 2 shows correlation coefficients between various parameters for all five stations. Significant correlations at different types of stations are denoted as follows: italicized fonts for domestic stations, boldface italicized fonts for the industrial station and boldface fonts for mixed stations.

Table 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 2: Correlation coefficients calculated for station S1 to S5. Significant correlations at each type of stations are identified as follows: boldface italicized fonts for industrial station (S5), italicized fonts for domestic stations (S1 and S3) and boldface fonts for mixed stations (S2 and S4).

An important relationship seems to exist between pH and N-NO3 at all stations except for the industrial wastewater collecting site, S5 (i.e., at all stations collecting wastewater resulting from domestic activities). Similarly, pH correlates well with DO at all stations except the industrial one.

COD correlates with two metals, Cd+2 and soluble Fe+2, which is expected [30], but only at S1 and S3, where the daily variations of the concentration for these two metals (Cd+2 and soluble Fe+2) were similar.

No conclusion can be drawn for the industrial wastewater collector that was analyzed, where both positive and negative correlations were observed. The lack of correlation between the two metals and COD at the industrial wastewater collectors suggests that other processes, that alter the chemical equilibrium between the two chemical compounds, must be taken into account. For example some metals are complexed by organic compounds that are present in the water and the pH values can influence these phenomena.

DO correlates with pH and N-NO3 at all four sampling stations with domestic component (S1–S4) but the relationship vanish at S5 (industrial). There is also a negative correlation between DO and Fe+2 and Cd+2 only for domestic wastewater, which is expected because of the natural oxidation of metals. The correlation vanishes at the other three stations which collect wastewater from industrial areas.

Heavy metals, Fe+2 and Cd+2 correlate only at domestic stations and no relationships can be defined to link the concentration of Al+3 with other components.

The P-PO4 variation is linked to the variation of soluble Fe+2 at the two stations that collect domestic wastewater. Interestingly, these two elements exist together in reductive domestic systems because these are dominated by proteins, lipids, degradation products. This relationship disappears at the other stations, where the industrial load is significant. The other metals, Al+3, seems to be linked with P-PO4at stations S5 and S2, which collect wastewater with the highest industrial load. No link is observed for the rest of stations and for Cd+2 which can be explained by a higher probability of iron (II) orthophosphate to form in wastewater compared to Al+3 or Cd+2 orthophosphates.

Positive correlations can also be seen between P-PO4 and COD for all sampling sites except S1, where the relationship is still positive but less significant. The other nutrient, N-NO3, is anticorrelated with COD but only at S3 and is well correlated with pH and DO at all four stations with domestic component. The only exception is station S5, which collects mostly industrial wastewater.

Concluding, positive correlations were observed between the following parameters.(1)pH and N-NO3 everywhere except “purely” industrial water.(2)COD and soluble Fe+2 at domestic stations.(3)DO and pH, on the one hand, and DO and N-NO3 at domestic stations.(4)P-PO4 and soluble Fe+2 at domestic stations.(5)P-PO4 and COD everywhere, which, taking into account the high level of P-PO4 at domestic stations, might suggest that one important contributor to water quality degradation are household discharges.(6)Al+3 and P-PO4.

4. Conclusions

In the present paper we have analyzed the daily variation of several physico-chemical parameters of the wastewater (pH, COD, DO, Al+3, Fe+2, Cd+2, N-NO3, and P-PO4) at five collectors that have been characterized as domestic, industrial and mixed, according to the type of collecting area. Different results have been obtained for domestic and industrial wastewater. Most of the chemical parameters are within accepted ranges. Nevertheless, their values as well as their behavior depend significantly on the type of collected wastewater.

The overall conclusion is that wastewater with a high domestic load has the highest negative impact on water quality in a river. On the other hand, industrial wastewater brings an important nutrient load, with potentially negative effect on the basins where it is discharged. Our results suggested that meteorological factors (snow) might modify some characteristics of wastewater, but a clear connection cannot be established relying on one event only.

Significantly smaller pH values were measured in the wastewater with a high industrial load. The COD level clearly depends on the type of wastewater. Higher values were observed for wastewater with domestic sources, while “pure” industrial wastewater has the lowest COD. This might be explained by the fact that industrial wastewater benefits from some treatment before being discharged into the city sewage system. COD does exceed the maximum accepted values according to the Romanian law at all sites thus additional treatment is required at all stations. Accidental increases of Cd+2 concentrations are observed for pure industrial wastewater. The highest concentrations of P-PO4 are associated with domestic loads. Opposing, the N-NO3 level is clearly the highest in wastewater with a high industrial contribution.

Correlation analysis has been used in order to identify possible relationships between various parameters for wastewater of similar origin.

Positive correlations between various physico-chemical parameters exist for the domestic wastewater (DO, pH and N-NO3, on the one hand, and P-PO4, COD and soluble Fe+2, on the other hand). Except for two cases, these relationships break when the industrial load is high. Some of the existing correlations are expected as discussed above, thus any removal treatment should be differentiated according to the type of collector, before discharging it into the natural receptors in order to be costly efficient. Correlations between DO and COD and nutrient load suggest that the most important threat for natural basins in the studied area, are domestic sources for the wastewater.

The different percentages of industrial and domestic collected wastewater vary at each station, which has a clear impact on concentrations of the selected chemical components. Our results show that domestic wastewater has a higher negative impact on water quality than wastewater with a high industrial load, which, surprisingly, seems to be cleaner. This might be related to the fact that most industries are forced, by law, to apply a pretreatment before discharging wastewater into the city sewage system. Industrial wastewater affects the nutrient content of natural water basins. Although the time period was relatively short, our study identified specific requirements of chemical treatment at each station. An efficient treatment plan should take into account the type of wastewater to be processed at each station. Results presented here are linked with another research topic assessing the level of water quality in the lower basin of the Danube before and after implementing the complete biochemical treatment plants.

Acknowledgment

The work of Catalin Trif was supported by Project SOP HRD-EFICIENT 61445/2009.

Copyright © 2012 Paula Popa et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited – original found here: http://www.hindawi.com/journals/tswj/2012/549028/

 

 

Categories : Case Studies & Application Stories, Science and Industry Updates

Ultraviolet Water Purification – MyronLMeters.com

Posted by 30 Jan, 2013

Tweet A low pressure mercury vapor discharge tube floods the inside of a biosafety cabinet with shortwave UV light when not in use, sterilizing microbiological contaminants from irradiated surfaces. Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) is a disinfection method that uses ultraviolet (UV) light at sufficiently short wavelength to kill microorganisms. It is used in a variety […]

A low pressure mercury vapor discharge tube floods the inside of a biosafety cabinet with shortwave UV light when not in use, sterilizing microbiological contaminants from irradiated surfaces.

A low pressure mercury vapor discharge tube floods the inside of a biosafety cabinet with shortwave UV light when not in use, sterilizing microbiological contaminants from irradiated surfaces.

Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) is a disinfection method that uses ultraviolet (UV) light at sufficiently short wavelength to kill microorganisms. It is used in a variety of applications, such as food, air and water purification. UVGI uses short-wavelength ultraviolet radiation that is harmful to microorganisms. It is effective in destroying the nucleic acids in these organisms so that their DNA is disrupted by the UV radiation, leaving them unable to perform vital cellular functions.

The wavelength of UV that causes this effect is rare on Earth as the atmosphere blocks it. Using a UVGI device in certain environments like circulating air or water systems creates a deadly effect on micro-organisms such as pathogens, viruses and molds that are in these environments. Coupled with a filtration system, UVGI can remove harmful microorganisms from these environments.

The application of UVGI to disinfection has been an accepted practice since the mid-20th century. It has been used primarily in medical sanitation and sterile work facilities. Increasingly it was employed to sterilize drinking and wastewater, as the holding facilities were enclosed and could be circulated to ensure a higher exposure to the UV. In recent years UVGI has found renewed application in air sanitizing.

UV has been a known mutagen at the cellular level for more than one-hundred years. The 1903 Nobel Prize for Medicine was awarded to Niels Finsen for his use of UV against lupus vulgaris, tuberculosis of the skin.

Using ultraviolet (UV) light for drinking water disinfection dates back to 1916 in the U.S. Over the years, UV costs have declined as researchers develop and use new UV methods to disinfect water and wastewater. Currently, several states have developed regulations that allow systems to disinfect their drinking water supplies with UV light.

Method

Ultraviolet light is electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths shorter than visible light. UV can be separated into various ranges, with short range UV (UVC) considered “germicidal UV.” At certain wavelengths UV is mutagenic to bacteria, viruses and other microorganisms. At a wavelength of 2,537 Angstroms (254 nm) UV will break the molecular bonds within micro-organismal DNA, producing thymine dimers in their DNA thereby destroying them, rendering them harmless or prohibiting growth and reproduction. It is a process similar to the UV effect of longer wavelengths (UVB) on humans, such as sunburn or sun glare. Microorganisms have less protection from UV and cannot survive prolonged exposure to it.

A UVGI system is designed to expose environments such as water tanks, sealed rooms and forced air systems to germicidal UV. Exposure comes from germicidal lamps that emit germicidal UV electromagnetic radiation at the correct wavelength, thus irradiating the environment. The forced flow of air or water through this environment ensures the exposure.

Effectiveness

The effectiveness of germicidal UV in such an environment depends on a number of factors: the length of time a micro-organism is exposed to UV, power fluctuations of the UV source that impact the EM wavelength, the presence of particles that can protect the micro-organisms from UV, and a micro-organism’s ability to withstand UV during its exposure.

In many systems redundancy in exposing micro-organisms to UV is achieved by circulating the air or water repeatedly. This ensures multiple passes so that the UV is effective against the highest number of micro-organisms and will irradiate resistant micro-organisms more than once to break them down.

The effectiveness of this form of sterilization is also dependent on line-of-sight exposure of the micro-organisms to the UV light. Environments where design creates obstacles that block the UV light are not as effective. In such an environment the effectiveness is then reliant on the placement of the UVGI system so that line-of-sight is optimum for sterilization.

Sterilization is often misquoted as being achievable. While it is theoretically possible in a controlled environment, it is very difficult to prove and the term ‘disinfection’ is used by companies offering this service as to avoid legal reprimand. Specialist companies will often advertise a certain log reduction i.e. 99.9999% effective, instead of sterilization. This takes into consideration a phenomenon known as light and dark repair (photoreactivation and excision (BER) respectively) in which the DNA in the bacterium will fix itself after being damaged by UV light.

A separate problem that will affect UVGI is dust or other film coating the bulb, which can lower UV output. Therefore bulbs require annual replacement and scheduled cleaning to ensure effectiveness. The lifetime of germicidal UV bulbs varies depending on design. Also the material that the bulb is made of can absorb some of the germicidal rays.

Lamp cooling under airflow can also lower UV output, thus care should be taken to shield lamps from direct airflow via parabolic reflector. Or add additional lamps to compensate for the cooling effect.
Increases in effectiveness and UV intensity can be achieved by using reflection. Aluminium has the highest reflectivity rate versus other metals and is recommended when using UV.

Inactivation of microorganisms

The degree of inactivation by ultraviolet radiation is directly related to the UV dose applied to the water. The dosage, a product of UV light intensity and exposure time, is usually measured in microjoules per square centimeter, or alternatively as microwatt seconds per square centimeter (µW·s/cm2). Dosages for a 90% kill of most bacteria and virus range from 2,000 to 8,000 µW·s/cm2. Dosage for larger parasites such as Cryptosporidium require a lower dose for inactivation. As a result, the US EPA has accepted UV disinfection as a method for drinking water plants to obtain Cryptosporidium, Giardia or virus inactivation credits. For example, for one-decimal-logarithm reduction of Cryptosporidium, a minimum dose of 2,500 µW·s/cm2 is required based on the US EPA UV Guidance Manual published in 2006.

Weaknesses and strengths

Advantages

UV water treatment devices can be used for well water and surface water disinfection. UV treatment compares favorably with other water disinfection systems in terms of cost, labor and the need for technically trained personnel for operation: deep tube wells fitted with hand pumps, while perhaps the simplest to operate, require expensive drilling rigs, are immobile sources, and often produce hard water that is found distasteful. Chlorine disinfection treats larger organisms and offers residual disinfection, but these systems are expensive because they need a special operator training and a steady supply of a potentially hazardous material. Finally, boiling water over a biomass cook stove is the most reliable treatment method but it demands labor, and imposes a high economic cost. UV treatment is rapid and, in terms of primary energy use, approximately 20,000 times more efficient than boiling.

Drawbacks

UV disinfection is most effective for treating a high clarity purified reverse osmosis distilled water. Suspended particles are a problem because microorganisms buried within particles are shielded from the UV light and pass through the unit unaffected. However, UV systems can be coupled with a pre-filter to remove those larger organisms that would otherwise pass through the UV system unaffected. The pre-filter also clarifies the water to improve light transmittance and therefore UV dose throughout the entire water column. Another key factor of UV water treatment is the flow rate: if the flow is too high, water will pass through without enough UV exposure. If the flow is too low, heat may build up and damage the UV lamp.

Safety

In UVGI systems the lamps are shielded or are in environments that limit exposure, such as a closed water tank or closed air circulation system, often with interlocks that automatically shut off the UV lamps if the system is opened for access by human beings.

In human beings, skin exposure to germicidal wavelengths of UV light can produce sunburn and skin cancer. Exposure of the eyes to this UV radiation can produce extremely painful inflammation of the cornea and temporary or permanent vision impairment, up to and including blindness in some cases. UV can damage the retina of the eye.

Another potential danger is the UV production of ozone. Ozone can be harmful to health. The United States Environmental Protection Agency designated 0.05 parts per million (ppm) of ozone to be a safe level. Lamps designed to release UVC and higher frequencies are doped so that any UV light below 254 nm will not be released, thus ozone is not produced. A full spectrum lamp will release all UV wavelengths and will produce ozone as well as UVC, UVB, and UVA. (The ozone is produced when UVC hits oxygen (O2) molecules, and so is only produced when oxygen is present.)

UV-C radiation is able to break down chemical bonds. This leads to rapid ageing of plastics (insulations, gasket) and other materials. Note that plastics sold to be “UV-resistant” are tested only for UV-B, as UV-C doesn’t normally reach the surface of the Earth. When UV is used near plastic, rubber, or insulations care should be taken to shield said components; metal tape or aluminum foil will suffice.

A disadvantage of the technique is that water treated by chlorination is resistant to reinfection, where UVGI water must be transported and delivered in such a way as to avoid contamination.

Uses

Air disinfection

UVGI can be used to disinfect air with prolonged exposure. Disinfection is a function of UV concentration and time, CT. For this reason, it is not as effective on moving air, when the lamp is perpendicular to the flow, as exposure times are dramatically reduced. Air purification UVGI systems can be freestanding units with shielded UV lamps that use a fan to force air past the UV light. Other systems are installed in forced air systems so that the circulation for the premises moves micro-organisms past the lamps. Key to this form of sterilization is placement of the UV lamps and a good filtration system to remove the dead micro-organisms.[8] For example, forced air systems by design impede line-of-sight, thus creating areas of the environment that will be shaded from the UV light. However, a UV lamp placed at the coils and drainpan of cooling system will keep micro-organisms from forming in these naturally damp places.

ASHRAE covers UVGI and its applications in IAQ and building maintenance in its 2008 Handbook, HVAC Systems and Equipment in Chapter 16 titled Ultraviolet Lamp Systems. ASHRAE’s 2011 Handbook, HVAC Applications, covers ULTRAVIOLET AIR AND SURFACE TREATMENT in Chapter 60.

Water sterilization

Ultraviolet disinfection of water consists of a purely physical, chemical-free process. UV-C radiation attacks the vital DNA of the bacteria directly. The bacteria lose their reproductive capability and are destroyed. Even parasites such as Cryptosporidia or Giardia, which are extremely resistant to chemical disinfectants, are efficiently reduced.[9] UV can also be used to remove chlorine and chloramine species from water ; this process is called photolysis, and requires a higher dose than normal disinfection. The sterilized microorganisms are not removed from the water. UV disinfection does not remove dissolved organics, inorganic compounds or particles in the water.[10] However, UV-oxidation processes can be used to simultaneously destroy trace chemical contaminants and provide high-level disinfection, such as the world’s largest indirect potable reuse plant in Orange County, California.[11] That title will soon be taken by New York which is set to open the Catskill-Delaware Water Ultraviolet Disinfection Facility, by the end of 2012. A total of 56 energy-efficient UV reactors will be installed to treat 2.2 billion US gallons (8,300,000 m3) a day to serve New York City.

UV disinfection leaves no taint, chemicals or residues in the treated water. Disinfection using UV light is quick and clean.

UV tube project

The UV Tube is a design concept for providing inexpensive water disinfection to people in poor countries. The concept is based the ability of ultraviolet light to kill infectious agents by disrupting their DNA. It was initially developed under an “open source” model at the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley. The form and composition of the UV Tube can vary depending on the resources available and the preferences of those building and using the device. However, certain geometric parameters must be maintained to ensure consistent performance. Several different versions of the UV Tube are currently being used in multiple locations in Mexico and Sri Lanka.

Technology

Germicidal lamp

Germicidal UV is delivered by a mercury-vapor lamp that emits UV at the germicidal wavelength. Mercury vapour emits at 254 nm. Many germicidal UV bulbs use special ballasts to regulate electrical current flow to the bulbs, similar to those needed for fluorescent lights. In some cases, UVGI electrodeless lamps can be energised with microwaves, giving very long stable life and other advantages[clarification needed]. This is known as ‘Microwave UV.’

Lamps are either amalgam or medium pressure lamps. Each type has specific strengths and weaknesses.
Low-pressure UV lamps
These offer high efficiencies (approx 35% UVC) but lower power, typically 1 W/cm power density (power per unit of arc length).

Amalgam UV lamps
A high-power version of low-pressure lamps. They operate at higher temperatures and have a lifetime of up to 16,000 hours. Their efficiency is slightly lower than that of traditional low-pressure lamps (approx 33% UVC output) and power density is approx 2–3 W/cm.

Medium-pressure UV
These lamps have a broad and pronounced peak-line spectrum and a high radiation output but lower UVC efficiency of 10% or less. Typical power density is 30 W/cm³ or greater.
Depending on the quartz glass used for the lamp body, low-pressure and amalgam UV lamps emit light at 254 nm and 185 nm (for oxidation). 185 nm light is used to generate ozone.

The UV units for water treatment consist of a specialized low pressure mercury vapor lamp that produces ultraviolet radiation at 254 nm, or medium pressure UV lamps that produce a polychromatic output from 200 nm to visible and infrared energy. The optimal wavelengths for disinfection are close to 260 nm. Medium pressure lamps are approximately 12% efficient, whilst amalgam low pressure lamps can be up to 40% efficient. The UV lamp never contacts the water, it is either housed in a quartz glass sleeve inside the water chamber or mounted external to the water which flows through the transparent UV tube. It is mounted so that water can pass through a flow chamber, and UV rays are admitted and absorbed into the stream.

Sizing of a UV system is affected by three variables: flow rate, lamp power and UV transmittance in the water. UV manufacturers typically developed sophisticated Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) models validated with bioassay testing. This typically involves testing the UV reactor’s disinfection performance with either MS2 or T1 bacteriophages at various flow rates, UV transmittance and power levels in order to develop a regression model for system sizing. For example, this is a requirement for all drinking water systems in the United States per the US EPA UV Guidance Manual.[6]:5-2

The flow profile is produced from the chamber geometry, flow rate and particular turbulence model selected. The radiation profile is developed from inputs such as water quality, lamp type (power, germicidal efficiency, spectral output, arc length) and the transmittance and dimension of the quartz sleeve. Proprietary CFD software simulates both the flow and radiation profiles. Once the 3-D model of the chamber is built, it’s populated with a grid or mesh that comprises thousands of small cubes.

Points of interest—such as at a bend, on the quartz sleeve surface, or around the wiper mechanism—use a higher resolution mesh, whilst other areas within the reactor use a coarse mesh. Once the mesh is produced, hundreds of thousands of virtual particles are “fired” through the chamber. Each particle has several variables of interest associated with it, and the particles are “harvested” after the reactor. Discrete phase modeling produces delivered dose, headless and other chamber specific parameters.

When the modeling phase is complete, selected systems are validated using a professional third party to provide oversight and to determine how closely the model is able to predict the reality of system performance. System validation uses non-pathogenic surrogates to determine the Reduction Equivalent Dose (RED) ability of the reactors. Most systems are validated to deliver 40 mJ/[cm.sup.2] within an envelope of flow and transmittance.
To validate effectiveness in drinking water systems, the methods described in the US EPA UV Guidance Manual is typically used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, whilst Europe has adopted Germany’s DVGW 294 standard. For wastewater systems, the NWRI/AwwaRF Ultraviolet Disinfection Guidelines for Drinking Water and Water Reuse protocols are typically used, especially in wastewater reuse applications.[14]
UV systems destined for drinking water applications are validated using a third party test house to demonstrate system capability, and usually a non pathogenic surrogate such as MS 2 phage or Bacillus Subtilis is used to verify actual system performance. UV manufacturers have verified the performance of a number of reactors, in each case iteratively improving the predictive models.

Wastewater treatment

Ultraviolet in wastewater treatment is replacing chlorination due to the chemical’s toxic by-products. Individual wastestreams to be treated by UVGI must be tested to ensure that the method will be effective due to potential interferences such as suspended solids, dyes or other substances that may block or absorb the UV radiation.

“UV units to treat small batches (1 to several liters) or low flows (1 to several liters per minute) of water at the community level are estimated to have costs of 0.02 US$ per 1000 liters of water, including the cost of electricity and consumables and the annualized capital cost of the unit.” (WHO)

Large scale urban UV wastewater treatment is performed in cities such as Edmonton, Alberta. The use of ultraviolet light has now become standard practice in most municipal wastewater treatment processes. Effluent is now starting to be recognised as a valuable resource, not a problem that needs to be dumped. Many wastewater facilities are being renamed as water reclamation facilities, and whether the waste water is being discharged into a river, being used to irrigate crops, or injected into an aquifer for later recovery. Ultraviolet light is now being used to ensure water is free from harmful organisms.

Aquarium and pond

Ultraviolet sterilizers are often used in aquaria and ponds to help control unwanted microorganisms in the water. Continuous sterilization of the water neutralizes single-cell algae and thereby increases water clarity. UV irradiation also ensures that exposed pathogens cannot reproduce, thus decreasing the likelihood of a disease outbreak in an aquarium. UV irradiation can also have a positive impact on an Aquariums Redox balance
Aquarium and pond sterilizers are typically small, with fittings for tubing that allows the water to flow through the sterilizer on its way from a separate external filter or water pump. Within the sterilizer, water flows as close as possible to the ultraviolet light source. Water pre-filtration is critical so as to lower water turbidity which will lower UVC penetration. Many of the better UV Sterilizers have long dwell times and limit the space between the UVC source and the inside wall of the UV Sterilizer device.

Laboratory hygiene

UVGI is often used to disinfect equipment such as safety goggles, instruments, pipettes, and other devices. Lab personnel also disinfects glassware and plasticware this way. Microbiology laboratories use UVGI to disinfect surfaces inside biological safety cabinets (“hoods”) between uses.

Food and beverage protection

Since the FDA issued a rule in 2001 requiring that virtually all fruit and vegetable juice producers follow HACCP controls, and mandating a 5-log reduction in pathogens, UVGI has seen some use in sterilization of fresh juices such as fresh-pressed apple cider.



WIKIPEDIA AND MATERIAL FROM IWA WATER WIKI BY HTTP://WWW.IWAWATERWIKI.ORG IS LICENSED UNDER A CREATIVE COMMONS ATTRIBUTION-SHARE ALIKE 3.0 UNPORTED LICENSE.
Categories : Science and Industry Updates

Wastewater Treatment Technologies – Myron L Meters Blog

Posted by 24 Oct, 2012

TweetHow many of these wastewater treatment technologies are you familiar with?  What is the most effective combination of processes? How do you measure results? Who’s doing the best wastewater treatment research? Is this the best way? Or can the processes below be recombined, rethought, and retooled into something better? Activated sludge systems Advanced oxidation process […]

How many of these wastewater treatment technologies are you familiar with?  What is the most effective combination of processes?

How do you measure results? Who’s doing the best wastewater treatment research?

Is this the best way? Or can the processes below be recombined, rethought, and retooled into something better?

Activated sludge systems

Advanced oxidation process

Aerated lagoon

Aerobic granular reactor

Aerobic treatment system

Anaerobic clarigester

Anaerobic digestion

Anaerobic filter

API oil-water separator

Anaerobic lagoon

Bioconversion of biomass to mixed alcohol fuels

Bioreactor

Bioretention

Biorotor

Carbon filtering

Cesspit

Coarse bubble diffusers

Composting toilet

Constructed wetland

Dark fermentation

Dissolved air flotation

Distillation

Desalination

EcocyclET systems

Electrocoagulation

Electrodeionization

Electrolysis

Expanded granular sludge bed digestion

Facultative lagoon

Fenton’s reagent

Fine bubble diffusers

Flocculation & sedimentation

Flotation process

Froth flotation

Humanure (composting)

Imhoff tank

Iodine

Ion exchange

Lamella clarifier (Inclined Plate Clarifier) [2]

Living machines

Maceration (sewage)

Microbial fuel cell

Membrane bioreactor

Nanotechnology

NERV (Natural Endogenous Respiration Vessel)

Parallel plate oil-water separator

Reed bed

Retention basin

Reverse osmosis

Rotating biological contactor

Sand filter

Sedimentation

Sedimentation (water treatment)

Septic tank

Sequencing batch reactor

Sewage treatment

Stabilization pond

Submerged aerated filter

Treatment pond

Trickling filter

soil bio-technology

Ultrafiltration (industrial)

Ultraviolet disinfection

Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket digestion

Wet oxidation

MyronLMeters.com serves the wastewater treament industry with the finest handheld and inline water quality meters.

Please continue this discussion in our Linkedin Users group here:

http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Myron-L-Meters-Users-Group-4584088?gid=4584088&mostPopular=&trk=tyah

or on Facebook here:

https://www.facebook.com/myronlmeters

Categories : Science and Industry Updates