-------
another well within the same area but perhaps drawing from a different
aquifer may contain a preponderance of 1,1,1-trichloroethane and cls-1,2-
dlchloroethylene, and merely have detectable quantities of trichloroethylene.
Several possible sources for these contaminants have been suggested (13).
Included are industrial discharges (either through spreading on the land or
improper disposal at dumps), landfill leachates, septic tank degreasers and
similar products from individual households, sewer leaks, accidental spills,
cleaning and rinsing of tanks and machinery, leaking storage tanks, and from
the use of treated wastes for groundwater recharge. Although contributions
of organic solvents from improper pump lubricants or from well drilling aids
are not likely to be major, they should be recognized as potential sources.
Sometimes the source of contamination is not obvious. Crane and Freeman
(14), for example, reported trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene were
two of several solvents detected in the effluent from the anion-catlon exchange
resin used in their laboratory . The source of this contamination was traced
to the distribution plant where the resin was sent for regeneration. The
ground water used in the regeneration process was contaminated with organic
solvents which then contaminated the resin.
Once an aquifer is contaminated, the water purveyor or other user must
either seek an alternative source or provide treatment to remove or reduce
the concentrations of these contaminants. The following information Is
presented for guidance on the latter option. For each solvent, general
properties and water treatment data are given. Most of the treatment data
were obtained through pilot plant studies. In the Discussion and Summary
Section, both theory and empirical data concepts were used to estimate aera-
tion and adsorption efficiency over a wide range of contaminant concentra-
tions and desired effluent qualities.
-------
CHd- CO.2 Solubility: 1100-1250 mg/L (15,16,17)
9 25°C
Molecular Height: 131 Vapor Pressure: 57.8 am Hg 9 20°C (15,16)
Threshold Odor Concentration: Henry's Law Constant: 0.49* (15)
500 ag/L (18,19) 0.48* (16)
11.7 x 10-3 ata ,3 (17)
mole
Boiling point: 87°C
Other name: (20,21,59)
TCZ; 1,1,2-trichioroethylene; 1,2,2-trichloroetnylene; trichloroethene; acetylene
trichloride; ethinyl trichloride; ethylene trichloride; Trlclene; Trielene; Trilene;
Trlchlorma; Trichloren; Algylen; Trimar; Triline; Tri; Trethylen*; V««tro*ol; Chlorllen
C«aalg«n«; Germalgene; Benziaol; l,l,-dichloro-2-chloro«thylene; Blacsolv; Blancosolv;
Cacolene; l-chloroethylane; Chlorylan; Circoaolv; Cravhaapol; Dow-tri; Oukeron;
Fleck-flip; Flock-flip; Lanadin; Lethurin; Nclco 4546; Nialk; Perar-a-clor; Petzlnol;
Philex; Triad; Trial; Triasol; Anaaenth; Chorylen; Oensiafluat; Fluate; Nareogea;
Nerkosoid; Threthylen; Threthjlene; Trilen
Trichloroethylene i« commercially produced by chlorinating ethylene (CH2 •
CH2) or acetylene (CH Z CH). Its uae is declining because of stringent regulations;
however, it has been a common Ingredient in many household products (spot removers,
rug cleaners, air fresheners), dry cleaning fluids, industrial aetal cleaners and
polishers, refrigerants, and even anesthetics (22,23). Its ubiquitous use is perhaps
why triehloroethylene is often the predominant synthetic organic contaminant in
groundwater.
Other ***** some incidental evaporation losses, conventional water treatment
(coagulation, settling, precipitative softening, and filtration) is not likely to
be effective for removing triehloroethylene. In two studies (5,24) in which the
triehloroethylene concentration in the source was less than 1 ug/L, no significant
losses were observed through the treatment plant. Other processes, such as aeration
and adsorption are effective and will be discussed individually.
This expression is diaensionless (concentration in air divided by concentration
in water at equilbrium).
-------
Aeration
USEPA-DWRD conducted pilot scale laboratory and field aeration studies using
a 4 -cm (1*5 in) diameter glass column, approximately 1.2 m (4 ft) long with a
fritted glass diffuser in the bottom. In the laboratory, trichloroethylene was
added to Cincinnati, Ohio tap water to give concentrations of approximately 100-
to 1000 ug/L and aerated (counter-current flow) at different temperatures. The
efficiency of stripping trichloroethylene from water ranged from 70 to 92 per-
cent with an air-to-water ratio (volume to volume) of 4:1 and a contact time of
10 minutes (Table 1). At a contaminated well site in New Jersey, the same
aerator consistently gave over 80 percent removal of trichloroethylene where
the mean influent concentration was 3.3 ug/L.
Mebolsine Kohlman Ruggiero Engineers (NKRE) (25) also evaluated diffused-
air aeration on a pilot scale at a well site on Long Island, New York (Table 1).
They compared a rectangular aeration tank [0.6m x 1.2m x 0.6m deep (16 ft^)]
having four diffusers with a 27 cm (10.5 in) diameter Plexiglass®* column
having a single diffuser. Retention times ranged from 5 to 20 minutes and air-
to-water ratios, from 5:1 to 20:1. The highest removal efficiency was 73 percent.
In a follow-up study (26) using a 76 cm (30 in) diameter column, 3m (10 ft) in
length with five diffusers, the efficiency of removal ranged from 69 percent to
90 percent with air-to-water ratios from 5:1 to 30:1. The trichloroethylene
concentration in the unaerated water ranged from 132 to 313 ug/L. An important
note is the concentrations of trichloroethylene and the other organic contaminants
in the untreated water were lowest when the well pump was first started and the
levels steadily increased for several hours after pumping.
^Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.
-------
TABLE 1. REMOVAL OP TSICHLORQgTHYLENE FROM DRINKING WATER
USING DIPFUSED-AIR AERATION
Kfluaae Caacaatratiaa. at/T.
at
Study
Coacaacratlim. a«/t
r tattaa
Isl 2;l 3;1 4tl »tl
20tl
Ciad
TM
aaiCl.. 01
10*4
397
241
110
73
m &i4
as 273
13* UO
40 21
22 I*
SOS
102
41
11
31*
12
U
9
S3
22
•
3
1
a
2
a
a
a
3
a
a
(1.3
ac
Cant^HLntMA (tall
flow
with
earto* fUund
•ix; 10 •ta.eoatmec
(!••. tfeur
to
(A/?)
Stl
lOil
13tl
20tl
(23)
112
11*
122
*••
40"
0.4 «3 (i,
gul*r CMk uteit 4
». 10 •!» eoauct
k. 13- «ln cMicaet
27 ca (10.* la) __
aatar uiliaai A/T -0.6 a~l
e. S -«tB eoocact elaa
4. 10- via eoaeaet ela*
•» 13 ala eaacacs eiaa
f. 20 «ta eoacaee eiaa
Stl
Alr»To-Uacar lacloa
IStl 20tl
30tl
CoacflBtaacaa* 110
Hall o* 211
lalaaa (2*) 210
223
33
22
T6 e* (3O la)
3 • (10 fs) daaa (!*••
eoliua with S
10-aia eooucc tl»a.
A/7 - O.iT1
-------
Joyce (27) reported concentrations of trichloroethylene ranging from 4.5
to 22 ug/L at Smyrna, Delaware, after water containing 20 to 70 ug/L trichloro-
ethylene was passed through an induced-draft aerator. Although the advanced
waste treatment research conducted at Water Factory 21 was not conducted
directly on drinking water, it has shown trichloroethylene concentrations of
approximately 1 to 2 ug/L are effectively removed (98 percent) through an
ammonia stripping tower (air to water ratio of approximately 3000 to 1 when
the fan is on) and similar efficiencies have been observed on waste water
passed through a polyethylene packed decarbonator (air-to-water ratio approxi-
mately 22 to 1) (28,29).
Adsorption
Dobbs and Cohen (30) developed an adsorption isotherm for trichloro-
ethylene in distilled water using pulverized Calgon Filtrasorb* 300.
These data are illustrated in Figure 1 as a Freundlich isotherm. When tri-
chloroethylene has an equilibrium concentration of 100 ug/L, the capacity
predicted from this isotherm is approximately 7 mg/g. Other than isotherm
data, little information is reported on the effects of powdered activated
carbon for removing high concentrations of this contaminant. Slngley, e_t
al. (31) observed a 50 percent reduction in trichloroethylene concentrations
(from 1.5 to 0.7 ug/L) that was attributed to a powdered activated carbon
dosage of 7 mg/L in the Sunny Isles Water Treatment Plant, North Miami Beach,
Florida.
Other than these two studies, most of the available adsorption data has
been developed on granular adsorbents. In the summer and fall of 1977, the
USEPA-DWRD installed pilot scale adsorption columns [4 cm (1.5 in) diameter,
80 cm (31 in) of media] near contaminated wells at two water utilities In
New England. One was in the State of Connecticut where an industrial waste
-------
1
§
I
10.
1.0
I J « 1 I I I
C
c
H
STRUCTURE
Frotindlich Parameters on
F-3QQ Granular Activated Carbon
1C* 28.0
i t
r 1 t t tuff
!_ f f r t itt
t t t f
0.0001
0.001 aai 0.1
EQUILIBRIUM CONCENTRATION, mg/l
1.0
Figure 1. Adsorption Isotherm for Tricriloroetriyfene. Referenca 30.
-------
New Hempshire Ground Weter
Empty Bed Contact Tim* * 9 min
18 20 22 24 26
(2240) (6720) (11.200) (15.680) (20.160) (24.640)
10
Connect/cut Ground Water
Empty Bed Contact Time *8.S min
Columns sampled efter
2
_ _
0 4 3 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 104
(4740) (14.230) (23.720) (33.210) (42.700) (52.180) (123.340)
TIME IN SERVICE, weeks
(Bed Volumes)
Rgure 2. Removal of Trichloroethvleno by Adsorption on Granular Activated
Carbon and Polymeric Resin.
-------
lagoon-was thought to have contaminated a well field. The affected-water-
works had just completed two yean of pumping the contaminanted well to
waste, yet volatile organlcs were still present. The other USEPA-DWRD pilot
scale research installation was in New Hampshire. At both locations, granular
activated carbon (Calgon Filtraaorb* 400) and a synthetic resin (Rohm and
Haas Ambersorb* XZ-340) were exposed to the contaminated water.
In the New Hampshire study, trichloroethylene was the predominant contam-
inant and. concentrations ranged from 120 to 276 ug/L. Unfortunately, after
18 weeks, the test column became clogged with what appeared to be precipitated
iron. When cleaning was attempted, the contaminant wavefront was disrupted
and the study was ended after 23 weeks (Figure 2). In the Connecticut study,
trichloroethylene was one of the lesser contaminants and concentrations ranged
from less than 1 ug/L to 10 ug/L. The teat columns were sampled weekly for
one year, then allowed to run continuously, and resampled one year later.
Trichloroethylene was removed to below detection (0.1 ug/L)* for the
first year but the granular activated carbon was exhausted after two years.
The resin was still removing trichloroethylene at the time (Figure 2).
In laboratory studies with trichloroethylene concentrations at the 2 mg/L
level, Heely and Isacoff (32) report the equilibrium capacity on XZ-3409 is
84 mg/g. A pilot scale field study on Long Island (26) is further evaluating
the XZ-340* resin. In this project, 10 cm (4 in) diameter columns with
different
*For this discussion, breakthrough is the length of service when at least 0.1
ug/L of the contaminant Is consistently detected in the effluent from the
adsorbent. Length of service is expressed both in time and bed volumes (m^
water/m^ activated carbon).
10
-------
different depths of adsorbents (to vary contact tines) are being examined.
In-place steam regeneration is also being investigated. The project is
scheduled for completion in 1981 but preliminary results show trichloro-
ethylene capacity to breakthrough on the XE-340* resin is approximately 35
mg/g. The trichloroethylene concentrations range from 132 to 313 ug/L.
In Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, some homes having private wells
contaminated with trichloroethylene are using Collar* adsorption units, a
product of the Culligan Corporation. These home treatment devices contain
approximately 40 kg (87 IDS) of granular activated carbon and can be effec-
tive (depending on the loading and water usage) for several months. Infor-
mation on the effectiveness of other home treatment units (particularly the
small, low-flow cartridges) to remove trichloroethylene is not yet available.
Boiling
Boiling is sometimes suggested as a means for individuals to rid drink-
ing water of volatile organic*. Table 2 shows the results from four studies
conducted by the USEPA where 12 water samples were boiled for varying times.
Because boiling is not a standarized procedure, conditions are likely to
vary between households. Lataille (34) notes the importance of water depth
to boiling efficiency. Trichloroethylene is more efficiently removed from
a vessel containing 2 to 5 cm (1 to 2 in) of water than one having greater
water depths (Table 2).
11
-------
2. REMOVAL OF TXICBLOROETBTLESE FROM DRUKXNC WA1ZR, BY BT-ZLISG
XDffi OP BO TTf li*1* i
Mia.
0
(before
1
2
3
5
10
142
heating)
25
17
12
5
a
A
1262
237
186
136
65
5
A* Sollted Cincinnati. Ohio tap
1
137
45
44
35
23
-
water
rSXCHLORO
B
1107
589
389
261
118
15
£.ldiL&NE
C
176
28
20
20
11
2
CONCENTRATION, ug/L
D
1830 730 1460 2920 2000
279
110
57
20 12 17 194 6»,29b,500c
a
B. Spiked distilled water
C. Contaminated »%11 w»t«r fran P«nn»7lTmni»
0. Spiked Leziagton, Ma««achu««tt» tap water
a. Water depth « 2 -cm (1 in)
b. Water depth • 5 rm (2 ttt) ~~ ^"^
e. Veter depth - 11 cm (5 in)
Studies A-C by USZPA, Drinking Water Beaeareh Division, Cincinnati, OH (33). Water depth
approximately 10 ea (4 in).
Study D by USEPA, Region I, Surveillance and Analysis Laboratory, Lexington, HA (34)
12
-------
TETRACHLOROETHXLZNE
Cd, - CO.2 . Solubility: 140 mg/L 9 25°C (15)
150 mg/L 8 25°C (16,17)
Molecular Weight: 166 Vapor Pressure: 18.6 ma Hg (15,16)
Threshold Odor Concentrations: Henry's Lav Constant: 1.2 (15.16)
300 ug/L (18) 28.7x10-3 atm-m3 (17)
mole
Boiling Point: 121°C
Other Names: (20,21,59)
PCX; perchloroethylene; 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene; tetrachloroethene;
Ankilostin; carbon bichloride; carbon dichloride; Didakene; ENT-1860; ethylene
tetrachloride; NC1-C04580; Nema; Peravin; Perc; Perclene; PerSec; Tetralex;
Tetracap; Tetropil; Antisal; Fedal-Dn; Tetlen; Tetraguer; Tetraleno
Tetrachloroethylene is commercially produced by chlorinating acetylene
(CH5CH) or ethylene dichloride (CH2C1CH2C1, also known as 1,2-dichloroethane).
This solvent is widely used in dry cleaning, textile dyeing, metal degreasing,
and in the synthesis of fluorocarbons (22,23). As mentioned earlier, tetra-
chloroethylene has been used to apply polyvinyl-toluene liners to asbestos-
cement pipe. This solvent leaches into finished drinking water from newly
laid pipe as well as from pipe that had been installed for several years (3).
Tetrachloroethylene concentrations from this source range from a few micrograms
per liter to several milligrams per liter, the higher concentrations coming
from dead-ends, where water flow is not continuous. Specifications placed on
new pipe can alleviate this source of contamination, but treatment for existing
polyvinyl-toluene lined pipe in the ground is a problem that needs attention.
Intermittent flushing and continuous bleeding of the lines can lower the con-
centration of this contaminant (3). The remaining discussion on treatment
involves tetrachloroethylene found in the raw water source.
Although tetrachloroethylene is mainly a groundwater contaminant, it has
been found in low, measurable concentrations in some surface waters. In two
13
-------
instance* tetrachloroethylene was monitored before and after coagulation,
sedimentation, and filtration, and it was shown that thai* processes ar*
ineffactive for lowering the concentration of this contaminant (5,35).
Oxidation by o±one has been suggested, and Glaze (36) haa shown osonation
can remove tatrachloroethylene but optima conditions and subsequent by
product* are unknown.
Aeration
Diffused-alr aeration is effective for stripping tetrachloroethylane
froa water. Laboratory studies by the USEPA-DWHD have found that 30 to 60
percent of tetrachloroethylene can be removed with an air-to-wa.tar ratio of
1:1. Laboratory and pilot scale field studies have shown at least 95 percent
removal of tetrachloroethylene at higher air-to-water ratios. (Table 3).
The consulting firm, NK&E, (25) using both a tank and column aerator was
less successful, but a follow-up study (26) showed 75 to 95 percent removal
with an improved column design. HcCarty, at al. (29) reported 94 percent
removal of tetrachloroethylene (average influent concentration of 2.3 ug/L)
using ammonia stripping towers on highly treatad waste water.
Adsorption
Dobbe and Cohen (30) developed an adsorption isothera using a solution
of tetrachloroethylene In distilled water and pulverized Plltrasorb* 300
granular activated carbon (Figure 3). If an original tatrachloroethylene
concentration of 100 ug/L is assumed, an estimate of equilibrium capacity
from this Isothera would be 14 mg/g.
Adsorption tests using granular material on a pilot scale were conducted
in Bhode Island by the USEPA-DWHD during the summer of 1977. A portion of a
drinking water distribution system had become contaminated with between
14
-------
TABLE 3. REMOVAL OF TETRACHLORQETKLENE FROM DRINKING WATER USING DIFFUSED-AIR AERATION
Location at
Stody
Ararat*
Xaflttaat
Concaatracien
ot/1
Ararat* Mfluaat Concaatratten. u«A.
Air to Uatar Ratioa
1:1 Zti 3:1 4:1 8:1 16:1 20:1
rlu
•Spikad"
Tap Watar
1025
636
33>
U4
107
17
6M
161
139
32
32
3
416
177
103
17
17
2
304
46
47
7
7
1
136
34
34
4
4
1
16
4
a
a
a
a
i
a
a.
c.
a
2
a
a
a
4cm (1.
coltan,
contact
Araa to
5 la)
lOmta.
roluaw (A/7) «
Coataviaat*!
H«U in
92
Air-To-w«e«t Uttov
ill 10:1 1SH
20:1
Conta^aatad
tfcll on Long
Island (23)
35
27
46
63
33"
17«
•*•*
10*
11*
0.4 «3 (16
raetanpilar tank
with 4 dlffuaan.
«. 10 «ia contact tin*
b. 13 «la contact
27 em (10.5 -in) dianwtar
coliam. A/7-0. 6*'1
c. 5 nin contact tin*
d. 10 -nin contact tiata
a. 20 -via contact tiaw
3:1
Air-ToHtetar latloa
13:1 20:1
30:1
Contaminated
Hall on
tons laland (26)
101
92
52
50
29
76 en (30 ia) (Uanatar,
3 •• (10 ft) dMp
glaaa columo with 5
diffuaan, 10 -am.
contact tin«.
A/V - 0.3a-l
-------
1CCO _
= 111 llllii - i i i mm
1
02
1
CO
C
i I i i I Mil I t I I II
CL
1CO
0.001
v /
CL
STRUCTURE
Fr9unctlicn Parameters on
F-300 Granular Activated Carton
t i ffitt T i M inn i i i m MI i t i tun
0.01 ai 1.0
gQU/USfi/UM CQNCSNT3ATIGN. mg/l
Figure Z. Adsorption Isotherm for Tatracflioroetfrfiene. flefencs 20.
-------
600 ug/L and 2,500 ug/L of tetrachloroethylene from polyvinyl-toluene lined
asbestos cement pipe (3).__Two_different adsorbents were examined in 4 cm
(1.5 in) diameter glass columns. One test column contained Filtrasorb*
400 granular activated carbon and a parallel column, Ambersorb* XE-340
synthetic resin. Both columns had an 8.5 min empty bed contact time. The
granular activated carbon maintained an effluent concentration of tetrachloro-
ethylene below 0.1 ug/L for 11 weeks giving a breakthrough loading of 46.7
mg/g. Because of inclement weather, the study was stopped after 20 weeks.
At that time the resin was passing an average of 0.4 ug/L tetrachloroethylene
(Table 4). This gave an empirical loading to breakthrough of 45.6 mg/g for
the resin. Although the resin is similar to the activated carbon in loading
to breakthrough, it exhibited a relatively flat breakthrough curve. This
would suggest that the rate of contaminant movement through this resin is
slow relative to the wavefront movement through activated carbon.
TABLE 4. REMOVAL OF TETRACHLOROETHYLENE FROM DRINKING WATER BY ADSORPTION
Time in
Operation, Weeks
(bed volumes)
4 (4,700)
8 (9,400)
12 (14,100)
16 (18,800)
20 (23,500)
Influent
1367
1984
1950
906
825
Average Concentration, ug/L
Effluent
Filtrasorbw 400
Activated Carbon
< 0.1
< 0.1
0.1
0,2
2.8
Ambersorb" XE-340
Resin
< 0.1
0.1
< 0.1
0.2
0.4
Study by USEPA in Rhode Island. Empty bed contact time "8.5 min.
Approach velocity - 5m/hr (2 gal/min-ft2)
17
-------
The object!?* of a USE2AHJWRD study in Sew Jersey was to examine the
effectiveness of aeration and adsorption alone, as veil as combined. A con-
taminated veil was iateraittentiy pumped into a stainlsss scsei -ink having a
floating lid. The water was then pumped "a adsorption columns and an aerator
(Figure 4). In the non-aerated water tatrachloroethylene concentrations ranging
from 60 to 205 ug/L were reduced to less than 3.1 ug/L for 51 veeks by the
granular activated carbon (13 ain empty bed contact tise). Detectable quanti-
ties «1 ug/L) appeared in the effluent for *> veeics, then disappeared. After
53 weeks of service, the tetrachloroethylene csntrations vere still being
reduced to less than 0.1 ug/L, giving a loading of >32,500 a3/a3.
Headspaca-
Free
Storage
T
1
•••••
•
1
77
*m
4 cm
*
••
J
T
From
Well
22cm
v.».
30 cm
Air
A and D: Ambersortito XE—34O resin; 5 min. Empty Bed Contact Time (S3CT)
8 and C: Witcsrtfa 950 Granular Activated Carbon: 18 S3CT
£: Diffusad-air aerator 10 min Contact Time: 4:1 (air water)
Figure 4. Illustration of UScPA-OWRD Pilot Sca/e Treatment used at Contaminated We/I
in /Vew Jersey.
13
-------
Boiling
Tetrachloroethylene has an azaotropic boiling point of 87.7°C (37).
Table 5 shows the results of four separate boiling experiments by the
USEPA-DWRD. Different qualities of water were used; however, about 1 to
2 percent of the initial concentration of tetrachloroethylene remained
after 3 minutes of vigorous boiling.
TABLE 5. REMOVAL OF TETRACHLOROETHYLENE FROM WATER BY BOILING
Time of Boiling, Tetrachloroethylene Concentration, ug/L
min. A B C
0*
1
2
3
5
10
300
14
6
3
2
a
298 120
29 11
14 7
5 3
2 0.
<1 <1
9
2
<1
<1
a
a
* Before heating
A. Spiked Cincinnati, Ohio tap water
B. Spiked distilled water
C. Contaminated well water from Pennsylvania
19
-------
l,l,i-T2IC3LORQET3AHS
C-H^Cl, . Solubility: 4*00 ag/1 3 20°C (15); 720 ag/T. 3
----- 25°C (15)
5*97 ag/L 3 25°C (17)
Molecular Weignt: 133 • 7apor Pressure: 100 an Sg (15); 124 am Eg (15)
Threshold Odor Concentration: Henry's Law Constant: 0.17 (15); 1.2 (15)
Hot reported 4.92ziO~3 ata-ra^
aoie (^)
Soiling Point: 74.1°C
Other Names: (20,21,59)
Methylchlorofora; dloroethene; Aerothene TT; Chlorten; NC1-C0462S; alpha-
trichloroethane; «.-T; Chlorothane; Calorothene MU; Chlorochene 7G; Inhibisol;
Mechyltrlchloroaeehane; Trichloroechane
ltl,l-Irlcnloroecha&e is comnerciall/ produced by reacting chlorine
with viayl cnloride (C&i m C2C1) or acidifying viaylidene chloride (also
known a 1,1-dichloroethylene, C32 - Cdj) wish hydrochloric acid. 1,1,1-Tri-
chloroethane has replaced trichloroethylene in aany industrial and household
products. It is the principal solvent in sepcic tank degreasers, cutting
oils, inks, shoe polishes, and many other products (21,23,38). Among the
volatile organlcs found in groundwaters, 1,1,1-trlchloroethane and trichloro-
echyleae are encountered aost frequently and in the highest concentrations.
US£?A., Region III, has investigated an industrial well water situation in
Pennsylvania, in which the wells aost distant from the pollution sourca
contained trace quantities of trichloraethylene and the veils nearest the
pollution source(s) contained 1,1,1-trichloroethane. This possibly reflects
the previous change ia industrial solvent uses (39). 1,1,1-Trichloroechane
has also been identified in drinking water taken from surface sources. In
one instance, a cleaning agent containing 1,1,1-trichloroethane was being
used within the water treataent plant and the contaminants detsctad in
che finished water could have cone frao that source (-0).
-------
Aeration
NKRE (26) observed a 66 to 85 percent reduction in 1,1,1-trichloroethane
concentrations (influent concentrations of 3 to 7 ug/L) with air-to-water ratios
ranging from 5:1 to 30:1* The diffused-air aerator used in the USEPA-DWRD
study in New Jersey (see Figure 4) has consistently shown approximately 90
percent removal of 1,1,1-trichloroethane (influent concentration range of 170-
to 280 ug/L) at a 4:1 air-to-water ratio. Similarly, McCarty, ejc ml. (29)
obtained high removal efficiencies for 1,1,1-trichloroethane with both a packed
bed degasifier and an ammonia stripping tower used for advanced waste water
treatment at Water Factory 21. The influent concentrations of 1,1,1-trichloro-
ethane, however, were less than 5 ug/L.
Kelleher, £t al. (41) reported mixed results on an aeration study in Norwood,
Massachusetts. They used a 10 cm (4 in) diameter glass column packed with glass
raschig rings to a depth of 63 cm (25 in). Compressed air was blown up through
the packing material as contaminated water trickled downward. On Well 14 (see
Table 6) the removal ranged from 74 to 97 percent, for a broad spectrum of aer-
ation conditions, whereas on Well #3, the removal was poorer. This difference
could not be explained.
TABLE 6. REMOVAL OF 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE FROM DRINKING WATER
USING A PILOT SCALE FORCED DRAFT PACKED TOWER (41)
Effluent Concentration of 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, ug/L
Range of Air-to- Water Ratios
Source
Well
Well
#3
Influent
Concentration
ug/L
110
90
42
850
1200
630
1:1 to 10:1
10
8
46?
387
11:1 to 20:1
10
4
410
210
21:1 to 50:1
13
3
220
350
>50:1
5
49"
-------
Adsorption
Doha* and Cohen (30) developed an adsorption isothera for 1,1,1-tri-
chloroethane C?igurs 5). tlsing_ this isothara, the calculated capacity for
an original 100 ug/L concentration of 1,1,1-trichloroethane on Tiitrasorb3
300 is 1.1 mg/g. In a full scale study at a water treataent plant in Florida,
Ervin and Singiey (42) found no difference in she perforaance of four powdered
activated carbons (pulverized Calgon G7; 2uskey Watercarb9 Plus; ICI Hydro—
darco9 3; and Weatvaco Aqua Suchar9 II) to r«aove L,l,l—crlcaloroechane.
Ac doses of approximately 7 mg/L and with 2 hours of contact tiae, powdered
activated carbon effected at best 15- to 20 percent reaoval of i,l,i-tri-
chloroethane (influent concentration IS ug/L) (31,6-2).
Figure 5 illustrates some of the USEPA-DWRD results from pilot scale
adsorption projects. .The amount of contaminant varies as well as the type
of adsorbent; however, Che length of service to breakthrough for the granular
activated carbon ranged from 12,000 to 13,000 np/ar*. Expressed as a
contaminant loading, the activated carbon adsorbed from 0.02 to 7.5 ag/g.
In the New Jersey study» the activated carbon receiving aerated water (average
1,1,1-trlchloroethane concentration reduced from 237 ug/L to 23 ug/L by
aeration) produced an effluent with no detectable 1,1,1-trichloroethane
during the 53 week-long study. This resulted in an empirical loading of at
least 1.9 ag/g and a length of service greater than 32,000
-------
100
i
t
i i i mil i > Minn i | limn I i llllt
Cl H
Cl— C — C— -H
I I
Cl H
STRUCTURE
Freundlich Parameters on
f -300 Granular Activated Carbon
1/n*0.34
0.1 i i i LLlilL i iiium i i i i inn i it Mm
0.001
0.01 0.1 1.0
EQUILIBRIUM CONCENTRATION, my//
10
Rgura 5. Adsorption Isotherm for 1,1,1-Trichtoroethane. Reference 30.
-------
400
3CO
2CQ
100
W-3SQ S3CT •
S3CT *
lnflu«nr-
il ,
(W-S6Q) 0
(XE-34O) Q
10
(56001
120.180)
20
(11.200)
(40.320)
30
(18.300)
(60.4«0)
TJMS IN S&tVlCS.
I22.JCO)
(80.8401
Votomni
SO 30
;23.CCO) (33.500)
CC0.3COJ (120.S«C)
SO
20
Ground Watt
Itttmr urttioni
(W-980) 0
'XE-34Q1 0
10 20 30 JO 50 50
(5600) (11.200) (19.300) (22.400) (23.000) 133.300)
(20.190) (40.320) (60.^0) ,80.540) (100.300)
'.v
Figure 5. fiemovaJ of 7.1.1 -Tricn/oroetrare on Srsnuiar Jc
Carson and Polymeric Pesin.
-------
I
I
10
0w® f ®«M;
CaHtuetieut Grtur* Wmtr
Empty Mri Cwma nm««(
0
a
10
m
20 30 40 10 10*
03.730) (38380) (47.438) (SUOO) (121340)
OS
Of
oa
1000- 1OOOO 1&000 3OOOO
tfD VOWMtS.
30AX)
-------
Kalleher, e£ al. (*D conducted a »orptian experiaents at a contami-
nated 9*11 site in Xassachuaatts. They used four 10 ea (•* ia) diameter
glass columns, each contaiaing_ 60 ca (2 ft} of Filtrasorb5 400 granular
activated carbon, for a total adsorbent depth of 2.5 a (3 ft). These
were operated in series to assess the effects of contact tlae. Tiae to
breakthrough was not reported. The loadings to reach 3 ug/L of 1,1,1-tri-
chloroethane ia the effluent from an applied 100 ug/L concentration,
were 0.25 ag/g, 0.51 ag/g, and 0.74 ag/g for contact tinea of 7.5 aia,
15 ain, and 22.5 aia. respectively. These results are Included ia the
suamary portion of Figure 6. The total organic carbon (TOO concentration
v»s over 2 ag/L ia the Massachusetts water yet less than 0.5 ag/L ia the
Connecticut and New Hampshire Hater. This aay account for differences ia
performance.
Xeeley and Isacoff (32) and Isacofi and Sitraer (»3) compared Amber-
sorb9 JS-340 resin to Filtrasorb® 400 granular activated carbon for
removing 1,1,1-trichloroethane from a Sew Jersey well water. The
experiment was conducted using 5 ca long columns (containing 15 cc of
adsorbent) and water shipped to their laboratory from the contaminated
well. Ac 270 liters per aiaute per cubic aat*r (2 gpm/ft^) loading
rate (3-7 ain empty bed contact time), 1,1,1-trichloroe thane (average
applied concentration of 450 ug/L) broke through both adsorbents between
5,000 and 6,000 a^/m^. This produces a loading of approximately 1.7
A difference in adsorbent behavior was seen aztar contamioant break-
through. The granular activated carbon steadily became "exhausted while
the resin continued to remove a large percentage of the solvent. Rather
than having a incisive slope like the granular activated carbon, che
-------
slope of the breakthrough curve for the resin la gradual. Using the s<
contaminated source .la Hew Jersey, the OSEPA-DWRD found with its pilot
scale operation (Figure 4), that XE-340* removed 1,1,1-trichloroethane
(average applied concentration of 237 ug/L) for almost 111,000 m3/m3. Why
the service life found in the field study was so much longer than the service
life predicted from the Rohm and Haas laboratory study cannot be explained.
In the DSEPA-DWRD New Jersey study, a column containing Ambersorb*
XE-340 but receiving aerated water (See Figure 4) with an average 1,1,1-
trichloroethane concentration of 23 ug/L, had no detectable quantities
of the solvent in the effluent after 58 weeks, corresponding to a loading
of greater than 120,000 m3/*3.
In an earlier USEPA-DWRD project in Connecticut, a column containing
Ambersorb9 XE-340 (9-ialn empty bed contact time) was sampled weekly for one
year then resampled one year later. Breakthrough was evident at the end of
the first year (56,000 m3/m3)» but the adsorbent was not exhausted even at
the end of the second year.
Boiling
• Lataille (34) found that depending on the depth of water in the
pan, 1 to 20 percent of the initial 1,1,1-trichloroethane concentration
remained after 5 minutes of boiling. Similarly, personnel in the Rhode
Island State Health Laboratories (44) found an average of 2 percent of
the starting 1,1,1-trichloroethane concentration remained after 5 minutes
of boiling contaminated drinking water samples (Table 7).
27
-------
?*"-* 7. REMOVAL CF 1,1,1-TRlCHLOROETEANE DRINKING FROM WATER 3Y SOZLTIG
liae of boiling,
Water Saaple — airr.
Laxlagcon, MA*
Tap -Atar "spiked" (before
with 1,1,1-tricalo roe thane
Contaminated
Drinking Wacar (before
ia Hhoda Island
0
heating)
3
0
heating)
5
Concentration, ug/"L
680 ' 1350
3 23
37**
1**
2700 1900
35 5a,270,360c
* After Lacaille (34)
a. Water deoth - 2 ca
a. Water depth * 5 ca
c. Water depth » 11 cm
"Average of 12 testa vith water having 1,1,1-trichloroethane concentrations
ranging from 2 to 156 ug/L. After Refarsnce !>•*.
-------
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CC14
Molecular Weight: 153.8 " " "" Solubility: 800 mg/L
-------
.a «•*
a
si
It
OG
T7T . ? f
rc^OQ a 6
2
«
S
a-
-a
u
3
-5 c? 3
1/Sn •tt'eC-X-W^
-------
concentration of this contaminant In the untreated water urns 16.3 ug/L and
In the treated water, 16.0 ug/L, Indicating no net removal resulted from
powdered activated carbon addition (2 to 4 mg/L), coagulation, settling,
and filtration. Laboratory studies by the USEFA-DWRD that showed aeration
with the diffused air aerator described on page 5 and also in Table 1, (4:1
air-to-water ratio) could remove 91 percent of the carbon tetrachloride (13)
and powdered activated carbon was largely ineffective, as doses up to 30
mg/L removed only about 10 percent of this contaminant. Lykins and DeMarco
(49) reviewed the treatment data generated by another water utility using
the Ohio River during this period and concluded that consistent removals of
carbon tetrachloride were not obtained with powdered activated carbon, as
differences could have been attributed to analytical variation.
Dobbs and Cohen (30) and Weber (SO) have developed adsorption Isotherms
for carbon tetrachloride using different protocols and different types of
granular activated carbon (Figure 8). From these isotherm studies, it has
been determined that the calculated capacity for carbon tetrachloride on
activated carbon, for an equilibrium concentration of 100 ug/L, is between
1.6 mg/g and 7.0 mg/g. It is not known whether this range reflects true
differences in adsorbents or simply differences in Isotherm technique.
Symons (51) reported on the behavior of carbon tetrachloride in water
applied to pilot scale adsorbers containing Flltrasorb* 400 granular acti-
vated carbon. Two adsorbers, one with 5 min and the other with 10-nd.n empty
bed contact times, had been exposed to Cincinnati, Ohio tap water for 18
weeks when carbon tetrachloride was detected in the influent water. The
31
-------
100
§
ea
«r
3
X
S
03.
§
i
1.0
I I t » t I i *
. After Weoer. (SO '
(Unauiverrted Acijvatad
.4
^
4/ter Oooos and Csnen. (2Q) -
(Putverizsd Aczr/ated Carson)
Frsundlich Parameters on
F-3CO Granular Activated Carton
K » ;;.;
1/n » 0.33
I ( f ? T I I
I t I t t ' t t ' _ t t f I | t I t I _ t I '..'?''.!_
acoT
1.0
SQU1UB WUM CONCENTRATION, mg/l
10
Rgur» 3. Adsorption Isatfierms for Carton TetracnJorida
-------
.^Cincinnati Tap Watar
Oct. Atov. OK. Jut. Fab. Mar. April May Juna
'Ftgur* 9. Desorption of Carbon Tetrach/oride from Granular Activated Carbon
and Polymeric Resin
33
-------
aean concentration of the contaminant in the water was 12 ug/L, -which a
removed to less than- 0.1 ug/L for 3 veeks by the activated carbon vith 5 oia
contact time and between 1* and 16 weeks by the activated carbon with 10 ain
contact tiae. This corresponds to an eapirieal loading range of approximately
6,000 and 14,000 a3/^, respectively .
In the Tali, 1976, three granular activated carbons aanufacturad in
"ranee were also being exposed to tap water in the USZPA-DVTRD laboratory in
Cincinnati. Tso of the aaterials, PICA-*. and PICA-3, behaved similarly to
the ?iitrasorb®400 , but the third, PICA-C, had no capacity for carbon
tetrachloride* Further, ?ICA~C had no capacity for total organic carbon
or for trihalomethanes (31), leading the investigators to suspect the aatarial
vas either poorly activated or noc activated at all.
Symons, _et_ al . (13) reported Amfaersorb3 IS-340 reaoved carbon tecra-
' chloride from Cincinnati, Ohio drinking vater for about the same length of
Cia» as the granular activated carbon did. Although the length of service
to breakthrough was similar to that for granular activated carbon, the
shape of the adsorption and desorption corves vera quite different. For
activated carbon, desorptitm is evident when influent concentrations of the
contaminant decline, the resin, on the other hand, shows some desorption
buc auch less than the granular- activated carbon (Figure 9).
Table 8 lists some results of boiling vater contaminated by carbon tatra-
chloride. About 1 percent or less remains after 5 ainutes of vigorous boiling.
-------
TABLE 8. REMOVAL OF CARBON TETRACHLORIDE FROM DRINKING WATER BY BOILING
SAMPLE Time of Boiling, «in Concentration, ug/L
USEPA-DVRD 0 (before heating) 30
Cincinnati, Ohio
(tap water) 5 <0.1
Rhode Island 0 (before heating) 188
State Health Department (44)
(tap water) 5 2
35
-------
Cis-1,2-DICHLOROETSZLINE
cac. • cica
.Molecular Weight: 36.9 Solubility: 3500 ag/L 3 253C (13)
Threshold Odor Concentration: Mot Xaporcad 7apor ?rassura: 206 am Eg (15)
Boiling Point: 50.3°C Henry's Law Constant: 0.31 (15)
Other Manas: (20,21)
cis-acetylene dichloride; cis-l,2-dichloroec:iene; SC1-C51531
This isoner of dichioroethylene is used as a solvent and a faraentation
retardant (20).
Aeration
The engineering firm, 3X3Z, (25) aeratsd v«ll wacer containing 13 ug/L
to 118 ug/L (average 58 ug/L) of cis-l,2-dichloroethylene and found the.
average removal was 58 percent at an air-to-water ratio of 5:1. The removal
could be increased to 85 percent ac a 30tl air-to-vater ratio. In a USZPA-
*
DWRD aeration study in Hew Jersey, 80 percent removal of this contaminant
was observed ac as air-to—water "ratio of 4:1 and 10 tain contact time. The
diffused-air aeration devices- used in both the above studies are described in
Table 1, page 6.
Adsorption
An adsorption isotherm could not be found for cis-1,2—dichloroethyisne;
however, Dobbs and Cohen (30) developed :hat information for :he other isomer,
trans—1,2-dichloroethylene. That data is presented in Figure 10. Assuming
the rro isomers behave siailarily on activated carbon, the estimated adsorp-
tion capacity for the solvent at an equilibrium concentration of 100 ug/L is
0.9 mg/g. The empirical results from cvo USEPA-DWSL studies in 3ew England
("igure 11) compare favorably vith chose predicted by chi3 isothera data.
Tor a:caapia, ac one Mtilicy in Maw Hampshire, :r.e cis-l.I-dichlorsechayiar**
26
-------
100
|
H
.Of
C\
H
10
STRUCTURE
1.0
0.1
I • • • • I
Freundtich Parameters on
F-300 Granular Activated Carbon
1/n*0.51
t » I I I I III I I t I 11 III I
0.001
0.01
0.1
1.0
10
EQUILIBRIUM CONCENTRATION, mg/l
Rgura 10. Adsorption Isotherm for Trans-1.2-Oichtoroethylene. Reference 30.
37
-------
m M»w Htfrmsntr* Grouna
f/npry 3te Cartua Tim* * 9 min
0 10 20 30 40 50 104
(0) (11.380) (23.720) (25.530) (47.435) (53.200) !123.240)
T?MS 'N SSHVICS. «*•««
3»a Vaiurrest
Rgure 11. Removal yf Cis-1,2-Qicnloroetnyiena jy Adsorption on
Activated Carson ana Por/menc P.esin.
33
-------
averaged 6 ug/L In the water applied to the pilot scale adsorber and the
capacity for the activated carbon at exhaustion was identical to the pre-
dicted value, 0.2 mg/g. At the other site in Connecticut, the average
concentration of cis-l,2-dichloroethylene was 2 ug/L, and the predicted
and actual capacities were both 0.1 mg/g for the activated carbon. Companion
adsorbers containing Ambersorb* ZE-340 resin maintained an effluent concentra-
tion of cis-l,2-dichloroetheylene below detection for more than one year
but less than 2 years (> 5.4 «g/g loading) at the Connecticut site.
Hood and DeMarco (35) evaluated Filtrasorb* 400 granular activated
carbon, Ambersorb* ZE-340 resin, and Amberlite* I&A-904 anion exchange
resin on the organic laden groundwater in Miami, Florida. Cis-lt2-dichloro-
ethylene was one of the major contaminants in the untreated water and its
•
concentration remained unchanged after lime softening and filtration.
Pilot scale adsorbers [2.5 cm (1 in) diameter glass columns] were placed on
flow streams of raw, lime softened, and chlorinated filtered water. In the
untreated (raw) water, the average concentration of cis-l,2-dichloroethylene
was 25 ug/L, and this was detected in the effluent from the activated carbon
between 2 and 3 weeks (0.3 mg/g loading). The ZE-340 lasted approximately
9 weeks (0.7 mg/g loading), and the anion exchange resin did not remove any
of the contaminant. The effects of placing the adsorbents at other locations
within the treatment plant are shown in Table 9. The ZE-340 performed better
on the raw water than on the treated water, which may indicate how the high
pH of lime softening affects capacity. NKRE (26) reported a uniform loading
to breakthrough on ZE-340 for a 2 and 4 tain contact time. For some
unexplained reason, however, the loading declined when a longer contact time
(7.5 min) was used (Table 9).
39
-------
IA3LZ 9. 3210VAL OF Cia-1,2—3IC2LCROETHZL2SE 3Y ADSORPTION
^^ j-sisr
»U=rm«ort* 400
9ft 7W *MlOg
23
on ;il:*nd
mc«r 13
U2 >7.QOO
i 60 14,400
S 30 7.200
4 43 11,300
6 .tec •ifacciT*
JT C25)J
2 *a 37,:oo
4 102 39.300
7.3 102 19,700
chrauza*
^*/f*
3.3
3.2
0.3
>0.3
0.7
0.3
0.4
1.7
1.3
0.9
ar aoc« ia cffluaac
-------
Boiling
Two samples of well water-from Pennsylvania, having cis-l,2-dichloro-
ethylene as one of the contaminants, were boiled for varying times by the
DSEPA-DWRD in Cincinnati and then analyzed. The results, given in Table
10, show 5 tain of vigorous boiling reduced the contaminant level to 5 ug/L or
less.
TABLE 10. REMOVAL OF Cis-1,2-DICHLOROETHYLENE FROM WATER* BY BOILING
Tine of Boilng, min.
0 (before heating)
1
2
3
5
10
Concentration, ug/L
Sample 1
739
168
51
31
14
<1
Sample 2
153
43
34
34
20
5
*Contaainanted well water from Pennsylvania. Study by USEPA, Drinking
Water Research Division, Cincinnati, OH, 1979. Water depth approximately
8 cm.
41
-------
C3LORIDE
C2^ - CHC. -.- -- Solubility: 50 ag/1 1 10°C (15,15)
Molecular Weight: 62.5 Vapor Pressure: 2560 an Eg (15)
Threshold Odor Concentration: Henry's Law Cons cant: 50 (15); 201 (15)
Hoc H-eportad
Soiling Point: -14°C 5.4 ao-a-
aoie <29>
Other Manes: (20, .21, 59)
Chloroechylene; Chloroechene; Chloretheae; Zthylane, Chlara-; Sthylaae
aonochloride; Monochloroethene; aonochloroethylene; 7d; 7inyi C aonomer
7inyl chloride is commonly produced by reacting chlorine gas with
ethylene (C3? " ^2) (52). Billions of kilograms of this solvent ars used
annually in the United States to produce polyvinyl chloride (?VC), the aost
widely used ingredient for aanufacturing plastics throughout the world (50).
la 1973, Oressaan and McTarren (61) conducted pilot plant tests on ?VC pipe.
They sampled five water distribution systems that used ?VC pipe and found
vinyl chloride concentrations in the water ranged from 0.7 to 55 ug/L. They
concluded the viayl chloride contamination levels were related to the vinyl
chloride aonomer residual in the pipe, and whether or not the water flowed
continuously or sat idle for long periods. The authors pointed out, however,
that producers of ?VC pipe claiaed that changes recently aade in the aanufac-
turing process lowered residual aouomer ia the pipe and thus lessened vinyl
chloride expected to leach into drinking water front new ?VC pipe. If vinyl
chloride therefore, is detected only in the distribution system (absent in
the raw water), piping aaterials aay be the source.
Special precautions are necessary to sample and analyze for vinyl
chloride because of its low boiling point (high volatility). Unlike rri-
shloroechyiene, for «anpia, Tisyl chloride vouii sscsoe decaccisr. in a
-------
routine analysis for tribalomethanes. For this reason, little definitive
occurrence or treatment information exists on this contaminant in drinking
water. Furthermore, few laboratories are equipped for experimentation
with carcinogens, so treatment information will probably have to be developed
at sites where vinyl chloride is detected.
One such site is a groundwater location in Southern Florida. Vinyl
chloride was detected intermittently in this source and the average concen-
tration reduction for this contaminant through the lime softening basins
and filters was 25 to 52 percent (35). These losses were, likely, to the
atmosphere around the open basins. Finished water from the treatment
plant was routed to four pilot-scale granular activated carbon columns
connected in series.' Each column contained 76-cm (30-in) of Filtrasorb*
400 activated carbon and the empty bed contact time was approximately 6
minutes per column. Vinyl chloride concentrations in the influent ranged
from below-detection to 19 ug/L, and adsorption on the activated carbon
was erratic. For example, to maintain an effluent concentration of vinyl
chloride below 0.5 ug/L, the estimated activated carbon loading was 810-,
1250-, 2760-, and 2050 m3/*3 for empty bed contact times of 6-, 12-,
19-, and 25 minutes, respectively (35, 51). Similarly, vinyl chloide was
reported to be poorly removed on Ambersorb XE-340 synthetic resin (51).
Because of its high volatility, vinyl chloride should effectively be removed
by aeration.
A3
-------
1,2-DICHLOROETHASE
Molecular Weight: 99
Threshold Odor Concentration:
2000 ag/L (18,19)
Soiling Point: 33°C
Other aaaes: (20,21,59)
Solubility: 3700 ag/L 3 25°G (15,15)
Vapor Pressure: 32 an 2g (15,15)
Henry's Law Constant: 0.05 (15.15)
sole
(17)
1,2-dichlorethane; 3orer Sol; 3rocide; Sestrasol 3or«r-5ol; Dichlore-
aulsion; 3i-Chioro-£ulsion; dichloroethane; Alpha, beca-Olchloroethaae;
Dichioroethylene; Dutch liquid; 23C; Z3? 1,555; ethane dichloride; echylene
chloride; ethylane dichlorid*; gylcol dichlaride; HC1-C00511; Acacylene dichloride;
Diofora
1,2-Dichloroethaae is used as a solvent for fats, oils, vases, guns, and
resins (20).
Aeration
This contaminant is not as easily removed from water by aeration as the
previously discussed solvents. For example, Symons, ec al.- (13) reported an
air-to-water ratio of 4:1 removed only 40 percent of th* 1,2-dichloroethane- from
contaminated veil water in. Sew Jersey.
Adsoration
Dobbs and Cohen (30) developed, an adsorption isotherm (Figure: 12) for 1,2-di-
chloroechane on Filtrasorb3 300 granular activated carbon. From that data, the
estiaated capaciry at an equilibrium concentration of ICO ug/L is approxiaatsly
0.5 mg/g. In a USEPA-DWRD study in New Jersey, Vitcarb9 950 granular activated
carbon maintained an effluent concentration of 1,2-dichloroethane below 0.1
ug/L (influent concentration averaged 1.4 ug/L) for 31 veeics vhich yields a load-
ing of approximately 0.1 ag/g (17,400 a^/m^) £a breakthrough. Ambersorb3 IE-3iO
rssin showed breakthrough after 54 veeks of service, a loading at approxiaately
0.3 3g/j (103,360 a3 '^).
-------
10.0
1
s
I
I
1.0*
0.1
0.001
CI Cl
I I
H — C — C — H
STRUCTURE
Freundlich Parameters on
F-3QO Granular Activated Carbon
K»3.57
1Sn*0.83
i i t 1 1 n t
t r > i tn
t » 1 1 M
t i
0.01
0.10
1.0
10.0
EQUILIBRIUM CONCENTRATION, mg/l
figure 12. AdsorptionJsotherm for 1.2 -Dichloroethane. Reference 30.
45
-------
la a study by Deiiarco, ££ al . (24), and DeMarco and 3rodtaan (53) in.
Louisiana, 1,2-dichlo roe thane (average concentration of 3 ug/I.) was not.
removed by conventional coagulation and filtration but was removed :o less
than 0.1 ug/1 for 39 days (1723 a3/a3) through a full scale adsorber contain-
ing 76-ca (30-i'n) of TJestvaco V7-G granular activated carbon (20-ain 23CT).
I
DISCTSSION AND
Trichloroethylene, tetrachloraethylene, 1,1,1-trichlcroethar.e, carbon
tetrachloride, cis-i,2-dichloroethyiene, and 1,2-dichioroethane are solvents
found in drinking water. Some of their properties are shown in Table 11.
Because of their volatility, they are seldom detected in high concentrations
in surface water except during periods when rivers, susceptible to contam-
ination, have as ice cover. Ground waters in the eastern United States
(along the Atlantic Coast and particularly in New England) and in California
are increasingly showing contamination by these solvents. The scope of this
problem is likely to grow as monitoring improves.
These contaminants do noc occur naturally nor are they produced as signi
ficant chlorination byproducts during disinfection. Carbon tetrachloride
can be a contaminant in chlorine; however,, pending improvements in chlorine
specifications say help eliminate that source. Tetrachloroethylene can be
leached from polyvinyl-toluene lined asbestos cement pipe; trichloroethylene
has been traced to certain adhesives used to join reservoir liners; and,
vinyl chloride has been shown to leach from ?VC pipe manufactured prior to
1977. All of these possible sources should be examined if solvent contami-
nation is discovered only in the distribution system. The occurrence of
these contaminants in the source water can generally be related to a near-by
practice such as degreasing and ground discharge of wastes.
-------
i "
.a
S
a
B
i
£
s:
§
§
?
i
$
s
>
H
2
i
•
*H
»"4
M
S
-5
SI
^H
*
i
-
*,
*
a
<-•
"
* *
M t>
M
-
S
«4
L
s
i
i i,
• X
2 g
1
i
j,
a
i ,
M
!
1 2 si 5
1 S o ss i « s
S S I 3 8 Sg f g 8
i *
S 5
~ <• -• •?
s 5 = fe 5 . «
t*. ** i 22 r88
3 * s ! e ~ * a
— k
« s. « a
C- S s - a
S ^ ** "3 S
" 2 S § I -. 2
•»««- •• asj
S 8 0. | S e- §SS
• " *»*» « T»
32 2 5
^ *»-. «-»* "3 S *»
*
- c sc St. • a « «
" ^^ ^^ • • • *• ^i «
5 ^ s §5 | - - 2 a
•* •» « *
2^1
f _ C 3 **
• ^ fa *•
S 3 S I i - -
- o J 8 8 5 - 5 2 S
R - - 1 S 2 2 -
M
R S.^ 82 t -
C «•« ***» "S 2 -
„ SC - -« ". - « ~.
, 5 s Si = JJ * 1 S s
p4 **
A 2i? M m
a ^-. ss b 5
** 22 ••> *" s . 2
i* « -s *.•*. *: "* * S
s s c |S s ee s is8
" M *» **.
.. •»
» i C
-• y - s Js ? s
f < i « ^ 1* \ 31 £ *J s "s
Hi BlBiHlli!
Is s h I ^ £ *
•
s
•s
1
w
5
•
*
§
•
i
««
s
•
•
>
•
o
I
•
»
«*
•
a
M
O
§
g
«4
M
•
47
-------
CS25A—DWSD has found several of chase sol-rents preseac when a graundwater
is found Co be contaminated. For example, trichioroethylene ar catrachloro-
ethylene aay be present in the highest concentrations, but leaser quantities
of related solvents are also present. One reason for this aight be related to
solvent purler. la the manufacturing of these solvents, the end-product depends
on the temperature, degree of acidification, and chloriaation, so a. commercial
grade solvent aight have varying amounts of several related compounds, Figure
12. Another reason for the presence of a variety of solvents in one location
aight be biological degradation of a parent compound ia the ground. When
solvent contamination is suspected, a thorough analysis for volatile organics
should be aade so the moat effective treatment aethod can be selected.
Laboratory and field experimentation have shown air stripping can be a
successful aeans of lowering the concentration of most of these contaminants
in drinking water. In an 2PA-WBD experiment, tap water samples spiked with
trichloroethlene and tetrachloroethylene alone, and a combination of the tvo
solvents were aerated. So significant difference was observed ia the effici-
ency of removal of the individual solvents, whether they were alone or combined.
•
This is important because mixtures of solvents exist in contaminated water and
even though the- effectiveness of the process- varies for each solvent, aerating
to remove one specific contaminant will also reduce the concentrations of the
others. A typical example of this is given in Table 12. Assuming aeration is
employed to remove tetrachloroethylene, the principal target along with concen-
trations of the other solvents are reduced. In this illustration, if the concsn-
trations are siaply added, the water contains approximately 460 ug/L of volatile
organics before aeration and 40 ug/L afterwards, for about 92 percent overall
removal efficiency.
-------
j
CJUI
i!
"I
V
1
1
5*
HLORIOE
CHCI=CHCI
1 .2-DICHLOROETHYLENE
i
1
!
s;
$
tu
"s
" o u
CCI,
BON TETRAC
I
1
i
-------
7A3L2 12. iFrlCTS CF ASUTION ON A 50L7ZST CONTAMIXASD
1, l-Dichlaroethylece
1 4 * » "" -T-iehlors-thaae
Tfttrachioroethylene.
Trichloroethylene
cis-1, 2-Dichioroethylane
1,1-Dichioroethane
1, 2-Dichloroe taane
Before Aeration
122
237
94
3
0.5
5
1-4
After Aeration**
4
23
9
0.4
<0.1
1
0.3
Removal
97
90
90
37
>80
83
42
5.2 :i5).
•* ^ '- S \
1.1 (15 1=
0.3 (15,15
0.31 (15)
0.24 (15)
0.05 (15,1
*USZ?A-DWRD study ia Sew Jersey
**Diifused-air aeration, 10 mia. contact; *
4:1 (vol to vol) air to water; Area to Volume " 0.3m~-
-------
Henry's Law constant is useful in estimating whether or not aeration
should'be considered (29), and Figures 14, 15 and 16, and Table 13 compare
empirical data with a theoretical optimum removal.* Singley, e£ al. (56)
have recently concluded that the mass transfer coefficient for volatile
compounds is important in Judging _a priori the effectiveness of aeration,
and that these coefficients are needed for designing full-scale stripping
columns and have to be developed on-site. Future USEPA-DWRD aeration studies
will include.development of design information.
There is a question of whether or not the off-masses create a problem
with aeration. In one USEPA-DWRD sponsored aeration project (26), the prin-
cipal investigator sampled for volatile solvents in the off-gasses near the
top of the aerator and identified trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene,
1,1,1-trichloreothene, and 1,2-dichloroethane. The mean concentrations were
201 , 85 , 30 -, and 22 ug/L, respectively. This air sampling program is
continuing but the likelyhood of creating an air pollution problem by aerating
solvent contimanted drinking water is remote given existing air quality
standards.
Adsorption also has varying degrees of effectiveness. Figure 17 summar-
izes the isotherm data developed by Dobbs and Cohen (30) and, for purposes
of illustration, adsorption capacities for two different concentrations of
each solvent are shown in Table 14. For perspective, the capacities for
chloroform and broooform are also shown. Note, cis-1,2-dichloroethylene
isotherm data were not available, but assuming it might behave like the
other isomer, the trans-l,2-dichloroethylene information was included. An
isotherm for vinyl chloride has not been reported.
*This optimum removal curve was developed using the reciprocal of the Henry's
Law constants given in Reference 16. An explanation of this concept is given
in Reference 57.
51
-------
Oiffus»d**ir. US&A-OWRO
ir. NKRS (25.26}
fe ftAA £(3pS *flX •2E9«L«U3AC^5&
cai Opo'muat Psrrormane
Kour. 14 -
r,gur« ,*.
fram Znnxing
S"
;v Airman.
-------
100.
10.
I
0.1
0.01
Theoretic*!
Optimum
Performance*
1.1,1-Trichloroethene
(methyl chloroform)
0.1:1 1:1 10:1 T00:1
AIR TO WATER RATIO
1000:1
%Diffused-air. USEPA-DWRD
• Diffused-eir. NKFtE (25.26)
A Pecked Tower. Kelleher. et el (41)
100.
I ia
UJ
oe.
u
c
1.
0.1
0.01
Theoretical Optimum Performence *
Carbon Tetrechloride
0.1:1 1:1 10:1 100:1
AIR TO WATER RATIO
1000:1
Figure IS. Comperison of Actual and Theoretical Removal of 1.1.1-Trichloroethane and
Carbon Tetrachloride from Drinking Water by Aeration.
53
-------
ICO
i
§
10
0.1
0.01
Tftaarsacai
Optimum
1:1 10:T 100:1
AIR TO WATER RATIO
1000:1
Diffusad-air. USSPA-OWRO
' Offfusad-a/r. NKZ£(25.25)
100
10
•**
ce r.
IU
u
or
VU
e.
at -
0.01
Theorso'caJ
Optimum
Performanca *
7.2'Oichionathane
1:1 10:1 100:1
AIR TC WATc?. 3ATIO
1CCO:1
5. Csmcanson zf ~c:xai snc ~'^scrs::c3i ssmovst ;f ^s-'.2-2icr.i
and 1.2-Gicnicr?etnana r'rsm Zr.nxir.g /Vsrsr zy ^ersticn.
-------
55
-------
M.I* t ! I f » t Itl
O.C001
acot 0.01 O.T
SQU/USfifUM CONCENTRATION. mg/I
1.0
Ffgurw "\7. Comparison of Adsorption Isotherms. Referents 30.
-------
TAUT* 14. ACTIVATED CARBON EQUILIBRIUM ADSORPTION CAPACITITES* FOR
• TRICHLORpETHYLENE AND RELATED SOLVENTS
Adsorption Capacity, mg/g
Contaminant Equilibrium Concentration Equilibrium Concentration
1000 ug/L 100 ug/L
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
i, i, ITTRICHLOROETHANE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
TRANS-1, 2-DICHLOROETHILENE**
1 , 2-DICHLOROETHANE
CHLOROFORM*
BROMDFORMt
28
51
2
10
3
4
3
20
7
14
1
2
1
<1
<1
6
*Taken from Dobbs and Cohen, 1980
**Ci8-l,2-Dichloroethyl«ne data not available.
^Added for perspective
Vinyl chloride adsorption capacity data not available.
57
-------
Tae following technique was usea to estisate carbon usage for the
contaminant concentrations shown in Table 15. First, two ratios wera
established far each contaminant; a) that becseea capacity at sxzaustian
observed from field studies divided ay theoretical capacity determined from
isotherm data, and b) that between capacity at actual breakthrough and
capacity at exhaustion (Table 13). Isotherm capacities at the given zantaa-
iaant concentrations (1COO, 100, 10, and 1 ug/L) vere then multiplied by
ratio "a" to give an estiaated activated carbon -.isage to exhaustion, and
that value ?%s then divided by ratio "V to give an estiaated activated
carbon usage to breakthrough. 3y plotting these rvo values on sesilog paper,
carbon usage for interaediate «fflueat concentrations vas estiaated froa
the graph.
Tor example, assume a pilot—scale study on a water containing an
average concentration of 1,1,1-crichloroethane of 210 ug/L showed the acti-
vated carbon usage to breakthrough (0.1 ug/L) was 7,400 arVm3 (2,250 gal/lb)
and to exhaustion, 13,200 m^/m3 (4^000 gal/lb). This yields an exhaustion-
to-breakthrough ratio of 13,200/7,400 or 1.3. From the isotherm data ia
Reference 30, the equilibrium capacity (I/M) is 1.46 ag/g, which corresponds
to a theoretical activated carbon usage of 2,750 a3/a3 (830 gal/lb). This
yields an actual-to-theoretical activated carbon usage ratio of 13,200/2,750
or 4.3. Thus, for a given influent concentration of 1,000 ug/L, the esti-
aated activated carbon usage to exhaustion would be 4,300 a-Vm^ (1,450
gal/lb - 300 gal/lb x 4.3) and to breakthrough, 2,570 a3/a3 (300 gal/lb -
1,450/1.3). The activated carbon usage for intermediate effluent concentr-
ations qan then be determined from Figure 13. The range of estiaated carbon
usage shown ia Table 15 is extremely wide for certain contaminant concentra-
tions, so an-sita pilot scald sxserinestation vould 34 prudent L: traazaer.t
-------
T4«tT» IS. ABSQBPTXQH OF TH1CHLORQETHILEHE ABD RELATED SOLVENTS
BX GRAHBLAR ACTIVATED CABBOH, SUMMABX
*»«•
w/t
•Cft)
j_2*tf c*!S5i37*
*"~ "r^ft—rlnn **/•*
VvV \flwwv
0.1 (2.9)
0.1 (2.9)
0.8 (2.9)
0^ (2J)
0.1(2)
U2 (*)
Ul (1)
0.1 (2.9)
0.1 (2.9)
0.8 (2.9)
0.1 (2.9)
OU (2.9)
0.1 (2.9)
0.1(2.9)
W (9)
2.3 (7 .9)
OU (2.9)
0.1 (2J)
0^-(2.3)
1.5(9)
2.3 (7.5).
3.1 (10)
a • (2^51
U.* V •• *l
0.1 (2.9)
0.1 (2.3)
0.9 (3)
Ul («)
2.7 (9)
3.1 (U)
0.1 (2.5)
fl.7 (2.4) _
mm — —
9
8.3
11
IS
f
11
U
8O
9
TJ.
IS
22.5
U
U
8.5
9
1O
3
1
12
11
9
U
*•
17
U
25*
U
11
U
22.
33
44
17.5
17
--^ZI-^— ^^^^a^^^^^™*
>20.UO
H0.900 tac 023.340
>».»
>32OOO .
12.300
m^l^^r^
>32.300
>32.900
>«0.900 ktf <123.340
>20.UO
*.»!
2.700J
r,90ot
19.700
>32.300
11.WO
11.400
14.000
*,050
4.100
7.100
1,100
14,200
29.100
no
1.250
t.wo
2.050
1TDO
.****
17.400
>32.300
3^00
3,400
4090
>7^JOO
2.300
2.500
- "
>20.1M
>123.340
>»^oo
>32.900
33.100
**•* • ~^
>32^00
>32.300
>U3.340
>20OM
MC r«port*4
aacnvortod
•otroaorcoA
30.MO
>32,300
21.000
22^00
29.000
MC nsotcad
19.100
14,300
13.700
19.000
41,600
2.400
•
—
s.ou
• AAA
.••a
43.900
>3Z.500
9,160
7.850
>7,000
>7.000
7,450
7.450
•
21.500
99.900
101.910
199,800
17.300
37.400
112.MO
237.100
479,200
3.800
3.800
3.800
2.MO
12.000
9,400
94.400
9,400
9,400
9.400
9.400
9.400
13,300
21,000
iMtiMS*
MC rmporwd
3 .MM
«3U°
3,700
3.000
4,000
4,000
4,000
4.000
4.000
4.000
•in •
ENHXTO
*•
*
•
B**oaa
•
^
" •
•
(41)
•
•
cv^nno
*
•
•
(91)
*
(35)
~-
•
Epjk-cmo
»
(35)
•
"
»
/ C^>
(53 ]
tfte^na
(24)
. .
-
•
-
.
-
(a)
•
t
ft
e.c*»c*4 W Ftwadllcli tJ.eh.i- (»>
jdaospcloa of
-------
toco
\
i1 1CC
I
w
2
K
I-
>•*.
I ,
i
O.T
Estimated A czvated C-arson
Usage to exhaustion.
(599 text)
;.;.7- Trichioroethane
initial ssncantrazj'on « 1CCQ ug/L
Estimated Aesvated Carton
Usage to Breakthrough*
(saa-texQ
2.CCO (600) 3.000 (SCO)
ACTIVATED CAR3GN USAGE.
4,000(1200}
5.CCO(15CO)
•
Figure 13. -Estimating Activated Carnon Usage :o Achieve Target effluent dualities
-50
-------
I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
CO
•»
H
H
tc
g
M
I
co
to
H
u
(O
I
M
%
ta
•
«e
I I I I
I I I I A ' '
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
i i
-S
, . . . ' " ' ii"
• •
88
i i
* i
« i« O
• • •
I I
II I •
rt n
ii1'
M « «
* • •
I I I
I I I
d 882-
I I
II2
. e ^>
r> « •<
I I I I
•4 *» r»
e M « «•
*+^**-^
1222
i i t i
!«»*»•
• • ^
•<*•*.
iii1
• • •
O fi n
8
•
M
•4
•
U
b
v«
1
j
M
S
•M
8
tH
W
• • • •
e o-.-
I I I
2222
ii
I*
75
• V
•4
U
1§S<
i
I w
N «
• a
a —
;s
u •
u i
H
-------
by activated carbon idsorptisn Is contanpiated. Furthermore, competition
for adsorption sizes in water containing a high organic content aay be the
reason Wood and Deilarco (25, and Sclleher, _et_ _al. (•*!) abserred increasing
capacities with Increasing contact tines.
The synthetic resin, ^mbersorb E-3-*0* looks very premising as it has a
>
high capacity far aost of these contaminants (Table 17). Whether or not it
can be economically regenerated by stsam is the topic of on-going research
(25), and it nay not be known for seme tine. Studies have shown the effecti-
veness of this resin, like activated carbon, is influenced by the quality of
the applied water. Its capacity aay be reduced at the high pH of liae soften-
ing (32) and when competition exists for the adsorption sites (12). The
effects of applying chlorinated water to the aaterial is not known but should
be resolved if the product is approved for use on potable water.
-------
TABLE 17. ADSORPTION OF TRICHLOROETHTLZNE AND RELATED SOLVENTS BY AMBERSORB* XE-340, SUMMARY
fcpty
Bad depth, Ceauet
•(ft) (in
to 0.1 ug/L
bnafcchroufh,
«3/«3
TrichloroctlqrlM*
T«erachloro«ctirUa*
•
l,l,l-Triehloro«thttM
Carbon Tiermehlerld*
CU ,1, 2-Dichloro«tlirl«M
219
210
210
177
4
3
41
SI
63
70
»4
1400
3
2
5
33
237
23
1
19
19
40
38
40
40
25
22
16
6
2
0.3(1)
0.6(2)
1.2(4)
0.8(2.3)
0.1(2.3)
0.2(0.4)
0.3(1)
0.6(2)
1.2(4)
0.3(1)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
1.2(4)
0.8(2.3)
0.2(0.8)
0.2(0.8)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
0.3(1)
0.6(2)
1.2(4)
0.3(1)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
0.8(2.3)
2
4
7.3
»
8.3
S
2
4
7.3
2
3
>
8.3
9
7.3
9
3
3
9
3
10
2
4
.3
.3
83.700
78,600
>33.300
>20.160
>U3.340
>117.000
>99.900
78,600
>33.300
106,000
112.900
17.920
>123.340
> 20, 160
39,300
56.000
82.600
> 100, 800
>20,160
7.360
13.120
37.200
39,300
19,700
36,400
14,400
7.200
11, 500
>20.160
>39.000 bat O.23.340
26
26
26
13
KPAHJUfi
EF*-DVn
26
26
26
26
EPA-DWD
ZPA-DWRD
EFA-DWU
13
26
13
EFA-OHU
EPA-DWD
13
13
13
26
26
26
26
33
33
35
13
EP4-DWRD
0.2(0.8)
108,860
EPA-DWTtB
63
-------
5ST2JATSD T3ZATMarr COSTS
Computer cose programs based on che Gulp data (52) were used to astiaate
the treatment coses far removing cricaioroechylene, cecrachloroethyiese,
l,l,ltrichloroethane, c±s-i,2-dichioroeehylene, carbon catrachloride, and
1,2-dichloroethane from grouadwater. Mb case calculations were aade for
viayl chloride removal because of Che lack, of treatment data for this contami-
nant. •
The cose analysis is based on 1.3 a^/aia (500,000 gal/day) flow vich
Che creacaenc system shown ia Figure 19. The groundwater is treated by
cower aeration, diffused air aeration, or granular activated carbon (GAC)
followed by chlorioacion, clearvell storage, and high-lift puapiag. The
aeration towers are rectangular with an overall height of 3 a (10 ft) and an
air supply of 137 sla/m^ (52 scfm/ft^) of surface area is assumed. They have
electrically drives induced-draft fans, fan stacks, and drift eliainators.
The tower costs do not include supply pumps or underflow pumps. The aeration
basins are rectangular with a depth of 3.5 at (12 ft). The diffused air
supply system was sized for 14 sLa/mr (5 scfm/'t^) of basin flow area.
Adsorption consists of 3 steel contactors ia series with an initial carbon
supply. Carbon usage is based on 5-aonth chrowavay at a cost of Sl.JO/kg
(S.70/lb). Chlorlaatlon consists of a feed system (ao basin) and a building
for cylinder storage. A chlorine dose of 2 ag/L is assumed and Che cost of
chlorine is 5.35/kg ($320/ton). Clearvell storage is above ground, vlch a
capacity equal eo 10 percent of Che daily plant flow. The high lift pumping
has a head of 12 a {40 ft). The estimated creataent cost does not include
axrendit'iras for land, sliae or corrosion control, :ar.cas, off-gas "nanclir.?,
or carbon disposal.
-------
it
i
!
i
$
I
•o
w
c
.a
.8
1
6
"^
s~
iv.
•5 5
2|
*i2
<*
A
Ivl
1*8
. c
m p. O
i|i
StS
§3«
^ ^
4. A A.
' T '
i %
\ .
s
f
I"
o
i
\
1
Ji
s
S
5
I
I
i
5
&
!
I
1
ei
£
65
-------
Figures 20 through 25 jive the total treatment cost in dollars per 1CCO
gallons of created, water as a function af operating flow. Each figure shows
-g — --
the 90 ta *?" percent removal cose range la Sccober 1980 dollars far aeration
covers, aeration basins, and GAG for an influent contaminant concentration
varying from 1 Co 1000 ag/L. The required aeaycion basin and tower volumes
for costing purposes were computed as a function of the mean air-to-water
ratios given in Table 13. The cosr bands for aeration cavers are relatively
narrow because little economy—of-scale exists far operating these units at
such small hydraulic loadings.
The carbon requirements were the aean values given in Table 16. The
adsorption cost ranges are wider than chose estimated for ae*acion because of
the influence of contaminant concentration. For example, the cost of 90
percent removal by aeration is the same whether the contaminant concentration
is reduced from 1000 to 100 ug/L. or from 1 to 0.1 ug/L. Adsorption capacity
and activated carbon, usage, however, vary with contaminant concentration;
therefore, the cost of 90 percent removal by activated carbon is higher if
the influent: concentration is 1000 ug/L compared to 100 ug/L. The cost range
for adsorption is very wide for some contaminants because of poor adsorb-
ability. To achieve: high percentages of removal for the poorly adsorbed
contaminants a large amount of activated carbon is required and this incraases
Che cost of treatment.
Figure 26 illustrates another way of presenting the cost information
given ia. Figures 20 to 25. The total treatment cost of crichloroethylene
removal is shown as a function of influent concentration at '*• levels of
effluent concentration for each of the 3 treatment nodes. Similar graphs
could be generated for the other contaminants. Figure 27 gives the total
-------
2JO
'ost 9/1000 gal
S
Total Treatment C
a.
Granular Activated Carbon Adsorption
t «^— —- • ^
• -i
«
^''Illlllllllll
3 0.1 • oia 03 O4 OJ5
20
w LO
\
I
I
I
OJ
Hi
Aeration
—
'"
0 OJ O2 O3 O4 OS Operating Flow, mgd
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% % of Design Flow
Figure 20. Cost oflrichforoethylene removal(90-99%) (October 1980 dollars, influent concentration of
1-1000 fig/1. design flow of 0.5 myd).
67
-------
Granular Activated Carbon Adsorption
g
\
VI
Q
2
5
a
0.1
0.1
0.2
O3
0.4
OS
10
a
1
SI
Q
Aeration
**
mil Tower
0 OJ 02 03
0% 20% 40% S0%
0.4 OiS Opsrar/ng rtow, mgrf
80% 100% % o/ D«5/gn flow
'igtira 21. Cast of teirachloroethylene removal fSO-SS^oi (October 1380 sollars. influent concentra-
tion of 1-1QGO u.g/1. design flow yf Q.S mga).
-S.
-------
8
ga
\-
1*
I
1;
i
2
.o
5
8
L Gr
anular Acti
vatet
ffr*1
i Carbon
*.
t ^-:5
Adso
ga
\
t»
w
s
o
1
I
1
o
2.0 i
1.0
OJ
Oi
oa
O4
OS
e
Aeration
0 ai O2 O3 O4 0.5 Operating Flow, mgd
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% K)0% % of Design Flow
Figure 22. Cost of 1, 1. 1 -trich/oroethane removal (90-99%) (October 1 980 dollars, influent concentra-
tion of 1-1000 ng/l. design flow of 0.5 mgd). • —
69
-------
iO.Ch
r
. Granular Activated Cartoon Adsorption
a
oa
b
0.4
'
ai
02
as
04
as
2.0
«
o
0
0%
OJ
Aeration
««*.
Tower
02 02 0.4 OtS Operating Flow, mgd
40% 60% 80% 100% % of Design
'igun 23. Cost zf :arson iairacnionda 's
tion of I-'COO j.g/1. Jesign 'low of O.
rC-j5°^/' 'Cc:ooer '3SC ioilars. .rflusrr :;ncsr:r3-
-------
Total Treatment Cost. $/1000 gal
3 5 -1
Total Treatment Cost. 9/tOOO gal
e 5 8 j
[ \':
• i
Granular Activated Carbon Adsorption
• • • • •
• • • • •
t+"""it'f"T
•i
) 0.1 O2
III,
: 'Ull
: ''l||||
I
»
0 OJ 02
0% 20% 40%
^
^^
X,
«
»
3"""
03 04
Aeration
iHiiiiin
'""""HU,
•
05
1 1 fiasm
HUH,, Totver
02 04 OS Operating Flow, i
60% 80% 100% % of Design Flow
Figure 24. Cost of ci&-1.2-dichloroethylene removal(90-99%l (October J 980 dollars, influent concen-
tration of 1-1000 iig/l. design flow of 0.5 mgd).
71
-------
Granular Activated Carson Adsorption
.2
i.o
• 0.5,
ai
SLO
S L0
ai
l|
l|
Aeration
a
'"•,
"»i,,
Basin
Tower
0 ai O2 GL3 C4 as Cawaung r/ow,
0% 20% 40% 80% S0% 100% % o/ D«s/gn
f-'gurs 25. Css? or r.2-dicnioroe:tiar>9removal{SO-S9<"ai
-------
SX)
I-
0.1
Granular Activated Carbon Adsorption
— -Effluent Concentration f )
10
100
000)
000
Aeration
Effluent Concentration ( )
K) too
Influent Concentration,
Basin
1000
Figure 26. Cost of trichloroethyfene removal (October 1980 dollars, effluent concentrations of 0.1-
100 ng/l. design flow of O.Smgd operating at 60% capacity).
73
-------
Granular Carton Adsorption
^
C i ...
LOt- ; — ;
f •— . — -
L ^
i- .
-^r^L1*^.
I I
0.1
0
ICc
X
a
cu
0.1
ll
oz
0,4
Aeration
"^^^
"'„
\
"Hi,
*^c
Basin
"'Ml,
""Iliu,
Tower
ai 02 03 a* oa
Treatment Plant Design Flow, mgd
figure 27. Cost ofrncnioroethy/ene rsmova/(SC-35%i
-------
treatment cost of trichloroethylene removal veru» treatment plant size for
each treatment type. Operating flow is 50 percent of design flow for this
data with an influent concentration of 1 to 1000 ug/L. Similar cost infor-
mation can be generated for the other contaminants. Note in these estimates
that operating a small treatment system at less than design flow has a
pronounced effect on unit costs*
As in any economic analysis, the cost data presented here are depen-
i
dent on the particular design assumptions that were made for the treatment
system. For example, the costs associated with both types of aeration are
quite sensitive to the removal efficiencies. The cost of treatment therefore,
can vary significantly depending of the design parameters selected by the
cost analyst and site-specific eonsideraitons. For this reason, these
cost estimates should be viewed as a preliminary attempt to quantify the
economics of removing trichloroethylene and related solvents from drinking
water.
Conclusion
Trichloroethylene and related solvents occur in both untreated and
treated drinking water. In general, groundwaters rather than surface waters
are more likely to have significant concentrations of these compounds. Some
exceptions might be during periods when a river is frozen over and volatile
organics cannot escape into the atmosphere, when upstream "spills" occur, or
when products used to treat or transport the water have contaminants (2,3,5,
58 61).
These solvents can be removed by aeration, adsorption on granular acti-
vated carbon or synthetic resins, or combinations of these processes. Aera-
tion, for example, pracceding adsorption seems very encouraging and may be
75
-------
the combination needed for treating certain problem vatars. 1
estimates of treatment coses show significant variations betveen proccess and
contaminants and amplify the a*ed for a thorough organic analysis and site
specific performance data. 7inyl chloride was not included in the economics
discussion because of the lack of treacaenc data. Its Henry's Law constant
is quite high, 201 ug/L air/ug/L water (15), so vinyl chloride should be
easily ranoved by aeration.* At one location vhere vinyl chloride interaittantly
occurred in .Che drinking water, neither granular activated carbon, nor synthetic
resin (22-340) effectively reaoved this contaminant (13, 51).
Soiling can be effective for removing these solvents but it requires at
lease 5-rainutes of vigorous boiling in a shallow pan. Table 13 lists the
treataene processes and their relative effectiveness for removing or reducing
the concentrations of these volatile organ!cs.
*7inyl chloride was one of several volatile organlcs included in a recent study
where contaminants were "spiked" in drinking water, then passed through a
pilot scale aeration cower. 7inyl chloride was the contaminant nost efficiently
removed. (DeMarco, J., ?. Vood, 7. Curtis, and X. Lang, "Aeraticn of Halszanated
^rganics". Paper in preparation).
-------
M
J
S
«
S
6
£
&
S
fid
fi
S
1
I
I
a
M
09
M
!
c*
0 0 «
•*< x**
*sss
*:SS
*-i 01
cs
0
p
u
o
•H
.e
0
es
s « S
8535
' « o 2
X O tH **
•« S *
4J O
Sr4
W •§
O •«
3 ? e
U I 6
1 5
0
*H
1
W
«
0
kl
2
m
e
00
s
U
«
u
4J
t>
t-
a
i
«M
U
u
O
u
1-1
x
•H
S
5
0
p
u
O
a
I
ta
0 S
o i
e S
• 00
«M e.
0 b
O 0 4J
e o. »
« 0
S4J hi
« O
000
*J«fc
011
OU
-------
The cooperation and assistance provided by vatsr utility and reg*iL*t:
personnel in the states ax Connecticut, New Easoshirs, Hhode Island, .Tew
Jersey, and Pennsylvania is greatly appreciated.
Special recognition is expressed to Mr. Charles D. Larson, USE?A,
Region I, Boston, MA and Mr. Melvin Haupnan, USZ?A, Region II, New York,
NY for their help in conducting our field studies.
The 'efforts of Ms Patricia ?ierson for typing this manuscript and
Dr. Jaaes M. Synons, Mr. Alan A. Stevens, Mr. Gordon G. 3obeck, Mr. Valte:
A. ?eige, Dr. Robert M. Clark, Mr. Jaaes Vestrick, and Mr. Thomas Thortan
for providing valuable editorial and technical comments are acknowledged.
73
-------
REFERENCES
1. Federal Register "Contcolrof Organic Chemical Contaminants in Drinking
Water", Vol. 43. Ho. 28, p. 5759 (Feb. 9, 1978).
2. Cairo, P. R., R. G. Lee, B. S. Aptowlcz, and W. M. Blankenshlp. "Is Your
Chlorine Safe to Drink?" Jour. American Water Works Association, Vol. 71,
Ho. 8, pp.450-453 (Aug. 1979).
3. Larson, C. D., Love, 0. T. and Reynolds, 6. B. "Tetrachloroethylene from
Lined Asbestos Cement Pipe". Presented at: Corrosion Control in Water
Distribution Systems. OSEPA Technology Transfer, Cincinnati, OH
(May 20-22, 1980).
4. Maddox, F. D., USEPA Region V. Personal Communication, February 14, 1980
as follow-up to article entitled, "Federal Test Link Carcinogenic Chemical
to Chlorine", The Cincinnati Enquirer (Dec. 16, 1979).
5. Seeger, D. R., Slocum, C. J., and Stevens, A. A., "GC/MS Analysis of Purgeable
Contaminants in Source and Finished Drinking Water". Proceedings. 26th
Annual Conference on Mass Spectrometry and Applied Topics, St. Louis, MO
([May 28-Jun. 2, 1978).
6. Dunlap, W., "Preliminary Laboratory Study of Transport and Fate of Selected
Organics in a Soil Profile". U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Groundvater Research Center, Ada, OK (1980).
7. Roberts, P. V., Schreiner, J., and Hopkins, G. D., "Field Study of Organic
Water Quality Changes During Groundwater Recharge in the Palo Alto Baylands",
Presented at the Symposium on Waste Water Reuse for Groundwater Recharge,
Pomona, CA (Sep. 7, 1979).
8. Chiou, C. T., Peters, L. J., and Freed, V. H., "A Physical Concept of Soil-
Water Equilibria for Honionic Organic Compounds". Science, Vo. 206,
pp 831-832 (Nov. 1979).
9. Symons, J. M., T. A. Bellar, J. K. Carswell, J. DeMarco, K. L. Kropp,
G. G. Robeck, D. R. Seeger, C. J. Slocum, B. L. Smith, and A. A. Stevens,
"National Organics Reconnaissance Survey for Halogenated Organics in
Drinking Water". JAWWA. Vol. 67, No. 11, Part I, 634-647 (Nov. 1975).
10. Jarema, R., "Plainville and Plainfield's Plight with Pollution". Connecticut
State Department of Health, Hartford, CT 06115 (Jul. 1977).
11. Johnson, D., H. Kaltenthaler, P. Breault, and M. Keefe, "Chemical Contamina-
tion". The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Special Legislative Commission on
Water Supply, 14 Beacon Street, Room 201, Boston,.MA 02108 (Sep. 1979).
12. Kim, N. K. and Stone, D. W., "Organic Chemicals in Drinking Water". New York
State Department of Health, Albany, NY 12237 (1980).
79
-------
13. Syeons, J. M., J. £. Carsweil, J. 3«M»rco, and 3. 7. Love, Jr., "leaoval of
Organic Contaminants froa Drisidng Vatar Ssisg Techniques Other Than
-Granular Activated Carbon Alone — A Prograss Report". la: Proceedings,
Practical Application a* Adsorption Techniques la Drinking Water. EPA, :JATC,
Challenges or Modem Society, Restcn, '.'A C1979; (la Press). .
14. Crane, A. M. and Freeman, A. ?., "Vatar Softening and Conditioning Equipment:
A Potential Source of Water Contamination". 2PA-60C/3-77-107, OB&D,
Environmental Research Laboratory, Gulf 3ra«2e, TL (Mar. 1977).
15. Dilling, W. L., "Incar?base Transfer Processes. II. Ivaporacion ?^.-»3 af
Chioro Methanes, Ethanes, Ethylena*, ?ropanes, and Propyianes from dilute
Aqueous Solutions. Comparisons with Theoretical Predictions". lavirocaeacal
Science and Technology, 7ol. 11, Ho. 4, pp. ^05-405 (Apr. 1977).
16. U; S. iaviratBaental Protection Agency., "Innovative and Alternative Tachnologr
Assessment Manual (2raft)". 2?A-430/9-73-':09> Office of Sesearch and
Development, MS2L, Cinciaaati, OH (1973).
17. Warner, ?. H., Cohen, J. M., and Ireland, J. C. "^etaraination of Henry's Lav
Constants of Selected Priority Pollutants" ?SZ?A. Office of Research and
Development, M£5Lt Cincinnati, OH (Apr. 1980).
13. Zoeteman, 3. C. J., "Threshold Odour Concentrations in Water of Chemical
Substances". 2LI.D.-Medelsling 74-3, National Institute Water, Laidschendam,
The Netherlands (1974).
19. Stafal, W. H.,' "Compilation of Odor and Taste Threshold Values Data". American.
Society for Testing Materials Data Series DSA8 (05-043000-36) ASTM, 1916
Race Screetr^Uad«j.ahia, PA 19103 (May 1973).
20. The Merdc IndeSl sere*, i Co., Inc., rUhway, SJ (9th Edition, 1976).
21. >TIOSH Registry of Toxic Effects of Cheaical Substances Vol. II, S. S. Depart-
ment of Health Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, CSC, National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH 45226
(Sep. 1977).
22. "Preliainary Study of Selected Potential Environmental Contaminants —
Optical Brighteners, Methyl chlorofora, Trichloroechylane, Tacrachlsro—
ethylene, Ion Exchange Resias". SPA 560/2-75-002 (PS 243-910) Office of
Toxic Substances, Washington, D» C. 20460 (Jul. 1975).
23. Kirk-Othaer Encyclopedia of Chemiral Technology, Volume 5, John Wiley
& Sons, Sew fork (3rd Edition, p 671, 1979).
24. Dettarco, J., X. V. 3rodtaann, Jr., H. Russell, and 3. Wood, "A Comparative
Study of Granular Activated Carbon in Plant Scale Operations". Presented
at 98th Annual AWWA National Conference, Atlantic City, £J (1973).
(unpublished).
25. "ebolsize Koh'.rsaa -luggiaro Engineers, P.C., "Technical Mesorsccua Veil Va;ar
Study Tastiag for :he Removal af Crsaai; Contasiinancs" Office 3f :r.a
Mayor, City of Glan Cove, Tf (Apr. 1973).
30
-------
*26. Nebolsine Coalman Ruggiero Engineers, P.O., "Removal of Organic Contaminants
from Drinking Water Supply at Glen Cove, NY." Interim Report on OSEPA
•Agreement No, CR806355-01, Office of Research and Development, MERL, Drinking
Water Research Diviaionr Cincinnati, OH (Jul. 1980).
27. Joyce, M., "Smyrna, Delaware Solves a Water Problem". Journal of Environmental
Health, Vol. 42, Ho. 2. pp. 72-74 (Sep./Oct. 1979). See also - Joyce, M.,
"Smyrna, Delaware Solves a Water Problem". Water and Sewage Works (Mar.
1980).
28. Argo, D. G., "Control of Organic Chemical Contaminants in Drinking Water".
Proceedings; Control of Organic Chemical Contaminants in Drinking Water,
Public Technology, Inc./U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Seminar (1978).
(In Press)
«
29. Mc'Carty, P. L., K. H. Sutherland, J. Graydon, and M. Reinhard, "Volatile
Organic Contaminants Removal by Air Stripping". Proceedings; AWWA
Seminar. "Controlling Organics in Drinking Water", 99th Annual National.
AWWA Conference, San Francisco, CA (Jun. 1979).
30. Dobbs, R. A. and Cohen, J. M. "Carbon Adsorption Isotherms for Toxic
Organics". EPA 600/880-023 Office of Research and Development,
MERL, Wastewater Treatment Division, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 (Apr. 1980).
* •
31. Singley, J. E., Beaudet, B. A., and Ervin, A. L. "Use of Powdered Activated
Carbon for Removal of Specific Organic Compounds" Proceedings. AWWA Seminar,
"Controlling Organics in Drinking Water", 99th Annual National AWWA Confer-
ence, San Francisco, CA (Jun. 1979).
32. Neely, J. W. and Isacoff, E. G., "Regenerability of Ambersorb XE-340",
Presented at New Jersey AWWA Section Meeting, Atlantic City, NJ
(Sep. 19, 1979).
33. Love, 0. T. Jr., "Boiling to Remove Trichloroethylene". U.S. Enivornmental
Protection Agency. Office of Research and Development, MERL, Drinking
Water Research Division, Cincinnati, OH (Nov. 27, 1979). (Mimeo)
34. Lataille, M., "The Effect of Boiling on Water Contaminated with Chlorinated
Solvents". 0. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I. Lexington, MA
(Dec. 4, 1979). (Mimeo)
35. Wood, P. R. and DeMarco, J., "Effectiveness of Various Adsorbents in Removing
Organic Compounds from Water" - Part I - removing Purgeable Halogenated
Organics". Presented at "Activated Carbon Adsorption of Organics from the
Aqueous Phase" - 176th ACS Meeting, Miami Beach, FL (Sep. 10-15, 1978).
36. Glaze, W. H., G. R. Peyton, F. T. Huang, J. L. Burleson, and P. C. Jones,
."Oxidation of Water Supply Refractory Species by Ozone with Ultraviolet
Radiation". Final Report, EPA R-804640, Office of Research and Development,
MERL, Drinking Water Research Division, Cincinnati, OH (1980). (Draft
under review for publication).
81
-------
Aseotrarie 3ata-I~. 3o. 33, Advances la Chemistry Series, (?.. F. Sould,
aoitor;, .^toericaa Chemical Society, Washington, 3. C. ;i?62^.
23. Fleisher, 11. 3. and .iac£a.~, 3. 1. , "Assessment of the Irract 21 rrganic
Solvent Cesspool daaners and Drain Openers on Nassau County rriakiag
Water Supplies". .'lassau County Department of Health, 240 Old Country Road,
Miaeola, TL (Dec. 1377).
39. 3y«r, 3. G. , USZ?A Region III, Water Supply Branch, Private Communication,
'(3ov. 3, 1979).
40. Stevens, A. A. , D. 1. Seeger, J. 2eMarca, and L. Moors. ~3.eao?al cf Higher
Molecular -eighc Organic Compounds by Che Granular Acrivatad Carbon Acsorpcic-
Unic Process". Proceedings , Practical Aoolicacions of Adsorption Tachaiouas
ia Drlakiag Vacer, 2PA/XAIO, Challenges of Modem Society, Xescan, 7.\ (1979).
(la Press)
41. Kellefaer, D. L. , Scover, 2. L. , and Sullivan, X. "laves civacion of Volacile
Organics lamoval". Presented At ^ev England Water Works Association
Meeting, Randolph, MA (Jaa. 17, 1980).
42. Zrvia, A. L. , and Siagley, J. t. , "Alternative Powdered Activated Carbon Study",
3«port prepared for Che City of North Miami Beach, Florida, Project Mo. 79-2C6-
003 by Environmental Science and Sagiaeerif ag , lac., Gaiasville, FL (Sep. 1979).
43. Isacof f , 2. G. and Bittaer, J. A. , ~H.esia Adsorbent Takes on Chloroorganics
froa Well Watar", Water and Sewage Works, pp. 41-42 (Aug. 1979).
44. Combs, W» S.. "Removal of Chlorinated Solvents from Water by Boiling ",
State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Departaent of Health,
Cannon Building, Providence, RI (Feb. 5, 1980). (Miaeo)
45. Sailer, ?. A. "Threshold Odor Concentration for Carbon Tetraehloride ia Driak-
ing Water". U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
and Development, ME2L, Drinking W«ter Research Division, Cincinnati, OH
(1977). (unpublished)
46. Federal Register. "Certain Fluo rocarbons (CHLOROFLUOROCAR30MS) ia Food, Food
Additive, Drug, An-t-iaT Food, Aniaal Drug, Cosmetic, and Medical Devica
Products as Propellants ia Seii-Pressurized Containers ", Vol. 43, :To. 33,
pp. L2J01 (Mar. 17, 1973).
47. Ljkias, 3. W. , "Summary of Short-Tera Sxperiaental Modes of Operation —
Svansville, Indiana". (Draft) Interia Report, EPA Grant No. £30*902,
Office of Research and Development, ME5L, Drinking Water Research Division,
Cincinnati, OH (May 1979). (Unpublished)
43. Evansvllle Courier, "High Carbon Tet Found ia Watar Used April 19", Zvaasvilla,
Indiana, (May 13, 1978).
49. Lykias, 3. W. and DeMarco, J. "An Overview of :he Use of Powdarad Accivacae
Carbon for Removal of Trace ^r^anics ia Drir^ciag Vacar' -". 3. Invir'iT.ner.z.al
?T5taction Agency, Offica of Research and Devalopnenr, 1^121, Drir^tir.? Vatsr
Rasaarch division, Ciaciacati, 3S (1930). Orafz)
32
-------
'SO. Weber, W. W., "Effectiveness of Activated Carbon for Removal of Toxic and/or
Carcinogenic Compounds from Drinking Water". Final Report EPA R8044367-30-01,
.Office of Research and Development, MERL, Drinking Water Research Division,
Cincinnati. OH (Mar^ 19*0).
51. Symons, J. M., "Interim Treatment Guide for Controlling Organic Contaminants
in Drinking Water Using Granular Activated Carbon". U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, MERL, Drinking
Water Research Division, Cincinnati, OH. (Jan. 1978).
52. Rosenzveig, M. D., "Vinyl Chloride Process Has Wide Range of Byproducts",
Chemical Engineering, pp. 105-107 (Oct. 18, 1971).
53. DeMarco J. and Brodtmann, H. V. "Prediction of Full Scale Plant Performance
'from Pilot Columns". Proceedings» Practical Application of Adsorption
'Techniques in Drinking Water. EPA/NATO, Challenges of Modern Society,
Reston, VA (1979). (In Press)
54. Klttsley, S. L., Physical Chemistry. Barnes and Noble, Inc., Hew York,
pp. 36-38 (2nd ed., 1967).
55. DCI Solvent Data Sheet. DCI Corporation, 5752 W. 79th Street, Indianapolis,
IB 46278.
56. Singley, J. E., A. L. Ervia, M. A. Mangone, J. M. Allen, and H. H. Land,
Trace Organics Removal by Air Stripping, prepared for: American Water
Works Association Research Foundation, Denver, CO (May 1980).
57. Symons, J. M., A. A* Stevens, 0. T. Love, Jr., and J. DeMarco, "Treatment
Techniques for Controlling Tribalomethanes in Drinking Water". U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
MERL, Drinking Water Research Division, Cincinnati, OH (In Press).
58. Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, "Water Treatment Process
Modifications for Tribalonethane Control and Organic Substances in the
Ohio River". Final Report EPA-600/2-80-028. Office of Research and
Development, MERL, Drinking Water Research Division, Cincinnati, OH
(Mar. 1980).
59*. Merrick, E. T., H. Ketcham, L. J. Murphy, Jr., and K. Sllke, "EPA Chemical
Activities Status Report", First Edition. EPA 560/13-79-003, Toxic
Integration Information Series, OSEPA Washington, D. C. (Apr. 1979).
60. Vinyl Chloride Ambient Water Quality Criteria. EPA 440/5-80-078. Criteria
and Standards Division, Office of Water Planning and Standards, U. S. EPA'
Washlngto, D. C. (1980).
61. Dressman, R. C. and McFarren, E. P., "Determination of Vinyl Chloride
Migration from Polyvinyl Chloride Pipe into Water Using Improved Gas
Chromatographlc Methodology" JAWWA, Vol. 70, 86. 1, pg. 29 (Jan. 1978).
83
-------
.,n*~. Pi-r-ec/'on Agency
I | f, r- v'v'rj" , ;-P: • ri--.'-^v"
t,i.-...-. i'"'io!3
-------