Influence of Water Treatment and Wastewater Treatment on the Changes in Residues of Important Elements in Drinking Water

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Drinking water is the essential medium for food production, and is also needed for direct consumption; while it must be free of harmful substances, it also must have a composition that is beneficial to health. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of water and wastewater treatment on reducing the concentrations of zinc (Zn), nickel (Ni), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), copper (Cu), lead (Pb), and arsenic (As) in the Western Pomerania Voivodeship in Poland. The research was carried out in 2017–2019. The analysis was performed with inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrophotometry (ICP-AES). The concentrations of trace elements in drinking water were below maximum acceptable concentrations (MACs). Reductions in the most dangerous elements during water treatment fluctuated from 48.5% (As) to 97% (Pb). Wastewater treatment reduced the concentrations of analyzed elements by a range of 28.6 to 60.8%, and the most toxic elements (Pb and As) by over 50%. Trace element concentrations in treated wastewater were below MAC values, and ranged from 1.15% (Pb) to 6.23% (As) of MACs for toxic elements. The concentrations of both essential elements (Zn, Ni, Fe, Mn, Cu) and toxic elements (Pb, As) in drinking water were below the MACs. Water treatment had a significant (p < 0.05) effect on decreasing trace element concentrations.

Related collections

Most cited references 27

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Advantages and disadvantages of techniques used for wastewater treatment

Grégorio Crini, Eric Lichtfouse (2019)

0 comments Cited 499 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Arsenic removal from water/wastewater using adsorbents--A critical review.

Dinesh Mohan, Charles U Pittman (2007)

Arsenic's history in science, medicine and technology has been overshadowed by its notoriety as a poison in homicides. Arsenic is viewed as being synonymous with toxicity. Dangerous arsenic concentrations in natural waters is now a worldwide problem and often referred to as a 20th-21st century calamity. High arsenic concentrations have been reported recently from the USA, China, Chile, Bangladesh, Taiwan, Mexico, Argentina, Poland, Canada, Hungary, Japan and India. Among 21 countries in different parts of the world affected by groundwater arsenic contamination, the largest population at risk is in Bangladesh followed by West Bengal in India. Existing overviews of arsenic removal include technologies that have traditionally been used (oxidation, precipitation/coagulation/membrane separation) with far less attention paid to adsorption. No previous review is available where readers can get an overview of the sorption capacities of both available and developed sorbents used for arsenic remediation together with the traditional remediation methods. We have incorporated most of the valuable available literature on arsenic remediation by adsorption ( approximately 600 references). Existing purification methods for drinking water; wastewater; industrial effluents, and technological solutions for arsenic have been listed. Arsenic sorption by commercially available carbons and other low-cost adsorbents are surveyed and critically reviewed and their sorption efficiencies are compared. Arsenic adsorption behavior in presence of other impurities has been discussed. Some commercially available adsorbents are also surveyed. An extensive table summarizes the sorption capacities of various adsorbents. Some low-cost adsorbents are superior including treated slags, carbons developed from agricultural waste (char carbons and coconut husk carbons), biosorbents (immobilized biomass, orange juice residue), goethite and some commercial adsorbents, which include resins, gels, silica, treated silica tested for arsenic removal come out to be superior. Immobilized biomass adsorbents offered outstanding performances. Desorption of arsenic followed by regeneration of sorbents has been discussed. Strong acids and bases seem to be the best desorbing agents to produce arsenic concentrates. Arsenic concentrate treatment and disposal obtained is briefly addressed. This issue is very important but much less discussed.