4.7 Article

The fate of organic micropollutants during long-term/long-distance river bank filtration

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 545, 期 -, 页码 629-640

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.12.057

关键词

River bank filtration; Organic micropollutants; Numerical modeling; Long-term behavior; Removal; Degradation

资金

  1. European Commission through the EU FP7 project SOLUTIONS [603437]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The fate of organic micropollutants during long-term/long-distance river bank filtration (RBF) at a temporal scale of several years was investigated along a row of monitoring wells perpendicular to the Lek River (the Netherlands). Out of 247 compounds, which were irregularly analyzed in the period 1999-2013, only 15 were detected in both the river and river bank observation wells. Out of these, 10 compounds (1,4-dioxan, 1,5-naphthalene disulfonate (1,5-NDS), 2-amino-1,5-NDS, 3-amino-1,5-NDS, AOX, carbamazepine, EDTA, MTBE, toluene and triphenylphosphine oxide) showed fully persistent behavior (showing no concentration decrease at all), even after 3.6 years transit time. The remaining 5 compounds (1,3,5-naphthalene trisulfonate (1,3,5-NTS), 1,3,6-NTS, diglyme, iopamidol, triglyme) were partially removed. Their reactive transport parameters (removal rate constants/half-lives, retardation coefficients) were inferred from numerical modeling. In addition, maximum half-lives for 14 of the fully removed compounds, for which the data availability was sufficient to deduce 100% removal during sub-surface passage, were approximated based on travel times to the nearest well. The study is one of very few reporting on the long-term field-scale behavior of organic micropollutants. It highlights the efficiency of RBF for water quality improvement as a pre-treatment step for drinking water production. However, it also shows the very persistent behavior of various compounds in groundwater. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据