11.07.2015 Views

Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic From Drinking Water

Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic From Drinking Water

Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic From Drinking Water

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

was reduced to 0.05 mg/L when the initial concentration was 0.35 mg/L or lower, while As(III) wasreduced to 0.05 mg/L when the initial concentration was less than 0.1 mg/L.McNeill <strong>and</strong> Edwards (1997b) also found that As(V) removal by manganese hydroxide solidsis sensitive to As(V) initial concentrations. At pH <strong>of</strong> 10.5, there was about 80 percent removal in thesystem with 75 µg/L <strong>of</strong> As(V) versus about 30 percent <strong>of</strong> removal in the 150 µg/L As(V) solution.Effect <strong>of</strong> <strong>Arsenic</strong> Oxidation StateAs(V) was generally more effectively removed by LS than As(III). Sorg <strong>and</strong> Logsdon (1978)conducted several LS pilot studies <strong>for</strong> the removal <strong>of</strong> both As(III) <strong>and</strong> As(V). Two <strong>of</strong> the tests wereper<strong>for</strong>med at pH 9.5 <strong>and</strong> 11.3. At a pH <strong>of</strong> 11.3, 99 percent <strong>of</strong> an initial As(V) concentration <strong>of</strong> 0.58mg/L was removed, whereas only 71 percent <strong>of</strong> an initial As(III) concentration <strong>of</strong> 0.34 mg/L wasremoved. At a pH <strong>of</strong> 9.5, 53 percent <strong>of</strong> an initial As(V) concentration <strong>of</strong> 0.42 mg/L was removed,whereas only 24 percent <strong>of</strong> an initial As(III) concentration <strong>of</strong> 0.24 mg/L was removed.Effect <strong>of</strong> pHThe optimum pH <strong>for</strong> As(V) removal by LS is approximately 10.5, <strong>and</strong> the optimum pH <strong>for</strong>As(III) removal is approximately 11 (Logsdon, et al., 1974; Sorg <strong>and</strong> Logsdon, 1978). Logsdon, etal. (1974) studied the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> excess LS on the removal <strong>of</strong> arsenic in jar tests. The test waterwas a well water that contained 300 mg/L hardness as CaCO 3 spiked with 0.4 mg/L As(V). The pHvaried between 8.5 <strong>and</strong> 11.5. At pH 10.5 <strong>and</strong> above, nearly 100 percent arsenic removal wasobtained. Below the optimum pH, the removals decreased with decreasing pH. When the water wasspiked with As (III), removals were only around 75 percent in the optimum pH range. Below theoptimum pH range, removals sharply decreased to less than 20 percent. <strong>Removal</strong>s <strong>of</strong> oxidized As(III),however, were almost identical to removals <strong>of</strong> As(V).Effect <strong>of</strong> Type <strong>of</strong> Precipitative Solids FormedArsenate removal during s<strong>of</strong>tening is controlled by <strong>for</strong>mation <strong>of</strong> three solids including calciumcarbonate, magnesium hydroxide, <strong>and</strong> ferric hydroxide. Calcium carbonate <strong>and</strong> magnesium hydroxideare produced from reactions which remove hardness from water after addition <strong>of</strong> lime, caustic soda,<strong>and</strong> soda ash. Ferric hydroxide can be <strong>for</strong>med by precipitation <strong>of</strong> iron naturally present in treatmentplant influent or by addition <strong>of</strong> iron coagulant during s<strong>of</strong>tening.2-11

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!