PB 258 271
TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS FOR THE REMOVAL OF
SELECTED CONTAMINANTS FROM DRINKING WATER
FINAL REPORT
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
IVATER SUPPLY DIVISION
RALPH STONE AND COMPANY* INC. LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

-------
£>'.OLICC«APHIC DATA 1. Kep«t No. 2.
5UCST
3. Hcopicftt's Acrcfliioo No.
4. 1 itle aoU buixitle
Treatment Effectiveness for the Removal of Selected Contaminants
from Drinking Water
i. keport Date
July 1975
<5.
7. Auctions)
Ralph Stone, H. A. Smallwood, J. Rodney Marsh
S- Pcffocmiag Of^aaiumoQ Rep*.
No.
?• Peifcraio£ Or*ioixjUioq ajo^ Adore* •
Ralph Stone and Company, Inc.
10954 Santa Monica Blvd.
Los Angeles, California 90025
10. Pio)ect/Tislt/»or'< Uau No.
11. Coatract/Cmat No.
EPA No. 68-01 -2692
I i. Sooodcsiaj Or£At«cnea(
FORM NTI3-3* <«£V. 3*72)
404l^p?1

-------
TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS FOR THE
REMOVAL OF SELECTED CONTAMINANTS
FROM DRINKING WATER
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-2692
By
Ralph Stone and Company, Inc.
10954 Santa Monica Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90025
(213) 478-1501 and 879-1115
Prepared For
Wafer Supply Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
March 1975
n

-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Mr. Roger Lee, Project Officer and
Mr. Thomas Hushower, both of the Water Supply Division, Environmental Protection
Agency, in directing the study presented herein. This report was researched and
written by Ralph Stone and Company, Inc., under EPA Contract No. 68-01-2692.
Mr. Ralph Stone served as Project Director, Mr. H.A. Small wood as Project Engineer,
and Mr. J. Rodney Marsh as Project Coordinator. This report was written by Messrs. J.
Rodney Marsh, Hsiao-Yung Hsu, and Michael Klinger. Data analysis was performed
by Messrs. Tuan Huynh, Yung-Sheng Liao, Gary Foster, and Richard Mills. Editor
on the project was Mr. John East. Typing was performed by Miss Greta Wall in, Mrs.
Martha Lieberman, and Mrs. Ruth Michaels.
Preceding page blank
iv

-------
ABSTRACT
An extensive literature survey was conducted to determine tieatment methods for re-
moving antimony, beryllium, bis-ethers, chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides, cobalt,
lithium, molybdenum, nickel, organophosphorus insecticides, polychlorinated biphonyls,
tungsten, and vanadium from drinking water. The processes discussed included adsorp-
tion, chemical oxidation, coagulation/precipitation, distillation, electrodialysis, ion
exchange, radiochemical degradation, reverse osmosis, and ultrafiltration. Treatment
efficiencies were determined in terms of influent and effluent concentrations for each
applicable treatment method. Process designs, constraints and limitations, operating
conditions, and costs were presented for each treatment process discussed. Each process
was evaluated as to its availability, applicability, and technical and economic feasi-
bility. The best available and best technically feasible treatment processes were pre-
sented for each contaminant.
v

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS	iv
ABSTRACT	v
TABLE OF CONTENTS	vi
LIST OF FIGURES	viii
LIST OF TABLES	xiv
SUMMARY	xv
SECTION
I	CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS	1
Conclusions	1
Recommendations	4
II	INTRODUCTION	13
III	CONTAMINANTS	15
Antimony	19
Beryllium	20
Bis-ethers	21
Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Insecticides	22
Cobalt	25
Lithium	26
Molybdenum	27
Nickel	28
Organic Phosphorus Insecticides	29
Polychlorinated Brphenyls (PCB's)	30
Tungsten	31
Vanadium	32
IV	TREATMENT PROCESSES	33
Introduction	33
Adsorption	34
Chemical Oxidation	44
vi

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
SECTION	PAGE
IV	TREATMENT PROCESSES (Cont.)
Coagulation/Precipitation	53
Distillation	72
Electrodialysis	83
Ion Exchange	90
Radiochemical Degradation	109
Reverse Osmosis	113
Ultrafiltration	123
V	BIBLIOGRAPHY	125
VI	GLOSSARY	141
APPENDIX	147

-------
FIGURES
Figure No.	Page
IV-1 TYPICAL ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION BED	35
IV-2 TYPICAL ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION COLUMN	36
(LAKE TAHOE)
1V-3 CARBON ADSORPTION: FIXED BED IN SERIES	37
1V-4 ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION: CAPITAL COST, 1974	40
IV-5 ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION: OPERATION AND	41
MAINTENANCE COSTS, 1974
IV-6 ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION: TOTAL COST, 1974	42
IV-7 ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION: LAND REQUIREMENTS	43
IV-8 OZONATION: CAPITAL COST RANGE, 1974	49
IV-9 OZONATION: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE	50
COST RANGE, 1974
IV-10 OZONATION: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974	51
IV-11 OZONATION: LAND REQUIREMENTS	52
IV-12 TYPES OF FLASH MIXERS	55
IV-13 TYPICAL CIRCULAR CENTER-FEED SEDIMENTATION TANK	56
1V-14 TYPICAL RECTANGULAR SEDIMENTATION TANK	57
IV-15 CUTAWAY VIEW OF TYPICAL RAPID SAND FILTER	58
IV-16 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF A RAPID SAND FILTER PLANT	59
IV-17 TYPICAL PRESSURE FILTER	60
IV-18 LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION, AND FILTRATION: 64
CAPITAL COST, 1974
IV-19 LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION, AND FILTRATION: 65
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS, 1974
IV-20 LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION, AND FILTRATION: 66
TOTAL COST, 1974
IV-21 LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION, AND FILTRATION: 67
LAND REQUIREMENTS
IV—22 CHITOSAN COAGULATION FOR COBALT, NICKEL,	68
TUNGSTEN, MOLYBDENUM, AND VANADIUM: OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974

-------
FIGURES (Cont.)
Figure No.	Page
1V-23 CHITOSAf < COAGULATION FOR COBALT, NICKEL,	69
TUNGSTE! J, MOLYBDENUM, AND VANADIUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
IV-24 ANTIMONY REMOVAL WITH HYDROGEN SULFIDE:	70
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
IV-25 ANTIMONY REMOVAL WITH HYDROGEN SULFIDE:	71
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
IV-26 MULTISTAGE FLASH EVAPORATION DISTILLATION	73
IV-27 VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR	75
IV-28 DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS: 76
CAPITAL COST, 1974
IV-29 DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS: 77
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
IV-30 DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS: 7fl
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
IV-31 DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR COMPRESSION. 79
VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR, MULTISTAGE FLASH
PROCESS: CAPITAL COST RANGE, 1974
IV-32 DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR COMPRESSION 80
VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR, MULTISTAGE FLASH '
PROCESS: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
IV-33 DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR COMPRESSION, 81
VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR, MULTISTAGE FLASH
PROCESS: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
IV-34 DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR COMPRESSION 82
VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR, MULTISTAGE FLASH '
PROCESS: LAND REQUIREMENTS
IV-35 SIMPLE ELECTRODIALYSIS SYSTEM	84
JV-36 ELECTRODIALYSIS; CAPITAL COST RANGE, 1974	86
IV-37 ELECTRODIALYSIS: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ft7
COST RANGE, 1974	B/
IV-32 lUCTSODlALYSfS: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974	88
,7-29 LUCTSODIALYSIS: LAND REQUIREMENTS	89
ix

-------
I IGUKLb) (Cont.)
Figure No.	Page
IV-40 TYPICAL ION EXCHANGE BED	91
IV-41	TWO BED DEMINERALIZER	92
IV-42	ION EXCHANGE COLUMN SERIES	93
IV-43	ION EXCHANGE FOR ALL ELEMENTS: CAPITAL	97
COST, 1974
IV-44	ION EXCHANGE FOR ANTIMONY AND VANADIUM: 98
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE,
1974
IV-45	ION EXCHANGE FOR ANTIMONY AND VANADIUM: 99
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
IV-46	ION EXCHANGE FOR BERYLLIUM: OPERATION AND 100
MAINTENANCE COST RANGE,1974
IV-47	ION EXCHANGE FOR BERYLLIUM: TOTAL COST	101
RANGE, 1974
IV-48	ION EXCHANGE FOR COBALT AND NICKEL:	102
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE,
1974
IV-49 ' ION EXCHANGE FOR COBALT AND NICKEL:	103
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
IV-50	ION EXCHANGE FOR LITHIUM: OPERATION AND	104
MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
IV-51	ION EXCHANGE FOR LITHIUM: TOTAL COST RANGE 105
1974
IV-52	ION EXCHANGE FOR TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM: 106
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
IV-53 ION EXCHANGE FOR TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM: 107
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
IV-54 ION EXCHANGE: LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL	108
ELEMENTS
IV-55 GAMMA RADIATION TREATMENT DEVICE	111
IV-56	MULTI-STAGE FLASH DISTILLATION WITH MICROWAVE	112
UNIT
IV-57	REVERSE OSMOSIS: TUBULAR MODULE	114
IV-58 REVERSE OSMOSIS: SPIRAL WOUND MODULE	115
IV-59	REVERSE OSMOSIS: FLOW DIAGRAM	116
x

-------
FIGURES (Cont.)
Figure No-	Par|ti
IV-60 REVERSE OSMOSIS: CAPITAL COST RANGE, 1974	119
IV-61 REVERSE OSMOSIS: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 120
COST RANGE, 1974
IV-62 REVERSE OSMOSIS: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974	121
IV-63 REVERSE OSMOSIS: LAND REQUIREMENTS	122
IV-44 TUBULAR ULTRAFILTRATION DEVICE	124
A-l	ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION: CAPITAL COST, 1974 148
A-2	ADTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION: OPERATION AND 149
MAINTENANCE COSTS, 1974
A-3	ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION: TOTAL COST, 1974 150
A-4	OZONATION: CAPITAL COST RANGE, 1974	151
A-5 OZONATION: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST 152
RANGE, 1974
A-6	OZONATION: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974	153
A-7	LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION, AND	154
FILTRATION: CAPITAL COST, 1974
A-8	LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION, AND	155
FILTRATION: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS,
1974
A-9 LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION, AND FILTRA- 156
TION: TOTAL COST, 1974
A-10 CHITOSAN COAGULATION FOR COBALT, NICKEL,	157
MOLYBDENUM, TUNGSTEN, VANADIUM: OPERATION
AND.MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
A-l 1 CHITOSAN COAGULATION FOR COBALT, NICKEL,	158
MOLYBDENUM, TUNGSTEN, VANADIUM: TOTAL COST
RANGE, 1974
A-12 ANTIMONY REMOVAL WITH HYDROGEN SULFIDE:	159
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
A-13 ANTIMONY REMOVAL WITH HYDROGEN SULFIDE:	1^0
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
A-14 DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:	161
CAPITAL COST, 1974
xi

-------
FIGURES (Cortf.)
F igure No.
A-l5 DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
A-16 DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
A-17 DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VERTICAL COMPRESSION, 164
VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATION, MULTISTAGE FLASH PRO-
CESS: CAPITAL COST RANGE, 1974
A-18 DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR COMPRESSION, 165
VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATION, MULTISTAGE FLASH PRO-
CESS: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE,
1974
A-19 DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR COMPRESSION, 166
VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATION, MULTISTAGE FLASH
PROCESS: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
A-20 ELECTRODIALYSIS: CAPITAL COST RANGE, 1974	167
A-21 ELECTRODIALYSIS: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 168
COST RANGE, 1974
A-22 ELECTRODIALYSIS: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974	169
A-23 ION EXCHANGE FOR ALL ELEMENTS: CAPITAL COST, 170
1974
A-24 ION EXCHANGE FOR ANTIMONY AND VANADIUM:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
A-25 ION EXCHANGE FOR ANTIMONY AND VANADIUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
A-26 ION EXCHANGE FOR BERYLLIUM: OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
A-27 ION EXCHANGE FOR BERYLLIUM: TOTAL COST RANGE,
1974
A-28 ION EXCHANGE FOR COBALT AND NICKEL: OPERATION 175
AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
A-29 ION EXCHANGE FOR COBALT AND NICKEL: TOTAL COST 176
RANGE, 1974
A-30 ION EXCHANGE FOR LITHIUM: OPERATION AND MAIN- 177
TENANCECOST RANGE, 1974
A-31 ION EXCHANGE FOR LITHIUM: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974 178
Page
162
163
171
172
173
174
XII

-------
I'lGURES (ConL)
Figure No.	page
A-32 ION EXCHANGE FOR TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM:	179
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE, 1974
A-33 ION EXCHANGE FOR TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM:	180
TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974
A-34 REVERSE OSMOSIS: CAPITAL COST RANGE, 1974	181
A-35 REVERSE OSMOSIS: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE	182
COST RANGE, 1974
A-36 REVERSE OSMOSIS: TOTAL COST RANGE, 1974	183
xiii

-------
TABLES
Table No.	Page
1-1 SUMMARY OF TREATMENT METHOD EFFECTIVENESS	6
1-2 TREATMENT PROCESS STATUS	10
1-3 PREFERRED TREATMENT METHODS	11
1-4 TREATMENT METHOD COSTS	12
III-1	SUMMARY OF PERTINENT CONTAMINANT PROPERTIES	16
IV-1	EFFECT OF OZONATION ON CHLORINATED	47
HYDROCARBON INSECTICIDES
1V-2 SOLUBILITIES OF PARTICULAR INORGANIC SALTS	54
XIV

-------
SUMMARY
An extensive six-month literature survey was conducted for the Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D. C., to duteimine treatment methods and efficiencies for
removing certain selected contaminants from drinking water. Tho purpoie was to prnsent
a list of useful processes which could assist in advanced technical planning for the
removal of certain contaminants from drinking water. The contaminants studied were
antimony, beryllium, bis-ethers, chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides, cobalt, lithium,
molybdenum, nickel, organic phosphorus insecticides, polychlorinated biphenyls,
tungsten, and vanadium.
The characteristics of each contaminant were listed and included natural and industrial
sources and uses, occurrence in drinking water supplies, toxicology, and a list of
acceptable treatment methods and removal efficiencies. Each treatment method was
considered separately and the descriptions included process theory, process configura-
tions and design, general and specific applications, and process economics. The
processes discussed were adsorption, chemical oxidation, coagulation/precipitation,
distillation, electrodialysis, ion exchange, radiochemical degradation, reverse osmosis,
and ultrafiltration.
In general, the inorganic contaminants can best be treated at present by lime coagulation,
possibly followed by a chelation-precipitation/extraction process to polish the effluent.
Ion exchange is an ideal method for producing high quality water, particularly at lower
feeds. Distillation, electrodialysis, and reverse osmosis hold promise, but more research
is required before any firm conclusions can be drawn. Carbon adsorption still appears to
be the method of choice for organics removal. The addition of an oxidation or radio-
chemical treatment step in concert with disinfection, will further improve the water
quality from an organic content standpoint.
xv

-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
Nearly all of the water treatment methods discussed herein are used in one form or
another at pilot or full-scale water treatment plants. Many of the specific process
variations discussed are still in the experimental stage, but all of the methods are
theoretically applicable to water treatment. However, much of the research that has been
done on the subject contaminants has related to wastewater treatment. There are certain
technical difficulties encountered when applying wastewater treatment data to drinking water
treatment because of the different solution concentrations involved. These factors
were considered in reaching the conclusions below.
Activated carbon adsorption (or simply carbon adsorption), is commonly employed
removing color, odor, taste, and refractory organic compounds from water. Many water
treatment plants already use carbon to polish the effluent product. The available data
indicates that carbon adsorption is an effective method for removing bis-ethers, chlori-
nated hydrocarbons, and organic phosphorus insecticides from water. Furthermore, the
data indicate that the treatment is more effective on influent waters containing small
quantities of contaminants such as are found in potable water sources rather than on
wastewaters containing high concentrations. Carbon adsorption may also be used to
remove some metals. There is some natural adsorption, but the removal can be greatly
enhanced by the addition of an organic chelating agent prior to passage through a car-
bon column or fine-grain carbon bed. The carbon will readily remove the chelating
agent, thereby also removing the complexed metal with it.
Synthetic polymer adsorbents (e.g.,Amberlite XAD-4) have been extensively tested and
show some promise. They are not widely used in water treatment plants but have been
tested in pilot scale installations. Some tests have yielded higher removal efficiencies
for synthetics over carbon for some contaminants. Inorganic adsorbents, such as mag-
netite, are capable of removing some cations, but since magnetite is a specialty ad-
sorbent, there is the question of general usage. Water treatment plants whose influent
contains certain toxic constituents could find a use for synthetic organic resins or inorganic
adsorbents, but their use will be limited in the majority of water plants.
Microwave and gamma radiochemical treatment methods are also specialty methods.
Furthermore, because of the costs involved, they have to be considered "luxury"
methods. For small flows with exotic contaminants and where cost is not a controlling
factor, these devices can be useful, but it is doubtful that they will find their way into
routine use at most water treatment plants.
Chemical oxidation and ultraviolet irradiation would probably not be worth considering
except that these methods are used daily for disinfection. With increasing apprehension
over the use of chlorine as a disinfectant, more attention is being focused on the use of
1

-------
ozone and ultraviolet for disinfection. A side benefit of these unit processes is oxida-
tion of refractory organic compounds at slightl/ increased dosages. No extra equipment,
personnel, or maintenance Is required and total costs are only marginally higher.
Coagulation/precipitation followed by filtration is probably the most widely used
physical chemical water treatment method. Usually lime or alum are used, although
activated silica, polycoagulants, ferric chloride, ferrocyanide, sulfides, and carbonates
are sometimes used. Coagulation/precipitation followed by filtration methods are re-
latively effective and low cost, which partially explains their popularity. They do a
good job of removing inorganic pollutants present in high concentrations. They also
are capable of removing some organic pollutants. For influents with low pollutant con-
centration levels, however, their removal efficiency drops considerably. Since many
drinking water pollutants are hazardous even at low concentrations, other treatment
methods may be needed in addition to conventional chemical treatment processes. One
possible additional process consists of adding an insoluble chelating polymer, such as
chitosan, to the influent water. The floes formed by the chitosan remove traces of
heavy metals and organics by a combination of chelation, enmeshment, and adsorption.
Distillation could conceivably be used to remove most of the inorganic ions. It is
commonly used to demineralize many salt or brackish wafers. To employ distillation
specifically for removing one or more of the subject contaminants, however, would not
be economical. Distillation is expensive and other, less-costly alternative methods
can do the job sufficiently well. Some organic contaminants are also carried over into
the effluent.
Electrodialysis is most applicable to the removal of inorganic ionic substances from water;
hence it is generally used in conjunction with ground water or pretreated surface
sources. It is effective in removing dissolved salts, and its efficiency and applicability
have increased with advances in membrane and process design technology.
Reverse osmosis is also currently used primarily in desalination operations. It is generally
less costly than distillation and can produce a high quality product. If trace toxic
substances are involved, there may be some carry-through problem. Furthermore, the
presence of significant quantities of organic contaminants may lead to severe membrane
fouling and deterioration. Raw wafer pretreatment, further research?and improved membrane
technology should provide higher quality effluents.
Ion exchange deminerallzation has its greatest current application in small-scale potable
water supply and industrial operations. The most common use of ion exchange is for
municipal, industrial, domestic, and laboratory water softening. It is particularly suited
for brackish water, for pretreatlng water that is to be completely demineralized, and for
certain industrial waters. A large number of water treatment plants use ion exchange
for hardness removal and effluent polishing. Ion exchange is potentially capable of
meeting all effluent standards for the specific contaminants investigated. There is a
problem, however, in that no one ion exchange resin is capable of removing all of the
contaminants. The costs of employing several specific ion resins may be prohibitive.
2

-------
It should be obvious that no single water treatment process will achieve ideal results.
To begin with, no one process will work equally well on organics and inorganics.
Furthermore, no one process is capable of performing equally well at all concentration
ranges for a given contaminant. Consequently, a muIti-component treatment process
system is desirable to achieve optimum results. For instance, such a system might
include pre-chlorination, lime coagulation with chelate addition, followed by carbon
adsorption, ion exchange, ozonation and post-chIorination.
Lime coagulation is an effective method for removing antimony (Sb), provided that
influent levels are not greater than 50 mg/liter. The solubility of the precipitate is such
that there will be a few mg Sb/liter in the effluent. The use of hydrogen sulfide
as a precipitant would be more expensive and would not increase removal efficiencies
particularly. The ion exchange resins available which can remove antimony generally
have not been proven beyond the laboratory test stage. Other possible treatment
methods include reverse osmosis, distillation, and electrodialysis. All of these are
theoretically capable of producing a satisfactory low antimony content effluent. For
smaller plants, ion exchange may be a good choice, once research has provided an
effective, long life resin. For larger flows, conventional flocculation, carbon adsorp-
tion,and filtration systems may prove most cost effective. Both reverse osmosis and
electrodialysis require less space and lower capital expenditures than the latter process
facilities.
Beryllium (Be) is effectively treated by ion exchange, reverse osmosis, distillation, or
electrodialysis. Reverse osmosis is probably the least efficient process because of the
nature of the beryllium ion. Of the other three, ion exchange is a good available
unit process and may be a feasible method, except for flows greater than 450 liters/sec
where electrodialysis could be competitive. Conventional coagulation, absorption,and
filtration has not yet been proven feasible for beryllium removal.
Cobalt (Co) currently is best treated by lime coagulation, although as much as 2 mg/liter
may be left in the effluent. The addition of chitosan or a chelate as a polishing agent
in connection with coagulation and filtration processes can increase the removal oF
cobalt and produce a satisfactory potable effluent. Ion exchange, reverse osmosis,
distillation, and electrodialysis can also produce a superior quality effluent, but at
higher cost. Cobalt concentrations in potable water sources seldom reach levels that
require special consideration.
The methods discussed above for cobalt removal are also applicable to molybdenum
(Mo), nickel (Ni), and vanadium (V). It should be added that reverse osmosis has been
used effectively in pilot plants to treat nickel plating wastes, producing high quality
effluents. Again,however, it is a question of space and cost limitations. The same
comments also apply to tungsten (W), with the exception that there is no evidence that
lime coagulation is an effective removal method for tungsten.
It is questionable whether there exists a need for lithium removal from drinking water.
Lithium is not especially toxic, having an LD^q of l.lg/kg body weight. Lithium
3

-------
chloride is used as a salt- substitute in low sodium diets and natural concentrations
seldom, if ever, exceed about 0.1 mg/liter. If lithium-free water is desired, howevei,
ion exchange, distillation, or electrodialysis could be used to provide it. For an exist-
ing treatment plant, ion exchange would be best, keeping in mind that the best resins
available for removing lithium would not remove anything else—they could be used only
for lithium removal. If a new plant is desired, it might be wise to consider distillation
or electrodialysis.
The best presently available method, based on current technology, for treating all or-
gqnic contaminants is activated carbon adsorption. Treatment efficiencies are consis-
tently high and costs relatively low. The only improvement likely in the foreseeable
future is the development of a synthetic adsorption media which may be even more
efficient and lower in cost. Adsorption combined with an oxidative disinfectant such
as ozone or ultraviolet radiation can remove additional organic contaminants from
drinking water. Although other techniques might work for some of the organics, It will
be difficult to find a treatment method as all-encompassing as adsorption. Similarly,
metal-organic coordination compounds can be removed by adsorption, further enhancing
its versatility. See Tables 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, and 1-4 for summary information regarding
treatment methods.
Recommendations
It should be obvious that a great deal of experimental work is required before any of
these conclusions can be taken as final. Many of the recommended removal processes,
such as complexation or radiochemical ,have only been tested on a laboratory scale.
These processes should be tested at least in pilot plant studies before designing a full-
scale plant around them.
More laboratory tests should be conducted on the twelve subject contaminants in an
effort to determine other, more efficient treatment methods. Further testing should be
done on the recommended treatment processes to extend their applicability to other of
the subject contaminants. Specific areas requiring research include:
•	Coagulation, absorption and filtration processes.
•	Distillation as it relates to the subject contaminants.
•	Electrodialysis as it relates to the subject contaminants.
•	The feasibility of large-scale application of specific-ion exchange resins.
•	The toxicity of beryllium and removal processes other than ion exchange,
electrodialysis, and distillation.
•	Heavy meJal chelation and extraction via adsorption.
4

-------
•	The toxicity of lithium to determine if lithium removal is ever necessary.
•	The full-scale application of chitosan as a coagulant.
© More efficient treatment methods for tungsten.
© The nature of the reaction product of the chlorinated hydrocarbon and organic
phosphorus insecticides with ozone, chlorine, and other oxidizing agents.
« The application of ultrafiltration to removing metal colloids, emulsified organics,
and insecticide-oil emulsions.
5

-------
TABLE 1-1
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT METHOD EFFECTIVENESS
o
Treatment Method
Contaminant
Influent Concentration
Effluent Concentration
Percent
Removal
Reference
Adsorption, activated
Isopropyl ether
1,023 mg/liter
203 mg/liter

168
carbon
Butyl ether
197 mg/liter
~ 0 mg/liter

168

Dichloroisopropyl ether
1,008 mg/liter
~ 0 mg/liter

168

Aldrin
5 ms/liter

85
39

DDT
5 mg/liter

76
39

Endrin
5 mg/liter

86
39

Lindane
10 //g/liter
0.06 fi g/liter

12

Parathion
10 mg/liter
0.1-2.5 mg/liter

59

Malathion
2 mg/liter
0.25 mg/I

39
Adsorption,
Amberlite XAD-4
Lindane
40 mg/liter
0.4 mg/liter

173

PCB's
*

76
173
Adsorption,
magnetite
Cobalt
Nickel


86
81
178
178
Ozonation
DDT
2 mg/liter
0.14 mg/liter

183

Dieldrin
1.31 mg/liter
0.22 mg/liter

183

-------
66
187
187
187
37
57
37
37
44
13
18
18
57
150
39
TABLE 1-1 (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT METHOD EFFECTIVENESS
Contaminant
Percent
Influent Concentration Effluent Concentration Removal
Parathion
Heptachlor
75
88
Lindane
98.5
DDT


-100
Antimony


90
Cobalt
12 mg/liter
1 .4 mg/liter

Molybdenum


10
Nickel
160 mg/liter
0.08 mg/liter

Nickel
2,935 mg/liter
< 1 mg/liter

DDT
10^g/liter

98
Endrin
10^/g/liter

55
Dieldrin
10//g/Iiter

55
Nickel
16 mg/liter
11.8 mg/liter

Vanadium
249 mg/liter
1 mg/liter

DDT
10-25 ^g/liter
0.2-0.75 // g/liter

-------
TABLE 1-1 (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT METHOD EFFECTIVENESS
Treatment Method
Contaminant
Percent
Influent Concentration Effluent Concentration Removal
Reference
03
Chitosan coagulation
Hydrogen sulfide
precipitation
Disti ilation
Electrodialysis
Ion exchange
Amberlite CG 400
Dowex 50
Wofatit MC 50
DEAE cellulose
Cobalt
Molybdenum
Nickel
Tungsten
Antimony
Metals
Ionic contaminants
Antimony
Beryllium
Cobalt
Nickel
Molybdenum
Tungsten
50 mg/liter
2,500 mg/liter
50 mg/liter
500 mg/liter
13^g
8.4-10.5 mg
11-12 mg
11-12 mg
0.1-5 mg/liter
0.004-2 mg/liter
36 mg/liter
45 mg/liter
170 mg/liter
2 mg/l i ter
~ 0
62
<	100
<	95
93-100
-100
-100
>96
>98
153
153
153
153
62, 65
89
102
98
98
191,97
97

-------
TABLE 1-1 (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT METHOD EFFECTIVENESS
Treatment Method
Contaminant
Percent
Influent Concentration Effluent Concentration Removal
Reference
«o
Ion exchange (Cont.)
ISM-1
De-acidite FF
Dowex -1-X8
Radiation
Mi cnowave
Gamma
Reverse osmosis
Lithium
Vanadium
Vanadium
Simple ethers
PCB's
Nickel
DDD
DDT
Lindane
5 mg/liter
5.58 //g/liter
100 ^g/liter
93.6 //g/liter
532 //g/liter
500 mg/liter
97 mg/liter
500 mg/liter
500 mg/liter
50 mg/liter
638//g/liter
0.006 //g/liter
2 mg/liter
8 mg/liter
306 n g/liter
'100
96
97
100
95
99.6
99
99
73
101
191
102
168
161
121, 153
120
55
114
55
55
114
120
*
Blank spaces indicate that information is not available.

-------
TABLE
TREATMENT
1-2
PROCESS STATUS
Org-P
Insect
General
Applica
Hon
Cl-
in yd ro-
carbons
Bis-
ethers
Ion Exchange

Reverse Osmosis
Distil lation
Electrodialysis
Coagnlqtion-
Precmitation

Non-Carbon Adsorption
WWW
Carbon Adsorption
RadiochemMJV)
Radiochem (Micro + gammq)
V.;,'.;• '.•I
• -K •'; '• * ;• - •' •'
Oxidation
Full Scale Operational
Pilot Scale Operational Tests
Lab Scale Tests
Not Applicable
= Theoretically Applicable, No Data Available

-------
TABLE 1-3
PREFERRED TREATMENT METHODS
T Contaminant
Treatment^---
Process """
Sb
Be
Co
Li
Mo
Ni
w
V
Bis—
ether
PCB
CI- Org-P
Hydro-, Insect.
Carbon 1
Ion Exchange

.y...
•V-.v'.V/.'-.
• •*«»* «»'
»* •. •' •. ••«
«»*«•* 

ii: :
«»!«»? <•»
•» •*. 1
«»; •»; •»

»*» «•».•••
• k * 4ft Z «»
•»•••• •• •
«• . M , «•
'v.V'.vV-:.



Electrodialysis
l •»{ *
•A'v*,;*
• ••
•v-A-v-.V-*
» ; «» t «•.
«»*«•*«»
•

«!*«•* «»
tA•*•.~' • - •
- ; o ; #
• ¦ | «» * • •
• ti


1
!
Coagulation-Precipitation


" ^
Vf'.V
y4» i • • i <


, =/?>.;
>; •» J o
AS'-'.'.
;.V
«»
s>


1
Non-carbon Adsorption









\*\«» ; «•
I ft «.» «.» <
t ** 5j
l". . I I'1 1
mV-1:1.':;
¦ •?••••**"
Carbon Adsorption








Jk^ri


L 1 ' " <
Oxidation








«»'
«• •
' l4» «»»

•s'V.'V.'/.
••rSrl'-rJ
: ••:
Radiochemical, Micro and
Gamma








••••••••«»
v . tf ; ti :«
/ } , 41
* •** **•
••ft.•
»«~ »»4 »«• »



i »';'«»*•*«•;
Best available (operational in at
least pilot-plant scale)
Best technically feasible (technically proven,
may or may not be operational)
Best available is
best feasible
Not applicable

-------
TABLE 1-4
TREATMENT METHOD COSTS
Treatment	Total Costs
Method	(dollars per thousand liters	Reference
of effluent—1974)
Adsorption, carbon
0.03-0.18
40, 55
Adsorption, synthetic resins
0.04-0.32
55
Ozonation
0.007 -0.1
186
Chlorination
0.001
196
Permanganate oxidation
0.03-0.12
55
Lime coagulation
0.035 - 0.13
estimated
Alum coagulation
0.030 -0.15
55
Chitosan coagulation
0.014-0.78
estimated
Hydrogen sulfide
precipitation
0.033 - 0.14
estimated
Multistage flash
distillation
0.25 - 1.50
82
Combined vapor compression,
vertical tube evaporation,
multistage flash distillation
0.002 -0.01
CO
00
CM
CO
Ion exchange—antimony and
vanadium
0.062 - 0.58
96
Ion exchange—beryllium
0.005 -0.5
96
Ion exchange—cobalt and nickel
0.062 -0.45
96
Ion exchange—lithium
0.062 - 0.45
96
Ion exchange—molybdenum and
tungsten
0.06-0.4
96
Reverse osmosis
0.12-0.58
40, 116, 129, 136
Electrodialysis
0.08-0.45
58, 116, 138
These costs represent treatment to a safe, potable effluent. They are summary figures and
are not meant to reflect all possible cases. Generally, the conditions used to derive the
cost curves in the text were assumed for these costs as well.
12

-------
SECTION II
INTRODUCTION
With increased water quality consciousness in America, it has become necessary to
consider the removal of trace substances from drinking water. Some of these substances
are known to have a high acute toxicity if ingested in large quantities, some present
problems of chronic toxicity when ingested regularly, some may be carcinogenic; infor-
mation on the health effects of others is virtually non-existent. Regardless of toxicity,
however, if there is any reason to suspect that a substance might have adverse health
effects on humans, then it becomes necessary to consider means of removing the sub-
stance from drinking water, or at least reducing it to a harmless level.
Recent research has demonstrated possible hazards associated with several substances
previously considered harmless. Consequently, there has been a surge of interest in
possible treatment methods for removing these substances. This interest has led to con-
siderable research which, although valuable, is scattered, disjointed, and inconsistent.
It is extremely difficult to design a treatment plant when data and design information
are so scattered and difficult to correlate. As a result, several literature searches have
been initiated in an effort to locate, summarize, and evaluate all available data on
removing a wide variety of potentially hazardous substances from drinking water.
The hazardous substances considered in this study are antimony, beryllium, cobalt,
lithium, molybdenum, nickel, tungsten, vanadium, bis-ethers, polychlorinated biphenyls,
chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides, and organophosphorus insecticides. An effort was
made to identify all possible treatment processes and evaluate their efficiencies for
removing the subject contaminants. The initial plan was to include all processes for
which we had removal information and only those processes. From the first, however,
it was evident that this would not be acceptable. For instance, no information was
found regarding the use of electrodialysis or distillation to remove any of the subject
contaminants. They are included in the report, however, because they will work to
some (albeit unknown) extent, and to have left them out would have been to mislead
planners. They are workable alternatives and must be considered. On the other hand,
a number of processes were left out. For instance, one source detailed a fractional
crystallization method for extracting beryllium and lithium from water. The process
was deemed to be completely unacceptable from a technical and economic point-of-
view, and was not considered a viable alternative. Consequently, it was left out of
the final report. Similarly, such waste treatment processes as activated sludge and
trickling filters were also left out despite the fact that there was enough data available
to indicate that they could remove some of the subject materials. They were not con-
sidered to be acceptable as drinking water treatment methods, since drinking water
supplies do not contain sufficient nutrients to support the necessary biological growths.
Even for the treatment methods that are discussed, much of the information collected
relates to the treatment of wastewaters. This is unfortunate because of the difficulty
of applying wastewater treatment results to drinking water treatment, but there is very
little data relating to the removal of many of the subject contaminants from drinking
water supplies. For instance, almost all of the data presented in Table 1-1 is derived
13

-------
from wastewater treatment sources. The same treatment methods are used for drinking
water treatment, however, and many of the influent concentrations listed in Table 1-1
reflect environmental levels.
This report is arranged in two parts. The first (Section III) contains detailed information
regarding each of the twelve contaminants. Uses, occurrence, and sources of contamina-
tion are described for each substance. Toxicology is discussed in terms of effects and
lethal doses. Treatment methods are then listed for each substance with page references
to the process descriptions. Where available, removal efficiencies are listed as well.
The second part (Section IV) contains the process descriptions. Each process subsection
contains: information on the theory of operation; a description of the working process;
some design information, limitations, and constraints; operating conditions; general
applicability; specific application to the subject contaminants; and a cost section
presenting cost curves, information on the derivation of the curves, and land requirement
graphs. All text cost curves are presented in metric units. Appendix figures are pre-
sented in Biglish units. The comprehensive bibliography following the report is
arranged by category to facilitate further technical review.
14

-------
SECTION III
CONTAMINANTS
Introduction
This Section contains information on the characteristics of each of the twelve subject
contaminants and lists of possible treatment methods for removing them. Each contami-
nant is treated separately. Information is provided on the industrial uses and routes of
entry into drinking water supplies, toxicology (especially as relates to human toxicities),
and possibly useful water treatment and removal methods. Each treatment method
mentioned is accompanied by the more significant examples of its recorded efficiencies
for removing the subject contaminant where such information was available. Other
examples are included in Section IV. The page numbers accompanying each treatment
method refer to the comprehensive description and analysis of the particular treatment
method in question. The first number given is the first page of the discussion of the
particular method. Other numbers refer to the specific mention of the subject contami-
nant in the text. Table 111-1 gives a summary of pertinent physical properties of the
contaminants.
15

-------
TABLE lll-l
SUMMARY OF PERTINENT CONTAMINANT PROPERTIES
Contaminant
Natural
Sources
Industrial
Uses
Toxicity^ ^
(LD50)
Treatment
Methods
Notes
Antimony (Sb)
Beryllium (Be)
o-
Bis-ethers
Stibnite Sb_S„
(California, Lf?ah,
Idaho, Nevada)
Alloys
Batteries
Paints
Glass
Medicines
Beryl BegAL^iOg^Alloys
(New England, Penn- Nuclear reactor
sylvania, Virginia, parts
North Carolina, Ala-Rocket fuels
bama, South Dakota, Computer parts
Colorado, California)
None
Chlorinated hydro- None
carbon insecticides
Solvents
Organic synthesis
Insect control
2 mg/kg
body weight
86 mg/kg
l^g/liter -
400 mg/liter
(TLV)
Variable, but
generally high
Endrin - 3 mg/kg
DDT - 16 mg/kg
Aldrin - 39 mg/kg
Lime coagulation
h^S precipitation
Ion exchange
Distillation
Electrodialysis
Ion exchange
Distillation
Electrodialysis
More toxic as a
vapor than in aqu-
eous solution
Carbon adsorption	Volatile, virtually
Microwave decom- all boil below 100 C.
position	Insoluble in water
Carbon adsorption	Refractory, long half-
Coagulation/pre-	lives, insoluble in
cipitation	water
Reverse osmosis
Chemical oxidation

-------
TABLE III-l (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF PERTINENT CONTAMINANT PROPERTIES
Contaminant
Natural
Sources
Industrial
Uses
Toxicity' 97
(LD50)
Treatment
Methods
Notes
Cobalt (Co)
Lithium (Li)
Molybdenum (Mo)
Nickel (Ni)
Cobaltite CoAsS Alloys
Skutterudite (Co,Ni, Pigments
Fe) As- (Ontario, Medicines
Idaho)
Lepidolite	Alloys
(FfOhOjKLiAlgSigOjgCatalysts
Amblyqonite	Organic synthesis
ljakf'oh)
Spodumene
LiAI(SiO )
(New England, Calif.)
180 mg/kg
757 mg/kg
Molybdenite MoS«
(New England, Ne
Alloys
ew Glass
York, Pennsylvania, Ceramics
Colorado, New Mex- Inks
ico, Washington)
125 mg/kg
Nicolite NiAs	Alloys
Pentlandite (Fe,Ni)^SgPlating
(Ontario, New Jer- Batteries
sey, Tennessee, Pigments
Colorado, Californ?a)Organic Synthesis
1600 mg/kg
Magnetite adsorp- An essential nu-
ticn	trient in trace
Coagulation/precipi- amounts
tation
Distillation
Electrodialysis
Ion exchange
Distillation
Electrodialysis
Lime coagulation
Ion exchange
Chitosan precipita-
tion
Distillation
Electrodialysis
Reverse osmosis
Coag/pptn
Ion exchange
Distillation
Electrodialysis
Ubiquitous in
nature in trace
amounts.
LiCl used as a
salt substitute
in low sodium
diets
Essential trace
element for
plants

-------
TABLE III—1 (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF PERTINENT CONTAMINANT PROPERTIES
Contaminant
Natural
Sources
Industrial
Uses
Toxicity^ 97
(LD50)
Treatment
Methods
Notes
Organic phosphorus None
insecticides
Polychlorinated
biphenyls
Tungsten (W)
Vanadium (V)
None
Wolframite (Fe,Mn)WO,
Scheelite CaWO^
(Connecticut, North
Carolina, Missouri,
South Dakota, Colorado,
Nevada, Arizona, Calif.)
Insect control
Synthesis
Insulation
Plasticizers
Paints
Alloys
Lamp filaments
Alloys
Glassware
Carnotite
K (UO ) (VO.L.3H O	Glas:
Vanadinife Pb^VO^CI	Dyes
(Arizona, New Mexico,	Inks
Utah, Colorado, Pennsyl-	Catalysts
vania)	Pesticides
Variable, but high Carbon adsorption
Parathion - 2 mg/kg Chemical hydrolysis Biodegradable
Malathion - 600mg/kg
0.5 mg/m (TLV)
1190 mg/kg
160 mgAg
with short
half-lives
Carbon adsorption
Gamma irradiation
inso
luble
Ion exchange
Coagulation/precipi-
tation
Distillation
Electrodialysis
Coagu I at i on/prec i-
pitation
Ion exchange
Distil lation
Electrodialysis
More toxic as
vapor or dust
than in solution

-------
Antimony (Sb)
Occurrence.
Antimony is a heavy metal used in the manufacture of bearings, alloys (such as Babbit)'
metal and hard lead), storage battery grids, pewter, printing type, lead electrodes,
rubber, textiles, paint, and glass. Its presence in water supplies can usually be traced
to wpsfe discharges from one of these industries. Antimony in solution exists as the
Sb43 or Sb+^ cation, or as the antimonite [SbOg Or Sb (OH)^-] anion.
Toxicology.
The toxicity of antimony is similar to arsenic's, although less acute. Antimony poisoning
can result in dermatitis, keratitis, conjunctivitis, nasal septal ulceration, and liver
damage.^ Jhe industrial threshold limit value (TLV) is 0.5 mg/m3.62 Antimony's
median lethal dose (LD50) varies from 1 00 mgAg as antimony metal to 4,000 mg/kg as
SbOs.^ A non-official recommended drinking water limit not to be exceeded is 0.1
mg/liter.33
Treatment Methods.
~
Lime Coagulation (Page I V-21 , IV-29). Removal efficiencies of better than 90 percent
have been demonstrated.3^
Hydrogen Sulfide Precipitation (Page IV—21, IV-30). Antimony sulfide has a solubility
of less than 2 mg/liter. Removal should be accomplished at least to that limit provided
that stoichiometric or better quantities of H2S are used.^'^
Ion Exchange (Page 1V-58, IV-62). Laboratory tests with Amberlite CG-400 have
demonstrated that at least 13 fjg can be removed with 10 g of resin.
Distillation (Page IV-40).
Electrodialysis (Page IV—.51).
* Page number refers to page in Section IV on treatment processes where the particular
treatment is discussed.
19

-------
Beryllium (Be)
Occurrence.
Natural weathering of beryllium-containing minerals can produce beryllium concentra-
tions in water of up to 0.31 /ig/liter.^ Higher concentrations are usually the result
of industrial waste discharges. Industrial uses and products include nuclear reactor
components, solid rocket fuels, filaments in neon and fluorescent tubes, and some
alloys. In aqueous solutions the ion normally exists as Be+^.
Toxicology.
Airborne beryllium is extreme!y toxic. Waterborne beryllium is not nearly as toxic as a
rule, except for certain of its salts.Exposure to relatively low concentrations of
the metal or one of these salts may cause death. Sub-lethal doses may cause dermatitis,
chemical conjunctivitis, ulcerations, rickets, blood or bone tumors, kidney stones,
and liver damage. The industrial 8-hour TLV Is 2 //g/m^ with a 30-minute peak limit
of 25 // g/m^.28 Tests on minnows have yielded 96-hour median tolerance limits
(TLm) of 0.15 mg/liter in soft water and 15 mg/liter in hard water.33
Treatment Methods.
Ion Exchange (Page IV-58, IV-62). Experiments on solutions containing 8.4 to 10.5 mg Be
treated with Dowex 50 have yielded removals of 93-100 percent J ^
Distillation (Page IV-40).
Electrodialysis (Page IV—51).
20

-------
Bis—Efhers
Bis-ethers have the structure R-O-R, where R is any organic radical (e.g., ethyl ether,
isopropyl ether, phenyl ether, and dichlorethyl ether).
Occurrence.
Bis-ethers do not occur naturally in water, but rather are associated with industrial
discharges. Uses vary from one ether to another, but generally include solvents and
precursers in organic synthesis. For example, dichloromethyl ether is used as a solvent
in textile scouring, isopropyl ether as an anaesthetic, and chlormethyl ether as an
intermediary in the manufacture of strongly basic anion exchange resins. Concentra-
tions in water are usually quite low, as the various compounds are insoluble. However,
bis-ethers can be emulsified under some conditions.
Toxicology.
The bis-ethers are irritants to skin, eyes, and mucous membranes. When ingested in
sufficient concentrations they can cause death. Threshold limit values can
range from 1 // g/liter for chl
methyl ether is a carcinogen.
Treatment Methods.
Carbon Adsorption (Page IV-2, IV-6). In laboratory tests of activated carbon treatment,
isopropyl ether concentrations were reduced from 1,023 to 203 mg/liter, butyl ether
concentrations from 197 mg/liter to nil, and dichloroisopropyl ether concentrations from
1,008 mg/liter to nil.168
Microwave Decomposition (Page IV-77, IV-78). Laboratory tests on simple ethers have
achieved reductions approaching 100 percent
^rqmethyl ether to 400 mg/liter for ethyl etherChlono-
21

-------
Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Insecticides
The following is a list of chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides and the drinking water
limits proposed for inclusion in the interim primary drinking water regulations.
Insecticide	1974 Limits (mc/liter)
Chlordane	0.003
Endrin	0.0002
Heptachlor	0.0001
Heptachlor Epoxide	0.0001
Lindane	0.004
Methoxychlor	0.1
Toxaphene	0.005
Aldrin, DDT, and Dieldrin are not on the list because their manufacture has been pro-
hibited. However, they may still appear in drinking water as a result of prior applica-
tions and current use of previously produced stocks.
Occurrence.
Contamination of water with these insecticides is associated with agricultural runoff,
atmospheric fallout, accidental spills, and insecticide manufacturing waste discharges.
They are generally applied in aqueous solution, in aqueous slurry, as a powder or dust,
or as an oil-borne emulsion.. Concentrations are usually quite low, as the various in-
secticides are virtually insoluble. For example, DDT in United States rivers has been
found in concentrations up to 0.72 /i g/liter, Aldrin up to 0.085 fl g/liter, Dieldrin up
to 0.17 ft g/liter, chlordane up to 0.075 fi g/liter, Heptachlor up to 0.16 /i g/liter,
and Endrin up to 4.23 // g/liter.^
Toxicology.
The chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides are neurotoxicants. They can enter the body
by ingestion, inhalation, or dermal absorption. The nature of the effects and toxicities
will vary from individual to individual, ranging from no effects at high intakes to death
from moderate intakes. The evidence regarding human toxicity is incomplete and often
contradictory. In general, the wisest course is to consider these chemicals as highly
toxic and to handle accordingly.
Treatment Methods.
Activated Carbon (Page IV-2, IV-6, IV-7).
22

-------
•	In pilot-plant tests, chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides at 6.3fl g/liter were
reduced to 0.04 to 0.11 ^g/liter.
•	Laboratory-scale tests on 5 mg/liter solutions yielded removal efficiencies of 76
percent for DDT, 85 percent for Aldrin, and 86 percent for Endrin.^
•	In laboratory-scale tests, Lindane was reduced from 10 to 1 A* g/liter 29
mg/liter carbon and from 1 to 0.05/i g/liter with 9 mg/liter carbon.
•	In laboratory-scale tests, Aldrin and Dieldrin were reduced by 99 percent using
10 g carbon/m^ of water. Insecticide concentrations were not given.
Coagulation/Precipitation (Page IV—21 , 1V-30).
•	In laboratory-scale tests with lime on 1 Oy g/liter solutions, removal
efficiencies of 98 percent for DDT, 55 percent for Dieldrin, ^5. percent for
Endrin, and less than 10 percent for Lindane were achieved.
•	In laboratory tests with alum, DDT was reduced from 10 to 0.2 fj g/liter and from
25 to 0.75 fJ g/liter.^
•	KMnO^ at 1 mg/liter can oxidize and precipitate sub-mg/liter quantities of
Aldrin completely in 15 minutes; at 40 mg/liter, sub-mg/liter quantities of
Heptachlor were completely removed in 5 hours. Endrin was not affected.*^
Reverse Osmosis (Page IV—81, IV-85).
•	In laboratory-scale tests using cellulose acetate membranes, Lindane was re-
duced from 50 to 8 mg/liter and from 500 to 133 mg/liter. DDT was reduced
from 910 to less than 3 mg/liter. DDD was reduced from 23 to less than 0.006
H g/liter. Lindane was reduced from 638 to 306 fj g/liter.' 14,120
•	Other researchers ha(ve demonstrated Lindane reductions of 73 percent from
500 mg/liter in raw water and 99 percent reductions of DDT and DDD from 500
mg/liter in raw water.^
General Adsorption (Page IV-2,IV-7). In laboratory-scale tests using Amberlite XAD-4,
Lindane was reduced from 40 to 0.4 mg/liter. Feeds of 20 mg/liter or less yielded an
effluent in which Liryl^e was undetectable. Similar results were obtained with other
insecticides as well.
Oxidation (Page IV— 12, IV-14, IV-16).ln laboratory-scale water treatment tests, DDT
was reduced from 2 .0 to 0.14 mg/liter and Dieldrin was reduced from 1 .31 to 0.22
mg/liter in 20 minutes using ozone J
Ultra-violet Irradiation (Page IV-77, IV-78). After ultra-violet exposure for one hour,
removals of 45 percent (Aldrin), 19 percent (Endrin), and 18 percent (Dieldrin) were
achieved. Concentrations were not given.
23

-------
Ion Exchange (Page IV-58,1V-63). There is some evidence that ion exchange can be used
for insecticide removal, but the data are incomplete. See text for particulars.
Ultrafiltration (Page IV-91). Ultrafiltration is capable of virtually complete removal
of particulate and oil-emulsified insecticides.^®
24

-------
Cobalt (Co)
Occuri cnce.
Cobalt is commonly used in alloy manufacture, nuclear technology, blue pigments foi
glass and china, and as a binder in the tungsten carbide tool industry. Cobalt in water
can result from waste discharges from these industries or from weathering of cobalt-
containing minerals. Natural concentrations can range to as much as 0.019 pig/liter,
with an average of 0.002 mg/liter. Jn solution, it exists primarily as Co4^.
Toxicology.
Cobalt is reported to be beneficial or non-toxic in concentrations up to 7fi g/day. In
excess it can cause polycythemia and respiratory ailments. 14,174 The TLV is 0.1
mg/m^ No official or unofficial drinking water limits have been established for
cobalt.
Treatment Methods.
Sorption on Magnetite (Page IV-2,IV-7). Removal efficiencies up to 94 percent have
been achieved in bench-scale water treatment experiments.
Carbon Adsorption (Page IV-2, 1V-7). At a pH of 2.8, the cobalt-APDC complex can
be quantitatively extracted into methylisobutyl ketone (MIBK).^ Stoichiometric
quantities of APDC are required. The APDC complex can be adsorbed onto activated
carbon.
Precipitation (Page IV—21, 1V-29, IV-30).
•	Ca (OH)2 reduced cobalt from 12 to 1 .4 mg/liter.^
•	Chitosan polymer treatment reduced cobalt concentrations by 62 percent in 50
mg/liter Co test solutions
Ion Exchange (Page 1V-58, IV-62). Wofatit MC50 chelating resin has demonstrated
virtually complete removal of cobalt from influent solutions containing 11 to 12 mg Co.^®
Distillation (Page IV-40).
Electrodialysis (Page IV-51).
* APDC—ammonium pyrrolidine dithiocarbamate.
25

-------
Lithium (Li)
Occurrence.
Although lithium in water usually results from natural causes, industrial discharges are
at times responsible for large or widely fluctuating concentrations. Lithium is used
industrially in certain alloys, as a "getter" in vacuum tubes, in lithium-hardened
bearing metals, in aircraft fijels, and in the synthesis of catalysts for various chemical
industries. Lithium salts are used in porcelain enamels, air conditioning, and multi-
purpose greases. In solution, it is found as the Li+ ion.
Toxicology.
Lithium is not known to be toxic at the concentrations most likely to be encountered.
Lithium chloride (LiCI) is used as a salt substitute in low-sodium diets.
Treatment Methods.
Ion Exchange (Page IV-58, 1V-62). The ion sieve cation exchange resin ISM—1 is ex-
tremely selective for lithium and has demonstrated virtually complete removals at low
concentrations.' ^
Distillation (Page IV-40),
Electrodialysis (Page IV-51).
26

-------
Molybdenum (Mo)
Occurrence.
Molybdenum can occur naturally in drinkina water supplies at concentrations up to
20/ig/liter due to weathering of minerals. It can also be found in water as a result of
waste discharges from industries related to the manufacture of glassware, ceramics,
printing inks, electrical equipment, and certain steel alloys.'3,33 |n solution it can
exist as the cation Mo+^, Mo+^, or Mo+5 or as the molybdate anion (M0O4
Toxicology.
Molybdenum is mildly toxic to man. In low concentrations it is an essential mineral
nutrient acting as a catalyst in the protein xanthine oxidase, a metabolic growth
factor J 3 Animal tests have demonstrated that an excess of molybdenum can cause
liver and kidney damage J 3 Molybdenum can concentrate in plant tissues up to 15 times
the exposure concentration.^ The TLV's for soluble and insoluble compounds are 5
and 10 mg/liter, respectively.^ Experiments on minnows have yielded 96-hour LD5Qisin
soft and hard water of 70 and 370 mg/liter, respectively.33
Treatment Methods.
Lime Coagulation (Page IV-21, 1V-29). At a pH of 8.2, molybdenum concentrations
were reduced by only 10 percent.
Ion Exchange (Page IV-58, IV-63). Several resins have shown a capability of removing
96+ percent of molybdenum from solutions of 0.1 to 5 mg/liter.^'
Precipitation (Page IV-21, IV-30). Chitosan polymer is reported to have reduced molyb-
denum concentrations from 2500 mg/liter to 36 mg/liter.
Distillation (Page 1V-40).
Electrodialysis (Page IV-51).
27

-------
Nickel (Ni)
Occurrence.
Nickel occurs naturally at concentrations up to 0.072 mg/liter with an average concen-
tration of about 0.005 mg/liter.33 Wastewater discharges from industries associated with
nickel-plating, nickel alloying, storage battery manufacturing, organic hydrogenation,
and the manufacture of nickel-chrome resistance wire can contribute to its presence in
water sources.33 In solution, it exists primarily as Ni+^.
Toxicology.
Nickel-contaminated water can cause dermatitis in sensitive individuals. Ingestion
of large quantities can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, central nervous system de-
pression, and myocardial damage. The airborne TLV is 1 mg/m^.^ Tests on minnows
have yielded 96-hour LC50
-------
Organic Phosphorus Insecticides
Occurrence.
Organophosphorus insecticides are short-lived, biodegradable, and highly toxic. The
more common ones include Demeton, Malathion, andParathion. Standards have been
established for those whose half-lives in water exceed eight weeks, such as Azodrin
(0.003 mg/liter), Dichlorvos (0.01 mg/liter), Dimethoate (0.002 mg/liter), and Ethion
(0.02 mg/liter). Like the chlorinated hydrocarbons, they do not occur naturally in
water, but are associated with wastes from manufacturing and agricultural uses. Con-
centrations of several // g/liter have been found
Toxicology.
The organophosphorus insecticides have a high acute mammalian toxicity. They are
cholinesterase inhibitors and consequently can cause severe malfunctions of neurotrans-
mitter mechanisms. Parathion and its derivatives are the most toxic organic phosphorus
insecticides; Malathion is about 0.01 as toxic.
Treatment Methods.
Activated Carbon (Page IV-2, IV-7).
•	In laboratory-scale tests, Parathion was reduced from 10 to 2,6 mg/liter and
Malathion from 2 to 0.25 mg/liter. Powdered carbon was used at 10 mg/liter
dosages.
•	In laboratory-scale tests, Parathion was reduced from 10 to 2.5 mg/liter using
5 mg/liter powdered carbon, from 10 to 0.1 mg/liter using 20 mg/liter
powdered carbon, and from 11 .4 to 0.05 U g/liter using dual granulated
carbon columns. "
Chemical Hydrolysis (Page 1V-16). One hundred percent reduction is possible using
5.25 percent hypochlorite.&
29
-------
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB's)
Occurrence.
These organic compounds do not occur naturally in water, but rather are associated
with waste disposal and accidental spills. Recent American regulations have restricted
their use to closed system electrical applications as insulation.Previously, they
were often used in the manufacture of plasticizere, flame retardants, synthetic rubber,
floor tile, ink, and paints.24 Aqueous concentrations are usually quite low, as the
various biphenyls are insoluble. Most of the PCB's produced in this country are produced
by Monsanto and are identified by the trade name Arochlor.
Toxicology.
The toxicity of the PCB's increases with increasing chlorine content.^ The human
organs particularly affected include the liver and kidneys. The	for PCB's
ranges from 500 to 4500 mg/kg«
Treatment Methods.
General Adsorption (Page IV-2, IV-7).
•	In laboratory tests using ion exchange, Amberlite XAD-4 treatment removed up
to 76 percent. Concentrations were not reported J 73
•	Several clay minerals have demonstrated PCB removal capability in laboratory
tests: illite 60 percent, montmorillonite 40 percent, and kaolinite 40 percent.^
Gamma Irradiation (Page IV-77, IV-78). Tests on 1 00 fi g/liter solutions of PCB's
yielded treatment removal efficiencies as high as 95 percent, depending on the dose,
pH, and presence or absence of oxygen J ^
30
-------
Tungstrn (W)
Occurrence.
The presence of tungsten in wafer can be attributed primarily to industrial discharge.
Tungsten is commonly used for incandescent lamp filaments and electron tubes, in
electronic communication apparatus, and as a toughener in the manufacture of steel.
It exists primarily as the tungstate anion {WO4) in aqueous solution.
Toxicology.
Little data is available on the toxicity of tungsten. In experiments on chickens,
ingested tungsten prompted the excretion of molybdenum, the loss of which adversely
affected their growth metabolism.^ jhe LD50 for soluble tungsten is 1190 mg/l:g.
Treatment Method.
Ion Exchange (Page IV-58, IV—63). DEAE cellulose is capable of reducing tungsten
concentrations of 0.004 to 2 mg/liter by 98 or more percent."'
Precipitation (Page IV—21, 1V-30). Chitosan polymer has reduced tungsten concentrations
from 500 to 170 mg/liter in laboratory tests.' *3
Distillation (Page IV-40).
Electrodialysis (Page IV-51).
31
-------
Vanadium (V)
Occurrence.
Vanadium in water is usually associated with industrial discharge. It can occur naturally
in concentrations up to 15 mg/liter, but is usually in significantly smaller quantities.
It is used in the production of rusf-resistant steel and in glassware, dyes, inks, paints,
varnish dryers, alloys, pesticides, and fuel oils.^ Vanadium pentoxide (V2O5) is used
as a catalyst in the manufacture of H2SO4. In solution, it may be found as V^ , y+5^
metavanadate (VO2"), VO4" , or V2 .
Toxicology.
There is no strong evidence that vanadium is carcinogenic to man or animal. It
inhibits the synthesis of cholesterol.^ When ingested tt,can cause gastric in-
testinal disturbances; inhibit the enzyme cholinesterase; cause a decrease in serum
albumin; and cause fatty degeneration, cirrhosis of the liver, kidney damage, anemia,
and muscular atrophy. " The TLV for V^O^ dust is 0.5/ig/m^, and for its fumes is
0.05 mg/m^. The 96-hour TLm for vanadium as vanadyl sulfate is 4.8 mg/liter in soft
water, and 30 mg/liter in hard water.^ The 96-hour TLm for V2O5 is 13 mg/liter in
soft water, and 35 mg/liter in hard water.^
Treatment Methods.
Coagulation/Precipitation (Page IV—21, IV-30).
•	Coagulation with iron or aluminum salts is capable of reducing concentrations
from 249 to 1 mg/liter J
•	Chitosan polymer reportedly precipitates vanadium quite effectively. Numerical
data were not found, however.
Ion Exchange (Page IV-58, IV-63). De-acidite FF can reduce vanadium in solutions
containing up to 5 mg by 96 percent.^ Five grams of Dowex 1-X8 can produce a 97
percent vanadium-free effluent from 2 liters of sea water containing 5.58 H g vanadium/
liter."
Distillation (Page IV-40).
Electrodialysis (Pago IV-51).
32
-------
SECTION IV
TREATMENT PROCESSES
Introduction
This Section contains detailed descriptions of the water treatment methods referenced in
Section III: adsorption, chemical oxidation, coagulation/precipitation, distillation,
electrodialysis, ion exchange, radiochemical degradation, reverse osmosis, and ultra-
filtration. Each treatment method sub-section includes process theory, process descrip-
tion, limitations and constraints/jpplications, and specific applications for the twelve
subject contaminants. Each sub-section presents capital, operation and maintenance,
and total cost estimate curves. Information describing the references used to formulate
the cost curves can be found in the Appendix. Land requirement curves are also presented.
33
-------
Adsorption
Process Description and Theory.
Adsorption is a surface phenomenon involving the accumulation of substances at a sur-
face or interface between one phase and another. The process can occur at the inter-
face between any two phases but, in the case under consideration, only the liquid-solid
interface will be discussed.
Adsorption from solution onto a solid generally results from one of two driving forces
(or a combination, as is the case with most water and wastewater treatment systems).
These driving forces may result from a lyophobic (solvent-disliking) solute in regards to
the solvent, or from a solute with a high affinity for the solid. The intensity of the first
force is related to the solubility of the dissolved substance. The less soluble or more
hydrophobic a substance is, the more likely it is to move toward an interface and be ad-
sorbed. The second driving force results from a specific affinity of the solute for the
solid. This affinity may be one of three types of surface phenomena: electrical attrac-
tion, van der Waals' attraction, or chemical attraction. The first falls under the head-
ing of ion exchange and as such is discussed elsewhere. Adsorption as a result of van
der Waals' forces is generally termed "physical" adsorption. Chemical adsorption or
"chemisorption" describes the situation where the adsorbate undergoes chemical inter-
action with the adsorbent.
There are basically two modes of operation—batch-type contact and column-type contin-
uous flow. In a batch operation, a quantity of the adsorbent (powdered, granular, pel-
letized, etc.) is added to a specific volume of water to be treated. The solution is
mixed and allowed to remain in contact for a predetermined time. The adsorbent is then
filtered out, leaving a cleaner effluent. The exhausted adsorbent can be discarded or
regenerated. The influent in column operations (see Figures IV—1 and IV-2) passes through
a fixed column of adsorbent, producing a cleaner effluent. When the adsorbent can no
longer remove the contaminants, the exhausted column is withdrawn and either discarded
or regenerated. Fixed-bed adsorption systems can be operated in series or parallel
(Figure IV-3).
Moving-bed operations are variations on the column-type configuration. In a moving
bed, the water flow is directed upward through the bottom of the adsorber and clean wa-
ter is drawn off at the top. The system is designed to remove slugs and exhausted ad-
sorbent from the bottom while fresh adsorbent is added at the top.
The most frequently used absorbents of the several available are activated carbon, pow-
dered or granular charcoal, and carbon. Generally speaking, granular carbon is used
in column-type operations and powdered carbon in batch-type units.
Column-type carbon units are usually operated at 1 to 2 literv'sec/m^ with column dimen-
34
-------
SURFACE
VM3H
INFLUENT
FRESH CARBO
SPENT
CARBON
BACKWASH
D=AI,H
ErFLUENT

CARBON
SAND
GRAVEL
FILTER BLOCKS
Source: 193
FIGURE IV-1
TYPICAL ACTIVATED CARBON
ADSORPTION BED
35
-------
XJ_. r_rjj_xL_Li_LL-U. J J-. -Li-' -AJ-U-HTb-
BOLT RING
INFLUENT
BACKWASH
r\
20 I HOLES
FT
WASH
WATER
CARBON CHARGE
SURFACE WASH
CARBON BED SURFACE
u_
Ul
NEVA CLOG SCREEN

CARBON DISCHARGE
EFFLUENT
BACKWASH
<• lpq	FIGURE IV-2
source: lyj.	TYPICAL ACTIVATED CARBON
ADSORPTION COLUMN
(IAKE TAHOE)
36
-------
r*
	Reactivated Granular Girbon	
r 	i
r
~1
Adsorber
Adsorbei
Spent
Carbon
Storage
Tank
1	
I
L_J
Influent
Wr-Jl
To Filtration,
Chlorination and
Distribution
Fi Itration
Coagulation and
Sedimentation
Furnace
[U\
After-
Bumer
Stac !<.
Quench
Reac-
tivated
Carbon
Storage
uz_
Recycle |
Source: 55.
FIGURE IV-3
CARBON ADSORPTION:
FIXED BED IN SERIES
37
-------
sions of 3 to 9 m deep and 1 .2 to 6 m in diameter. Contact time averages about one
to two hours. When powdered activated carbon is being used, the carbon dosage is
usually kept at 50 to 3,000 mg/liter of water. The residence lime is 2 to 3 hours if
three consecutive adsorption tanks are used; 48 to 120 hours if there is only one tank.
Using activated carbon, pretreatment is necessary if the suspended solids concentration
in the water exceeds 50 mg/liter.. Chemicaf clarification is usually least expensive,
although filters are more reliable. The activated carbon becomes exhausted after a
certain period. It can be reactivated by dewatering, then heating to 816 to 927 C
until the adsorbed impurities are oxidized and vaporized.
Other adsorbents are usually applied in a similar fashion. Among the more common
types are clays, silica, zeolites, magnetite, and polymeric material. Clay's natural
adsorbency has been put to use in water and wastewater treatment. Clay is not particu-
larly easy to work with, but it is cheap and can be easily disposed of by landfilling.
Silica is another good natural adsorbent, but purified silica is expensive and its use
has largely been limited to laboratory separations. Zeolites and magnetite lie about
mid-way between ion exchange and adsorption. They are used most commonly for wa-
ter softening and are regenerated chemically. A number of synthetic organic polymers,
such as polyurethane and Amberfite, have found application as adsorbents. They are
easily regenerated chemically and virtually Indestructible under normal operating con-
ditions.
Application.
Activated carbon, probably the most useful method for removing organic compounds
from water, is commonly used for removing humic taste and odor compounds from
drinking water and for removing refractory organics from sewage. Enough information
is available to show that it could be used to treat all of the organic subject contam-
inants.
Laboratory tests on ethers have shown activated carbon capable of reducing isopropyl
ether concentrations from 1023 to 203 mg/liter, butyl ether concentrations from 197
mg/liter to nil, and dichloroisopropyl ether concentrations from 1008 mg/liter to nil
The research indicated that higher molecular weight ethers are more readily adsorbed
than lower weight ethers. The lower the solubility of the ether, the higher the adsorption.
Higher pH tends to increase the capacity of the carbon J
Investigations of Endrin and Dieldrin with initial concentrations in the range of 0.5 to
10 U g/liter have found that the pesticides could be reduced to 0.25// g/liter with
powdered activated carbon dosages of 30 to 60 mg/liter. Sigworth found that over 99
percent of Chlordane with a 50 mg/liter initial concentration was removed by a 10 mg/
liter carbon dosage. Whitehouse investigated Aldrin and Dieldrin with concentrations
of 0.0066 and 0.0044 mg/liter, respectively, and showed that over 90 percent removal
could be obtained after one hour and a carbon dosage of 100 mg/liter for Aldrin and
200 mg/liter for Dieldrin.^ Sigworth studied DDT and Lindane with initial concentrations
38
-------
A r
of 5 mg/liter and 25 mg/liter, respectively. He concluded that 10 mg/liter carbon
dosage in the treatment plant could accomplish 90 percent removal of most pesticides.
Adsorption by granular carbon has been considered one of the most effective methods
of removing organic phosphorus insecticides. Robeck found that Parathion concentration
in water was reduced from 11 .4 to 0.05 mg/liter by passage through two carbon columns.^
The necessary carbon dosage and the associated degree of removal for methyl Parathion,
Demeton, and Guthion should be in the same range as those for Parathion. Huang found
that 10 mg/liter carbon could reduce Parathion from 10 to 0.1 A^g/liter and 126 mg/liter
carbon could reduce Endrin from 10//g/liter to 0.1 //g/literJ®
Although no data were found, activated carbon should also be able to remove the heavy
metals. There is some removal of the ions, but removal efficiencies can be increased
to nearly 100 percent by adding an organic chelating agent (such as dithizone, oxime,
or EDTA)^2jhe carbon removes the complex by adsorbing the organic agent, bringing
the metal with it.
There are other adsorbants capable of removing pesticides. Musty investigated the use
of the synthetic polymer Amberlite XAD-4 for the removal of various insecticides J ^3
The pesticides examined includeddt-BHC, Lindane, /3-BHC, Aldrin, and Dieldrin in tap
water at initial concentrations of 1 fJ g/liter each. He found consistent removals of
better than 60 percent.
Voznesenskaya investigated the use of crushed magnetite for the removal of nickel and
cobalt J78 Crushed natural magnetite (diameter 0.4 to 0.6 mm) was used in 60 cm deep
beds. Removal efficiencies for cobalt and nickel were 94 and 86 percent, respectively.
Concentration data were not given.
Activated Carbon Costs.
Costs were estimated over a plant size range of 1 to 1,000 liters/sec. Capital costs were
amortized at 7 percent over a twenty year period. Capital costs decline until about
450 liters/sec, where adding duplicate units causes the curve to level. Operation and
maintenance costs included overhead (40 percent of the costs). Carbon costs were estima-
ted to be $0.66Ag. A powdered carbon dosage rate of 100-250 mg/liter was used with
a recovery rate of 85 percent. For granular carbon, a 5 percent loss upon reactivation
was assumed. In determining frequency of regeneration, a hypothetical water concen-
tration of 750 mg/liter was assumed. This includes all possible contamination which
might be removed by carbon and not just the subject contaminants. Electrical power
was estimated at $0.02 pei kwhr. Estimates of capital cost (Figure 1V-4), operation
and maintenance cost (Figure IV-5), total cost (Figure IV-6), and land requirements
(Figure IV-7) are presented. Land requirements were calculated based on in-house .
information and manufacturers' claims.
39
-------
1.0
0.1
0.01
10	100
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
1000
Source* Sec Fiaure A-l	FIGURE IV-4
Source, bee figure A I.	ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION:
CAPITAL COST
1974
40
-------
1 .0
o
o
o
0.1
0.01
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-5
ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
Source: See Figure A-2.	1974
41
-------
1.0
I 1 I
I I I
J.
I i in!
i i i I i 111
10	100
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
1000
Source* See Fiqure A-3	FIGURE IV-6
9	ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION:
TOTAL COST
1974
42
-------
.2
.0
.8
.6
.4
2
0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
400
200
100C
0
6C0
800
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-7
Source: 198.	ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION:
LAND REQUIREMENTS
43
-------
Chemical Oxidation
Process Description and Theory.
Oxidation, a chemical process involving some change in the nature of the chemical
compounds involved, results from: withdrawal of hydrogen, addition of oxygen, or
withdrawal of electron(s). The first type of reaction can be illustrated by the oxi-
dation of an alcohol to an aldehyde.
rch2ch-oh —rch2ch=o
The second type of reaction can be illustrated by the oxidation of an aldehyde to an
organic acid.
RCH,CH=0 —»- RCH0C=0
2	OH
The third type of reaction involves electron transfer from the substrate to the oxidizing
9	-C— C- + Cu*+2-U^C = + Cu<+1) + 1/2H2
For certain simple inorganic reactions, oxidation is equivalent to a loss of electrons.
In general, oxidation (like reduction) refers to the change of oxidation state or oxida-
tion number. When a compound contains an atom which undergoes an increase in oxi-
dation number, the compound is said to be oxidized.
Oxidation is used as a water treatment to convert undesirable chemical and biological
species into species which are neither harmful nor otherwise objectionable. Most
frequently it is neither necessary nor practical to carry the oxidation process to absolute
completion,as compounds of much lower toxicity are formed as intermediate oxidation
products. In general, chemical oxidation for water treatment ir\cludes the oxidation
of inorganic substances such as Mn+^ (to MnO 2(5)), 5 (to SO ^), SOg- (to SO
etc., and organic substances such as phenols, amines, humic acids, bacteria, ana
algae.
The four major oxidation agents generally used are: air, ozone, chlorine, and
permanganate. Aeration is used to accomplish several purposes other than oxidation,
such as stripping of volatile gases and organics. It is used to oxidize divalent iron
and manganese and certain taste and odor imparting organic compounds. The major
disadvantage of aeration is that the oxidation proceeds more slowly than in other oxi-
dation methods. There are several ways in which aeration can be accomplished. The
most common is air diffusion, in which compressed air is bubbled through the water. A
similar process involves the spraying of water into the air. In a third method—gravity
aeration—the water is allowed to fall over a series of steps and baffles.
Ozone is useful for phenol and cyanide oxidation, iron and manganese removal, disin-
fection, and taste and odor removal. For ozonation of water, ozone must be manufac-
tured at the treatment site. Ozone is unstable, spontaneously decomposing to oxygen,
44
-------
and consequently cannot be stored for any length of time. Clean, dry air or oxygen is
passed through an electrical discharge to generate the ozone. The gaseous ozone is
then mixed with the water in a contact chamber or ozone tower.
The disinfection of relatively clean water requires 1 to 2 mg ozone/liter J ^ The
efficiency of ozone absorption from air depends on the time of exposure, the effective
interface, and the concentration differential. The advantages of using ozone as an oxi-
ck^ include its rapid rate of reaction, the fact that it imparts no taste or odor to the
water, and the fact that it adds no dissolved solids which must be removed later. Ozone's
disadvantages include its relatively high cost and that it must be generated on site and
used immediately.
Chlori ne, the most common method of destroying disease-producing organisms found in
drinking water, also improves coagulation and odor control. The advantage of using
chlorine is based on its relatively low cost and its oxidizing power. Chlorine gas is
highly irritating and must be handled with care. Below 9.5C, chlorine combines with
water to form chlorine hydrate (chlorine ice) which obstructs feeding equipment. If
phenols contaminate the water, chlorine disinfection can cause the formation of chloro-
phenols, which impart unpleasant tastes and odors. There is some evidence that chlorine
reacts with industrial organic wastes to produce exotic carcinogens.
Chlorine is available as a relatively pure liquid or in solid compounds. The chlorine
compounds which have been used for water-treatment are chlorinated lime (CaCIOCI),
calcium hypochlorite (Ca(OCI)2)f sodium hypochlorite (NaOCI), and chlorine dioxide
(CIQ2). relatively large-scale water treatment, liquid chlorine is much less ex-
pensive than solid. Chlorine gas is toxic and the chlorine containers must be handled
with utmost care.
There are two ways to feed the chlorine gas: direct feed and solution feed. In direct feed,
chlorine gas is fed directly into the water by means of a control and measuring device
known as a chlorinator. In this process, particular care must be taken to provide suitable
diffusion of the gas at adequate submersion depth to prevent the loss of free chlorine.
Usually, it is submerged at least four feet. In solution feed,chlorine gas is dissolved
under controled conditions in a small flow of water that is passed through a gas-flow
regulating device. This concentrated solution of chlorine is then added to the water
to be treated. Solid chlorine compounds are generally dissolved in a small quantity of
water before they go to the feeding point. These solutions or slurries are then added to
the water.
Potassium permanganate (KMnCXj.) has been used as a water treatment to remove iron and
manganese as the oxides and organic compounds by oxidation. Organic oxidation products are
enmeshed in the resulting MnC>2 precipitate. Potassium permanganate is a powerful
oxidizing agent, does not impart tastes or odors to the water, is relatively safe and
easy to handle, and can be fed either as a solid or as an aqueous solution. Solids are
fed directly into the raw water in large mixing chambers. Mechanical mixing
45
-------
is necessary to ensure complete mixing and dispersal of the permanganate. Solution
permanganate is fed from a chemical tank in which the solution is agitated constantly
to insure mixing. The feed rate is usually proportional to the flow rate of the raw water.
Application.
Of our subject contaminants, the organics are more susceptible to oxidation than the
inorganics. Theoretically, some of the transition metals could be oxidized to the oxides
(which are insoluble),but, in practice, this is usually kinetically unfavorable. This
discussion of the specific applications of oxidation will consequently be limited to the
organic compounds.
Most of the available information concerns the oxidation of insecticides. Chlorination
is not particularly effective in oxidizing chlorinated hydrocarbons.^'^' * Further-
more, there is a distinct possibility that the chlorine and insecticides will react to
form new compounds which may be more toxic than the original chlorinated hydrocarbons.
Consequently, the use of chlorine is not recommended for treating chlorinated hydrocarbons.
Data on the use of potassium permanganate as the oxidant are contradictory. It would
soem that different pesticides are affected differently. One researcher reported that
KMn04 was ineffective in removing Endrin and Dieldrin but was capable of 80 + percent
removal of Aldrin and Heptachlor under a wide variety of conditions and with short
contact times.^ A pilot study demonstrated no effect on Lindane, Endrin, Dieldrin, or
DDT, but 75 percent removal of Parathion.^ Another researcher found that Lindane
and Endrin were not affected, DDT was partially reduced, and Heptachlor was 88 per-
cent removed J ^ Permanganate applications seldom exceed 5 mg/liter. ^
Ozone is capable of reducing Dieldrin by 80 percent and reducing Endrin from 10 mg/liter
to 5 mg/liter at 10 mg/liter Og.59 Another study showed 75 percent removal of Lindane
and virtually complete removalof Dieldrin and Aldrin.^ See Table IV—1 for the results
of a third study.
Aeration is generally ineffective, except on Aldrin and possibly Dieldrin.55,59 Removals
of Aldrin can be as high as 85 percent .59 Hydrogen peroxide is ineffective in removing
Aldrin or Lindane from solution. Other oxidizing agents, such as persulfate, have only
limited applicability, usually under very special conditions, and for only one or two
insecticides. '
A similar process, hydrolysis, involves the destruction of organic chemicals under
strongly acidic or basic conditions. This is usually accomplished using typical pH ad-
justing chemicals, such as H2SO4, HCI, NaOH, and NH4OH. A further treatment
step is required to readjust the pH.
Whitehouse reported that below a pH value of 3 the concentration of Aldrin and Dieldrin
in water rapidly decreased due to hydrolysis.^ Endrin has also been reported
46
-------
TABLE IV-I
EFFECT OF OZONATION ON
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON INSECTICIDES
Time of
Ozonation
Ozone
Absorbed
(mg/ liter)
y-BHC
Dieldrin
DDT
TDE (DDD)
Before
0-7-r>nntinn
After
Ozonation
Before
Ozonation
After
Ozonation
Before
Ozonation
After
Ozonation
Before
Ozonation
After
Ozonation
^g/'iter
5
8.8
1.32
0.88
1 .29
1.08




10
18-3
1 .39
0.81
1 .30
0.66




20
36.0
1.31
0.34
1.31
0.22




5
11.7




2.00
0.54
2.00
0.62
10
20-0




2.00
0.46
2.00
0.43
20
38-2




2.00
0.14
2.00
0.13
Source: 183.
-------
to undergo decomposition in the presence of acid. The four organophosphorus in-
secticides (Parathion, rrethyl Parathion, Demeton, Guthion) are readily hydrolyzed in
an alkaline medium. The half-lives for Parathion and methyl ftirathion in a 4N
hydroxide solution are 32 minutes and 7.5 minutes, respectively.^ According to
Melnikov, the time required for 50 percent hydrolysis of the thiono-isomer of Demeton
at 20C and pH 13 is 75 minutes, and that of the thio-isomer is 0.85 minutes*^ Leigh
observed that more than 98.5 percent of the Lindane was removed at pH 11.5 in
6.5 hours and a complete removal of DDT was obtained at pH 11 .1 in less than 24
hours.187
Ozonation Costs.
Capital costs were amortized at 7 percent over 20 years. Captial costs included building
costs, contactor tank costs (concrete, baffles, lining), ozonators, driers, pumps, pipes,
and controls. Maintenance costs were calculated at 2 percent of building and contactor
tank costs and 3 percent of ozonator and drier costs. Power costs were estimated at
$0.Q2/kwhr and 22 kwhr/kg of ozone. An ozone dosage of 10 mg/liter was used. Labor
was not included in the cost calculations. The lower cost curves were based on manufac-
turers claims and the upper curves were derived from published reports. Figures 1V-8,
IV-9, and IV—10 present, respectively, capital costs, operation and maintenance cost,
and total cost of ozonation. Land requirements for ozonation, derived from in-house
information and manufacturers' claims, are presented in Figure IV-11 .
48
-------
o
0.01
0.001
10
100
1,000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
Source: See Figure A-4.
49
FIGURE IV-8
OZONATION: CAPITAL COST RANGE
1974
-------
0.01
0.001
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-9
OZONATION: OPERATION
Source: See Figure A-5.	AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
50
-------
1.0
0.1
o
o
0.01
0.001
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-10
Source: See Figure A-6.	OZONATION: TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
51
-------
0.6
0.5
0.4
CM_
° 0.3
o
V
0.2
0.1
1
X
1
1
200 400 600 800 1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
Source: 198.
FIGURE IV-II
OZONATION: LAND REQUIREMENTS
52
-------
Coagulation/Precipitation
Process Description.
Coagulation and precipitation are processes which change the physical or chemical
properties of dissolved, colloidal, or suspended solids to such an extent that they
will settle out of solution by gravity. A coagulant either changes surface charge
properties to the extent that particles will tend to agglomerate or it enmeshes particles
in a polymeric suspension. In either case, the final products are large, agglomerated
particles (or floes) which more readily settle under the influence of gravity. A pre-
cipitant is a chemical which will react with a soluble species to form an insoluble
compound which precipitates out of solution. Often coagulated or precipitated particles
are also removed by filtration after sedimentation. See Table IV-2 for a summary of
solubilities of inorganic salts.
Particle coagulation results from the destabiiization of stable suspended and dissolved
solids and colloids. Stability is due to electrical charge and solvation effects. De-
stabilization is accomplished by the addition of cationic polyelectrolytes or cationic
electrolytes such as Al+^, Fe+ ,or Fe+^; the formation of charged hydrous oxides such as
Alx (OH)y+n; the natural coagulation of anionic and cationic polyelectrolytes; or the
entrainment in hydrous oxide floes. Destabiiization is most effective when the contami-
nant solids come in contact with small charged microflocs of hydrous oxide. When
followed by flocculation to generate larger particles, the solids can be removed by
sedimentation, flotation, or filtration.
To accomplish coagulation or precipitation, chemical coagulants or precipitants are
added to the raw water in solid, slurry, or solution form. The chemicals and influent
are mixed for 1 to 2 minutes in a rapid mix tank (see Figure IV—12) followed by a slow
mix of about 30 minutes to stimulate particle growth. Several hours in a clarifier (see
Figures IV-13 and IV-14) are usually sufficient to separate the bulk of the solids from
the water although filtration is often necessary (see Figures IV-15, IV-16, and IV-17).
Dewatered solids can be recovered and recycled, Incinerated, lan^fiNed, used as
fertilizer, or simply dumped in the ocean, depending on the nature oFthe waste, the
chemicals added, and local regulations.
A number of chemical compounds are suitable for use as coagulants or precipitants.
Common coagulants include alum (A^fSO^Jg • 14 l^O^ferric chloride (FeCI^), lime
(Ca(OH)2), ferrous sulfate (FeSCXj.), clays, and natural and synthetic polymers.
Precipitants include chlorine (C^), potassium permanganate (KMnO^), potassium
ferrocyanide (K^Fe(CN)6), hydrogen sulfide (HL5), sodium sulfide (h^S), soda ash
(Na2C03), caustic soda (NaOH), activated silica (SiC^), and certain polymeric
materials like chitosan. These categories are not rigid and some of these chemicals
are classed as both coagulants and precipitants in the literature. This is due to a
certain overlap and similarity in the physical processes involved.
53
-------
TABLE IV-2
SOLlJBILITirS OF PARTICULAR INORGANIC SALTS
mg/lilci


Cations

Anions
Sb
Be Co Li Mo
Ni W
V
SbOg" Mo04~^ WO^ VOg
Carbonate
-
1 1 104 -
I -
-
- - - -
Chloride
105
S 106 106 |
106 |
s
- - - -
Ferrocyanide
-
- 1 S
1 -
-
-
Hydroxide
-
1 3.2 105 io3
130 -
-
- - - -
Sulfate
1
105 105 105 -
106 -
s
- - - -
Sulfide
1.7
S 1 S 1
1 1
1
- - - -
Calcium
-
- - - -
-
-
1 6.0 "
Iron
-
- - - -
-
-
1 " 1
Magnesium
-



1 105 1
S - Soluble, solubility 2 100 mg/liter but unknown
I - Insoluble, solubility < 10 mg/liter but unlcnown
No entry denotes no compound or no data
Numbers are solubilities tn mg/liter at 20 C and 760 mm of Hg
54
-------
IN £
	(b)
MECHANICAL
Cn
Oi
lb)
(J I
Source: 194.
FIGURE IV-12
TYPES OF FLASH MIXERS
-------
Influent
Wolknoy
Sludge
Discharge
Blodes
Effluent Cnonne!
Effluent Weir
Effluent
Wolkwoy,
-------
DRIVE SPROCKET WITH
SHEAR PIN HUB->.
-OPENING FOR
DRIVE CHAIN
ryfif5
I—>- EFFLUENl {
INFLUENT
WIDTH
OF TANK
BAFFLE
PLAN
cn
vj
INFLUENT
5LUDGE
60 MIN
X
FLOW
nWATER LEVEL]
\>RECESS FOR
v^JRIVE CHAIN
dx'
AVERAGE
WATER
DEPTH
—J	
I
VJ.			.^rrI?AVEk
' -SLUDGE
HOPPER
	ADJUSTABLE
WEIRS
" r"

EFFLUENT
PIVOTING FLIGHT
1-2X6 FLIGHTS SPACED. '
APPROXIMATELY 10-o" CENTERS
SECTION
Source: 198.
FIGURE IV-14
TYPICAL RECTANGULAR
SEDIMENTATION TANK
-------
Source: 195*
FIGURE IV—15
CUTAWAY VIEW OF TYPICAL
RAPID SAND FILTER
-------
Pata of floa» aod loss
of bcoa Gouqes. I
Ui
S3
OperaIOhies
Opera fm^Tvlpor.	
Pipe. Gallery PloorT^-
Source: 195.
F I lltr B«jd
Wosb Troucjto;
Wf«Ve.5 ki
Hydraulic. Valve.5
•from0pcrohoq
Tabtca,
. ../fntlue.ol to
Pil fera
Lf|lucof to Clear We.ll.
FIGURE IV-16
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF A
RAPID SAND FILTER PLANT
-------
DISTRIBUTOR
^Ti ... . .
v \ \ \ \ \ '•
SURFACE WASH ARM
MIXED
MEDIA
UNOERDRAIN LATERALS
CONCRETE
SECTION
INFLUENT-WASTE
150* FLANGE
ELEVATION
EFFLUENT-BACKWASH
150* FLANGE
Source: 198.
FIGURE IV—17
TYPICAL PRESSURE FILTER
60
-------
Exact water treatment parameters will vary depending on the chemicals used and the
nature of the water treated. Water with a total dissolved or suspended solids concen-
tration of less than 50 mg/liter is more difficult to treat effectively than more concen-
trated waters because of the difficulty in forming floes in such a dispersed system.
Similarly, settling is greatly hindered when treating a water with greater than a 2000
mg/liter concentration of solids.
The control of pH can be very important, especially when dealing with ions whose
chemical nature is pH dependent, such as carbonates or hydroxides. Alum coagulation
treatment is favored at pH's of 5-7; alkaline pH's favor lime treatment. Usually chemical
treatment must be followed by some sort of neutralization to stabilize chemically the water
and return it to- a pH near 7.
There are several technical problems associated with coagulation and precipitation.
Both methods produce considerable quantities of sludge solids. For instance, alum
produces 0.45 kg perj 00 to 200 g of aluminum added. Lime produces 450 to 600 kg
of sludge per 1000 m of soft water. AqJ^drous ferric chloride produces about
50 kg of sludge per 1000 m of soft water. These large sludge quantities present con-
siderable disposal problems. In designing a treatment process involving chemicals, the
resulting sludge disposal problem must be taken into account.
With large quantities of solids present, scaling can also be a problem. If allowed to
continue, scaling requires periodic plant shutdown for cleanup to prevent complete
clogging. One way to avoid scaling is to use construction materials which are not
readily susceptible to scaling, such as stainless steel or epoxy-reinforced fiberglass.
Application.
All the coagulation and precipitation processes and required chemicals so far discussed
have been used in full-scale treatment plant applications. The same is not true for some
of the specific applications to be discussed below. Many of these have been examined
on a laboratory scale only. The basic processes, however, are well known and conven-
tional.
Numerous tests have been conducted on several of the subject contaminants using lime
as the coagulant. For instance, tests on water samples contaminated with antimony have
yielded removal efficiencir-s better than 90 percent at a pH of 11 Tests carried out
on molybdenum solutions at a pH of 8.2, however, have yielded removal efficiencies
of less than 10 percent.^ A solution of 12 mg cobalt/liter was reduced to 1 .4 mg/liter
using lime at a pH of 9.5.^ Several researchers have reported different results for
nickel. Nilsson reported a reduction from 16 to 6 mg/liter at a pH of 9.5. Dean^ re-
ported reductions from 2935 to less than 1 mg/liter at a pH of 11 .1 after 30 minutes of
contact time and settling. Other researchers^ fjpve reported reductions in nickel from
160 to 0.08 mg/liter at a pH of 8.7. Patterson^ reported that 100 mg/liter nickel was
reduced to 1 .5 mg/liter at a pH of 9.9 with the addition of 250 mg/liter lime; 5 mg/liter
was reduced to 0.35 mg/liter at a pH of 10 with 260 mg/liter lime and 20 mg/liter ferrous
sulfate followed by sedimentation and mixed media filtration; and 5 mg/liter was reduced
to 0.15 mg/liter at a pH of 11 .5 with 600 mg/liter lime followed by sedimentation and
61
-------
filtration. Some testing has also been done on various chlorinated hydrocarbon and
organo-phosphorus insecticides using lime. At initial insecticide concentrations of 10
mg/liter, removal efficiencies of 98 percent for DDT, 55 percent for Dieldrin, 35
percent for Endrin, less than 10 percent for Lindane, and 20 percent for Parathion were
recorded J ®
Alum is another commonly used coagulant. Tests on nickel solutions have yielded re-
ductions from 16 to 11 .7 mg/liter.^' Research with solutions of vanadium using either
ferric chloride or alum yielded reductions from 249 to about 1 mg/liter.156 Alum was
used at a pH of 8.5 and in ratios (by weight) of aluminum to vanadium of 50 to 100.
Tests with ferric chloride were carried out at iron to vanadium ratios of 3 to 10 and at a
pH of 8.5-9. NH4OH was used to adjust the pH and two hours of contact and settling time
were allowed. Using alum followed by sand filtration, DDT concentrations were reduced
from 10 mg/liter to about nil, but Lindane was reduced by less than 20 percent. Two
sets of experiments using alum alone yielded reduction in DDT concentrations from 10 to
0.2 M g/liter and from 25 to 0.75 A*g/Iiter.^ Effects of alum on Parathion were
negligible.
A new polymer called chitosan is showing promise of being an effective water and waste-
water treatment chemical. It is a natural polymer derived from crab shells, but can be
synthesized on a commercial scale relatively cheaply and easily.Experiments con-
ducted with a variety of metals have shown excellent results. Chitosan is insoluble
in water and is added to the water to be treated in an acetic acid solution. As soon as
it is added to the water, the chitosan precipitates in large floes which chelate and adsorb
transition metals. Lal>scale tests have been conducted on cobalt, nickel, molybdenum,
and tungsten. Cobalt and nickel solutions of 50 mg/liter each were treated with 100
mg of chitosan for 20 minutes for removal efficiencies of 62 and 90 percent, respectively]^
Using 200 mg of chitosan, tungsten concentrations were reduced from 500 to 170 mg/liter
and molybdenum concentrations were reduced from 2500 to 36 mg/liter J ^ Reportedly,
removal efficiencies for vanadium are also very high,^^ but no data were available.
Chitosan sludges are easily destroyed by incineration.
There are several more specialized, less common precipitants in use,such as potassium
ferrocyanide, soda ash, sodium or hydrogen sulfide, and caustic soda. ^ Hydrogen sulfide
dissolved in hydrochloric acid and added to a water sample will precipitate antimony to
the solubility of antimony sulfide .^,65 Sujfjjgj wj|| precipitate most metals present in a
cationic form. Waters treated with sulfides require some sort of post-treatment, such
as the addition of ferrous sulfate, to remove excess sulfides.
Coagulation/Precipitation Costs.
Capital costs were amortized at 7 percent over twenty years. Maintenance was estimated
at 3 percent of capital. Salaries were assumed constant. Chemical costs used were
$0.13Ag for lime, $1 .76Ag for H2S, and $16.50Ag for chitosan. HoS costs include
gas delivery equipment. Chitosan costs include acetic acid. The total chemical costs
depend on the concentrations of susceptible material in the water. For H2S and chitosan
which precipitate all of the heavy metals, a range of 0.1 to 10 mg/liter was used. For
62
-------
lime, a concentration range of 0.1 to 750 mg/liter was used. Operation and maintenance
costs do not include sludge dispocal, but do include sedimentation and filtration. Figure,'»
IV—18, IV—19, and IV-20 present capital, operation and maintenance, and total costs
for lime coagulation. Figure IV—21 presents land requirements for lime coagulation.
Land requirements were calculated from in-house information and manufacturers'
literature. Figures IV-22 through IV-25 present operation and maintenance and total
costs for chitosan coagulation for cobalt, nickel, tungsten, molybdenum, and vanadiun
and for antimony removed by hydrogen sulfide precipitation.
63
-------
0.001
I 1 I I 11
11 ml
1 ' ' » ' '''
10	100
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
1000
FIGURE IV—18
LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION,
Source: See Figure A-7.	AND FILTRATION: CAPITAL COST
1974
64
-------
1 .0
o
o
o
0.1
0.01
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
Source: See Figure A-8.	FIGURE IV-19
LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION,
AND FILTRATION: OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE COSTS
1974
65
-------
0.01
I I t
1 « "ll	' I I 1 t 11 ll	I I I I I 11
10	100
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
1000
FIGURE IV-20
_	A _	LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION,
Source: See Figure A-9.	AND FILTRATION: TOTAL COST
1974
66
-------
200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV—21
LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION,
\ND FILTRATION: LAND REQUIREMENTS
67
-------
1.0
10 mg heavy metals/liter effluent
0.1
0.1 mg heavy metals/liter effluent
o
0.01
0.001
100
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
1000
FIGURE IV-22
CHITOSAN COAGULATION FOR COBALT,
NICKEL, TUNGSTEN, MOLYBDENUM,
AND VANADIUM: OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
Source: See Figure A-l 0.	1974
68
-------
10 mg heavy metals/liter effluent
o
o
0.1 mg heavy metals/liter effluent
0.01
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-23
CHITOSAN COAGULATION FOR COBALT,
NICKEL, TUNGSTEN, MOLYBDENUM
Source: See Figure A—11 .	AND VANADIUM: TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
69
-------
1 .0
o
0.1
10 mg heavy metals/liter
mg heavy mefals/liter
0.01
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-24
Source: See Figure A-12. ANTIMONY REMOVAL WITH HYDROGEN SULFIDE:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
70
-------
1 .0
o
o
o
10 mg heavy metals/liter
0.1
0.1 mg heavy metals/liter
0.01
100
10
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-25
ANTIMONY REMOVAL WITH HYDROGEN SULFIDE:
TOTAL COST RANGE
Source: See Figure A-l 3.	1974
71
-------
Distillation
Process Description and Theory.
Distillation involves the separation of water from the non-volatile components of a
solution by conversion of the water from a liquid to a vapor followed by condensation
of the vapor apart from the influent. Ideally, the process should provide a product
water 100 percent free of non-volatile contaminants. Realistically, product waters can
range from 500 to less than 1 mg/liter dissolved solids, depending on the type of distilla-
tion system.
Distillation is an expensive method of water purification. Although scale economies do
exist, the process is economically unfeasible except when: (1) only highly brackish or
salt water is available for potable use, (2) inexpensive waste heat is available, (3) a
very high degree of treatment is required, or (4) contaminants cannot be removed by
any other method. Several full-scale plants are presently in operation.
The major problems associated with distillation relate to power requirements,corrosion,
scaling, and cost. For example, an influent stream of 3.5 percent (36g/liter) NaCl
at 25C theoretically requires at least 90 kwhr/1,000 liters of pure water. Furthermore,
because of many thermodynamic irreversibilities in the distillation process, actual pro-
cesses operate at less than 10 percent of the optimum thermodynamic efficiency.
As water evaporates in the distillation process, dissolved salts become increasingly con-
centrated in the remaining brine. Eventually, the concentration exceeds the solubility
of the dissolved salts and calcium carbonate, calcium sulfate, and magnesium hydroxide
scales form. These can plug piping and reduce heating efficiency and must be removed;
pH control can minimize the problem. Concentrated solutions of inorganic salts can also
be very corrosive. Consequently, only certain corrosion-resistant metals can be used in
their construction (such as cupronickel alloys, aluminum, and titanium.
Minor problems include carryover of volatile contaminants, especially ammonia and
organic compounds. Ammonia carryover can be avoided by lowering the pH of the feed
to less than 3, but this can increase corrosion. Volatile organic compounds can foul
heat transfer surfaces and cause taste and odor problems in the effluent. Lowering the
distillation temperature helps. Both carryover problems can be fairly well dealt with
by various conventional pre- and post-treatment methods.
Three distillation methods are commercially important: boiling type with long tube
vertical evaporator, flash evaporation, and forced circulation with vapor compression.
In multistage flash evaporation (Figure IV-26),influent water is pumped through heat trans-
fer units in each of the several stages. Steam from the influent water condenses on the
outside of the tubes and is collected in trays. The concentrated wastewater cascades from
one stage to the next as a result of the pressure differential until it reaches the lowest
72
-------
De-
aerator
Influent
Trays to Collect
Fresh Water
Heat
E xchanger
Steam

iW\r -yvw- -vv^v— -vCw-
>* ... I / v _ * >	' ^ _ '
I
Condensor Tubes
JL.L
i
I
Distillation
Condensate Unit
Return
Boiler
Effluent
_L
Reaeration
and
Mineralization
Product
Water Air
		 Waste
Source: 55.
FIGURE IV-26
MULTISTAGE FLASH
EVAPORATION DISTILLATION
73
-------
stage, where it is pumped out. Although this process is less efficient thermodynamicall y
than ordinary evaporation, construction cost:, are lower. The influent water must be
treated for removal of suspended solids and deaerated before it can be pumped through
the system.
In vapor compression evaporators, influent water is heated to less than boiling and the
evaporated vapor is compressed and returned to serve as the heating medium. This
process requires partial vacuum conditions. The commercial applicability of the con-
figuration is limited by the capital cost of the vapor compressors.
The third type, vertical tube evaporation, holds the most promise for future large-scale
desalination plants. Tests have indicated 15 to 20 percent higher performance ratios
than other designs with fewer problems of scale formation. In a three-stage unit (Figure
IV-27), pretreated influent water enters the heat exchanger in the last stage and con-
tinues to warm up as it passes through the other heat exchangers. Influent water moving
through the heat exchangers condenses the steam from the various heating units. When
the hot influent water reaches the first stage, it flows down through vertical steam-heated
tubes. The wastewater from the bottom of the first heating unit becomes the feed to the
second.
Application.
Although no data were located concerning the use of distillation for removing any of the
twelve subject contaminants, the very nature of the process makes it obvious that non-
volatile contaminants can be removed up to 100 percent,especially when dealing with
influents of low concentrations such as would be expected with these contaminants. The
process would probably be most applicable to treating water containing cobalt, lithium,
molybdenum, nickel, tungsten, and vanadium. Antimony and beryllium are volatile
enough that there might be a carryover problem. All of the organic compounds would
present carryover problems.
Distillation Costs.
Capital cost was estimated using a 7 percent amortization rate over 20 years. Operation
and maintenance included labor, tube replacement, fuel, chemicalsO^SC^), and power
($0.0Vkwhr). Figures IV-28, IV-29, and IV-30 present, for the multistage flash
process, estimates of capital, operation and maintenance, and total costs. The curves
represent the range of values in the literature. Figures IV—31, IV-32, and IV-33
present the same information for distillation by the combined vapor compression, vertical
tube evaporator, multistage flash process . Figure IV-34 presents an estimate of land
requirements for either process.
74
-------
Influent
Suspended
Solids
Removal
De-
aerator
f"
1 HeatEx-
changer
s/)
-
) No.l
! Effect
I No. 2
/ Effect
rU
Product
Waste
	— Steam
		 Condensate and product
Brine
Reaeration
and
Mineralization
ToChlorination
and Distribution
Source: 55.
FIGURE IV-27
VERTICAL TUBE
EVAPORATOR
75
-------
1.0
o
0.1
0.01
1000
100
10
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-28
r r. .	DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE
Source: See Figure A-l4.	FLASH PROCESS: CAPITAL COST
1974
76
-------
10.0,
o
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-29
DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE
Source. See Fiqure A-15	FLASH PR0CESS: OPERATION AND
See h.gure A 15.	MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
77
-------
10.0
0.1	| | | | i i i 11	i i t 1 i i i 11	i i i I i i i |
1	10	1 00	1 000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
Source: See Figure A-16.
78
FIGURE IV-30
DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE
FLASH PROCESS: TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
-------
0,001	1 I I I I I III	I t 1 I t I 111	I I I I I I ,, I
1	10	100	1000
Design Capacity (lifers/sec)
FIGURE IV—31
DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR
COMPRESSION, VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR,
c c. A 17 MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS: CAPITAL COST RANGE
Source: Ss6 FiQure A"1 /•	|
79
-------
1.0
o
o
0.1
0.01
1	10	100	1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-32
DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR
COMPRESSION, VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR,
. c. * iq	MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS: OPERA-
Source: See Figure A-18.	t|Qn and MA|NTENANCE c0ST RANGE
1974
80
-------
§ 0.01
0.001
100
1000
10
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
Source: See Figure A-19.
FIGURE IV-33
DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR
COMPRESSION, VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR,
MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS: TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
81
-------
400 600 800 1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-34
DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED VAPOR
COMPRESSION, VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATOR,
MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:
LAND REQUIREMENTS
$2
-------
Ek-ctroHialysb
Process Description and Theory.
Electrodialysis (illustrated in Figure IV—35) utilizes electromotive forces to transport
ionized materials across semipermeable membranes separating solution chambers.
An operating electrodialysis unit consists of several chambers (formed by alternating
anionic and cationic membranes) situated between two electrodes. Electrodialysis
membranes are typically made of conventional ion exchange materials: cationic
membranes of sulfonic acid derivatives and anionic membranes of quaternary amine
compounds.^
The contaminated influent passes through the chambers and, under the influence of the
electromotive forces, the cations move toward the cathode, and the anions toward the
anode. The ions are unable to pass through more than one membrane because the
alternated anionic and cationic membranes allow the passage of only one type of ion.
Consequently, every other chamber contains concentrated waste or purified water.
There are several efficiency-reducing problems associated with the process. For instance,
the passage of an ion from one chamber to another increases the electrical resistance of
that chamber. Eventually, the resistance becomes great enough that no further ion
migration is possible. This establishes a lower limit of salinity in the product water.
An increase in system operating temperature will overcome this to some extent. Ion
buildup at the membrane (concentration polarization) will also increase resistance.
Ions which are irreversibly adsorbed by the membranes, or which precipitate as a result
of changes in solution composition, can foul the membranes. Finally, the concentrated
waste brine must be disposed of.
There are several process configurations possible. The continuous process, particularly
suited to large-scale applications, consists of a series of electrodialysis units, each of
which receives the effluent from the one preceding. This arrangement achieves greater
demineralization than modular units, but does have the problem that changing feed water
conditions from one unit to another requires continuous system adjustment. The batch
recirculation process achieves the desired effluent quality by pumping a fixed volume of
feed from a reservoir, through the electrodialysis unit, and back to the reservoir until
the desired effluent quality is achieved. This process requires considerably more hard-
ware in terms of piping, controls, and reservoirs than the continuous process. Higher
power is also needed, and since the feed quality is constantly changing, conditions
at the membranes vary widely. The process yields a constant effluent quality regardless
of changes in influent and membrane properties.
In the feed-and-bleed process, a portion of the effluent water is continuously recycled
with the fresh feed, which allows the feed quality to be kept constant. The process
does consume considerable power, though, and some fairly sophisticated controls are
needed.
83
-------
Influent

Anode
Cathode
Brine
Product
A = Anion permeable membrane
C = Cation permeable membrane
Pretreated
and Filtered
Water,
pH Control
L

Carbon Adsorption Brine
To Chlorination
and Distribution
Source: 198.
84
FIGURE IV-35
SIMPLE ELECTRODIALYSIS SYSTEM
-------
In the internally staged process, the effluent makes several passes in series between a
single set of electrodes. If is a continuous process that produces a high degree of
demineralization with a constant power demand. This process requires more membrane
per unit of product water than the other configurations.
Application.
No data have been found on the use of electrodialysis for treating any of the subject
contaminants. The process is used on a moderately large scale for the removal of
general dissolved solids, however. The nature of the process dictates that some degree
of removal could be accomplished for the eight metallic contaminant species. The
magnitude of this removal must remain conjectural,though,until further, more compre-
hensive data are available. The process description was included only because the
process is a valuable addition to the list of potential treatment methods and should not
be ignored due to lack of concrete data.
Electrodialysis Costs.
Capital costs (Figure IV—36) were amortized at 7 percent over twenty years. Capital and
operation and maintenance (Figure IV-37) costs were derived mainly from informa-
tion from one manufacturer— Ionics. Two different membrane systems were examined
in estimating costs—IM-12 and Brackish Water. The installed cost of IM-12 is about
37 percent higher than the Brackish Water membrane, but operation and maintenance
costs are about 31 percent less. Figure IV-38 presents a range for total cost of electro-
dialysis units.
Membranes can be cleaned by chemical treatment, or reversing current flow. Reverse
current flow processes cost about 8 percent less to operate and maintain. Because of
the highly competetive nature of electrodialysis research and marketing for water
treatment, no information is available on power requirements,costs, or land and space
requirements. Land requirements (Figure IV-39) were independently estimated by
Ralph Stone and Company,Inc.
85
-------
1 .0
t2
a>
o
§ 0.1

o
U
0.01
i i I i i i 11 i i i It i m 1
1 I I I I I
10	^00
Design Capacity (liters/se&)
1000
FIGURE IV-36
ELECTRODIALYSIS:
CAPITAL COST RANGE
Source: See Figure A-20.	1974
86
-------
0,01 I 1 1 ' I 1 1''1 1 » * I t I I I I I I 1 I ¦ ¦.. I
1	10	100	1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-37
ELECTRODIALYSIS: OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
Source: See Figure A-21.	1974
87
-------
1.0
o
o
o
0.1
0.01
1000
100
10
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-38
ELECTRODIALYS IS:
Source: See Figure A-22.	TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
88
-------
4.0
3.5
2.5
CN
E
o
o
o
D
-------
Ion Exchange
Process Description and Theory.
88
Ion exchange is a common type of chemical reaction. For instance, one method of de-
tecting chloride in aqueous solution uses an ion exchange reaction using silver nitrate.
M+CI~ + Ag+N03" = M+N03- + AgCI (i)
The M and Ag cations have exchanaed the chloride and nitrate anions which were their
partners in the original solutions. Recently, the ion exchange technique has been
associated with the process of causing water to flow through beds or columns of zeolite
type materials. An ion exchange material is a solid consisting of a molecular network,
usually an organic polymer or inorganic silicate, containing electrically charged sites
of one particular charge sign and mobile ions of the opposite sign. In a cation exchange
resin, the immobile molecular network is anionic; the mobile ions are cations. In anion
exchanges, the molecular charges or signs are reversed.
Ion exchange is used to substitute one ion for another in a solution. For example, if
water containing Ca+2 ions flows through a column of cation exchange material con-
taining Na+ ions as the mobile group, displacement occurs, with the Ca^ binding to
the molecular network and Na+ ions appearing in the effluent. This particular process is
the one used to convert hard water to soft water.
The nature of the ionic groups on the ion exchanger material largely determines the be-
havior of the ion exchanger. The group type affects both the ion exchange equilibrium
and ion selectivity; the total number of groups per unit volume of resin dictates the ex-
change capacity.
There are two main operating modes for ion exchange: batch and column applications.
Batch operation involves adding a quantity of ion exchange resin to water to be treated
and mixing the slurry until a condition of equilibrium is attained for the ion exchange
solution. This mode of operation is used for ionic solutions with high selectivity under
the equilibrium conditions. Furthermore, the ion being released by the resin should be
relatively harmless or easily removed (e.g., by precipitation from water). Column op-
eration (see Figures 1V-40 through 42) is, strictly speaking, a series of batch operations.
In practice, column operation involves passing water through a packed column or open
bed filled with ion exchange resin. It can be applied for ions with low selectivity toward
the resin, and requires that the water be free of settleable and suspended solids before it
flows through the column (to prevent bed clogging and fouling).
There are several types of ion exchangers available—strongly and weakly acidic cation
exchangers and strongly and weakly basic anion exchangers. Strongly acidic cation ex-
changers include those resins containing functional acid groups such as sulfonic (R-SO^H)
or sulfuric (R-OSO3H). Weakly acidic cation exchangers include those resins contain-
ing functional weak acid groups such as phenolic (R-C^H^-OH), carbonic (R-OCO2H),
or carboxylic (R-COOH). Strongly basic anion exchangers contain such functional groups
as primary amine (R-NI^)/ secondary amine (R-R NH), and tertiary amine (R-R^N).
90
-------
2 IN ZEOLITE
ZEOLITE
FILLING
chamber
6 IN WAFER
STOCK VALVE
ItypI
1O"0 ss
llWB JOHNSON
WELL SCREEN,
f304 SS.OOIO
OFENINfcS,
8 REQUIRED
e'-o'
12'-0"DIA
INFLUENT
(IN)
-------
INFLUENT
SKID
CAT J ON
COLUMN
AN ON
COLUMN
EFFLUENT-;
CONDUCTIVITY
CELL
PLAN
PURITY INDICATOR
-METER
.PRESSURE
GAUGE
%
ALKALI
MIX TANK
DRAIN
POT
TO
DRAIN
! J
ICARl!
J	
i
OY !
j
V!	11	rt
ELEVATION
Source: L.A. Water CondiKoning, Inc.
FIGURE IV-41
TWO BED DEMINERALIZER
92
-------
Treatment
Waste
f~
r—
r—
r—
Pri-
mary
Cation
From
Carbon
Column
Pri-
mary
Anion
Second-
ary
Cation
Second-
ary
Anion
Product
Water
Storage
J~L
— — J
	j
Backwash
cycle
Waste

Regeneration
Sulfuric
Ammonia
Rinse
Pri-
mary
Cation
Pri-
mary
Anion
Second-
ary
Cation
Second-
ary
A nion
Storage
Water
I	
~
Waste
Source:45.
FIGURE IV-42
ION EXCHANGE
COLUMN SERIES
93
-------
Weakly basic anion exchangers contain funcfionaf groups derived from qua-
ternary ammonium compounds, such as R-R'^N^OH". R is the organic network of the
resin and R' is an organic radical such as an alkyl group.
The efficiency of an ion exchange unit depends on the characteristics of the exchange
material, the operating parameters (temperature, pressure, flow rate, solution pH, etc.),
and whether there is one column or several operated in series. The various types of ex-
change resins and the various functional groups strongly affect the selectivity of a resin
and its affinities for different ionic species. For instance, to cite a rather obvious ex-
ample, an anion exchange resin could not be used to remove cations from solution. Any
attempt to do so would be completely inefficient. The operating parameters generally
afFect the equilibrium constants and the speeds of reaction. Consequently, a change in
any of these parameters would change the efficiency of the unit.
Ion exchange resins have a finite capacity: as the exchange sites become filled with
contaminant ions, the operating efficiency will eventually fall below acceptable levels.
The saturated resin must then be removed from operation and regenerated. The details
of regeneration vary depending on the resin and the contaminant ionsjaut, in general,
regeneration involves the removal of the contaminant ion and its replacement by mobile
ions of the same type as were originally on the resin prior to its use. This is accomplish-
ed by flooding the resin with an extremely concentrated solution of the original ion, re-
versing the equilibrium,and exchanging the ions again. The resulting concentrated
waste brine of the contaminant ion must be disposed of.
Application.
Ion exchange is most commonly used to soften or demineralize water, to concentrate and
recover useful by-products from industrial wastes, or in analytical separations. For in-
stance, a simple demineralizer is the two-bed batch operation. This consists of a cation
and an anion exchanger operated in series. The contaminant cations and anions are re-
moved and replaced by hydrogen and hydroxide ions. The exchangers are regenerated
with concentrated strong acid and concentrated sodium hydroxide, respectively.
All eight of the subject metal contaminants can be removed to some degree by ion ex-
change. Nearly all of the available data relate to bench-scale experiments, however.
Antimony was removed from solution using Amberltte CG-400, 100-200 mesh, 8 percent
cross-linked. This is a strongly basic, polystyrene type anion exhange resin, (n the
laboratory experiments, 13 mg of antimony (as antimonite) were completely rembved
from acid solution using 10 g of resin.
Beryllium can be removed by Dowex 50 (ton X, 300-400 mesh), a strongly acidic, poly-
styrene-type cation exchange resin. Laboratory experiments indicated a resin require-
ment of 0.25g resin per milliequivalent of cation. Tests on slightly alkaline solutions
containing 8.4 and 10.5 mg Be yielded effluents of 0.6 and 0 mg Be, respectively.^^
Cobalt and nickel can be removed with Wofatit MC 50 chelating ion exchange resin. In
laboratory tests, amounts in raw water up to 12 mg of each were removed completely.'®
Lithium can be removed from solution with an ion sieve cation exchange resin, such as
ISM-2. No data were available on conditions or removal efficiencies, but the resin in
94
-------
question has shown a very high selectivity for lithium over other metals and quantitative
removals can be expected J®"
Molybdenum can be removed by several resins, but almost always as the molybdate anion.
De-Acidite FF, a strongly basic, polystyrene type anion exchange resin can be used to
remove molybdenum from acid (pH=2-4) solutions. In tests conducted with 25 ml col-
umns of resin, 95 percent of the molybdenum was removed from influent solutions contain-
ing up to 2.75 mg/liter Mo. Removal was even better using DEAE (diethylaminoethyl)
cellulose in the SCN form. In actual tests, passing 10 ml samples at a pH of 3 and
molybdenum concentrations of 0.1 to 5 mg/liter through lg samples of the cellulose
achieved 98 + percent removal. 97
Tungsten can also be removed as the tungstate anion using DEAE cellulose in the SCN
form. The actual tests ,which consisted of passing 10 ml samples at a pH of 3 and tung-
sten concentrations of 0.004 to 2 mg/liter through lg samples of the cellulose,achieved
98 + percent removal.
Vanadium can be removed as the vanadate anion using anion exchange resins. Using
De-Acidite FF, up to 96 percent of the vanadium can be removed from acid solutions
containing 1.5 to 5 mg V when passed through 25 ml columns of the resin J ^1 Slightly
better results have been achieved using Dowex 1-X8, a strongly basic, polystyrene type
anion exchange resin, in the SCN form. In the actual tests, two liters of sample con-
taining 11.16 mg of vanadium were acidified, 15.2 g of ammonium thiocyanate were
added, and the solution was passed through 5 g of the resin. The effluent contained
0.30 mg of vanadium.^
It should be pointed out that these are not the only resins available that will accomplish
these removals. Some of the resins mentioned here will probably also remove others of
the subject metals. Unfortunately the data, if exising, were not located.
Some work has also been done on removing insecticides using anion exchange. Experi-
mental data are incomplete and inconclusive, but the limited tests conducted so far have
yielded very good removal efficiencies.^
Ion Exchange Costs.
Costs were estimated over the range of 1 to 1,000 liters/second based largely on manu-
facturers' cost estimates for various size water treatment plants. Capital costs were am-
ortized at 7 percent over a 20 year useful life. Annual maintenance costs were esti-
mated at 3 percent of capital costs. Resin costs were estimated at 3 percent of original
capital costs. Resin regenerants used were H2SO4 at $0.04 per kg and NaOH at $0.81
per kg. Amounts of regenerants per regeneration were estimated using a CaCOg con-
taminant model. Frequencies of regeneration were based on estimated maximum and
minimum concentrations derived from the literature. For the resin specific for lithium
removal, a concentration range of 0.00008 to 0.1 mg/liter was used. The resins for tung-
sten, molybdenum, cobalt, and nickel are limited primarily to trace heavy metals and
95
-------
a rangs of 0.01 to 10 mg/liter was used. The resins for beryllium, antimony,anr] vanadium
are non-specific/so a range of 1 to 250 mg/liter was used.
Prefabricated (pressure) ion-exchange units were utilized up to about 200 liters/sec
and field-buil^open-type (gravity) units were utilized thereafter. Salaries were as-
sumed constant. Figure IV-43 presents capital costs for all elements. Figures IV-44
through IV—53 present 0) operation and maintenance and (2) total costs for antimony and
vanadium, beryllium, cobalt and nickel, lithium, and tungsten and molybdenum.
Figure IV-54 presents land requirements.
96
-------
KOI
o
o
o
o
U
0.1
Pressure
Gravity
0.01L
' ' I t t i < I ¦ » i I . . i il
I I M I n
10	100
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
1000
Source: See Figure A-23.	FIGURE IV-43
ION EXCHANGE FOR ALL ELEMENTS:
CAPITAL COST
1974
97
-------
Pressure
Gravity
250
a)
o
o
o
tn
o
u
1 mg/liter
0.01
100
10
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-44
Source: See Figure A-24.	ION EXCHANGE FOR
ANTIMONY AND VANADIUM:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
98
-------
Pressure
Gravity
250 mg/liter
V%
a>
8
o
1 mg/liter
0.01
100
Design Capacity (I iters/sec)
1000
Source: See Figure A-25.	FIGURE IV-45
ION EXCHANGE FOR
ANTIMONY AND VANADIUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
99
-------
Gravity
Pressure
250 mg/lit-er
o
o
o
1 mg/liter
0.01
0.001
100
1000
10
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-46
ION EXCHANGE FOR
BERYLLIUM: OPERATION
Source: See Figure A-26.	AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
100
-------
Pressure
Gravity
o
o
0.01
250 mg/liter
1 mg/liter
0.001
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-47
Source: See Figure A-27.	ION EXCHANGE FOR
BERYLLIUM: TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
101
-------
1.0
12
a>
8
° o.i
•*-
V>
o
u
o.oi
FIGURE IV-48
ION EXCHANGE FOR
COBALT AND NICKEL:OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
Gravity
Pressure
10 mg/liter
0.1 mg/liter
1000
100
10
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
Source: See Figure A-28.
102
-------
I 0.1
«•
8
u
Pressure
Gravity
10 mg/liter
0.1 mg/liter
0.01
1 1 » I « n 11
I	o
1 1 ' " '1 1 1 ' 1 ' ' "
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-49
ION EXCHANGE FOR
COBALT AND NICKEL:
Source: See Figure A-29	TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
103
-------
1.0
0.1
Gravity
Pressure
0.1 mg/liter
0.00008 mg/liter
0.01
100
10
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
Source: See Figure A-30.	FIGURE IV-50
ION EXCHANGE FOR
LITHIUM: OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
104
-------
1.0
Pressure
0.1 mg/lifer
o
o
° 0.1
0.00008 mg/liter
0.01
100
10
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV—51
Source: See Figure A-31 .	ION EXCHANGE FOR
LITHIUM: TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
105
-------
o
§
fc.
Gravity
Pressure
•+«
8
u
10 mg/lifer
0.01 mg/liter
0.01
10
100
1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-52
Cn c c- a ->7	|0N exchange FOR TUNGSTEN
Source: See Figure A-32.	ANQ MOLYBDENUM: OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
106
-------
1.0
o
o
o
i 0.1

lA
o
u
Pressure
0 mg/liter
0.01 mg/liter
Gravity
0.01 ' ' 1 1 I « « » »I » t i I i i nl i » » » t t . .
10	100
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
1000
Source- See Figure A-33	RGURE IV"53
urce. bee h.gure A JJ .	|Qn exchange fQr
TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
107
-------
2.0
E
o
8
O
Q>
u
<
0.5
800
1000
200
400
600
0
Design Capacity (lifers/sec)
FIGURE IV-54
ION EXCHANGE:
LAND REQUIREMENTS
Source: 198.	FOR ALL ELEMENTS
108
-------
Radiochemical Degradation
Process Description and Theory.
A large number of organic compounds are susceptible to degradation by electromag-
netic radiation of certain wavelengths. Each wavelength possesses energy which can
be used to overcome chemical bonding energies and break down molecules Into stable
compounds or unstable atoms or ions. The unstable radicals so produced can react
with undecomposed molecules and break them down. In water, for instance, gamma
radiation will produce a series of ionizing reactions among organic compounds and
will react with water to produce unstable atoms and free radicals which will also react
with the organic compounds in solution. End products usually consist of smaller,
simpler organic compounds which can be subjected to conventional treatment.
Among the high energy radiations which can be or have been employed in waste treat-
ment studies are ultraviolet, gamma radiation, and X-rays. Long wavelength, low
energy microwaves have also been studied and show some promise. Microwave de-
gradation is a result of vibrational and heat energy phenomena and is quite different
from other radiation treatment methods.
In practice, all radiation treatment methods are expensive and exhibit a host of opera-
tional difficulties. They are, however, remarkably effective in treating some refractory
organic wastes,and they have an advantage in that no material is added to the water
which must be removed later with coincident sludge disposal problems.
Ultraviolet. Ultraviolet irradiation is perhaps the simplest of the radiation processes.
It has been used at pilot-plant scale as a disinfectant and has proven to be fairly
effective. The most common source of ultraviolet light of 2500-2650 A is low-pressure
mercury vapor lamps. For large-scale operation, a more efficient source is needed.
Since normal glass does not transmit ultraviolet, windows for the ultraviolet must be of
quartz or special UV-transmitting glass.
In practice, only shallow water can be treated by ultraviolet, since it normally is
capable of only a few inches penetration in water. This necessitates using either a very
shallow water trough below a battery of lamps or a series of lamps immersed in the water
to be treated. The addition of certain energy-attenuating catalysts, however, can in-
crease effective penetration in clear water to about three feet. Turbidity and color
can seriously limit the effectiveness of ultraviolet treatment as they will block the
radiation. Consequently, turbid or colored waters require some pretreatment prior to
ultraviolet treatment. Conventional coagulation/sedimentation would probably be
su fficient.
Ultraviolet radiation reacts with water to produce hydrogen peroxide (H2P2), an
effective Oxidant of organic compounds. The reaction is not a fast one, however,
and the use of a catalyst to speed it up is advisable. The more common ones are ZnO
Or Ti02 "sands" in the bottom of the treatment chamber.
109
-------
Ultraviolet treatment can completely eliminate carbamates From drinking water.^
Removal efficiencies for chlorinated hydrocarbons vary, depending on the structure of
the compound. For instance, after one hour of treatment, Aldrin is reduced by 45
percent whereasEndrin and Dieldrin are reduced by only about 18 percent.^' Dieldrin
tends to isomerize when treated with ultraviolet. Organic phosphorus compounds are
also reduced by ultraviolet, but data on reduction efficiencies are unavailable.
Gamma Radiation. Gamma irradiation has only been examined on a laboratory scale
and consequently no data are available for pilot or full-scale plants. The current
source for gamma radiation is cobalt-60. In the future, nuclear reactor wastes could
conceivably be used instead of Co-60. In practice, a concentric cylinder design
is used (see Figure IV-55 ). The innermost cylinder contains the radiation source
material. The water to be treated is passed through a cylinder surrounding this core.
The whole configuration can be easily shielded. Suspended solids must be removed prior
to treatment because of the danger of producing radioactive particles in the water.
Similarly, effluent from the gamma treatment columns must be monitored and filtered
to remove any radioactivity which might have gotten through.
Protecting the health and safety of the operator is the major problem with the use of
gamma radiation. Gamma radiation is extremely hazardous and the utmost care must be
exercised in its use. Special shielding for operators and equipment is required.
There is the added problem of public acceptance of drinking water which has been
exposed to radioactivity.
Gamma radiation has been used to remove PCB's from water on a laboratory scale. Tests
on 50 and 100/yg/liter PCB solutions yielded peak removal efficiencies of 92-95
percent at a pH of 6 with a gamma dose of 10.0 M rad.
Microwaves. The third type of radiation under discussion, microwave radiation, has
also only been examined at the laboratory level, and then only on simple alcohols,
ketones, and ethers. Furthermore, the tests were performed on gaseous samples, not
water solutions. However, I he process still might be applicable in conjunction with
another process such as distillation, where the components of the solution pass through
a vapor phase (see Figure IV-56).The distilled water and organic vapors could be passed
into a chamber and subjected to a continuous microwave discharge. The tests so far
conducted have yielded virtually 100 percent degradation into simple gaseous products
(H2,CO, CO2, CH4, etc.).162
Radiochemical Costs.
No cost data are presented for radiochemical treatment. For the most part, the indivi-
dual methods are still too much theory and not enough practice. None of the tests
utilizing gamma and microwaves have progressed beyond laboratory scale. Ultraviolet
has been tested on a pilot scale, but results are very inconsistent and contradictory.
For information on the costs of the various types of radiation treatment, see References
158 and 163 for gamma radiation and 55 and 159 for ultraviolet. No cost data were
located for microwave treatment.
110
-------
Lead
Shie.
Treated
Wafer
Out
Water
Cobalt 60
Clari fication
Irradiator
Carbon
Adsorption
To Chlorination
_ and Distribution
Ion
Exchange
Source: 158.	FIGURE IV-55
GAMMA RADIATION TREATMENT
DEVICE
111
-------
Heat
Exchanger
To Chlorination and
Distribution
Influent
Suspended Solids
Removal System Deaerafor
Mineralization
& Reaeration

Water
Trays to Collect
Fresh Water
Condenser
Tubes
n fluent
Microwave
Unit
Boi er
Dfiminftrnllye
Product Water
Distillation Unit
Concentrated
Waste
Source: 55.
FIGURE IV-56
MULTISTAGE FLASH DISTILLATION
WITH MICROWAVE UNIT
112
-------
Reverse Osmosis
Process Description and Theory.
The reverse osmosis process, a new development in the field of solute-solvent
separation/ consists of letting the fluid mixture of higher concentration flow under
pressure through a membrane, and withdrawing desalinized product at atmospheric
pressure and room temperature. The process has been applied to water purification
and various other purposes involving the separation, concentration, or fractionation
of substances in fluid solutions. Osmosis is the spontaneous flow of water from a less
concentrated solution to a more concentrated solution through a semipermeable mem-
brane. To obtain pure water in a similar process, the direction of water flow must be
reversed (i.e., pure water must flow from a more to a less concentrated solution). This
can be done by applying pressure on the more concentrated aqueous solution to reverse
the flow of treated water. This is the "reverse osmosis" technique.
Reverse osmosis is similar to filtration, in the sense of removing liquid from a mixture by
passing it through a device which retains the other components. However, there are two
important differences. First, extra pressure has to be applied to the more concentrated
solution to counteract the osmotic pressure from the opposite direction. Second, filters
separate suspended matter primarily on the basis of size, whereas the semipermeobility
of the reverse osmosis membrane depends significantly on other factors as well. The
basic principles underlying reverse osmosis are still controversial, and there is no gene-
rally accepted theory capable of explaining the mechanism.
75
A typical reverse osmosis cell consists of two detachable parts. One provides the in-
let opening for the pressurized flow of feed solution. The other, the osmosis cell, pro-
vides the outlet opening for the withdrawal of the product solution after it has passed
through the membrane. Cellulose acetate has been the most widely used membrane
material. There are four modulus designs for the osmosis cell—multiple plate, large
tubes, spiral-wound, and hollow fine fiber. See Figures IV-57, IV-58, and IV-59 for
examples of reverse osmosis apparatus.
Multiple plate devices have the membranes placed in a unit similar to a plate and frame
filter press. The membranes in large tube units are rolled Into cylindrical shape and inserted
into porous fiberglass-reinforced epoxy tubes. The solution flows in the axial direction,
while the product flows through the porous support. The membrane in a spiral-wound
device is folded over a porous backing material and wrapped around a water take-off
tube. This assembly is then placed inside a pressure vessel. In hollow fiber units, mil-
lions of hollow fibers (25 to 250in diameter) made of membrane material are packed
into a special epoxy resin tube sheet. The input water, under high pressure, flows over
the surface of the fibers, with the desalted water collecting inside the fibers and flowing
out through the fibers' center pores.
113
-------
Influent
Outlet1
Porous
Support
Structure
Product Outlet
Product
Collection
Coupling
Tube Holding Plate
Product Flow
Cellulose
Acetate
Regenerable
Membrane
FIGURE IV-57
REVERSE OSMOSIS:
Source: 127.	TUBULAR MODULE
114
-------
Roll to
Assemble
Brine Side
Separator
Screen
Product
Water
Backing Material on the
Product-Water Side, with
Membrane on Each Side,
Glued Around Edges and to
Center Tube
Product Water Flow
(After Passage
Through Membrane)
Brine Flow
Membrane	
Product-Water Side
Backi
Membrane
Brine Side Spacer
~
0.004jU 0.028/y
jzJl
m
r
0.004n 0*020^
Source: 137.
115
FIGURE IV-58
REVERSE OSMOSIS:
SPIRAL-WOUND MODULE
-------
To Chlorination
and Distribution
-h:
Reverse Osmosis
Units
Brine
Carbon Adsorption
Source: 198.
116
FIGURE IV-59
REVERSE OSMOSIS:
FLOW DIAGRAM
-------
Reverse osmosis systems are now commercially available in a wide capacity range (from
9.5 liters/day to 567,750 liters/da>) Most existing commercial units are for treat-
ing brackish water (i.e., 1,000 to 5,000 mg/liter total dissolved salts). The flux
through a particular membrane is determined by its thickness, chemical composition,
and porosity. It also depends on system conditions such as temperature, differential
pressure across the membrane, salt concentration of solution touching the membrane,
and velocity of the feed moving across the membrane.
It is often necessary to treat the water being fed to a reverse osmosis plant to improve
membrane efficiency and prevent scale formation. Turbidity is usually removed by
sand filtration, sometimes with a coagulant added before the filter. Carbonate formation
can be eliminated by adding acid to the feed. Post-treatment includes pH adjustment,
degasification, disinfection, and others.
Cellulose acetate is the most frequently used membrane material because it possesses the
strength and permeability necessary to be an effective osmotic membrane, is fairly stable,
and is relatively inexpensive. Polyamide membranes are less pH sensitive, but tend to
be more reactive to chemicals in the water, such as chlorine. Cellulose acetate mem-
branes may undergo considerable hydrolysis at alkaline pH,necessitating adjustment to a
lower pH before treatment. Dissolved organics in the water can interfere with reverse
osmosis by fouling the membranes or even dissolving them if present in high enough
concentrations. Consequently, oxidation or carbon adsorption treatment are necessary
if organics are present. Activated carbon can be used to reduce chlorine residuals to a
level harmless to the membranes.
Application.
Considerable research has been conducted on the use of reverse osmosis for removing
nickel from water. For example, Hauch investigated reverse osmosis for treating dilute
nickel-plating solutions with nickel concentrations of up to 1,000 mg/liter. He used
Batch 316-type cellulose acetate membranes operated at a pH of 4 to 6, a temperature
of 24 C, a flow of 1,469 liters per square meter per day/and a pressure of 21 kgf/cm^.
His average removal efficiency was 91 .3 percent.^® Efficiencies up to 99.9 percent
can be achieved if ultra-thin membranes of cellulose acetate, cellulose methyl sulfonate,
or cellulose o-propyl sulfonic acid are used at a production rate of 0.12 liter/m^ of
membrane per day.'^'
Chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides can also be removed by reverse osmosis under cer-
tain conditions. Although some insecticides (such as DDT and Aldrin) interact with the
membrane, proper control of pH and flow rate is usually sufficient to prevent membrane
deterioration J 09 Hindin studied removal efficiencies of cellulose acetate mem-
branes for several insecticides. Lindane was reduced from 50 to 8 ng/liter at 0.073 liter/cm
per day; DDT was reduced from 910 to less than 3 ng/liter at 0.081 liter/cm^ per day;
TDE (DDD) was reduced from 23 to less than 0.006 ng/liter at 0.061 liter/cm^ per day;
and BHC was reduced from 638 |/g/liter to 306 ng/liter at 0.057 liter/cm per day.
117
-------
Cost's for Reverse Osmosis.
Reverse osmosis costs were estimated over a range of flows similar to those of other
processes. The section on ultrafiltration dots not give cost data, but the costs should
be quite close to those for reverse osmosis since the processes are quite similar.
The capital cost (Figure IV-60) for reverse osmosis was amortized at 7 percent over
twenty years, and included engineering and design costs. Operating and maintenance
costs (Figure VI—61) included power and membrane replacement. Brine disposal was not
included. A raw water salt content of 500 mg/liter treated to 50 mg/liter was assumed.
Total cost is shown in Figure IV-62. A wide band is shown in the curves to show dis-
parities between sources. The lower line shows estimated costs, and the upper line
the highest costs given in the various sources. Figure 1V—63 shows land requirements
as a function of design capacity for reverse osmosis plants.
118
-------
0.01	1 » « I 1 1 ill 1 I * 1 I » * 'I » I 1 1 t 1 ¦
1	10	100	1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-60
Source: See Figure A-34.	REVERSE OSMOSIS:
CAPITAL COST RANGE
1974
119
-------
1.0
o
o
0.1
l/>
0.01
)	100
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
1000
FIGURE IV—61
c c. * oc	REVERSE OSMOSIS: OPERATION AND
Source: See Figure A 35.	MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
120
-------
0.01 ' ' ' ' 1 ' I ''
' « I I » I Ml	t	1	L_i
10	100	1000
Design Capacity (liters/sec)
FIGURE IV-62
Source: See Figure A-36.	REVERSE OSMOSIS:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
121
-------
10 -
8 —
CM
O
O
O
O
-------
Ultrafiltration
Process Description and Theory.
Membrane filtration involves surface filtration at relatively high pressures and low flow-
rates through dynamically formed membranes.^5 Ultrafiltration membranes (organic poly-
mer films 0.125 to 0.25 mm thick) are two-layered, containing a thin (0.1 to 10 /l) sep-
aration layer on a relatively porous supporting substructure. The separation layer con-
tains pores ranging in size from 3 to 100 A. The separation layer in ultrafiltration devices
is adjacent to a pressurized chamber containing the influent. Under the influence of
pressure, small molecules will pass through the membrane with the larger molecules
retained in the pressurized chamber. Pressure drop across the membrane ranges from
141 to 2812 g/cm^. Typical hydraulic loadings range from 53.8 to 323 liters/m .
Ultrafiltration units usually consist of plate configurations having channel dimensions of
about 2.25 mm or tubular configurations having inside diameters of 5 to 25 mm. The
plate device is made up of sheets of porous material upon which the separation membrane
has been cast. The sheets are arranged in a parallel fashion and terminate in a collec-
tion manifold. The feed solution passes between the plates and the effluent permeates
the membrane and passes up the porous support to the exit header.
Tubular devices (see Figure IV-64) consist of a support tube (made of sintered porous
polymeric material or fabricated as a composite of fiberglass and polyester or epoxy
materials) with the membrane placed inside the tube. The feed flows through the tube
and the effluent permeates the membrane, due to the operating pressure. The effluent
passes into the porous supporting material and is collected in a manifold.
Backwash!ng is unnecessary since the separation membrane's pores do not clog. Also,
there is no tendency for solids to build up on the membrane. If throughputs are too low,
concentration gradients can be established, although these decrease the unit's efficiency.
Since membrane treatment methods are generally used as effluent polishing techniques,
it is assumed that the influent will already have been subjected to routine conventional
treatment methods. As an effluent polishing technique, ultrafiltration is used to remove
those contaminants not removed by other treatment methods. These include fine parti-
culates and colloids, refractory organics, high molecular weight bio-polymers, soluble
emulsified oils, bacteria, and viruses.
Application.
No data were located regarding the use of ultrafiltration for any of the twelve subject
contaminants, but the method would be applicable to certain states of some of the con-
taminants. For instance, ultrafiltration could be used to remove any subject contaminant
occurring in fine particulate or colloidal form. This would generally apply to the metal
contaminants and the water-insoluble insecticides. The higher weight insoluble liquid
organics, such as the PCB s,could be removed in a fashion similar to emulsified oils.^®
The process would also be useful in removing insecticide-oil emulsions, such as might
occur near agricultural areas. Generally speaking, solids and organic remo^gjs are
better than 95 percent, with effluent concentrations of only a few mg/liter.
123
-------
• •
Impure
Wafer
• •
• •'
Membrane
z
f «
^ 9^9* Concentrated
• • Srine
• • •
2ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
oo
Pure
Water
Holding
Tank .
£^3	Concentrated Brine
Ultrafiltration
Membrane Unit
Pure
Water Discharge
FIGURE IV-64
TUBULAR ULTRAFILTRATION
DEVICE
Source: 130.
124
-------
SECTION V
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The references in this bibliography are the result of an extensive six-month literature
search. This list is by no means exhaustive, but consists of those references cited or
otherwise directly used in writing this report. The literature search involved a review
of the relevant literature published since 1965. Over fifty major technical and
scientific journals were searched. Water Resources Abstracts, Excerpta Medica, Engi-
neering Index, Pollution Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, Applied Science and Tech-
nology Index, Science Abstracts, and Environmental Abstracts were searched for
other relevant articles. The IHversity of Wisconsin Water Resources Information
Center computer file was searched using appropriate "key words". Over fifty books
and government reports were also read for this report. Manufacturers literature was
utilized for process descriptions and cost information.
125
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
General Contaminant Characteristics
1 . Adams, R.S., Jr. "Effects of Soil Organic Matter On the Movement and Activity of
Pesticides in the Environment." In Fifth Conference on Trace Substances in Environ-
mental Health. June 29-July 1, 1971, 81-95.
2.	Ahmed, M., and D. B. Focht. "Oxidation of Polychlorinated Biphenyls by Archroma-
bacter pCB." Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 10(2): 70-73,
Aug. 1973.
3.	American Chemical Society. Fate of Organic Pesticides in the Aquatic Environment.
Advances in Chemistry Series No. 111. Washington, D.C., 1972.
4.	American Chemical Society. Organic Pesticides in the Environment. Advances in
Chemistry Series No. 60. Washington, D.C., 1966.
5.	American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. Documentation of the
Threshold Limit Values for Substances in Workroom Air. 3rd ed. Cincinnati, 1971 .
6.	"Research Heightens Concern over PCB's. " Chemical and Engineering News, 720.1,
April 17, 1972.
7.	Asai, R. T., W. E. Westlake, and F.A. Gunther. "Endrin Decomposition on Air-
DriedSoils." Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 4(5): 278-284,
Sept. - Oct. 1 969.
8.	Bender, M.E. "Toxicity of Hydrolysis and Breakdown Products of Malathion to Fathead
Minnows." Water Research, 3(8): 571-582, Aug. 1969.
9.	Bixby, M.W., G.M. Boush, and F. Matsumura. "Degradation of Dieldrin to Carbon
Dioxide by a Soil Fungus." Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology,
10(2): Aug. 1973.
10.. Brescia, F. Fundamentals of Chemistry. New York: Academic Press, 1966.
11.	Dube, D.J., G.D. Virth, and G.F. Lee. "Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Treatment
Plant Effluent." Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, 46(5): 966-972,
May 1974.
12.	Edwards, C.A. "Persistent Pesticides in the Environment." CRC Critical Reviews in
Environmental Control, 1 0 ): 7-68, Feb. 1970.
126
-------
13.	Famsworth, C. G. "Study of Molybdenum in Public Water Supply." Water and
Sewage Works, 117(12): 418-421, Dec. 1970.
14.	Fox,M. R. S. "Nutritional Aspects of Metals." Metallic Contaminants and Human
Health, 198, 1972.
15.	Goldblatt, P. J., M. N. Lieber, and H. W. Witschi. "Beryllium Induced Ultra-
Structural Changes in Intact and Regenerating Liver." Archives of Environmental
Health, 26: 48-56, Jan. 1973.
16.	Haque, R., D. W. Schmedding, and V. A. Freed. "Aqueous Solubility, Adsorp-
tion and Vapor Behavior of Polychlorinated Biphenyl Aroclor 1254." Environmental
Science and Technology, 8 (2), Feb. 1974.
17.	Hill, D. W. and P. L. McCarty. "Anaerobic Degradation of Selected Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon Pesticides." Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation,
39 (8): 1259-1277, Aug. 19371
18.	Huang, Ju-Chang. "Pesticides in Water: Effects on Human Health." Journal of
Environmental Health, 34 (5): 501-510, Mar./Apr. 1972.
19.	Ketelaar, J. A. "Chemical Studies on Insecticides." Recueil Travaux Chimiques,
Des Pays-Bas, 64: 649-658, 1950.
20.	Klein, W., and F. Korte. "Conversion of Pesticides Under Atmospheric Conditions
and in Soil." in Fifth Conference on Trace Substances in Environmental Health.
Aug. 1967, 71-8^n
21.	Kuratsume, M., and Y. Masuda. "Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Non-Carbon Copy
Paper." Environmental Health Perspectives, 1: 15-20, April 1972.
22.	Mayersdorf, A., andR. Israeli. "Toxic Effects of Chlorinated Hydrocarbon
Insecticides. "Archives of Environmental Health, 28: 159-163, March 1974.
23.	Melnikov, W. N. Chemistry of the Pesticides. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1971.
24.	Savage, E. P., and J. Tessari. "PCB's and the Environment." Journal of Environ-
mental Health, 35 (1): 30-34, July-Aug. 1972.
25.	Sigworth, E. A. "Identification and Removal of Herbicides and Pesticides."
Journal of the American Waterworks Association, 57(8): 1016-1022, Aug. 1965.
26.	Smith, R. G. "Five Metals of Potential Significance: Nickel, Vanadium, Cadmium,
Chromium, Zinc." Metallic Contaminants and Human Health, 149-57, 1972.
27. Stalling, D. C., and F. L. Mayer, Jr. "Toxicities of PCB's to Fish and Environ-
mental Residues." Environmental Health Perspectives, 1: 159-164, April 1972.
127
-------
28.	Tepper, L. B. "Beryllium." Metallic Contaminants and Human Health, 127-138,
1972.
29.	Traigcr, G. J., and G. L. Plaa. "Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Toxicity." Archives of
Environmental Health, 28: 276-278, May 1974.
30.	Turekion, D. C. "Treatment of Effluent from Manufacture of Chlorinated Pesticides
with a Synthetic, Polymeric Adsorbent-Amberlite XAD-4." Environmental Science
and Technology, 7(2): 138-141, Feb. 1973.
General Works on Treatment Methods
31.	Adams, J. "Iron and Manganese Removal." Water and Sewage Works, 116(7):
250, July 1969.
32.	Aly, O. M., and S. D. Faust. "Removal of 2, 4-D Derivatives from Natural Waters."
Journal of the American Water Works Association, 57 (2): 221-230, Feb. 1965.
33.	Handbook of Environmental Control. Cleveland: CRC Press, 1973.
34.	"Iron Removal Cures Red Water Problem." Public Works, 101(1): 91, Jan. 1970.
35.	"New System for Desalting Water." Public Works, 101 (11), Nov. 1970.
36.	"Physical-Chemical Treatment of Wastewater." Public Works, 103(1): 64-65,
Jan. 1972.
37.	Argo, D. G., andG. L. Culp. "Heavy Metals Removal in Wastewater Treatment,
pt. 1. "Water and Sewage Works, 119 (8): 62-65, Aug. 1972.
38.	. "Heavy Metals Removal in Wastewater Treatment, pt. 11." Water and
Sewage Works, 119 (9): 128-132, Sept. 1972.
39.	Atkins, P. R. The Pesticide Manufacturing Industry - Current Waste Treatment and
Disposal Practices. EPA 12020 FYE 01/72. Washington: U. S. Government Printing
Office, Jan. 1972.
40.	Besik, F. "Wastewater Reclamation in a Closed System." Water and Sewage Works,
118 (7): 213-219, July 1971.
41.	Brown, H. G., G. P. Hensley, et. al. "Efficiency of Heavy Metals Removal in
Municipal Sewage Treatment Plants." Environmental Letters;5 (2): 103-114, 1973.
42.	Cadman, T. W., and R. W. Dellinger. "Techniques for Removing Metals from Process
Wastewater." Chemical Engineering, 81 (8): 79-85, Apr. 15, 1974.
128
-------
43. Cardinal, P. J. "Advanced Waste Treatment Project in the United States." In
Advanced Waste Treatment Seminar. Osaka, Japan, May 1967.
44.	Dean, J. G., F. L. Bosqui, and K. H. Lanoutee. "Removing Heavy Metals from
Wastewater, "Environmental Science and Technology, 6(6): 518-522, June 1972.
45.	Dryden, F. D. "Mineral Removed by Ion Exchange, Reverse Osmosis, and Electro-
dialysis." In Workshop in Wastewater and Reuse, South Lake Tahoe. Berkeley:
University of California, June 1970.
46.	Du Faure de Citres, Jean. "Ultrapuriflcation of Water Containing Lithium,
Beryllium, and Boron." Chemical Abstracts, 71: 53405h.
47.	Environmental Protection Agency. Removal of Heavy Metals by Conventional
Treatment. Apr. 1974.	~~~
48.	Esmond, S. E., and A. C. Petrasek, Jr. "Trace Metal Removal." Industrial
Water Engineering, 11 (3), May/June 1974.
49.	Fair, G. M., J. C. Geyer, and D. A. Okun. Water and Wastewater Engineering.
New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1958.
50.	Fulmer, M. "Rid Sewage of Toxic Inorganics." Water and Wastes Engineering,
8 (1): 26-27, Jan. 1971.
51.	Gordon, R. G., et al. "Effectiveness of Water Treatment Processes in Pesticide
Removal." Water and Water Engineering, 69 (2): 352-3, Aug. 1965.
52.	James, G. V. Water Treatment. Cleveland: CRC Press, 1971.
53.	Katy, W. K.,andR. Eliassen. "Saline Water Conversion." Water Quality and
Treatment. New York: McGrawHill Book Co., 1971, pp. 612-622.
54.	Lin, Y. H.,and J. R. Lawson. "Treatment of Oily and Metal Containing Waste-
water." Pollution Engineering, 5 (11): 45-47, Nov. 1973.
55.	Liptak, B. G. Environmental Engineers' Handbook, v. 1. Radnor, Pa: Chilton
Book Company, 1974.
56.	Logsdon, G. S. and J. M. Symons. "Removal of Trace Inorganics by Drinking
Water Treatment Unit Processes." In Symposium Series No. 136. American
Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1974, pp. 367-3771
57.	Nilsson, R. "Removal of Metals by Chemical Treatment of Municipal Wastewater."
Water Research, 5 (2): 51-61, Feb. 1971.
129
-------
58.	Ottinger, R. S., et al. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization,
Recovery or Disposal of Hazardous Waste, v. 4. Environmental Protection Agency.
670/2-73-053-d, Aug. 1973.
59.		. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization, Recovery or
Disposal of Hazardous Waste, v. 5. Environmental Protection Agency.
670/2-73-053-e, Aug. 1973.
60.		. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization, Recovery or
Disposal of Hazardous Waste, v. 6. Environmental Protection Agency.
670/2-73-053-f, Aug. 1973.
61.				. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization, Recovery or
Disposal of Hazardous Waste, v. ll. Environmental Protection Agency.
670/2-73-053-i, Aug. 1973.
62.		. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization, Recovery or
Disposal of Hazardous Waste. v. 12. Environmental Protection Agency.
670/2-73-053-1, Aug. 1973.
63.		—. Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization, Recovery or
Disposal of Hazardous Waste, v. 13. Environmental Protection Agency.
670/2-73-053-m, Aug. 1973.
64.	Parthasardly, N. V. "Survey of Methods for Treatment of Effluent in Electroplating
Industry." Environmental Health, 2- 358-365, Oct. 1969.
65.	Patterson, J. W. and R. A. Minear. Wastewater Treatment Technology. 2nd ed.
TTEO 73 1, 11EQ 20.032. Chicago: Institute for Environmental Quality, 1973.
66.	Robeck, G. G., K. A. Dostel, J. M. Cohen, and J. K. Kreisel. "Effectiveness
of Water Treatment Processes in Pesticide Removal." Journal of the American
Waterworks Association, 57 (2): 181-189, Feb. 1965T
67.	Saivato, J. A., Jr. Environmental Engineering and Sanitation. New York:
Wiley-lnterscience, 1972.
68.	Siegerman, Howard. "Application of Electrochemistry to Environmental Problems."
Chem Tech, 672-74, Nov. 1971.
69.	Skryleva, L. G. "Separation of Heavy Metals from Industrial Wastewater."
Zh. Prikl. Khim., 44 (4): 745-51,1971. (Chemical Abstracts, 75 : 25013 t).
70.	Snowden, F. C. "Metal-Finishing Wastes Can Become Potable Effluent."
Water and Sewage Works, 116 (5): TW/9, May 1969.
130
-------
71.	Spira, J., and K. A. Schmidt. "A New Approach to Municipal Water Treatment."
Public Works, 126-128, Aug. 1969.
72.	StoJtenberg, D. H. "How to Reclaim a Poisoned Lake." Public Works,
103 (3), March 1972.
73.	Office of Saline Water. Saline Water Conversion Report for 70-71. (J. S. Dept.
of the Interior.
74.	Washburn, C. "Clean Water and Power." Environment, 18: 40-44, Sept. 1972.
75.	Weber, W. J. Jr. Physiochemical Processes for Water Quality Control. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 1972.
76.	Whitehouse, J. D. A Study of the Removal of Pesticides from Water. Research
Report No. 8. Lexington, Ky: University of Kentucky, Water Resources Institute,
1967.
77.	Zuckerman, M. M., and A. H. Molof. "High Quality Reuse Water by Chemical-
Physical Wastewater Treatment." Journal Water Pollution Control Federation,
42 (3): 437-463, March, 1970.
General Treatment Plant Economics
78.	"Desalting Operating Costs Lowered in a Modular Design." Chemical Engineering,
75 (4), Oct. 1968.
79.	El-Ramly, N. A., and J.M. English. Uncertainty Cost of New Systems with
Special Consideration to Desalting. Water Resources Center Desalination Report-
No. 24 (UCLA-Eng-7071), University of California at Los Angeles, July 1970.
80.	Evans, D. R., and J. C. Wilson. "Capital and Operating Costs - Advanced Water
Treatment." Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 44 (1): 1-13,
Jan. 1972.
81.	Guthrie, K. M. "Capital Cost Estimating." Chemical Engineering, 76:114,
March 1969.
82.	Prehn, W. L., and J. L. McGaugh. Desalting Cost Calculating Procedures.
Office of Saline Water Research and Development Progress Report No. 555,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, 1970.
83.	Ralph M. Parsons Co. The Economics of Desalting Brackish Waters for Regional,
Municipal, and Industrial Water Supply in West Texas. Office of Saline Water
Research and Development Progress Report No. 337, U. S. Dept. of Interior.
131
-------
Ion Exchange
84.	"Ion Exchange Goes Back to School." Chemical Week, 101: 84-88, Sept. 9, 1967.
85.	"Ion Exchange Resins for Purifying Water." Water and Waste Treatment, 9:258,
Jan/feb. 1965.
86.	"Ion Exchange: Steady Does It." Chemical Week, 103(1): 31, Aug. 24, 1968.
87.	"New Ion Exchangers Soften Hard Water Problems." Chemical Week, 111 (1):37,
Aug. 22, 1972.
88.	Arden, T. V. Water Purification by Ion Exchange. London: Butterworth and Co.,
Ltd., 1968.
89.	Bishay, T. Z. "Application of Radioactivation to the Sequential Separation of
Antimony, Cadmium, Chromium, Cobalt, Iron, Tin, and Zinc from Aluminum
and Lead by Ion Exchange Chromatography." Analytical Chemistry, 44 (6):
1087-90, May 1972.
90.	Bowers,E. "Ion Exchange Softening." Water Quality and Treatment. New York:
McGraw Hill Book Company, 1971, pp. 343-377.
91.	Bresler, S. A., and E. F. Miller. "Economics of Ion Exchange Techniques for
Municipal Wafer Quality Improvement." Journal of the American Waterworks
Association, 64 (11): 764-772, Nov. 72.
92.	Calmon, C. "Trace Heavy Metal Removal by Ion Exchange." Traces of Heavy
Metals in Water, Removal Processes and Monitoring. EPA-902/9-74-001,
Nov. 1973, 7-42.	
93.	Downing, D. G. "Calculating Minimum-Cost Ion Exchange Units." Chemical
Engineering, 72 (25), Dec. 1965.
94.	Filar, H. Jr. Desal Ion Exchange for Demineralization at Santee, California.
EPA R2-73-239; FWPCA WPRD-5-01-67. Santee County Water District, May 1973,
215.
95.	Gilwood, M. E. "Saving Capital and Chemicals with Counter Current Ion
Exchange." Chemical Engineering, 74:86, Dec. 18, 1967.
96.	Holmes, J., and E. Kreusch. Acid Mine Drainage Treatment by Ion Exchange.
EPA-R2-72-056, Nov. 1972.
97.	Ishida, K., and R. Kuroda. "Ion Exchange Separation of Rhenium (VII), Moly-
bdenum (VI), and Tungsten (VI), Using a Weakly Basic Cellulose Ion Exchanger."
Analytical Chemistry, 37 (2): 212-215, Feb. 1967.
132
-------
98. Jaehnig, Wolfgang. "Separation of Uranium (VI) from Solutions by Chelonites."
Zhoumal Chemie, 12 (7): 271-272, 1972. (Chemical Abstracts, 77:14189s).
99.	Kiriyama, T., and R. Kuroda. "A Combined Ion Exchange - Spectrophotometry
Determination of Vanadium in Sea and Natural Waters." Analytica Chimica Acta,
62 (1): 464, 1972.
100.	Kreusch, E., and K. Schmidt. Wastewater Demineralization by Ion Exchange.
EPA Water Pollution Control Research Series 17040, Dec. 1971.
101.	Leont'Eva, G. V., and V. V. Volkhim. "Determination of Lithium Content in
Solutions of High Mineralization Using the ISM-1 Cation Exchanger." Zhoumal
Anal. Khim., 28 (155), 1973. (Chemical Abstracts, 79: 1113826).
102.	Milton. G. M., and W. E. Grummitt. "Ion Exchange Methods for the Quantitative
Separation of the Alkaline Earths and Their Application to the Determination of Sr^®
in Milk Ash." Canadian Journal of Chemistry, 35:541, 1957.
103.	Newman, J. "Water Demineralization Benefits from Continuous Ion Exchange
Process." Chemical Engineering, 74 (4): 72-74, Dec. 18, 1967.
104.	Parks, C. S., and I. M. Abrams. "Fundamentals of Ion Exchange in Water Treat-
ment." Heating, Piping, and Air Conditioning, 42 (2): 98402, Aug. 1970.
105.	Robinson, D. J., et al. An [on Exchange Process for Recovery of Chromote from
Pigment Manufacturing. EPA-670/2-74-044, June 1974.
106.	Sanks, R. L. Ion Exchange Color and Mineral Removal from Kraft Bleach Wastes.
EPA-R2-73-255, May 1973.
107.	Solt, G. S. "Waste Treatment by Ion Exchange." Effluent and Water Treatment
Journal, 13(12): 768-773, Dec. 1973.
108.	Zabban, W., T. Fithian, andD. R. Maneval. "Converting Acid Mine Drainage
to Potable Water by Ion Exchange." Coal Age, 77 (7): 107-111, July 1972.
Reverse Osmosis
109.	Abion, L. A., and J. O. Osbum. "Transport Mechanism in Hollow Nylon Fiber
Reverse Osmosis Membranes for Removal of DDT and Aldrin from Water."
Water Research, 7 (7); 461-477, March 1973.
110.	"It's Full Speed Ahead for Reverse Osmosis." Chemical Week, 103 (1): 40,
Aug. 3, 1968.
111.	"Reverse Osmosis System in Practice." Water and Waste Treatment, 13 (1): 15-16,
May/June 1970.
133
-------
112.	"Technology Newsletter." Chemical Week, 111 (2): 35, Nov. 29, 1972.
113.	"Wide Markets for Thin Membranes." Chemical Week, 105 (9): 33, Aug. 30, 1969.
114.	Bennett, P. J., et al. "Removal of Organic Refractories by Reverse Osmosis."
|n Proceedings of the 23rd Purdue Industrial Waste Conference, Pt. 2, May 1968,
1000-1017.
115.	Bregman, J. I. "Membrane Processes Gain Favor for Water Reuse." Environmental
Science and Technology, 4 (4): 296-302, April 1970.
116.	Clark, C. F. Economic Analysis of the Membrane Water Desalting Processes.
Office of Saline Water Research and Development Progress Report No. 638,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, Dec. 1970.
117.	Cruver, J. E., and 1. Nusbaum. "Application of Reverse Osmosis to Wastewater
Treatment." Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 46 (2): 301-311, Feb.
1974>
118.	Hauck, A. R., and S. Sourirajan. "Reverse Osmosis Treatment of Diluted Nickel-
Plating Solution." Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 44 (7): 1372-1382,
July T972.
119.	Hindin, E., and P. J. Bennett. "Water Reclamation by Reverse Osmosis."
Water and Sewage Works, 116 (2): 66-73, Feb. 1969
120.	Hindin, E., et al. "Organic Compounds Removed by Reverse Osmosis." Water
and Sewage Works, 116 (R): 466, Dec. 1969.
121.	Golomb, A. "An Example of Economic Plating Waste Treatment by Reverse Osmosis."
In Advances in Water Pollution Research, June 1972, 567-577.
122.		"Application of Reverse Osmosis to Electroplaling Waste Treatment."
Plating, 57 (4): 376, April 1970.
123.		. "Application of Reverse Osmosis to Electroplating Waste Treatment."
Plating, 57 (10); 1001-1005, Oct. 1970.
124.	Gulf Oil Corp. Water Renovation of Municipal Effluents by Reverse Osmosis.
EPA 17040 EOR, Feb. 1972.
125.	Kaup, E. C. "Design Factors in Reverse Osmosis." Chemical Engineering,
79: 46-55, Apr. 2, 1973.
126.	Lacey, R. E."Membrane Separation Processes." Chemical Engineering,
79: 56-74, Sept. 4, 1972.
134
-------
127.	Litman, F. E., H. K. Bishop, and G. Belfort. "A New Concept in Reverse
Osmosis Design." Desalination, 11: 17-30, 1972.
128.	Merten, Ulrich. Desalination by Reverse Osmosis. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1966.
129.	Miller, E. F. "Lowering the Cost of Reverse Osmosis Desalting." Chemical
Engineering, 75: 153-158, Nov. 18, 1968.
130.	Nordstrom, R. P., Jr. "Ultrafiltration Removal of Soluble OilPollution
Engineering, 6 (10): 46-47, Oct. 1974.
131.	North Star Research and Development Institute. Ultrathin Membranes for Treating
Metal Finishing Effluents by Reverse Osmosis. EPA— 12010 DRH 11/71, Nov. 1971.
132.	Nussbau, I., et al. "Reverse Osmosis - New Solutions and New Problems."
Chemical Engineering Progress, 68 (1): 69-70, Jan. 1972.
133.	Pepper, D. "Reverse Osmosis and Ultrafiltration Techniques." Effluent and Water
Treatment Journal, 13(12): 779, Dec. 1973.
134.	Porter, M. C. "Membrane Ultrafiltration for Pollution Abatement." American
Institute of Chemical Engineering Symposium Series, 29 (129): 100-122, 1973.
135.	Rosehart, R. G. "Mine Water Purification by Reverse Osmosis." Canadian
Journal of Chemical Engineering, 51 (6): 788-789, Dec. 1973.
136.	Shields, C. P. "Reverse Osmosis for Municipal Water Supply." Water and
Sewage Works, 119 (1): 64-70, Jan. 1972.
137.	Sourirajan, S. Reverse Osmosis. New York: Academic Press, 1970.
138.	Southern Research Institute. Demineralization of Wastewater by the Transport-
Depletion Process. EPA Water Pollution Control Research Series, 17040 E UN
0^71, Feb. 1971.
139.	Stavenger, P. L. "Putting Semipermeable Membranes to Work." Chemical
Engineering Progress, 67 (3): 30-36, March 1971.
140.	Stevens, D., and S. Loeb. Reverse Osmosis Desalination Cost Derived from the
Coalinga Pilot Plant Operation. Water Resources Center Desalination Report
No. 13, University of California at Los Angeles, Feb. 1967.
141.	Wiley, A. J., et al. Reverse Osmosis Concentration of Dilute Pulp and Paper
Effluents. EPA 12040 EEL 02/72, Feb. 1972.
135
-------
Distillation
142.	Briley, M. J. "The Present State of Desalination." Water and Water Engineer-
ing^ 72 (2), Sept. 1968.
143.	El-Ramly, N. A., J. M. English, and J. W. McCutchan. The Multistage Flash
Desalting Process - Its Commercial Application. Desalination Report No. 38
(UCLA-ENG-7079), University of California at Los Angeles Water Resources
Center, Aug. 1970.
144.	Hise, E. C., and S. A. Thompson. Conceptual Design Study of a 250 MGD
Combined Vertical Tube-Flash Evaporator Desalination Plant. Office of Saline
Water Research and Development Report No. 391, U. S. Dept. of the Interior,
Aug. 1968.
145.	Spiewak, L. Investigation of the Feasibility of Purifying Municipal Waste Water
by Distillation" ORNL-TM-2547, Tennessee: Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Apr. 1969.
Electrodiatysis
146.	"Electrodialysis Plant for Siesta Key, Florida." Water and Water Engineering,
73 (1): 159-160, April 1969.
147.	Filar, H., Jr. Carbon Adsorption and Electrodialysis for Demineralization at
San tee, California. W7308976. Santee County Water District, California,
May 19?3.
148.	Pruyn, K. T., J. S. Harrington, and J. D. Smith. "Mathematical Model of the
Electrodialysis Process." Water Pollution Control Research Series. ORD - 17090FTA
07/69, July 1969.
149.	Scott, G. "Electrodialysis Comes of Age." Effluent and Water Treatment Journal,
13: 293-297, June 1972.
150.	Smith, J. D.f and J. T. Eisenmann. "Electrodialysis in Advanced Waste Treatment."
Water Pollution Control Research Series. WP-20-AWTR-18, Feb. 1967.
Coagulation and Precipitation
151.	Fitzgerald, C. L., M. M. Clemens, and P. B. Reilly, Jr. "Coagulants for Waste-
Water Treatment." Chemical Engineering Progress, 66 (1); 36-40, Jan. 1970.
152.	Illin, V. A., etal. "Removal of Heavy Metal Ions from Wastewater." Chemical
Abstracts, 197T.
136
-------
153.	Muzzarclli, R. A. A. "Selective Collection of Trace Metal Ions by Procipitation
of Chitosan and New Derivatives of Chitosan." Anal/tica Chimica Acta,
54 (1): 133, 1971.
154.	Muzzarelli, R. A. A., and O. Tubertini. "Chitin and Chitosan on Chromatographic
Supports and Absorbents for Collection of Metal Ions from Organic and Aqueous
Solutions and Seawater.11 Talanta, 16:1571-1577, 1969.
155.	Skyleva, L. G. "Removal of Heavy Metal Ions from Industrial Wastewater by
Potassium Ferrocyanide." Chemical Abstracts, 70:102822g, 1968.
156.	Ulviat, M., A. Zorock, and J. Roman. "Removing Vanadium from Industrial Water."
Chemical Abstracts, 74: 146098 N, 1970.
Radiochemical
157.	Carp, A. E., B. J. Lisha, and P. L. Zlemer. "Decomposition of Aldrin by Gamma
Radiation." Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 7 (6): 221-237,
June 1972.
158.	Craft, T. F., and G. G. Eichhoiy. Dye Stuff Color Removal by Ionizing Radiation
and Chemical Oxidation, EPA-R2-73-048, March 1973.
159.	Hatzinger, O., S. Safe, and V. Zitko. "Photochemical Degradation of Chloro-
biphenyls." Environmental Health Perspectives, 1:15-20, April 1972.
160.	Henderson, G. L., and D. C. Crosby. "Photodecomposition of Dieldrin Residues
in Water." Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 3 (3): 131-134,
May/June 1969.
161.	Kinoshita, S., and T. S. Urada. "On the Treatment of Polych fori noted Biphenyls
in Water by Ionizing Radiation." In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference
on Advances in Water Pollution Research. June 1972, 607-612.
162.	Liu, S. W., and I. P. Wightman. "Decomposition of Simple Alcohols, Ethers, and
Ketones in a Microwave Discharge." Journal of Applied Chemical Biotechnology,
21: 168-172, June 1971.
163.	Mytelka, A. I. "Radiation Treatment of Industrial Wastewaters: Economic Analysts."
American Institute of Chemical Engineering, 97 (65): 246-250, 1969.
137
-------
Ad sorption
164.	Adams, A. D. "Activated Carbon: Is It Really that Good?" Water and Wastes
Engineering, 11 (3): B—(9-11), March 1974.	~~
165.	"Have Treatment Plant, Will Rent." Chemical Week, 111 (2): 69, Oct. 11, 1972.
166.	Eichelberger, I. W., and J. J. Lichtenberg. "Carbon Adsorption for Recovery of
Organic Pesticides." Journal of the American Waterworks Association,
63:25-27, Jan. 1971.
167.	Filar, H. Jr. Carbon Adsorption and Electrodialysis for Demineralization at
Santee, California. W7308976, Santee County Water District, California,
May 1973.	
168.	Giusti, D. M., R. A. Conway, and C. T. Lawson. "Activated Carbon Adsorption
of Petrochemicals." Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 46 (5): 947-966,
May 1974.
169.	Hewes, C. G., and R. R. Davison. "Renovation of Wastewater by Ozonation."
American Institute of Chemical Engineering Symposium Series, 29 (129): 71-80,
VF7T.
170.	Hyndshaw, A. L. "Activated Carbon to Remove Organic Contaminants from Water."
Journal of the American Waterworks Association, 64 (5): 309-311, May 1972.
171.	Jellinek, H. H. G., and S. P. Sangal. "Complexation of Metal Ions with Natural
Polyelectrolytes." Water Research, 6 (3): 305-310, March 1971.
172.	Kennedy, D. C. "Treatment of Effluent from Manufacture of Chlorinated Pesticides
with a Synthetic Polymeric Adsorbent - Amberlite XAD-4." Environmental Science
and Technology, 7(2): 138-141, Feb. 1973.
173.	Musty, P. R., and G. Nickless. "Use of Amberlite XAD-4 for Extraction and
Recovery of Chlorinated Insecticides and PCB's from Water." Journal of Chroma-
tography, 89: 185-190, Feb. 27, 1974.
174.	Rizzo,J.L. "Granular Carbon for Wastewater Treatment." Water and Sewage
Works, 118 (2): 238-240, Aug. 1971.
175.	Shell, G. L., and D. E. Burns. "Powdered Activated Carbon Application."
International Association on Water Pollution Research, Oxford, Eng.: Pergamon
Press, 1972, 657-670.
176.	Schwartz, H. G., Jr. "Adsorption of Selected Pesticides on Activated Carbon
and Mineral Surfaces." Environmental Science and Technology, 1(4): 332-337,
Apr. 1967.
138
-------
177.	Atke,J . F., and J . Reinke. "Extraction of Organochlorine Pesticides from Water
by Porous Polyethane Coated with Selective Adsorbents." Environmental Letters,
3 (2): 117-135, 1972.	—
178.	Vozncsenchaya, A. M. "Sorption of Oxides of Group VII Metals on Magnetite."
Chemical Abstracts, 79:9691g.
179.	Yokota, N., and S. Tokuda. "Removal of Metal Traces from Liquid Phases."
Chemical Abstracts, 75: 143824 f.
Oxidation
180.	Atkinson, J. W., and A. T. Palin. "Chemical Oxidation Methods in Water
Treatment." CRC Critical Reviews in Environmental Control, 1 (1): 153-166,
Feb. 1973.
181.	Edisords, C. A. "Persistent Pesticides in the Environment." CRC Critical Reviews
in Environmental Control, 1 (1): 127-138, Feb. 1973.
182.	Faust, S. D. "Chemical Hydrolysis of Some Organic Phosphorus and Carbamate
Pesticides in Aquatic Environments." Environmental Letters, 3 (3): 171-201, 1972.
183.	Gardiner, D. K., and H.A.C. Montgomery. "The Treatment of Sewage Effluents
with Ozone." Water and Waste Treatment, 12 (3): 92-102, Sept./Oct. 1968.
184.	Gunther, F. A., D. E. Ott, and F. E. Hearth. "Oxidation of Parathion to
Paraoxonium in Aqueous Media by Silver Oxide (Ag20)." Bulletin of Environ-
mental Contamination and Toxicology, 3 (1): 49-57, Jan ./Feb. 1968.
185.	Hewes, C. G., and R. R. Davison. "Renovation of Wastewater by Ozonation."
American Institute of Chemical Engineering Symposium Series, 29 (129): 71-80,
1973.
186.	Huibers, D. Th. A., R. McNabney, and A. Halfon. Ozone Treatment of
Secondary Effluents from Wastewater Treatment Plants. Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Robert A. Taft Water Research Center Report No.
TWRC-4, Apr. 9, 1969.
187.	Leigh, G. M. "Degradation of Selected Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Insecticides."
Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 41 (11): 450, Nov. 1969.
188.	"Ozone Chemistry and Technology." Advances in Chemistry Series, No. 21,
American Chemical Society, March 1961.
189.	Rook, I. I. "Formation of Haloforms During Chlorination of Natural Waters."
Water Treatment and Examination, 23 (2): 234, 1974.
139
-------
190. Rosen, H. M. "Use of Ozone and Oxygen in Advanced Wastewater Treatment-."
Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 45 (12): 2521, Dec. 1973.
Addenda
191.	Hall, F. M., and A. Bryson. "Ion Exchange Resins in Steel Analysis."
Analytica Chimica Acta, 24 (1), 1961.
192.	Seidl, J. "Removal of Organic Substances from Industrial and Drinking Water by
Adsorption Resins." Pollution Abstracts, 1 (6), Dec. 1970.
193.	Swindell-Dressier Company. Process Design Manual for Carbon Adsorption.
Environmental Protection Agency Technology Transfer, Oct. 1971.
194.	Organizacion Mundial de la Salud. Teona, Diserio Y Control de las Procesos
de Clarificacion Del Agua. Apr. 19737
195.	American Waterworks Association, Inc. Water Treatment Plant Design. New York,
1969.
196.	Culp, R. L., and G. L.Culp. Advanced Wastewater Treatment. New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1971.
197.	Christensen, H. E., andT. T. Luginbyhl. eds. The Toxic Substances List, 1974
Edition. HEW No. 74-134. Rockville, Md: U.S. Dept. of Health, Education,
and Welfare, June 1974.
198.	Ralph Stone and Company, Inc. Unpublished data.
140
-------
SECTION VI
GLOSSARY
Acid. 1) Any compound which can react with a base to form a salt, the hydrogen of
the acid being replaced by the metallic or positive ion.
2) A substance that dissolves in wafer with the formation of a hydrogen ion (H+).
Activated Carbon. Carbon particles usually obtained by carbonization of cellulosic ma-
terial in the absence of air and possessing a high adsorptive capacity.
Adsorption. The phenomenon by which a gas, liquid, or solid adheres to the surface of
a body.
Aeration. The process of mixing air and water by such methods as the spraying of li-
quid in the air, bubbling air through the liquid, agitating the liquid to promote
surface absorption of air, or trickling the liquid through a column of packed
media or trays.
Aeration Tank. A tank in which sludge, wastewater, or other liquid is aerated.
Aldrin. A chforinated hydrocarbon insecticide; specifically 1,2,3,4,10,10 - hexochforo-
1,4,4a,5,8,8a - hexahydro - 1,4,5,8 - dimethartanaphthalene.
Alkalinity. The capacity of a solution to neutralize an acid.
Alum. A hydrated aluminum sulfate A^SO^-j* 14 H2O or potassium aluminum or am-
monium aluminum sulfate. Alum can be used to coagulate colloidal pollutants
for better settleability.
Anion. Ion with a negative charge. It can be removed at the anode of an electrolytic
cell.
Anode. 1) the positive terminal of an electrolytic cell. 2) The electrode at which
oxidation occurs in an electrolytic cell. 3) The negative terminal of a source
that is delivering current.
Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Unsaturated hydrocarbons, such as benzene (C^H^) or naphtha-
lene (C]qH]4), having a ring or fused ring structure with the general formula
^-n^2n-6*
Backwashing. The process of cleaning a filter by reversing the flow of wafer through it.
Base. 1) A substance that dissolves in wafer with the formation of hydroxy! Ions (OH ).
2) A compound which can react with an acid to form a salt, the hydroxy! ion of
the base being replaced by the acid anion.
Biosorption. The adsorption of matter on the surface of biological slimes.
141
-------
Bis-ether. An organic compound formed of two identical organic radicals joined by an
oxygen atom: chemically R-O-R.
Brackish. Water having a mineral content in the general range between fresh water and
seawater. Water containing from 1,000 to 10,000 mg/liter of dissolved solids.
Breakpoint Chlorination. Addition of chlorine to water or wastewater to the point where
the chlorine demand has been satisfied and further additions result in a free
residual that is directly proportional to the amount added beyond the breakpoint.
Carbohydrate. A compound of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, usually having hydrogen
and oxygen in a proportion of two to one.
Carcinogen. A substance having the potential for producing cancers or increasing the
cancer-causing potential of other substances.
Catalyst. A substance that alters the rate at which a chemical reaction takes place
But which itself remains unchanged.
Cathode. 1) The negative terminal of an electrolytic cell. 2) The electrode at
which reduction occurs in an electrolytic cell. 3) The positive terminal of a
source that is delivering current.
Cation. Ion wHh a positive charge. It can be recovered at the cathode of an electro-
lytic cell.
Chelate. An organic, compound which binds with a metal at two or more points,
Chlordane. A chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide, specifically 1 ,2,4,5,6,7,8,8-
octachloro - 2,3,3a,4,7,7a - hexahydro - 4,7 - methanoindene.
Chlorination. The application of chlorine to water or wastewater, generally for the
purpose of disinfection, but frequently for oxidation purposes or taste and odor
control,
Chronic Toxicity. Long term toxicity.
Clarification. Any process which reduces the concentration of suspended matter in a
liquid.
Clorifier. A unit designed to achieve clarification; usually applied to sedimentation
tanks or basins.
Clay. Soil consisting of inorganic material with grain size smaller than 0.002 mm.
Coagulation. In water and wastewater treatment, the destabilization and initial ag-
142
-------
gregation of colloidal and finely divided matter by the addition of floc-forming
chemicals, such as lime, alum, or polyelectrolytes.
Colloid. A finely divided dispersion of a material (0.01-10 micron-sized particles),
called the "dispersed phase" (solid), in another material, called the "dispersed
medium" (liquid). Normally the particles are negatively charged.
Contamination. A general term signifying the introduction into a material or media of
such substances as microorganisms, chemicals, wastes or sewage which render
the material less desirable for its intended use.
Covalent Bond. Nonionic chemical bond formed by shared electrons.
DDD. A chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide specifically 1 ,1- dichloro - 2,2 - bis
(p-chlorophenyl) ethane.
DDT. A chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide specifically 1,1,1 - trichloro - 2,2 - bis
(p-chlorophenyl) ethane.
Desorption. A phenomenon where an adsorbed molecule leaves the surface of the ad-
sorbent.
Dieldrin. A chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide, specifically 1,2,3,4,10,10 - hexa-
chloro - 6,7 - epoxy - 1,4,40,5,6,7,8,8a - octahydro - 1,4,5,8 - endo-exo-
dimethanonaphthalene.
Distillation. Vaporization of a liquid followed by condensation of the vapor.
Effluent. The liquid which leaves a unit operation or treatment process.
Electrodialysis. A membrane separation process utilizing a voltage impressed across
cation-anion selective membrane pairs to remove dissolved solids from aqueous
solutions.
Emulsion. A heterogeneous system consisting of at least one immiscible liquid dispersed
in another in the form of microscopically visible droplets.
Endrin. A chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide, specifically the endo-endo isomer of
Dieldrin.
Feeder, Chemical. A mechanical device for applying chemicals to water or wastewater,
often at a rate controlled by the rate of flow.
FiIter. A device for screening solids from liquids based on molecule or particle size.
143
-------
Flowmeter~ An instrument for measuring the rate of flow of a fluid moving through a
pipe or duct system.
Gamma Ray. Hioh energy electromagnetic radiation of wavelengths between 0.005
and 1.40 X with great penetrating power;emitted as a result of radioactive de-
cay or shifts of orbital electrons.
Halide. Any binary compound of a halogen.
Halogen. Any one of the chemically related elements flourine, chlorine, bromine, io-
dine, and astatine.
Hard Water. Any water that contains an excess of metallic cations in solution that react
with soap to form a precipitate.
Heptachlor. A chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide, specifically 1,4,5,6,7,8,8 - hep-
tachloro - 3a,4,7,7a - tetrahydro - 4,7 - methanindene.
Hydrocarbon. A compound containing only carbon and hydrogen.
Hydrolysis. The chemical decomposition of a substance by water, in which the water it-
self is also decomposed.
Hydrophilic. A term applied to substances with high affinity for water.
Hydrophobic. A term applied to substances with low affinity for water.
Influent. Fluid inflow.
Ion. An atom or molecule possessing an electrical charge.
Ion Exchange. A reversible interchange of ions between a liquid and a solid involving
no radical change in the structure of the solid. The solid can be a natural zeo-
lite or a synthetic resin.
Ionic Strength. A term reflecting the extent of the interaction of ions with one another
in a solution.
Ionization. The conversion of neutral particles into ions.
Ionization Constant. A value relating the equilibrium concentrations of the dissociated
and undissociated forms of an ionizable compound in solution at a given temper-
ature .
144
-------
Isomers. Those molecufes which have the same number and kind of atoms but different
molecular configurations.
Isotopes. Elements with the same atomic number having different numbers of neutrons
in the nucleus.
LD5Q. Fifty percent lethal dose, the dosage at which 50 percent of the test population
dies.
Lindane. A chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide specifically 1,2,3,4,5,6 - Hexachlor-
ocyclohexane.
Malathion. An organo-phosphorus insecticide, specifically S-(I,2 - dicarbethoxyethyl)
- 0,0-dimethyldithiophosphate.
Methoxychlor. A chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide, specifically, 1,1,1 - Trichloro-
2,2 - bis (p-methoxyphenyl) methane.
Microwaves. Electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths between 1 and 100 cm.
Neutralization. The reaction of an acid and a base to achieve a solution that is neither
acidic nor basic.
Nonelectrolyte. A material, the aqueous solution of which is not conductive to an
electric current.
Osmosis. The diffusion of a solvent through a semi-permeable membrane into a more
concentrated solution.
Ozone. Triatomic molecular oxygen, O3.
ParothiQn. An organophosphorus insecticide specifically 0,0 - diethyl O-p-nitrOphe-
nyl thiophosphate.
pH. The negative logarithim of the hydrogen ion concentration.
Polymeric Materials. Organic material in the form of long chains of repeating small
organic molecules (monomers).
Potable Water. Water sufficiently pure for human consumption.
Raw Water. Untreated water.
Reservoir. A pond, lake, tank, basin or other space used for the storage, regulation,
and control of water.
Residual Chlorine. The amount of chlorine left in the treated water that is available
145
-------
to oxidize contaminants if the/ enter the stream.
Reverse Osmosis. The process in which a solution is pressurized to a degree greater
than the osmotic pressure of the solvent, causing it to pass through a membrane
in a direction opposite that of conventional osmosis.
Salt. A compound made up of the positive ion of a base and the negative ion of an ac
Saturated Hydrocarbon, An organic compound having the formula CnH2n+2»
Scaling. A salt formation on boundary surfaces due to super saturation.
Sedimentation. The settling of suspended matter from a liquid usually aided by provi-
sion of decreased velocities and increased retention times.
Sludge. The solid residues left following a treatment process.
Softening. The process of removing metallic cations from water.
Solvation. The chemical and physical processes Involved in the solution of soluble
substances.
TLm. Median tolerance limit; the concentration at which 50 percent of the test organ
	 isms can survive for a specified period of exposure.
TLV. Threshold limit value; the concentration below which no adverse health effects
are observed.
Toxaphene. A mixture of polychlorobicyclic terpenes; used as a chlorinated hydro-
carbon insecticide.
Toxic Substance. Any substance causing adverse effects to an organism when ingested
inhaled/Dr otherwise brought into contact.
t
Ultra filters. Filters with membrane elements containing pores of 3 to 100 A.
O
Ultraviolet Radiation. Electromagnetic radiation of wavelengths less than 4,000 A,
just shorter than visible light.
Underflow. The bottom discharges from a clarifier or thickener.
Zeolite. Various natural or synthetic silicate minerals used as ion exchangers or adsor-
bents.
146
-------
APPENDIX
This appendix presents the sources for all the information used to formulate the treat-
ment method cost curves. Each point on the curves was derived from the numbered
reference listed below the curve. The numbers refer to the numbered bibliography
entries. Those points marked "estimated" were based on previous company studies or
information supplied by the manufacturers. All information was updated to 1974. These
curves are presented in English units as all of the data were in English units and the
initial curves were plotted in English units.
147
-------
10
1.0
O)
o
o
o
0.1
.01
100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol
Source
O
167
A
40
~
175
«
174
O
55
FIGURE A-l
ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION:
CAPITAL COST
1974
148
-------
.0
O)
o
o
o
0.1
0.01
100
10
0.1
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol
Source
O
167
A
40
~
175
•
174
O
55
FIGURE A-2
ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
1974
149
-------
O)
o
o
o
0.01
0.1
10
100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A	40
O	55
FIGURE A-3
ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION:
TOTAL COST
1974
150
-------
0.1
0.01
0.001
10
0.1
100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A	186
~	Estimated
FIGURE A-4
OZONATION:
CAPITAL COST RANGE
1974
151
-------
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol
A
~
Source
186
Est i mated
FIGURE A-5
OZONATION:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COST RANGE
1974
152
-------
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A	186
~	Estimated
FIGURE A-6
OZONATION:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
153
-------
~
CD
O
O
o
5 o.i
o
U
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol
Source
Estimated
FIGURE A-7
LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION,
AND FILTRATION: CAPITAL COST
1974
154
-------
I I I I 1 11 ll
1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
®	Estimated
FIGURE A-8
LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION, AND FILTRATION:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
1974
155
-------
V*
O
U
0.01
J	I
I I i I I I I
1	l
I I 1 I I I
1 111
-LL
0.1
Symbol
1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
Source
100
Estimated
FIGURE A-9
LIME COAGULATION, SEDIMENTATION,
AND FILTRATION: TOTAL COST
1974
156
-------
10

1 0 mg/liter
1.0
o
TO
O
o
o
K
o
u o.i
0.01
0.1 mg/liter
0.1
1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
100
Symbol	Source
A , ~	Estimated
FIGURE A-10
CHITOSAN COAGULATION
COBALT, NICKEL, MOLYBDENUM, TUNGSTEN, VANADIUM:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
157
-------
10 mg/liter
0.1 mg/!iter
0.1	1	10	100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A/ ^	Estimated
FIGURE A-l 1
CHITOSAN COAGULATION
COBALT, NICKEL, MOLYBDENUM, TUNGSTEN, VANADIUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
158
-------
100 mg/liter
o
O)
o
o
o
0.1 mg/liter
«/>
o
u
0.01
100
10
0.1
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
O, •	Estimated
FIGURE A-12
ANTIMONY REMOVAL WITH HYDROGEN SULFIDE:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
159
-------
1
o
u
100 mg/liter
o
CD
° 0.1
-------
I I I I I I I I
0.1
1 i i i11 ml
1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
1 » »!»»».!
100
Symbol
Source
82
FIGURE A-14
DISTILLATION BY THE
MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS
CAPITAL COST
1974
161
-------
10
o
o>
1.0

o
U
0.1	1	10	100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
O	82
FIGURE A-15
DISTILLATION BY THE MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:
OPERAriON AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
162
-------
10
o
o
0.1
100
10
0.1
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
O	82
FIGURE A-16
DISTILLATION BY THE
MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
163
-------
10
o
CD
o
8
§ 1.0
o
u
0.1
—

—
	 o 	
u

1 1 1 1 1 1 M
r i i I i m 11 i i i f i i ¦ i
0.1
10 1(
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol
O
A
Source
82
83
FIGURE A-17
DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED
VERTICAL COMPRESSION, VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATION
MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:
CAPITAL COST RANGE
1974
164
-------
10
o
O)

o
U
1 .0
o
0.1
I I I I 11 tl
0.1
1 I I
I I 11 il
1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
i 1 i li i n
100
Symbol
O
A
Source
82
83
FIGURE A-18
DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED
VAPOR COMPRESSION, VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATION,
MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST RANGE
1974
165
-------
1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol
O
A
Source
~82
83
FIGURE A-19
DISTILLATION BY THE COMBINED
VAPOR COMPRESSION, VERTICAL TUBE EVAPORATION
MULTISTAGE FLASH PROCESS:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
166
-------
o
u
0.01
-L-JL
0.1
JU
» I i 1111
. i
10
Design Capacity (MGD)
100
Symbol	Source
A	138
±	58
°	116
*	145
FIGURE A-20
ELECTRODIALYSIS:
CAPITAL COST RANGE
1974
167
-------
10
a
o>
o
o
o
1 .0
t/*
o
u
0.1
0.1
1 ' 1 11"1 1 1 ' i ¦ «»«I
1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
JLLL
100
Symbol
Source
A
O
~
138
116
146
147
145
FIGURE A-21
ELECTRODIALYSIS:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COST RANGE
1974
168
-------
10
. „ Capacity (WGD)
Design ^°P"
Source
138
58
U6
U5
\69
-------
1.0
o
o>
4^
6
V
1.0
Pressure •
Gravity
0.1
' ¦ » I i » * 11
0.1
I 1 I
11 nil
1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
' 1 1 ' ' ' ¦
100
Symbol
¦O (Pressure)
• (Gravity)
Source
96
Estimated
FIGURE A-23
ION EXCHANGE FOR ALL ELEMENTS:
CAPITAL COST
1974
170
-------
o
o>
o
o
o
-------
10 -
Gravity
Pressure
250 mg/liter
o
1 mg/liter
0.01
10
0.1
100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
^ (Pressure) 96
A (Gravity) Estimated
FIGURE A-25
ION EXCHANGE,ANTIMONY AND VANADIUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
172
-------
10
1.0
o
Pressure
Gravity

250 mg/liter
0.1
1 mg/liter
0.01
0.1
TO
100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A (Pressure) 96
^ (Gravity) Estimated
FIGURE A-26
ION EXCHANGE BERYLLIUM:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COST RANGE
1974
173
-------
10
Pressure
o> 1.0
Gravity
250 mg/liter
1 mg/liter
0.1
• 1 ' ¦ 1 1 |
i. ii
I • ¦¦ ¦ 1
i »
JLiuj.
i-L.
0.1
Symbol
1 .0	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
Source
A, ~ (Pressure)	96
^ (Gravity) Estimated
100
FIGURE A-27
ION EXCHANGE/BERYLLIUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
174
-------
Gravity
Pressure
1 0 mg/liter
o.i —
0.1 mg/liter
0.01
100
10
0.1
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A, A (Pressure)	96
A, ^ (Gravity)	Estimated
FIGURE A-28
ION EXCHANGE,COBALT AND NICKEL:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COST RANGE
1974
175
-------
Gravity
Pressure
o
o
o
1 0 mg/litcr
0.1 mg/liter
0.01
0.1
10
100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A, A	96
A, A	Estimated
FIGURE A-29
ION EXCHANGE,COBALT AND NICKEL:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
176
-------
Pressure
Gravity
0.1 mg/liter
0.00008 mg/liter
0.1
100
10
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A / A (Pressure)	96
^A (Gravity) Estimated
FIGURE A-30
ION EXCHANGE,LITHIUM:
OPERATION AND MAINTEN \NCE
COST RANGE
1974
177
-------
Pressure
Gravity
O)
o
o
o
0.1 mg/llter
0.00008 mg/liter
0.01
100
0.1
10
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
AfA (Pressure)	96
A,A (Gravity) Estimated
FIGURE A-31
ION EXCHANGE/UTHIUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
178
-------
10
Pressure
Gravity
10 mg/liter
*

0.01 mg/liter

1	10
Design Capacity (MGD)
100
Symbol	Source
A, A (Pressure)	96
(Gravity) Estimated
FIGURE A-32
ION EXCHANGE/TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COST RANGE
1974
179
-------
Pressure
Gravity
10 mg/liter
0.01 mg/liter
0-1	1	10	100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A,A (Pressure) 96
* (Gravity) Estimated
FIGURE A-33
ION EXCHANGE,TUNGSTEN AND MOLYBDENUM:
TOTAL COST RANGE
1974
180
-------
o>
o
o
o
n ¦
o.oi
100
10
0.1
Design Capacity (MGD)
Symbol	Source
A	199
A	116
O	129
om	115
•	145
B	Estimated
•	140
•	136
FIGURE V34
RFVERSE OSMOSIS:
CAPITAL COST RANGE
1974
181
-------
' i i 1 i 11 il	|	i i hull	i i i 1 11 ii.
0.1	1	10	100
Design Capacity (MGD)
Lyrnbol	Source
A	199
A	116
°	129
®	Estimated
•	140
•	136
FIGURE A-35
REVERSE OSMOSIS:
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COST RANGE
1974
182
-------
0.1
o.l
1
10
Design Capacity (MOD)
Symbol
X
A
O
a
Source
Estimated
FIGURE A-36
reverse OSMfAst\s'E
total COST range
1974
183
-------