Investigation of the efficiency of existing iron and arsenic removal plants in Bangladesh

Al-Muyeed, Abdullah; Afrin, Rumana

doi:10.2166/aqua.2006.0013

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The mobility of cadmium and zinc in polluted and unpolluted spodosols were field-measured and modeled by Degryse and Smolders (2006 Remediation. The efficiency of sixty arsenic and iron removal plants presently operated in Bangladesh using iron oxidation to co-precipitate was investigated by Al-Muyeed and Afrin (2006). The technology was found to be a cost-effective solution for treating both ferrous iron and arsenic in groundwater supplies.…”

Section: Heavy Metalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Groundwater Quality

Lange¹,

Mendez-Sanchez²

2007

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Heavy Metalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Groundwater Quality

Lange¹,

Mendez-Sanchez²

2007

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three-year monitoring of the efficacy and improvement of the most popular arsenic removal filter in Nepal

Ogata

2023

Groundwater for Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are interventions to reduce the impact of arsenic contamination of groundwater on human health in developing countries effective? A systematic review

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Within developing countries, groundwater provides an alternative drinking source to polluted surface water. However, the presence of arsenic in some groundwater sources has resulted in chronic worldwide poisoning. The aim of this review was to determine the effectiveness of field-based technologies for the removal of arsenic from groundwater in developing countries. Methods: A structured search strategy was conducted in a range of databases. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened using pre-defined inclusion criteria. Included studies were quality appraised prior to data extraction. The primary outcome was the percentage of effluent water samples meeting WHO guidelines for arsenic concentrations (≤0.01 mg/L). Secondary outcomes included: (a) arsenic concentrations in effluent water samples meeting the national guideline limit (≤0.05 mg/L), (b) arsenic concentrations in human tissue, and (c) knowledge and attitudes related to the interventions. Results: Fifty-one reports, evaluating 50 different technologies, were included. Sixty-seven percent (n = 34) of studies were conducted in Bangladesh. Fifty of the included reports were appraised as 'weak', with one 'strong' report of a randomised-controlled trial. In summary, the effectiveness of the oxidation and filtration interventions is poor, while the evidence for coagulation, co-precipitation and filtration, subterranean and membrane and electrolytic methods is mixed. Evidence regarding adsorption and zero valent iron interventions is more persuasive with most results suggesting good evidence of effectiveness (i.e. ≥95% of samples with arsenic concentrations ≤0.01 mg/L). In particular, activated alumina and sono/three-kolshi/gagri/pitcher filters have ≥95% of samples meeting national guidelines. Disappointingly, only one study reports excellent evidence of effectiveness: BRAC (2000) for activated alumina (i.e. ≥95% of samples with arsenic concentrations ≤0.01 mg/L). The success of each technology was highly dependent on context, especially their acceptability to users, a sense of ownership and expectations of women's roles in society. Conclusions: Most studies were poorly conducted and reported. Consequently, although some technologies met national guidelines, the evidence-base for decision-making regarding arsenic mitigation technologies at household-and community-level is weak. To improve this situation, primary research needs to be commissioned with adequate sample sizes, testing the impact of key contextual factors, using valid tools for analysis, and meeting standards for completeness of reporting.

show abstract

Investigation of the efficiency of existing iron and arsenic removal plants in Bangladesh

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Groundwater Quality

Groundwater Quality

Three-year monitoring of the efficacy and improvement of the most popular arsenic removal filter in Nepal

Are interventions to reduce the impact of arsenic contamination of groundwater on human health in developing countries effective? A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About