Prepared by:
Purbashree Sarmah(2014CEV2092)
Surya Sujathan(2014CEV2094)
Madhur Chachondia(2014CEV2586)

Ganga water facing water quality deterioration:
◦ River’s importance in Indian culture
◦ dense population residing at its banks
◦ faces several forced and unforced human activities

In the sites it was observed that the TVC values were relatively higher in
holy places (Sood et al., 2008)

In this review paper, effectiveness of Ultraviolet irradiation on coliform
bacteria inactivation in the Ganga water is reviewed.



Germicidal action mainly due to UV-C light on
microorganisms.
Consists of UV reactors that efficiently delivers the
required dose for microbial inactivation.
The microbial response is given by the 1st order kinetic
Equation as shown below:
Where
N0 = Concentration of infectious microorganisms before
exposure to UV light
N = Concentration of infectious microorganisms after
exposure to UV light

UV reactors made of open/closed channel vessels
containing:
◦ UV lamps
◦ lamp sleeves
◦ UV sensors
◦ temperature sensors
Figure1: Example of UV Disinfection
Equipment (USEPA, 2006, UV Disinfection
Guidance Manual; Severn Trent Services)
Parameters
Various option from
different journals
UV Light Generation UV-LEDs,
and Propagation
high-pressure mercury
vapor lamp with side
glowing optical fiber,
LP, MP, PUV with
pulsed xenon source
UV Dose-Response
UV-LEDs with 10.8,
13.8, 56.9 mJ/cm2,
High-pressure mercury
vapor lamp with
17.2 mW/cm2, PUV
with 3 mJ/cm2
Wavelength
265nm, 280nm,
310
nm, 254 nm, 200nm,
270 nm
Turbidity
14 NTU, 0.67 NTU, 10
NTU, 0 NTU, 2.2 NTU,
6.5 NTU, 10.2 NTU
Best
option(log
reduction up to 4)
PUV with pulsed xenon
source
with
side
glowing optical fibre
Challenge
Pre treatment
PUV with 3 mJ/cm2
Costly
Sedimentation,
Filtration
254 nm
Difficult to maintain
Sedimentation,
Filtration
0-10 NTU
Water should be filtered Sedimentation,
until
getting
the Filtration
required standard
Costly
than
other Sedimentation,
methods. Maintenance Filtration
is difficult
Our sample where E coli was present in maximum quantity of about 27CFU
if we apply all the best options we may get up to 4 log reduction.

To achieve better disinfection following may can be adopted:
◦ Optical fibre can be used to ensure uniform distribution within the
UV reactor.
◦ Pre treatment such as coagulation, sedimentation and filtration can
be adopted to reduce high turbidity and organic matter present in
Ganga water.
◦ UV reactors can be improved to make process more economical so
as to improve its popularity compared to chlorine disinfection.

Ample quantitative information is needed to study the effect of microorganism-related factors like :
◦ Different environmental species encountered in water
◦ DNA repair mechanism
◦ Differences in spectral sensitivity in various micro-organisms

Further research is required in accurate analysis of water flows and UV
intensity over UV reactors, using CFD so as to achieve simple, reliable
and cheap in situ process control systems.

Further research can be done on the optimum use of optical fibre to
achieve more economy.
►
UV disinfection is best method for disinfection as it requires no
chemical consumption thus:
o
o
o
►
►
►
►
Saves large scale storage space
Transportation and managing cost
Safety hazards related issues
High removal of 99.99% can be attained if used under optimum
operational conditions.
Does not give toxic byproducts such as trihalomethanes.
But it is not very cost effective compared to chlorine disinfection .
It cannot give any residual because of which it is more popular only for
POU systems.

AnchalSood, Kamal Deep Singh, PiyushPandey, Shivesh Sharma, 2008, “Assessment of bacterial indicators and
physicochemical parameters to investigate pollution status of Gangetic river system of Uttarakhand (India)”, Ecological
Indicators 8 ( 2008 ) 709 – 717

Andreza B. Silva, Nelson M. Lima Filho, Maria A.P.F. Palha, Sandra M. Sarmento, 2012, “Kinetics of water disinfection
using UV-C radiation”, Fuel 110 (2013) 114–123

BrahmiMounaouer, HassenAbdennaceur; “Ultraviolet Radiation for Microorganism Inactivation in Wastewater”, 2011,
Journal of Environmental Protection, 2012, 3, 194-202.

Dunn, J., Ott, W., Clark, W., 1995. Pulsed-light treatment of food and packaging. Food Technol.49, 95–98.

Gang Lu, Chaolin Li *, YinggangZheng, Qian Zhang, Juan Peng, Ming Fu, 2008, “A novel fiber optical device for ultraviolet
disinfection of water”, Environmental Science and Engineering Research Center, Shenzhen Graduate School, Harbin
Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, PR China.

Gates, F.L., 1930. A study of the bactericidal action of ultraviolet light, III: the absorption of ultraviolet light by
bacteria.J.Gen.Physiol.13, 31–42.

Halliday, D., R. Resnick. 1978. Physics. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Hoyer, O., 2004. Water disinfection with UV radiation—requirements and realization. In: Proceedings of the European
Conference UV Karlsruhe, UV radiation. Effects and Technologies, September 22–24, 2003, Karlsruhe

Kumiko Oguma, Ryo Kita, Hiroshi Sakai, MichioMurakami, Satoshi Takizawa, 2013, “Application of UV light emitting
diodes to batch and flow-through water disinfection systems” Desalination 328 (2013) 24–30.

Linden, K.G., Shin, G., Sobsey, M.D., 2001. Comparative effectiveness of UV wavelengths for the inactivation of
Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts in water.Water Sci. Technol.43, 171–174.
REFERENCES contd..

Meulemans, C.C.E. 1986. The basic principles of UV-sterilization of water. In: Ozone +Ultraviolet Water Treatment, Aquatec
Amsterdam, Paris: International OzoneAssociation.

Miller, R., Jeffrey, W., Mitchell, D., Elasri, M., 1999. Bacterial responses to ultraviolet light.Am. Soc.Microbi ol.65, 535–
541.

Oguma, K., Katayama, H., Ohgaki, S., 2002. Photoreactivation of Escherichia coli after low- or medium-pressure UV
disinfection determined by an endonuclease sensitive site assay. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 68, 6029–6035.

Parker, J.A., and J.L. Darby. 1995. Particle-associated coliform in secondary effluents: Shielding from ultraviolet light
disinfection. Water Environment Research 67:1065–1075.

Raymond E.Cantwell, Ron Hofmann, “Inactivation of indigenous coliform bacteria in unfiltered surface water by ultraviolet
light”, 2008, Elsevier Ltd. WATER RESEARCH 42 (2008) 2729 – 2735.

Robert G. Qualls, Michael P. Flynn, J. Donald Johnson , 2013, “ The role of suspended particle in ultraviolet disinfection”,
Journal (Water Pollution Control Federation), Vol. 55, No. 10 (Oct., 1983), pp. 1280-1285

Ruby Pandey, DivyaRaghuvanshi, D.N Shukla,2014, “Assessment of Physico-Chemical Parameters of River Ganga at
Allahabad With Respect To WQI”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (An
ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization) Vol. 3, Issue 9, September 2014

T.Wang, S.J.MacGregor , J.G. Anderson, G.A. Woolsey, 2005, “Pulsed ultra-violet inactivation spectrum of Escherichia
coli”, The Robertson Trust Laboratory for Electronic Sterilisation Technologies, University of Strathclyde, Royal College,
204 George Street, Glasgow G1 1XW, UK

USEPA, 2006, “Ultraviolet Disinfection Guidance Manual for the final long term 2 enhanced surface water treatment rule”,
Office of Water (4601), EPA 815-R-06-007

W.A.M. Hijnen, E.F. Beerendonk, G.J. Medema, 2005, “Inactivation credit of UV radiation for viruses, bacteria and
protozoan (oo)cysts in water: A review”, Kiwa Water Research Ltd., P.O. Box 1072, 3430 BB Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.