A Review of Ozone and Its Application to Domestic Wastewater Treatment

McCarthy, Jeremiah J.; Smith, Cecil H.

doi:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1974.tb02133.x

Cited by 32 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The EPA (198) estimates the cost of ozone disinfection for a 10 MGD wastewater treatment plant to be 3.49,/1000 gal as compared to chlorine disinfection costs of 1.420/1000 gal. Others have made similar cost comparisons and arrived at similar results (27,197,199). Ozone is expensive because it takes large amounts of energy to generate it and the capital cost for the generating equipment is high (197).…”

Section: Alternatives To Chlorinationmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…In almost all waste treatment plants in the United States disinfection depends upon chlorination (27). By varying the chlorine dose and contact time, the coliform concentration can be reduced to almost any desired level.…”

Section: Wastewater Disinfectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most prominent among these is ozonation. Ozone is electrolytically produced at the treatment plant and mixed with the water or wastewater (27). Like chlorine, ozone has a high oxidation potential and acts as a rapid and effective disinfectant (/9).…”

Section: Alternatives To Chlorinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Like chlorine, ozone has a high oxidation potential and acts as a rapid and effective disinfectant (/9). It has seen limited use in the past in the U. S., but it is widely used in Europe, especially for treatment of water supplies (27). Several pilot plant scale studies of ozone use have been done in the U. S. (195).…”

Section: Alternatives To Chlorinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Environmental health sciences center task force review on halogenated organics in drinking water

Deinzer¹,

Schaumburg²,

Klein³

1978

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The disinfection of drinking water by chlorination has in recent years come under closer scrutiny because of the potential hazards associated with the production of stable chlorinated organic chemicals. Organic chemical contaminants are common to all water supplies and it is now well-established that chlorinated by-products are obtained under conditions of disinfection, or during tertiary treatment of sewage whose products can ultimately find their way into drinking water supplies. Naturally occurring humic substances which are invariably present in drinking waters are probably the source of chloroform and other halogenated methanes, and chloroform has shown up in every water supply investigated thus far. The Environmental Protection Agency is charged with the responsibility of assessing the public health effects resulting from the consumption of contaminated drinking water. It has specifically undertaken the task of determining whether organic contaminants or their chlorinated derivatives have a special impact, and if so, what alternatives there are to protect the consumer against bacterial and viral diseases that are transmitted through infected drinking waters. The impetus to look at these chemicals is not entirely without some prima facie evidence of potential trouble. Epidemiological studies suggested a higher incidence of cancer along the lower Mississippi River where the contamination from organic chemicals is particularly high. The conclusions from these studies have, to be sure, not gone unchallenged. The task of assessing the effects of chemicals in the drinking water is a difficult one. It includes many variables, including differences in water supplies and the temporal relationship between contamination and consumption of the finished product. It must also take into account the relative importance of the effects from these chemicals in comparison to those from occupational exposure, ingestion of contaminated foods, inhalation of polluted air, and many others. The susceptibility of different age, genetic, and ethnic groups within the population must also be carefully considered. The present review discusses: the reasons for disinfection; the general occurrence of chlorinated organics in drinking water; the chemistry in the synthesis of chlorinated organics under aqueous conditions; and alternatives to chlorine for disinfection.

show abstract

Section: Alternatives To Chlorinationmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Wastewater Disinfectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Alternatives To Chlorinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Alternatives To Chlorinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Environmental health sciences center task force review on halogenated organics in drinking water

Deinzer¹,

Schaumburg²,

Klein³

1978

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Significant reductions of 48, 19, and 76%, respectively, were detected for COD, TS, and FOG after 10 min of ozonation. A number of studies have reported reductions of 25 to 75% in secondary effluent COD after ozonation (Kinman, 1972;McCarthy and Smith, 1974;Trussell et al, 1976). In our study further improvements in water quality Means within the same column with no common superscripts are significantly different (P<.01), n=8.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Application of Ozone with Physical Wastewater Treatments to Recondition Poultry Process Waters

Chang

Sheldon

1989

Poultry Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several wastewater treatments, including direct ozonation and a combination of ozonation with either slow sand filtration, dissolved air flotation, or diatomaceous earth (DE) filtration, were tested for their ability to recondition broiler process waters. The quality of broiler prechiller overflow water was significantly improved with all wastewater treatments examined, surpassing the USDA's recycling requirements in nearly all trials. A combination of screening, DE filtration, and ozonation yielded the highest quality water. With this treatment, significant reductions in chemical oxygen demand, total solids, and the total microbial load including conform bacteria and salmonellae of 87, 65, and 99.9%, respectively, were detected in the reconditioned prechiller water. Percentage of light transmission at 500 nm (%T) of treated water increased to 97 % of tap water and compared favorably with %T of potable water. This same water treatment was tested on final carcass rinse and neck chiller overflow waters. The quality of these treated waters was also significantly improved. It was concluded that poultry process waters could be effectively reconditioned for recycling by screening, DE filtration, and ozonation. Furthermore, wastewater organic loads discharged to wastewater treatment facilities can be effectively reduced through these reconditioning practices. (

show abstract

Ozone

2009

White's Handbook of Chlorination and Alternative Disinfectants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Review of Ozone and Its Application to Domestic Wastewater Treatment

Cited by 32 publications

References 6 publications

Environmental health sciences center task force review on halogenated organics in drinking water

Environmental health sciences center task force review on halogenated organics in drinking water

Application of Ozone with Physical Wastewater Treatments to Recondition Poultry Process Waters

Ozone

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About