By: Yaal Lester School of Mechanical Engineering and the Hydrochemistry laboratory Tel Aviv University Dr Hadas Mamane Dr Dror Avisar Tel Aviv University 1 Our objective: Determine the potential of UV and ozone based advanced low concentrations such as pharmaceuticals and more. oxidation processes (AOPs), as complementary treatment, Traditional treatments do little to break them down for the removal of pharmaceuticals from water and(World wastewater Health Organization). Drinking water and waste water contain toxic chemicals at very AOP: Chemical oxidation involving the production of the hydroxyl radical (•OH) Households Industry Hospitals Water Works WWTP Agriculture Rivers Groundwater 2 UV / H2O2 / O3 O3 UV/O3 UV/H2O2 UV/H2O2 OH• OH• UV/H2O2/O3 O3/H2O2 UV/H2O2 OH• OH• OH• Pollutant 3 1. Determine the potential of each AOP process in deionized water (optimization and comparison). 2. Determine the influence of wastewater on the processes Lab reactor O3 out Pilot system O3 in H2O2 Feed Tank Membrane bioreactor - MBR O3 reactor UV reactor 4 2 OH Creates AOP conditions ( H O ), thus generally more effective than UV alone H2O2 concentration is very important (scavenging effect H O OH HO H O ) h 2 2 * 2 k 2.7107 M 1S 1 2 2 2 0 1.6 -2 1.2 k (1/min) Ln (Ct/C0) Example: Sulfamethoxazole degradation -4 0 mg/L 5 mg/L -6 10 mg/L 0.8 0.4 0 -8 0 0 2 4 Time (min) 50 100 150 6 [H2O2] (mg/L) 5 200 Molecular O3 – selective oxidant At high pH (~ > 7) may also produce OH• (O3 + OHO3 OH•) Ciprofloxacin (CIP) and cyclophosphamide (CPD) ozonation (2 mg/L), with and w/o t-butanol) 0 HN N N OH• O -1 F O OH O O P N H Cl N Ln C/C0 Ciprofloxacin -2 OH• CIP CPD -3 CPD + t-butanol CIP + t-butanol -4 Cl Cyclophosphamide O3 0 5 10 Time (min) 15 20 6 H2O2 react with O3 to form •OH: 2O3 + H2O2 2•OH + 3O2 H2O2 reduces dissolved O3 reduce the removal of O3 sensitive pollutants 0 0.4 0.12 (1:2) CIP 0 CIP 0.2 CPD 0 CPD 0.2 0.1 0 10 20 Time (min) 30 0.03 (1:1) -3 0 0.06 (1/min) 0.2 CPD -2 0.09 CPD k (1/min) 0.3 CIP -1 k Ln (Ct/C0) CIP 40 Cyclophosphamide (CPD) and Ciprofloxacin (CIP) Degradation ([O3]0 = 0.5 mg/L) 0 0 5 10 H2O2/O3 ratio (M/M) 15 CPD and CIP rate constants at different H2O2/O3 molar ratio 7 Main influencing parameters Effluent organic matter (EfOM) Light screening, OH• scavenging Carbonates (HCO3-, CO3-2) OH• scavenging 8 In water Pollutant UV H2O2 OH• In effluent Pollutant UV H2O2 OH• EfOM, carbonates EfOM 9 In water: Pollutant Product O3 OH-, H2O2 OH• In effluent: Pollutant O3 H2O2 Product OH• EfOM OH• O3 scavenged EfOM, Carbonates OH• scavenged 10 1. Use synthetic wastewater effluent (analyze each constitute) 2. Use “real” wastewater effluent (SHAFDAN) Synthetic effluent characteristics Parameter Results Conductivity 1315 us/cm pH 8 UVT 75 TOC 0-8 mg/L Hardness 220 mg/L PO4-P 0.7 mg/L NH4-N 3.1 mg/L NO3-N 0.3 mg/L Alk 25 and 200 mg/L Cl 230 mg/L NaHCO3 11 [O3] = 5 mg/L (batch mode) O3 Out O3 In DO3 sensor [CPD] = 1 mg/L [TOC] = 0 – 8 mg/L [Alk.] = 25 and 200 mg/L Cooling sleeve 12 Alkalinity = 25 mg/L Alkalinity = 200 mg/L 100% 100% Alginic acid Alginic acid NOM 80% NOM 80% Peptone CPD removal Peptone CPD removal 60% 40% 40% 20% 20% 0% 0% 0 60% 2 4 6 TOC (mg/L as C) 8 10 0 2 4 6 TOC (mg/L as C) 8 Peptone and NOM significantly reduced the removal of CPD at high at TOC The decrease in CPD removal due to alkalinity was noticeable mainly low TOC -1). concentration their effect on •OH. concentrationsthrough (TOC < 5 mg Lscavenging 13 10 O3 (dose 300 mg/L) with and w/o H2O2 TOC 100% 80% 0 mg H2O2 60% 150 mg H2O2 40% UV / H2O2 20% 100% 0% 80% 0 60 90 120 Time (min) 60% TOC 30 40% UV only UV+50mgL H2O2 20% UV+250mgL H2O2 0% 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 Time (min) 14 150 Removal of TOC by O3 and UV based processes – Cost comparison Process TOC (mg/L) In Out TOC Removal (%) UV 7.8 6.5 16 O3 7.4 7.2 3 UV/H2O2 7.5 3.6 52 O3/H2O2 7.4 2.7 64 O3 then UV/H2O2 9.6 4.3 55 O3/H2O2 then UV/H2O2 9.8 5.3 46 EEM (kWh/m3/mgL-1) UV O3 Total 9.2 9.2 1.4 1.4 9.5 0.3 9.8 11.1 0.5 11.6 15 To conclude… UV and O3 based AOP may present an interesting option for pharmaceuticals removal in water. In general, O3 based processes are more energy-efficient. Using AOPs for wastewater treatment, one must consider: 1. EfOM in wastewater highly reduce the processes efficiency. 2. Alkalinity influence the processes only at low TOC concentrations. 16 17