4.7 Article

Removal of Trace Pharmaceuticals from Water using coagulation and powdered activated carbon as pretreatment to ultrafiltration membrane system

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 550, Issue -, Pages 1075-1083

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.01.179

Keywords

Pharmaceutical Contaminants; Membrane ultra-filtration; Powdered Activated Carbon; Coagulation; Lake Michigan; Waste water Treatment

Funding

  1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  2. Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Lake Michigan Coastal Program
  3. Purdue Water Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the efficacy of water treatment technologies: ultra-filtration (UF), powdered activated carbon (PAC), coagulation (COA) and a combination of these technologies (PAC/UF and COA/UF) to remove target pharmaceuticals (Acetaminophen, Bezafibrate, Caffeine, Carbamazepine, Cotinine, Diclofenac, Gemfibrozil, Ibuprofen, Metoprolol, Naproxen, Sulfadimethoxine, Sulfamethazine, Sulfamethoxazole, Sulfathiazole, Triclosan and Trimethoprim) was investigated. Samples of wastewater from municipal WWTPs were analyzed using direct aqueous injection High Performance Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Quadrupole Mass Spectrometric (LC/MS/MS) detection. On concentration basis, results showed an average removal efficiency of 29%, 50%, and 7%, respectively, for the UF, PAC dosage of 50 ppm, and COA dosage of 10 ppm. When PAC dosage of 100 ppm was used as pretreatment to the combined PAC and UF in-line membrane system, a 90.3% removal efficiency was achieved. The removal efficiency of UF in tandem with COA was 33%, an increase of 4% compared with the single UF treatment. The adsorption effect of PAC combined with the physical separation process of UF revealed the best treatment strategy for removing pharmaceutical contaminant from water. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available