4.7 Article

Tracking oil and gas wastewater-derived organic matter in a hybrid biofilter membrane treatment system: A multi-analytical approach

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 613, 期 -, 页码 208-217

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.031

关键词

Dissolved organic matter; 3D fluorescence spectroscopy; Produced water; Biofiltration; Ultrafiltration; Nanofiltration

资金

  1. National Science Foundation Sustainability Research Network program [CBET-1240584]
  2. ConocoPhillips
  3. Directorate For Engineering
  4. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [1240584] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dissolved organic matter (DOM) present in oil and gas (O&G) produced water and fracturing flowback was characterized and quantified by multiple analytical techniques throughout a hybrid biological-physical treatment process. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of DOM by liquid chromatography-organic carbon detection (LC-OCD), liquid chromatography-high-resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS), gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), and 3D fluorescence spectroscopy, demonstrated increasing removal of all groups of DOM throughout the treatment train, with most removal occurring during biological pretreatment and some subsequent removal achieved during membrane treatment. Parallel factor analysis (PARAFAC) further validated these results and identified five fluorescent components, including DOM described as humic acids, fulvic acids, proteins, and aromatics. Tryptophan-like compounds bound by complexation to humics/fulvics were most difficult to remove biologically, while aromatics (particularly low molecular weight neutrals) were more challenging to remove with membranes. Strong correlation among PARAFAC, LC-OCD, LC-HRMS, and GC-MS suggests that PARAFAC can be a quick, affordable, and accurate tool for evaluating the presence or removal of specific DOM groups in O& G wastewater. (C) 2017 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