Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations
5.2 Recommendations
The following are recommendations for further testing.
1. It is recommended that wastewater characteristics of the desired facility are determined to select the appropriate advanced treatment option.
Before implementation at any particular facility, the wastewater at that facility should be fully characterized to determine potential treatment alternatives. Specifically, the make-up of the DOC can be used to predetermine the potential effectiveness of a treatment. As an example, Boyer and Singer (2005) found that MIEX® treatment was less effective in waters that had higher concentrations of bromide. While MIEX® and/or GAC may be suitable for certain treatment facilities, alternatives such as enhanced coagulation could be explored based on wastewater characteristics at a given treatment facility.
2. Granular activated carbon adsorption equilibrium tests should be conducted over a longer time period for a better isotherm representation.
Due to the time frame and availability of testing apparatuses, the isotherm for GAC in this project was run for 24 hours; however, it would be beneficial to calculate a more extensive isotherm curve using data from multiple days as opposed to a single day. Additionally, instead of approximating DOC using therelationship of UV254 to DOC, DOC should be directly measured.
3. Pilot-scale tests should be used to more accurately model the removal capabilities of GAC.
In this project, GAC was tested in a laboratory scale column. A pilot-scale column may provide more realistic data on expected performance at the full-scale. The larger scale testing would also allow for more accurate removal data to be collected. Treated water from the MIEX® process should be used for this isotherm to more accurately predict the removal characteristics with GAC. It would also be useful to test multiple bed heights for the GAC column and how they relate to breakthrough and bed exhaustion. Data from additional pilot-scale testing can be used to estimate yearly operating costs, including the cost of GAC and MIEX®.
4. The full-scale cost analysis should include considerations of operation, maintenance and GAC regeneration.
In the scope of this project, a full-scale cost analysis was not completed because the treatments tested did not meet TOC requirements for Zone II and IWPA regulations. At the full-scale, GAC regeneration costs and other operation and maintenance costs need to be considered. For an existing facility, onsite regeneration is not recommended due to the cost, space and operation requirements. Regeneration should be considered when designing a new facility. All costs must be weighed against other options that would not require discharge into a Zone II Area.
5. When implementing advanced treatment to an existing facility, training is required for the operator(s) of the facility.
The facility should have a plan for operation when implementing a MIEX® fluidized bed and GAC column used in series. The operator(s) of the facility must be trained on the conditioning of the fluidized bed and column, the recharge of the MIEX® resin, and regeneration of GAC. At the facility in this project, there was not an operator on site at all times. This was determined to be unsuitable based on the complexity of this system and needs to be taken into consideration at other facilities where this process could be added.
References
Activated Carbon: Norit® GAC 300; Marshall, TX, 2010; No. 2215. Activated Carbon: Hydrodarco® 4000; Marshall, TX, 2010; No. 1211.
Armenante, Piero M., Adsorption with Granular Activated Carbon (GAC). New Jersey Institute of Technology, 2012.
Bhakhri, A.; Bliss, J.; Finelli, T.; Kurrumchand S.; Roberts, K.; Wang, Z. Removal of PFOA from
water using UV treatment, chemical oxidation, & adsorption by activated carbon & zeolites. BS. Major Qualify Project, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 2012.
Boyer, Treavor H.; Singer, Philip C., Bench scale testing of a magnetic ion exchange resin for removal of disinfection by product precursors. Water Research 2005, 39, 1265-1276.
Crittenden, J.C.; Trussell, R.R.; Hand, D.W.; Howe, K.J., Tchobanoglous, G. Water Treatment Principles
and Design, 3rd ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, New Jersey, 2012.
Droste, R. L. In Theory and practice of water and wastewater treatment. J. Wiley: New York, 1997. Eaton, A. D.; Franson, M. In Total Organic Carbon (TOC); Standard methods for the examination of
water & wastewater. American Public Health Association: 2005; pp 5-19.
Edzwald, J.K.; Becker, W.C; Wattier, K.L. Surrogate parameters for monitoring organic matter and THM precursors. J- Am. Water Works Assoc. 1985, 77, 122-132.
Environmental Operating Solutions, MicroC 1000 Technical Specifications,
2006. http://www.eosenvironmental.com/docs/microc1000productinformation.pdf (Accessed February 13, 2013)
EPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency, September 2000. EPA 832-F-00-017 EPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency, December 2001. EPA 542-F-01-020 General Chemical Total organic carbon removal and reduction.
http://www.generalchemical.com/Total-organic-carbon-removalreduction.html (accessed
September 21, 2012).
Glaze, W., Peyton, G., Lin, S., Huang, R., Burieson, J., 1982. Destruction of pollutants in water with ozone in combination with ultraviolet radiation. 2. Natural trihalomethane precursors. Environ. Sci. Technol. 16, 454–458.
Houghtalen, R.; Akan, A.; Hwang, N.; Water Pumpss. Fundamentals of Hydraulic Engineering Systems, 4th Ed.; Pearson Higher Education, Inc.: New Jersey, 2010; pp 147
Katsoyiannis, A.; Samara, C. The fate of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in the wastewater treatment process and its importance in the removal of wastewater contaminants.. Environ Sci Pollut Res
Koran, K.; Suidan, M.; Khodadoust, A. Sorial, G., Brenner. Effectiveness of an anaerobic granular activated carbon fluidized-bed bioreactor to treat soil wash fluids: a proposed strategy for Remediating pcp/pah contaminated soils. Water Res. 2001, 35, 2363 – 2370.
Krasner, S.; et al. Enhanced Coagulation and Enhanced Precipitative Softening Guidance Manual.
Environmental Protection Agency 1999, EPA 815-R-99-012, 15 September 2012.
Kumar, K. V.; Sivanesan, S. Comparison of Linear and Non-linear Method in Estimating the Sorption Isotherm Parameters for Safranin onto Activated Carbon. J. Hazard. Waste Hazard. Mater. 2005,
B123, 288-292
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. (March 2009). 314 CMR 5.00 Ground Water Discharge Permit Program. Retrieved September 28, 2012.
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. (July 2010). 310 CMR 22.00 The Massachusetts Drinking Water Regulations. Retrieved January 9, 2013.
Mergen, Max R.D.; Jefferson, Bruce; Parsons, Simon A.; Jarvis, Peter, Magnetic ion-exchange resin treatment: Impact of water type and resin use. Water Research 2008, 42, 1977-1988. Norit America’s Inc., Granular Activated Carbon Evaluation. 2001. NA00-4 2000
Orica Watercare Inc., MIEX® Process Description, 2009.
http://www.miexresin.com/index.asp?page=7 (accessed February 9, 2013).
Orica Watercare Inc,. May 2004. Magnetic ion exchange resin exceeds EPA disinfection byproduct (DBP) standards. Elsevier Ltd.
Poltak, R. F. Guides for the design of wastewater treatment works. 2011.
Tomaszewska, M.; Mozia, S.; Morawski, A.W.; Removal of organic matter by coagulation enhanced with adsorption on PAC. Desalination.2004, 161, 79-87.
Turton, Richard, 1955- (1998). CAPCOST software to accompany: Analysis, synthesis, and design of chemical processes. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Zhang, R.; Vigneswaran, S.; Ngo, H. H.; Nguyen, H., Magnetic ion exchange (MIEX®) resin as a pre- treatment to a submerged membrane system in the treatment of biologically treated wastewater. Desalination 2006, 192, 296-302.
Zhang, R.; Vigneswaran S.; Ngo, H.; Nguyen, H., Fluidized bed magnetic ion exchange (MIEX®) as pre- treatment process for a submerged membrane reactor in wastewater treatment and reuse.