1 / 15

Presented by VEETech, P.C. 942 Millbrook Avenue, STE # 6 Aiken, SC

Removal of Arsenic from Drinking Water using Hybrid Ion Exchangers or HIX : A Prudent approach for Rural Water Utilities. Presented by VEETech, P.C. 942 Millbrook Avenue, STE # 6 Aiken, SC. Sources Natural Geochemical contamination through soil leaching

may-neal
Download Presentation

Presented by VEETech, P.C. 942 Millbrook Avenue, STE # 6 Aiken, SC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Removal of Arsenic from Drinking Water using Hybrid Ion Exchangers or HIX : A Prudent approach for Rural Water Utilities Presented by VEETech, P.C. 942 Millbrook Avenue, STE # 6 Aiken, SC

  2. Sources Natural Geochemical contamination through soil leaching Inorganic arsenic, which occurs as As(III) or As(V) in drinking water, presents great threat to public health Exposure can cause Thickening and decoloration of skin Nausea and Diarrhea Decreased production of blood vessels Skin cancer and tumors of the bladder, kidney, liver and lung Effect of Arsenic in Drinking Water

  3. Illustration of a typical three-step procedure to disperse both crystalline and amorphous HFO nanoparticles inside the spherical polymer beads to form Hybrid Ion Exchangers or HIX

  4. Desirable Attributes of Fixed Bed Sorbents (e.g., HIX) for Arsenic Removal • Excellent Mechanical Strength and Attrition Resistance • Selective towards both As(III) and As(V) • Does not require pre or post treatment (e.g., pH)

  5. Desirable Attributes (contd…) • Does not alter the electrolytic quality of treated water • Does not generate fines or pressure drops during long term column operation • Efficiency is not affected by the presence of high concentrations of silica, phosphate, or sulfate in water • Can treat up to 40,000 bed volumes (BV) of water/cycle • Can be regenerated up to 20 to 30 cycles of operation • Can remove multiple contaminants such as Ra, U, and perchlorate along with Arsenic

  6. Typical Influent / Effluent TDS vs. Bed Volume

  7. Typical Influent / Effluent pH vs. Bed Volume

  8. Typical Bench Scale Study: Arsenic(III) Effluent History for a column run

  9. Typical Bench Scale Study: Comparison of Arsenic and Silica Breakthrough

  10. Typical Pilot Scale Study: Arsenic Effluent History at City of Rosharon, TX Inlet As: 27ug/l Run length: 14 days Flow rate: 1.2 gpm Column Dia: 3” Column Ht: 2’ Maximum contaminant level (MCL)

  11. Typical Pilot Scale Study: Arsenic Effluent History at City of Andrews, TX Inlet As: 25ug/l Run length: 35 days Flow rate: 0.2 gpm Column Dia: 3” Column Ht: 2’ Arsenic ug/l Maximum contaminant level (MCL) Bed Volumes

  12. Typical Fixed Bed Sorbent (HIX) Based Arsenic Removal System for Rural Water Utilities

  13. AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES/TREATMENT METHODS • The Technologies/Sorbents that are available in the • marketplace to remove arsenic from drinking water are: • Granular Ferric Oxide (GFH) • E33 Granular Ferric Oxide (GFO) • G2 Ferric Oxide Treated Diatomite • Apyron Aqua-Bind SP60 • Most of the above sorbents lack Mechanical Strength • and require pre/post treatment • Most of the above media except HIX and G2 are not • Regenerable. HIX clearly stands out particularly for • simultaneous removal of Arsenic and other co-contaminants (U and Ra).

  14. Typical Installed Cost for Fixed Bed Systems

  15. Typical Operating Cost for HIX Fixed Bed Systems Note: For inlet water containing Arsenic and other co-contaminants like Radium or Uranium, the operating cost for treatment is expected to increase in the range of 40% to 60%

More Related