Effectiveness of sand media filters for removing turbidity and recovering dissolved oxygen from a reclaimed effluent used for micro-irrigation

Reusing wastewater to cope with water scarcity: Economic, social and environmental considerations for decision-making

“…Pedrero et al (2010) discussed the most common water quality problems when reusing water for agricultural irrigation. These are: specific ion toxicity (plants take up certain ions like sodium, chloride, and boron) (Goodfellow et al, 2000); soil permeability caused by sodium that alters soil structure, the water infiltration rate and soil aeration (Menneer et al, 2001); nutrients, but only when there might be an imbalance between the uptake and the provision (Minhas and Yadav, 2015); microbiological content (pathogens, residual drugs, organic compounds, endocrine disruptor compounds and active residues of personal care products) (Shargil et al, 2015); miscellaneous problems (clogging problems in the irrigation system or excessive residual chlorine) (Elbana et al, 2012). An important parameter to decide on the economic feasibility of a reuse plan in agriculture is salinity, as this is not reduced by regular treatments, but requires environmental and economic costly solutions such as reverse osmosis (Haruvy, 1997;Ghyselbrecht et al, 2012).…”

Reclaimed Water Filtration Efficiency and Drip Irrigation Emitter Performance with Different Combinations of Sand and Disc Filters

“…Therefore, the difference in porosity caused by different sand filter medium grade compositions is an important factor influencing removal efficiency, and finer sand media do not necessarily result in higher removal efficiency (Tebbutt, 1971). A study by Elbana et al (2012) found that the removal efficiencies of four types of sand filter media (0.32, 0.47, 0.63 and 0.64) were 60-85% when the mean turbidity level was 10.2 FNU, and another study observed removal efficiencies of 61 and 71% when the mean turbidity levels were 10.3 and 8.06 FNU, respectively . The value of 2.0 is the maximal in Figure 2, regardless of the fitting curve.…”

“…The value of 2.0 is the maximal in Figure 2, regardless of the fitting curve. Studies by Duran-Ros et al (2009) andElbana et al (2012) found that when the TSS was higher in reclaimed water, the removal efficiency decreased. A study by Duran-Ros et al (2009) found that the removal efficiencies were 47.3 and 66.63% (d e = 0.30 mm) when the TSS was 10.03 or 6.49 mg l À1 , respectively.…”

Treatment of rainwater runoff in recovery and recycling companies: Lab and pilot-scale testing

“…It is generally known that, depending on the influent composition, removal efficiencies of 50-99.9% can be reached. [4,10] The removal caused by the activated carbon filtration strongly depends on the composition of the influent. It is therefore necessary to look at different parameters to verify the actual capacity of activated carbon filtration of this kind of wastewater.…”