In designing aquatic herbicides containing copper, an important goal is to maximize efficacy for target species while minimizing risks for nontarget species. To have a margin of safety for nontarget species, the concentration, duration of exposure (i.e., uptake), and form (i.e., species) of copper used for herbicidal properties should not elicit adverse effects on populations of nontarget species. To determine the potential for risk or adverse effects (conversely the margin of safety), data regarding the comparative toxicity of copper-containing herbicides are crucial. A series of comparative toxicity experiments was conducted, including baseline estimates of toxicity (LC50s, LOECs), sensitive species relationships (thresholds and exposure-response slopes), and bioavailability of toxic concentrations and forms of copper 7 days after initial herbicide application. Aqueous 48-h toxicity experiments were performed to contrast responses of Daphnia magna Strauss, Hyalella azteca Saussure, Chironomus tentans Fabricius, and Pimephales promelas Rafinesque to copper herbicides: Clearigate(R), Cutrine(R)-Plus, and copper sulfate. D. magna was the most sensitive aquatic animal tested for all three herbicides; 48-h LC50s for organisms exposed to Clearigate, Cutrine-Plus, and copper sulfate were 29.4, 11.3, and 18. 9 microg Cu/L, respectively. In terms of potency (calculated from the linearized portion of the exposure-response curves, which included 50% mortality), D. magna was the most sensitive animal tested. Organisms exposed to Clearigate, Cutrine-Plus, and copper sulfate had exposure-response slopes of 2.55, 8.61, and 5.07% mortality/microg Cu/L, respectively. Bioavailability of Clearigate and Cutrine-Plus was determined by comparing survival data (LC50s) of test organisms exposed to herbicide concentrations during the first and last 48-h of a 7-day exposure period. Even in these relatively simplified water-only exposures, a transformation of copper to less bioavailable species over time was observed with a 100-200% decrease in toxicity (i.e., an increase in 48-h LC50s) for all four test animals. This series of laboratory experiments provides a worst-case scenario for determining the risk associated with the manufacturer's recommended application rates of Clearigate (100-1,000 microg Cu/L), Cutrine-Plus (200-1,000 microg Cu/L), and copper sulfate (100-500 microg Cu/L) in natural waters for four nontarget freshwater animals.

Mitigation strategies can be implemented to decrease chlorinated and non‐chlorinated organic exposures to biota of aquatic receiving systems thereby reducing associated risks. In this work, we investigated the concept of coupling a physical/chemical reactor (i.e. a cavitation reactor) with a biological reactor (i.e. a constructed wetland) in an effort to efficiently transform PCE, TCE, and petroleum in freshwater into non‐toxic chemical forms or concentrations. Rates of TCE degradation due to cavitation ranged from 0.010 to 0.026 min‐1 with corresponding half‐lives of 69 to 27 min. Compared to controls, degradation of petroleum in water by cavitation was not detected in these experiments. After treatment in anaerobic wetland reactors, TCE and PCE decreased by more than 99 % under two flow regimes (5‐d and 20‐d HRT). In reciprocating constructed wetland reactors receiving petroleum, mean COD, BOD5, and total Zn decreased by 90.0, 88.8, and 86.8 %, respectively, in wetland outflows compared to the initial conditions (96‐h HRT). Percent survival (96‐h) of D. magna and P. promelas increased from zero percent in initial conditions to 80.1 (± 18.9) and 80.0 (± 21.4) %, respectively, after treatment in the constructed wetland reactors. The experimental results obtained in the laboratory‐scale set‐up and the theoretical model for the hybrid reactor concept will be used to obtain the intrinsic kinetic coefficients for the appropriate reactors. This kinetic information will be used to scale‐up the hybrid reactor model concept for the same level of pollutant removal.

No abstract

Wastewater treatment facilities across the Midwest typically operate at > 80% capacity and run out of biosolids/sludge storage capacity when land application contractors (if applicable), drying beds, storage lagoons, and tanks are unable to keep up with volume demands. Several mechanical dewatering options (e.g., belt filter press, centrifuge, etc.) are available as short-term or long-term remedies but are capital intensive for facilities already operating on a tight budget. The objective of this study was to evaluate Geotube® containers as a biosolids dewatering option for a wastewater treatment facility including cost effectiveness, ease of operation, solids retention, solids handling time, flow and volume rates, seasonality, and footprint required to operate. Geotube® containers, with the aid of dewatering polymers, were recommended to and implemented by a wastewater treatment facility into which biosolids were pumped directly from an above ground liquids storage tank. After inline flocculation, the permeable geotextile that forms the Geotube® container allows efficient dewatering while containing the fine grain solids. Overall, this dewatering methodology greatly reduced the volume and mass of residual solids and costs associated with hauling and disposal while allowing continual operation of the facility. For containment and dewatering of biosolids, this Geotube® project (including dewatering polymer and feed equipment) cost less than $0.03/gallon, required minimal technical assistance to install and operate, retained >95% solids, solids were only handled once they were dried sufficiently for hauling and disposal (18 to 40% cake solids), did not interfere with plant operations, and the lay-down area was 6,050 ft 2 . Compared to the previous biosolids management technique (i.e., belt filter press), this Geotube® project saved the facility nearly $25,000 after the first year of operations.