Treatment Technology to Meet the interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Inorganics: Part 2

Sorg, Thomas J.; Logsdon, Gary S.

doi:10.1002/j.1551-8833.1978.tb04198.x

Cited by 126 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The ferric sulfate achieved better removal than the alum (88.6%-99.0% versus 18.5%-93.6%) and was less sensitive to increases in pH. Sorg and Logsdon [15] reported comparable findings in their pilot-scale study-i.e., significant removal of arsenic with conventional treatment and superior performance by the ferric coagulant. Similar results are also cited from an earlier bench-scale evaluation conducted by Logsdon et al [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Comparing Two Operating Configurations in a Full-Scale Arsenic Removal Plant. Case Study: Guatemala

Hoyos

Flores

González

et al. 2013

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study was conducted in Naranjo County located in the municipality of Mixco, Guatemala. The water supply source comes from two wells with a maximum flow of 25.24 and 33.44 L·s . The aim of this study was to conduct laboratory tests, basic engineering and supervision of the construction and evaluation of an operations plant using two configurations, A (low-rate sedimentation and ceramic filter) and B (high-rate sedimentation and clinoptilolite filter), to remove arsenic present in water for human use and consumption. This plant supplies water to Naranjo County in Mixco, Guatemala (5000 inhabitants). First, a laboratory Jar Test was performed to evaluate arsenic removal efficiency. And second, a conventional clarification plant was then built (design flow: 25.24 L·s ) for arsenic, values that comply with Guatemalan standards. For this case, the relation between Fe(III) dosage/mg and As(V) removal was 1:46.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Comparing Two Operating Configurations in a Full-Scale Arsenic Removal Plant. Case Study: Guatemala

Hoyos

Flores

González

et al. 2013

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hossain (2006) reported that the UNICEF is going to use some improved field test kits like Arsenator, kit with photometer (developed by Mahidol University in Thailand), and kit based on the molybdenum blue method which does not produce arsine gas (Hussam et al, 1999;Christen, 2001). Sorg and Logsdon (1974) reviewed arsenic removal technologies intensively. The most commonly used As removal methods are oxidation, co-precipitation and adsorption onto coagulated flocs, lime treatment, adsorption onto sorptive media, ion exchange resin and membrane techniques (Hering et al, 1996(Hering et al, , 1997Joshi and Chaudhuri, 1996).…”

Section: Testing Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arsenic contamination in groundwater and its proposed remedial measures

Akter

Ali

2011

Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Arsenic contamination occurs in groundwater of Bangladesh mainly from the alluvial and deltaic sediments.Arsenic contamination of groundwater in Bangladesh was first detected more than a decade ago and the 'shallow tubewells' were reported as the main source of arsenic contaminated water. From the nutritional and metabolic points of view, arsenic is likely to adversely affect human health and nutrition. Up to now, several studies have been carried out on this context; however, inadequate knowledge on arsenic sources, mobilization and transport still remains as a constraint due to lack of data, information and technological advances. Thus, a review study has been undertaken on the sources of arsenic, its causes, mobilization, transport, effects on human health, arsenic test procedures and removal methods, in the context of groundwater contamination in Bangladesh, and finally sustainable remedial measures of arsenic have been proposed. This study suggests that laboratory facilities for testing of arsenic and effects of enhanced groundwater pumping, phosphate fertilizer etc., need to be updated, expanded and studied. This review work is significant to further knowledge improvement, as the topic is general and worldwide. It can be concluded that the integration of the proposed remedial measures with the national geographic information system interface database relating to arsenic for analysis, production of hazard maps, and dissemination on television show for the planners, engineers, managers, field supervisors and affected people, can reach at the sustainable solution for mitigating arsenic and associated problems successfully in Bangladesh.

show abstract

“…These include pre-formed iron (hydr)oxides (Pierce & Moore, 1982;Goldberg, 1986;Waychunas et al, 1993;Fuller et al, 1993;Fendorf et al, 1997;Grossl et al, 1997;Raven et al, 1998;Manning et al, 1998;Jain et al, 1999) and coprecipitation with ferric and ferrous salts Roberts et al, 2004;Sorg & Logsdon, 1978). Zero-valent iron (ZVI) filings have also been effective at removing arsenic compounds from water (Su & Puls, 2001;Lackovic et al, 2000;Bang et al, 2005b,a), presumably due to adsorption onto iron corrosion products.…”

Section: Review Of Arsenic Adsorption Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Electrochemical arsenic remediation for rural Bangladesh

Addy¹

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Professor Ashok Gadgil, Co-Chair Professor Robert Jacobsen, Co-Chair Arsenic in drinking water is a major public health problem threatening the lives of over 140 million people worldwide. In Bangladesh alone, up to 57 million people drink arsenic-laden water from shallow wells. ElectroChemical Arsenic Remediation (ECAR) overcomes many of the obstacles that plague current technologies and can be used affordably and on a small-scale, allowing for rapid dissemination into Bangladesh to address this arsenic crisis.In this work, ECAR was shown to effectively reduce 550 -580 µg/L arsenic (including both As [III] and As[V] in a 1:1 ratio) to below the WHO recommended maximum limit of 10 µg/L in synthetic Bangladesh groundwater containing relevant concentrations of competitive ions such as phosphate, silicate, and bicarbonate. Arsenic removal capacity was found to be approximately constant within certain ranges of current density, but was found to change substantially between ranges. In order of decreasing arsenic 2 removal capacity, the pattern was: 0.02 mA/cm 2 > 0.07 mA/cm 2 > 0.30 -1.1 mA/cm 2 > 5.0 -100 mA/cm 2 . Current processing time was found to effect arsenic removal capacity independent of either charge density or current density. Electrode polarization studies showed no passivation of the electrode in the tested range (up to current density 10 mA/cm 2 ) and ruled out oxygen evolution as the cause of decreasing removal capacity with current density. Simple settling and decantation required approximately 3 days to achieve arsenic removal comparable to filtration with a 0.1 µm membrane.X-ray Absorption Spectroscopy (XAS) showed that (1) there is no significant difference in the arsenic removal mechanism of ECAR during operation at different current densities and (2) the arsenic removal mechanism in ECAR is consistent with arsenate adsorption onto a homogenous Fe(III)oxyhydroxide similar in structure to 2-line ferrihydrite.ECAR effectively reduced high arsenic concentrations (100 -500 µg/L) in real Bangladesh tube well water collected from three regions to below the WHO limit of 10 µg/L. Prototype fabrication and field testing are currently underway.

show abstract

Treatment Technology to Meet the interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Inorganics: Part 2

Cited by 126 publications

References 9 publications

Comparing Two Operating Configurations in a Full-Scale Arsenic Removal Plant. Case Study: Guatemala

Comparing Two Operating Configurations in a Full-Scale Arsenic Removal Plant. Case Study: Guatemala

Arsenic contamination in groundwater and its proposed remedial measures

Electrochemical arsenic remediation for rural Bangladesh

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About