Water Treatment Processes

ENVR 890 Mark D. Sobsey Spring, 00!

Water Sources and Water Treatment

Drinking water should be essentially free of disease-causing microbes, but often this is not the case.
A large ro ortion of the world!s o ulation drinks microbially contaminated water, es ecially in de"elo ing countries

#sing the best ossible source of water for otable water su ly and rotecting it from microbial and chemical contamination is the goal
$n many laces an ade%uate su ly of ristine water or water that can be rotected from contamination is not a"ailable

The burden of ro"iding microbially safe drinking water su lies from contaminated natural waters rests u on water treatment rocesses
The efficiency of remo"al or inacti"ation of enteric microbes and other athogenic microbes in s ecific water treatment rocesses has been determined for some microbes but not others. The ability of water treatment processes and systems to reduce waterborne disease has been determined in epidemiological studies

Summary of &ainline Water Treatment 'rocesses

Storage Disinfection
'hysical( #) radiation, heat, membrane filters *hemical( *hlorine, o+one, chlorine dio,ide, iodine, other antimicrobial chemicals

-iltration
.a id granular media Slow sand and other biological filters &embrane filters( micro-, ultra-, nano- and re"erse osmosis

/ther hysical-chemical remo"al rocesses

*hemical coagulation, reci itation and com le,ation Adsor tion( e.g., acti"ated carbon, bone char, etc, $on e,change( synthetic ion e,change resins, +eolites, etc.

Water Treatment Processes: Storage

Reservoirs, aquifers & other systems: store water protect it from contamination actors influencing microbe reductions !site"specific# detention time temperature microbial activity water quality: particulates, dissolved solids, salinity sunlight sedimentation land use precipitation runoff or infiltration

Water Storage an" Microbia# Re"$ctions

% Microbe levels reduced over time by natural antimicrobial processes and microbial death/die-off % Human enteric viruses in surface water reduced 4001,000-fold when stored 67 months !he "etherlands# & $ndicator bacteria reductions were less e%tensive, probably due to recontamination by waterfowl& % 'roto(oan cyst reductions lo)10# by stora)e were 1&6 for *ryptosporidium and 1&+ for ,iardia after about months !he "etherlands. ,&/ Medema, 'h&0& diss&#
& 1ecent $*1 data indicates lower proto(oan levels in reservoir or la2e sources than in river sources. su))ests declines in Giardia 3 Cryptosporidium by stora)e

Typica# S$r'ace Water Treatment P#ant

()emica# (oag$#ation*+#occ$#ation
Removes suspended particulate and colloidal substances from water, including microorganisms$ %oagulation: colloidal destabili&ation Typically, add alum !aluminum sulfate# or ferric chloride or sulfate to the water with rapid mi'ing and controlled p( conditions )nsoluble aluminum or ferric hydro'ide and aluminum or iron hydro'o comple'es form These comple'es entrap and adsorb suspended particulate and colloidal material$

*oa)ulation-4locculation, *ontinued
locculation:

Slow mi'ing !flocculation# that provides for for a period of time to promote the aggregation and growth of the insoluble particles !flocs#$ The particles collide, stic* together abd grow larger The resulting large floc particles are subsequently removed by gravity sedimentation !or direct filtration# Smaller floc particles are too small to settle and are removed by filtration

 %onsiderable reductions of enteric microbe concentrations$ Reductions )n laboratory and pilot scale field studies: ,-- percent using alum or ferric salts as coagulants Some studies report much lower removal efficiencies !.-/0# %onflicting information may be related to process control coagulant concentration, p( and mi'ing speed during flocculation$ 1'pected microbe reductions bof -/"--0, if critical process variables are adequately controlled 2o microbe inactivation by alum or iron coagulation )nfectious microbes remain in the chemical floc The floc removed by settling and3or filtration must be properly managed to prevent pathogen e'posure$ Recycling bac* through the plant is undesirable ilter bac*wash must be disinfected3disposed of properly$

+icrobe Reductions by %hemical %oagulation" locculation

*ryptosporidium 1emovals by *oa)ulation /ar !est 5tudies#

*oa)ulant

0ose m)/6# 1 6 -

7ocyst 1emoval, 8 lo)10# ++&: ;&7# :7 0&+# ++&- ;&<# +7 1&-#

9lum

$ron

,ran$#ar Me"ia +i#tration

4sed to remove suspended particles !turbidity# incl$ microbes$ (istorically, two types of granular media filters: Slow sand filters: uniform bed of sand5 low flow rate ./$6 7P+3ft8 biological process: 6"8 cm 9slime: layer !schmut&dec*e# Rapid sand filters: 6, 8 or ; layers of sand3other media5 ,6 7P+3ft8 physical"chemical process5 depth filtration

<iatomaceous earth filters

fossili&ed s*eletons of diatoms !crystalline silicate#5 powdery deposit5 few 6/s of micrometers5 porous

Slow Sand ilters

=ess widely used for large 4S municipal water supplies 1ffective5 widely used in 1urope5 small water supplies5 developing countries ilter through a ;> to ?>foot deep bed of unstratified sand flow rate @/$/? gallons per minute per square foot$ Aiological growth develops in the upper surface of the sand is primarily responsible for particle and microbe removal$ 1ffective without pretreatment of the water by coagulation>flocculation Periodically clean by removing, cleaning and replacing the upper few inches of biologically active sand

+icrobial Reductions by Slow Sand iltration

1ffective in removing enteric microbes from water$ Birus removals ,--0 in lab models of slow sand filters$
4p to C log6/5 no infectious viruses recovered from filter effluents

ield studies: naturally occurring enteric viruses removals -D to ,--$E percent5 average -E0 overall5 %omparable removals of E. coli bacteria$ Birus removalsF-->--$-05 high bacteria removals !4G study# Parasite removals: Giardia lamblia cysts effectively removed
1'pected removals --0

Roughing ilter 4sed in developing countries ine'pensive low maintenance local materials Remove large solids Remove microbes 6"8 log6/ bacterial reduction -/0 turbidity reduction

+icrobe Reductions by Rapid 7ranular +edia ilters

)neffective to remove enteric microbes unless preceded by chemical coagulation>flocculation$ Preceded chemical coagulation>flocculation & sedimentation 1nteric microbe removals of -/",-- 0 achieved$ ield !pilot# studies: rapid sand filtration preceded by iron coagulation>flocculation: virus removal .?/0 !poor controlH#$ Giardia lamblia: removals not always high5 related to turbidity removal5 ,--0 removals reported when optimi&ed$ Removal not high unless turbidity is reduced to /$8 2T4$ =owest removals shortly after filter bac*washing +icrobes primarily removed in filter by entrapped floc particles$ Iverall, can achieve -/0 microbial removals from water

+icrobe Reductions by %hemical %oagulation" locculation and iltration of River Water by Three R' Plants in The 2etherlands
7r)anisms 'lant 1 'lant ; 'lant < 6o)10 1eductions of Microbes =nteric 1&0 1&7 ?; >iruses 4@ "o data 0&4 1&7 *olipha)es 4ecal ;&0 ?; 0&; *oliforms 4ecal ;&1 ?; 0&6 5treptococci *lostridium ;&1 ?; 0&6 spores Plant 6 used two stages of iron coagulation>flocculation>sedimentation$ Plant 8 used iron coagulation>flocculation>sedimentation and rapid filtration Plant ; used iron coagulation>flotation>rapid filtration$

*ryptosporidium 1emovals by 5and 4iltration

1eduction 1ate M/hr# *oa)ulation 8 lo)10# 6 0&; "o Aes Aes "o 6+0 0&-# 1&0#

!ype 1apid, shallow 1apid, shallow 1apid, deep 5low

++&+++ -&0# ++&: ;&7#

*ryptosporidium 1emoval by *oa)ulation and 0irect 4iltration

1un "o& 1 ; < 4 Mean 6o)10 1eduction of Cryptosporidium <&1 ;&: ;&7 1&;&!urbidity 1&< 1&; 0&7 0&;B 0&:-

1aw water turbidity C 0&0 - -&0 "!D 9lum coa)ulation-flocculation. 9nthracite-sand-sand filtration. - ,'M/ft; B5uboptimum alum dose 7n)erth 3 'ecoraro& /9EE9, 0ec&, 1++-

1eported 1emovals of Cryptosporidium 7ocysts by 'hysical-*hemical Eater !reatment 'rocesses Fench, 'ilot and 4ield 5tudies#
'rocess *larification byG *oa)ulation flocculation-sedimentation or 4lotation 1apid 4iltration pre-coa)ulated# Foth 'rocesses 5low 5and 4iltration 0iatomaceous =arth 4iltration *oa)ulation @ Microfiltration Dltrafiltration 6o)10 1eduction

H1 - ;&6 1&- - ?4&0 H;&- - ?6&6 ?<&7 ?4&0 ?6&0 ?6&0

*ryptosporidium 1eductions by *oa)ulation and 4iltration 6aboratory studies on oocyst removalG - /ar test coa)ulation with 1 hr& settin) C ;&0 - ;&7 lo)10 - 5and filtration, no coa)ulant, 10 cm bed depth C 0&4- lo)10 - 5and filtration, plus coa)ulation, 10 cm bed depth C 1&0 lo)10
,re)ory et al&, 1++1& 4inal 1eport& 0ept& of the =nviron&, DI

Membrane 4ilters
+ore recent development and use in drin*ing water +icrofilters: several tenths of + to + diameter pore si&e nano" & ultra"filters: retention by molecular weight cutoff Typically 6,///"6//,/// +W%I Reverse osmosis filters: pore si&e small enough to remove dissolved salts5 used to desalinate !desalt# water as well as particle removal (igh ,--$--0 removal of cellular microbes Birus removals high ,-$--0 in ultra", nano" and RI filters Birus removals lower ! --0# by microfilters +embrane and membrane seal integrity critical to effective performance

*ryptosporidium 1eductions by Membrane 4iltration

Membrane, !ype 9, M4 F, M4 *, M4 0, D4 =, D4 4, D4 'ore 5i(e 0&; Jm 0&; Jm 0&1 Jm -00 I0 <00 I0 100 I0 6o)10 Cryptosporidium 1eduction ?4&4 ?4&4 4&;-?4&: ?4&: ?4&: ?4&4

M4 C microfilter filter. D4 C ultrafilter /acan)elo et al&, /9EE9, 5ept&, 1++-

9dsorbers and 4ilter-9dsorbers

Jdsorbers: 7ranular activated carbon adsorption
remove dissolved organics poor retention of pathogens, esp$ viruses biologically active5 develops a biofilm can shed microbes into water

ilter"adsorbers Sand plus granular activated carbon reduces particles and organics biologically active microbial retention is possible

*ryptosporidium 1emovals by 5and 4iltration

1eduction 8 lo)10# 6+0 0&-# 1&0#

!ype 1apid, shallow 1apid, shallow 1apid, deep 5low

1ate M/hr# 6 0&;

*oa)ulation "o Aes Aes "o

++&+++ -&0# ++&: ;&7#

Cryptosporidium 1eductions by Membrane 4iltration

Membrane, !ype 'ore 5i(e 6o)10 Cryptosporidium 1eduction

9, M4 F, M4 *, M4 0, D4 =, D4 4, D4

0&; Jm 0&; Jm 0&1 Jm -00 I0 <00 I0 100 I0

?4&4 ?4&4 4&;-?4&: ?4&: ?4&: ?4&4

M4 C microfilter filter. D4 C ultrafilter

/acan)elo et al&, /9EE9, 5ept&, 1++-

Eater 5oftenin) and Microbe 1eductions

% KHardL EaterG contains e%cessive amounts of calcium and ma)nesium ions
& iron and man)anese can also contribute to hardness&

% Hardness ions are removed by addin) lime *a7# and sometimes soda ash "a;*7<# to precipitate them as carbonates, hydro%ides and o%ides& % !his process, called softenin), is basically a type of coa)ulationflocculation process& % Microbe reductions similar to alum and iron coa)ulation when pH is H10 % Microbe reductions ?++&++8 possible when pH is ?11
& microbial inactivation @ physical removal

+icrobial Reductions by Softening Treatment

Softening with lime only !straight lime softening#5 moderate high p(
ineffective enteric microbe reductions: about D?0$

=ime>soda ash softening

results in the removal of magnesium as well as calcium hardness at higher p( levels !p( ,66# enteric microbe reductions ,--0$ =ime>soda ash softening at p( 6/$C, 6/$E and 66$8 has produced virus reductions of --$K, --$- and --$--; percent, respectively$

Jt lower p( levels !p( .66#, microbe removal is mainly a physical process

infectious microbes accumulate in the floc particles and the resulting chemical sludge$

Jt p( levels above 66, enteric microbes are physically removed and infectivity is also destroyed
more rapid and e'tensive microbe inactivation at higher p( levels$

Disin'ection o' Microbes in Water*on"entional &ethods used in the De"elo ed World

0istorically, the essential barrier to re"ention and control of waterborne microbial transmission and waterborne disease. -ree chlorine( 0/*l 1hy ochlorous2 acid and /*l- 1hy ochlorite ion2
0/*l at lower 0 and /*l- at higher 03 0/*l a more otent germicide than /*l strong o,idant and relati"ely stable in water 1 ro"ides a disinfectant residual2

*hloramines( mostly 405*l( weak o,idant3 ro"ides a stable residual o+one, /5 , strong o,idant3 ro"ides no residual 1too "olatile and reacti"e2 *hlorine dio,ide, *l/6,, string o,idant but not "ery stable residual *oncerns due to health risks of chemical disinfectants and their by7 roducts 1D8's2, es ecially free chlorine and its D8's #) radiation
low ressure mercury lam ( low intensity3 monochromatic at 69: nm medium ressure mercury lam ( higher intensity3 olychromatic 66;-6<; nm2 reacts rimarily with nucleic acids( yrimidine dimers and other alterations

Disin'ection .inetics
Disinfection is a kinetic rocess $ncreased inacti"ation with increased e, osure or contact time.
*hick=s >aw( disinfection is a first7order reaction. 14/T?2 &ultihit-hit or conca"e u kinetics( initial slow rate3 multi le targets to be @hitA *onca"e down or retardant kinetics( initial fast rate3 decreases o"er time Different susce tibilities of microbes to inacti"ation3 heterogeneous o ulation Decline of of disinfectant concentration o"er time *T *once t( Disinfection can be e, ressed at the roduct of disinfectant concentration B contact time A lies best when disinfection kinetics are first order Disinfectant concentration and contact time ha"e an e%ual effect on *T roducts A lies less well when either time ofrconcentration is more im ortant.

D0S0N+E(T0/N 1ND M0(R/2013 0N1(T0V1T0/N .0NET0(S

+irst /r"er

M$#ti)it

3og S$r4i4ors

Retar"ant

(ontact Time

+actors 0n'#$encing Disin'ection o' Microbes

&icrobe ty e( disinfection resistance from least to most( "egetati"e bacteria "iruses roto+oan cysts, s ores and eggs Ty e of disinfectant( order of efficacy against Giardia from best to worst
/5 *l/6 iodineCfree chlorine chloramines 8#T, order of effecti"eness "aries with ty e of microbe

&icrobial aggregation(
rotects microbes from inacti"ation microbes within aggregates can not be readily reached by the disinfectant

Dffects of Water Euality on Disinfection

'articulates( rotect microbes from inacti"ation
microbes shielded or embedded in articles

Dissol"ed organics( rotects

consumes or absorbs 1#) radiation2 disinfectant coats microbes

$norganic com ounds and ions( effects "ary with disinfectant 0( effects de end on disinfectant.
-ree chlorine more biocidal at low 0 where 0/*l redominates. *hlorine dio,ide more microbiocidal at high 0

.eactor design, mi,ing and hydraulic conditions3 better acti"ity in F lug flowF than in Fbatch7mi,edF reactors.

0nacti4ation o' Cryptosporidium /ocysts in Water by ()emica# Disin'ectants

Disin'ectant (T99 5mg*min637 Re'erence

+ree ()#orine Monoc)#oramine ()#orine Dio:i"e Mi:e" o:i"ants /=one

!, 008 !, 008 ;!8 <9 0 >?*98

.oric) et a#., 9990 .oric) et a#., 9990 .oric) et a#., 9990 Venc=e# et a#., 999! +inc) et a#., 999@ .oric) et a#., 9990 /Aens et a#., 999@

C. parvum oocysts inacti"ated by low doses of #) radiation( GH; mIoulesCcm 6

Disin'ection1 .ey 2arrier 1gainst Microbes in Water

-ree chlorine still the most commonly used disinfectant &aintaining disinfectant residual during treated water storage and distribution is essential.
A roblem for /5 and *l/6, which do not remain in water for "ery long. A secondary disinfectant must be used to ro"ide a stable residual

#) radiation is a romising disinfectant because it inacti"ates *ry tos oridium at low doses
#) may ha"e to be used with a chemical disinfectant to rotect the water with a residual through distribution and storage