4.8 Article

Removal of emerging contaminants of concern by alternative adsorbents

Journal

WATER RESEARCH
Volume 43, Issue 15, Pages 3787-3796

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2009.06.009

Keywords

Adsorption; Activated carbon; Zeolites; Emerging contaminants; Drinking water treatment

Funding

  1. Water Research Foundation [2905]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effective removal of emerging contaminants of concern (ECCs) such as endocrine-disrupting chemicals, pharmaceutically active compounds, personal care products, and flame retardants is a desirable water treatment goal. In this study, one activated carbon, one carbonaceous resin, and two high-silica zeolites were studied to evaluate their effectiveness for the removal of an ECC mixture from lake water. Adsorption isotherm experiments were performed with a mixture of 28 ECCs at environmentally relevant concentrations (similar to 200-900 ng/L). Among the tested adsorbents, activated carbon was the most effective, and activated carbon doses typically used for taste and odor control in drinking water (<10 mg/L) were sufficient to achieve a 2-log removal for most of the tested ECCs. The carbonaceous resin was less effective than the activated carbon because this adsorbent had a smaller volume of pores in the size range required for the adsorption of many ECCs (similar to 6-9 angstrom). For the removal of ECC mixture constituents, zeolites were less effective than the carbonaceous adsorbents. Because zeolites contain pores of uniform size and shape, a few of the tested ECCs with matching pore size/shape requirements were well removed, but the adsorptive removal of others was negligible, even at zeolite doses of 100 mg/L. The results of this study demonstrate that effective adsorbents for the removal of a broad spectrum of ECCs from water should exhibit heterogeneity in pore size and shape and a large pore volume in the 6-9 angstrom size range. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available