Treatability Studies on the Optimization of Ozone and Carbon Dosages for the Effective Removal of Contaminants from Secondary Treated Effluent

Abstract

This study investigates the novel and advanced integrated pilot-scale treatment system of removal of contaminants in the secondary effluent from municipal wastewater. The main intent of this work is to assess the combination of pressure sand filter (PSF), ultrafiltration (UF), ozone (O₃), and granular activated carbon (GAC) to treat wastewater and evaluate its suitability for water reuse. The experiments were carried out in a following condition: $PSF + UF + O 3 + GAC$ , $PSF + O 3 + GAC$ , and $PSF + UF + GAC$ . Configuration 1 was found to be more effective when compared to the other two and almost there occurred complete removal of contaminants. Whereas configuration 2 had the lowest removal efficiency of all, and configuration 3 had quite positive results. The influence of process parameters such as ozone dosage, flow rate, and filtration time was optimized. The optimized filtration time was 20 min with the filtration feed flow rate of 300 LPH. The best configuration of this treatment process produced a removal efficiency of about 80 to 90% with the ozone dosage of 8.33 mg/L with a flow rate of 4 l/min, whereas there occurred complete removal by the subsequent action of GAC. Moreover, the biodegradability of wastewaters as measured by the BOD₅/COD ratio increased from 0.45 to 0.53. The proposed integrated pilot-scale process was effective in removing contaminants to the required level of discharge in the environment or reuse and it will pave the way to provide significant benefits to wastewater treatment.

1. Introduction

The increasing world population, climate crisis, and water scarcity bestowed to the raising demand for managing water resources through sustainable means. Owing to the water demand, industries and municipalities are focused on direct and indirect reuse of water/treatment of effluent discharge through various technologies. The reclaimed water from secondary effluent in municipal wastewater treatment plants are foremost and pave the way for preserving our limited resources of fresh water. However, secondary treated effluent cannot be used directly as it may contain organic and inorganic pollutants that would cause severe impacts on human health and the environment [1–8]. Emerging organic contaminants such as pharmaceuticals, personal care products, endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDC), and Total Organic Carbon (TOC) can cause hazardous effects even at low concentrations [7, 9]. So, it is important to reduce these contaminants concentrations effectively and reuse them safely to improve environmental and societal sustainability. As we are aware that the conventional treatment process comprises preliminary, primary, and secondary treatment where each process plays its role in removing contaminants but as a higher degree of treatment, it is paramount to have a tertiary or advanced treatment process to produce an effluent with high quality. Nowadays, many advanced treatment processes have emerged, and the primary objectives of this process lie in the removal of nutrients, pathogens, and turbidity. As a result, coagulation, membrane filtration, chlorination, and ultraviolet radiation are operated. Moreover, there were many other processes available for the treatment of sewage includes membrane distillation, electrodialysis, electrochemical oxidation, photo-electron oxidation, combined coagulation, reverse osmosis membranes, a hybrid reed bed constructed wetland, and microalgae tertiary treatment into activated sludge systems [10–17]. However, the above-mentioned process as an individual is not effective in removing contaminants [18] but an integrated or hybrid approach of treating wastewater is one of the most promising advancements aroused that can be successful and possess more advantages such as reduction of BOD/COD loads, production of favorable effluent quality, eliminates odor, less volume sludge, produce nutrient water for plant irrigation, and increased recycling benefits [19, 20].

The pressure sand filter possesses multiple layers of sand with a variety in size and is considered as one of the effective processes in removing suspended, sinkable, and floating particles present in the feed water with a minimum pressure drop. The main advantage of this simple system involves cost-effectiveness and can be adapted to produce desirable yields. Besides, the effective removal of contaminants depends on the thickness of sand, height of the filter, water flow rate, and size of gravels [21–23]. Membrane filtration tends to be one of the most important unit technologies at present. So, this study is aimed at using the ultrafiltration (UF) membrane process for the treatment of secondary effluent. This process yields high separation efficiency on turbidity, total suspended solids (TSS), organic matters, microorganisms, etc [24–29]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) reuse guidelines, this process can aid in allowing permeate water for reuse [30, 31]. The limitation of this process falls on the membrane fouling that escalates maintenance cost but to overcome this problem, chemical cleaning of the membrane was used [32, 33]. To pursue a reliable and removal of pollutants efficiently, adsorption onto granular activated carbon (GAC) and chemical transformation with ozone appeared to be the best advances worldwide due to its high surface area, economic design, strong oxidizing ability, and easy handling [34–41]. The combination of ozonation and GAC was used in this study as a substantial oxidation power of ozone with the high adsorption capacity of activated carbon can effectively degrade the recalcitrant and toxic organic pollutants [42, 43]. It was reported that the combination of ozone and GAC can enhance the removal of total organic carbon (TOC) [44–46]. It deteriorates spontaneously during the treatment process by a complex mechanism that entails the hydroxyl radical generation. Along these lines, when ozone deteriorates in water, the free radicals that are formed have a great capacity to oxidize and played a predominant role in the disinfection process. Additionally, it assists with controlling the odor and the viability of ozone relies upon contact time [47–50]. But the limitations of this include extreme toxicity, and the high cost of treatment (being both capital and power-serious). This study contributes to the construction of a novel pilot-scale process of treating the secondary effluent with the combination of pressure sand filter (PSF), ultrafiltration (UF), ozonation, and granular activated carbon (GAC) as new trends in wastewater treatments. Aforementioned, the main intent of this paper is to treat the secondary effluent through an integrated system and reuse it effectively for irrigation, household activities, agriculture, and industries; to characterize the secondary effluent for physicochemical properties; and to optimize the parameters such as ozone dosage, adsorbent quantity, and type of suitable carbon for the effective removal of total organic carbon (TOC). Additionally, to understand the mechanism of ozonation to effectively remove the pollutants present in a water matrix. This work can help researchers to get a notion of the effectiveness of integrated treatment systems and also to understand the feasibility of treatment options available for the proper management of wastewater.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Reagents

Hydrochloric acid, Hypochlorite, and caustic soda were procured from WAP TECH, Chennai. An air-fed ozone generator was used to produce ozone. A pilot plant was installed by WAP TECH at Sri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering, Chennai. The plant consists of a pressure sand filter (PSF), ultrafiltration (UF), ozonation, and activated carbon filter (ACF). Besides, the wastewater was collected from a secondary clarifier in a local sewage treatment plant and is stored in tanks. The treatment was planned to conduct based on three configurations, as shown in Figures. 1–3 ((1) PSF + UF + O₃ + GAC; (2) PSF + O₃ + GAC; (3) PSF + UF + GAC), to predict the best possible contacting patterns for the effective removal of COD, BOD, and TOC from secondary treated effluent.

Figure 1

Treatment configuration 1.

Figure 2

Treatment configuration 2.

Figure 3

Treatment configuration 3.

2.2. Process Description

The filtration time for the treatment process took 20 min for each trial. Raw water flows through the filter bed and the suspended matter gets retained between sand surface and the sand grains. There is a steady rise in the loss of head over a while and the stream get decreased once the pressure drop across the filter is excessive. To assist in cleaning the bed for PSF and ACF, the backwash operation cum rinse leaded via air scouring by a way of agitation through the under-drain system. This is being performed once after each trial. The air scouring agitates the sand with a scrubbing action, which tends to loosen up the interrupted particles and then the filter is ready to be put back into service. Further, the wastewater passes through the pore size of 100 $μ m$ bag filter and is collected in the feed tank upstream of the UF system. During the backwash period of 10 s, 6% of hydrochloric acid, 33% of hypochlorite, and 99% of caustic soda were pumped into the permeate port at a certain period of interval. The design quality parameters of PSF, UF, and GAC are reported in Table 1.

Table 1

Design quality parameters of the advanced treatment scheme.

Specification	Pressure sand filter	Ultrafiltration	Granular activated carbon
Diameter	250 mm	—	250 mm
Height	1350 mm	—	1350 mm
Media	Sand & pebbles	Hydrophilic membrane	Sand, activated carbon
Pressure	0.24 MPa	≤0.15 MPa	0.24 MPa
Operating flow	—	250 LPH	—
Permeate flow	—	200 LPH	—
Surface area	—	—	1100 m²/g
pH	—	1-10	—
Operating temperature (°C)	—	5-45	—

Ozonation contact tank consists of a 100 L capacity to hold wastewater with a height of 62 cm, an outer diameter of 50 cm, and an inner diameter of 48 cm. The gas mixture containing ozone was sent to the tank through the porous ceramic diffuser built at bottom of the tank with the concentration of 8.33 mg/L (nominal ozone pump capacity of 5 gm/hr) and the required amount of oxygen was 4 L/min with the ozonation contact time of 10 min. The ozonated water was fed into the granular activated carbon (GAC) filter vessel which had a packing size of 2.5 kg/cm² and the type of carbon used here is Activated Carbon IV 900. There were 3 trials in each scheme that was being performed. Backwashing is done once after trial, before heading, and operating the treatment unit. After, performing the trials, the samples were stored at 4°C until they were processed for analysis within a day. The pilot plant can be operated in manual mode, partially automated, and fully automated mode, and they were controlled by a control panel. Importantly, the treated effluent was collected in a storage tank and used for gardening.

2.3. Effluent Quality Parameters and Analysis

The samples were characterized in terms of COD, BOD, pH, turbidity, total organic carbon (TOC), and total suspended solids (TSS). A DRB 200 reactor was used to measure COD and TOC, whereas BOD was evaluated using the respirometric method. Turbidity was measured using a turbidity meter and the pH was determined using a portable pH meter procured from Hach. Whereas TSS was analyzed using DR 9000 from Hach.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Characterization of Source Water

The foremost physical-chemical parameters of the feed wastewater and the effluent of the full-scale treatment (PSF, UF, O₃, and GAC) relevant to this study are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2

Physico-chemical characterization of feed water, treated water quality, and National standards for reuse and discharge of wastewater.

Parameter	Feed water (secondary effluent)	PSF	UF	O₃	GAC	National standards
pH	7.47–7.65	7.30–7.37	7.11–7.12	6.43–6.52	6.29–6.33	5.5 to 9.0
TOC (mg/L)	80.2–137.9	$47.5 \pm 1.8$	$41.2 \pm 0.62$	$2.2 \pm 0.16$	0	—
COD (mg/L)	200–400	$188.5 \pm 5.6$	$172.4 \pm 1.9$	$55 \pm 0.5$	0	200
BOD₅ (mg/L)	120.1–153.3	$101.5 \pm 1.04$	$92.5 \pm 0.30$	$27.1 \pm 0.14$	0	100
Turbidity (NTU)	3–4	2.6–2.7	2.9–1.1	0.5	0	10
TSS (mg/L)	12	9	5	2	0	200
TP (mg/L)	29	22	19	14	0	—

3.2. Effect of pH

Significant pH control is foremost for ozonation. Besides, when it comes into contact with PSF, UF the pH was about at 7.44 to 8.14. Carboxylic acids are formed due to the response of molecular ozone with organic compounds [51], which barely respond with ozone, and bringing about decrease in pH values in the effluent during the underlying phase of ozonation. At the point when ozonation is done in acidic conditions, the solubility of carbon dioxide and the generation of carboxylic acids are repressed because of the increased presence of hydrogen ions in the system. Thus, the variations of pH in the effluent are dejected. The solubility of carbon dioxide and the generation of carboxylic acids are advanced within the presence of hydroxyl ions. At the point, when ozonation is carried out in basic conditions, consequently, fast reduction of pH in the effluent occurs during the underlying phase of ozonation. In any case, in basic conditions, hydroxyl radicals gradually mineralize the carboxylic acids, which prompt an increase in pH during the subsequent stages of ozonation, and the effective inhibitors (CO₃ ^2- and HCO₃ ^–) of hydroxyl radicals, react with hydroxyl radicals and hydroxide ions. At pH above 8, ozone decomposition was observed due to a strong effect of hydroxide ions. In an alkaline medium the formation of free • OH radicals create chain reactions by increasing the speed of destruction of ozone [52]. Since the formation of free radicals occurred at faster rate above 8 pH, it can be inferred that the best ozonation performance occurred at alkaline pH using less ozone and thereby increasing the ozone transfer efficiency [53].

3.3. Effect of Removing COD and BOD₅

The influent COD before heading it into the filtration units were different for each scheme such that the influent COD for configurations 1, 2, and 3 was about 290 mg/L, 287 mg/L, and 463 mg/L, respectively. All the trials for each configuration were performed and analyzed in a single day to deduct the functioning and to understand the capability of filtration units for better removal. Based on three trials performed figures 4–6 represents the effect of COD concerning configurations 1,2, and, 3, respectively. While, the error bars represent the standard deviation. COD concentration averaged 121.8 mg/L ( $SD = 5.006$ ) in the ozone influent and 94.6 mg/L ( $SD = 1.650$ ) in the ozone effluent for configuration 1 and there occurred complete removal in granular activated carbon. All the configurations were operated under the flow rate of 300 l/h and contact time of 20 min. For second configuration, the concentration averaged 221.4 mg/L ( $SD = 10.479$ ) in the influent of ozone and 168.6 mg/L at ozone effluent (7.644), whereas the COD concentration was 95.1 mg/L ( $SD = 18.340$ ) in granular activated carbon. As configuration 3 does not contain ozonation, the inlet concentration of COD in granular activated carbon was 177.3 mg/L with an outlet concentration of 92.3 mg/L. When overall efficiencies of all the configurations are taken into an account, the removal efficiency was effective in configuration 1, which was about 100% as it accompanied with all the units such as pressure sand filter (PSF), ultrafiltration (UF), ozonation, and granular activated carbon (GAC). The removal efficiency of configuration 2 was about 60.24% and 40.21% in configuration 3 and it was shown in Figures 4–6. The concentration of COD was low in configuration 2 due to the UF performance which was mislaid as it is well-known for its removal of particulate and macromolecules from the wastewater, but it was not present in configuration 2. On the other hand, there occurred a poor reduction of COD in configuration 3 due to the absence of ozone demand. In this regard, it can be inferred that the first configuration performed well as PSF, UF, ozonation, and GAC played a major role in reducing COD. Ozonation had a great effect on the operational performance thus resulting in a better reduction. Furthermore, GAC (with an average removal of 96%) performed better than sand filter (with the average removal of 47%) [54]. As predicted, it had a great influence on the reduction of contaminants from the wastewater. A set of oxygen flow rates including 1 l/min, 2 l/min, 3 l/min, and 4 l/min were scrutinized to investigate its effect on degradation performance and the optimized flow rate was at 4 l/min which had a greater impact on the removal efficiency of about 99%. Besides, the removal efficiency of 1 l/min, 2 l/min, and 3 l/min were 33%, 47%, and 60%, respectively.

Figure 4

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, UF, O₃, and GAC.

Figure 5

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, O₃, and GAC.

Figure 6

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, UF, and GAC.

The effect of removing BOD₅ was relatively good in configuration 1 with the rate of removing that keeps in between 39 to 99%. It was observed that the BOD₅ increased when the concentration of ozone was supplied in a small quantity, and there was a decline in the BOD₅ level when the contact time and the concentration of ozone was increased about 4 l/min with 8.33 mg/L. Thus, stating that ozonation had a great impact on the reduction of BOD₅. Furthermore, the BOD₅/COD ratio is one of the paramount indicators to check the effluent biodegradability. Predominantly, if the BOD₅/COD falls greater than 0.3, represents a readily biodegradable effluent, it was calculated from treated effluent and there was a steady increase in the ratio of about 0.45 to 0.53, indicating that the treated wastewater has a great potential for biodegradation [55]. Based on three trials performed figures 7–9 represents the effect of BOD concerning configurations 1,2, 3, respectively, and the error bars represent the standard deviation.

Figure 7

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, UF, O₃, and GAC.

Figure 8

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, O₃, and GAC.

Figure 9

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, UF, and GAC.

3.4. Solids and Turbidity

In configuration 1, TSS in the ozone effluent was greatly reduced and it averaged 2 mg/L. Besides, there occurred complete removal in GAC (about 100% efficiency). Pressure sand filter and granular activated carbon filter performed similarly concerning turbidity removal. PSF contributes as a sustainable and effective treatment option for suspended solids removal, whereas heterogeneous and biological oxidation occurs on the surfaces of granular material since contaminants either get adsorb or are oxidised by microbes attached to the granular filter media. When GAC is used as a postfiltration process, it receives a high-quality effluent to adsorb organic compounds which were not been adsorbed in previous stages. As per the WHO standards, ultrafiltration can effectively remove organic materials from wastewater [56–58]. In configuration 2 and 3, the rate of removal was less where TSS in the ozone effluent averaged 8 to 10 mg/L. For turbidity removal to be considered, in configuration 1, both the filters performed very similar, and the removal averaged 3-4 NTU for PSF, whereas, complete removal took place in GAC.

3.5. Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

TOC is a one of the paramount quantitative measures of the total amount of organic constituents present in the wastewater. Figures 10–12 represent the effect of TOC concerning configurations 1,2, and, 3, respectively, whereas, the error bars represent the standard deviation. The influent TOC before heading it into the filtration units were different for each scheme such that the influent TOC for configurations 1, 2, and 3 were 80.2 mg/L, 79.2 mg/L, and 139.2 mg/L, respectively. All the trials for each scheme were performed and analyzed in a single day to deduct the functioning and understand the capability of filtration units for better removal. According to the theory of fixed-bed adsorption, at a steady-state, the effluent concentration ought to equal the influent concentration. However, under wastewater treatment conditions the effluent concentration of TOC seldom reaches the influent concentration; but in this study the effluent concentration raised to a steady-state value that was lower than the influent concentration. In effect, the GAC column continues to remove the influent TOC indefinitely, and more or less the constant steady-state removal is usually attributed to biodegradation, thus, resulting in better separation efficiency. Since GAC has a finite adsorption capacity, effluent concentration increases with run time. The combination of ozone and GAC decreased the TOC loading from 137.9 mg/L to complete removal with the increase in removal efficiency from 30% to 100%.

Figure 10

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, UF, O3, and GAC.

Figure 11

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, O3, and GAC.

Figure 12

Bar chart representing the removal efficiency of pollutants in PSF, UF, and GAC.

4. Conclusion

The present study focused on the novel and advanced integrated pilot-scale treatment system (PSF, UF, O₃, and GAC) for treating municipal wastewater from secondary effluent. The potential of ozonation and carbon dosages had been scrutinized for the reduction of COD, BOD, and TOC that were detected and quantified in wastewater. In the light of the analysis obtained and discussions that had presented in the preceding sections, concluding remarks may be summarized as follows: (i)

The feasibility of applying ozonation, the biodegradation process, and the optimization of the reaction process were scrutinized. The selection, exploration of reactions, and water chemistry conditions such as ozone flow rate, pH, and filtration time were optimized and falls as a deciding factor for the treatment efficiency. Thus, it can be concluded that the ozonation contributed to the higher COD, BOD, and TOC removal efficiencies and better biodegradability

(ii)

No detection of dissolved ozone was observed during the first 2 to 4 min. Chemical reactions took place at a faster rate, and due to the high enhancement factor of ozone at the initial stage ozone mass transfer appeared as a limiting step. By the continuous ozonation, with the contact time of about 10 min, was found to be good and the fast kinetic pattern transitioned to a moderate pattern. There occurred a decrease in the removal efficiency in the lower flow rate of about 1 l/min and also in the high flow rate of above 5 l/min. So, the optimized ozone flow rate detecting better-removing efficiency of recalcitrant was about 70 to 80% was observed at 4 l/min with the concentration of 8.33 mg/L

(iii)

From the study, ozone degradation has a great potential to produce high quality treated water with reduced toxicity. It cannot be used as a stand-alone treatment process, which also requires a posttreatment process for removing the oxidation by-products before reusing the water. Therefore, the GAC process was performed, and it acted as an additional polishing effect and thus helped in better reduction of targeted COD, BOD, and TOC concentrations. By combining GAC as a posttreatment process, the complex odor issues were well controlled. The high level of TOC using GAC was greatly reduced and attained a removal efficiency of about 99%.

(iv)

Thus, the study exerts an effective removal of contaminants from municipal wastewater using an advanced integrated treatment system. As the results of the pilot system were quite positive and the effluent quality meets the National Standards for discharge to the sewer network as well as for reuse the treated water can be used it further or safely discharged to the environment. The proposed pilot-scale integrated system presents a successful process for obtaining high-quality water with low operational and running costs. Besides, PSF and UF can effectively help in removing suspended solids and bacteria, also, act as a pre-treatment, whereas GAC acts as a posttreatment process and adsorbs organic compounds that were not filtered in previous stages. Ultimately, the application of this treatment process with the combination of pressure sand filter, ultrafiltration, ozonation, and granular activated carbon will pave the way to provide significant benefits for treating wastewater

Footnotes

Data Availability

Data are available on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

This research is financially supported by the L&T Construction, Chennai, 600089, India. Authors would like to thank Sri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering, Kalavakkam, Tamil Nadu, India for providing the research facilities to carry out the pilot scale studies at College Sewage Treatment Plant. One of the author Mr. P. Ganesh Kumar thanks Mr. S. Jagannathan, the Chief Technology Officer of the Water & Effluent Treatment IC, L&T Construction, Chennai; Mr. K.S. Suresh, the Head of the Wastewater Business Unit, Water & Effluent Treatment IC, L&T Construction, Chennai; and Mr. Mohamed Ahmed Salah, the Water Technologist of the Water & Effluent Treatment IC, L&T Construction, Chennai for their support to do this project in time.

References

Bracher

G. H.

Carissimi

Wolff

D. B.

Graepin

Hubner

A. P.

Optimization of an electrocoagulation-flotation system for domestic wastewater treatment and reuse

Environmental Technology 2019 42

1998549

17 2669 2679

10.1080/09593330.2019.1709905

Chen

Tan

Zhang

Emerging organic contaminants and odorous compounds in secondary effluent wastewater: identification and advanced treatment

Journal of Hazardous Materials 2020 408, article 124817

1998549

10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124817

Alcamo

Döll

Henrichs

Kaspar

Lehner

Rösch

Development and testing of the water GAP 2 global model of water use and availability

Hydrological Sciences Journal 2010 48

1998549

10.1623/hysj.48.3.317.45290

2-s2.0-0038469997

Alcamo

Flörke

Märker

Future long-term changes in global water resources driven by socio-economic and climatic changes

Hydrological Sciences Journal 2007 52

1998549

2 247 275

10.1623/hysj.52.2.247

2-s2.0-34147220471

Echevarría

Valderrama

Cortina

J. L.

Martín

Arnaldos

Bernat

Cal

A. D. L.

Boleda

M. R.

Vega

Teuler

Castellví

Techno-economic evaluation and comparison of PAC-MBR and ozonation-UV revamping for organic micro-pollutants removal from urban reclaimed wastewater

Science of the Total Environment 2019 671

1998549

288 298

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.365

2-s2.0-85063449261

Hamid

K. I. A.

Sanciolo

Gray

Duke

Muthukumaran

Comparison of the effects of ozone, biological activated carbon (BAC) filtration and combined ozone-BAC pre-treatments on the microfiltration of secondary effluent

Separation and Purification Technology 2019 215

1998549

308 316

10.1016/j.seppur.2019.01.005

2-s2.0-85059842411

Jin

Wang

Jin

Rao

Giesy

J. P.

Hollert

Richardson

K. L.

Wang

Ecological risk of Nonylphenol in China surface waters based on reproductive fitness

Environmental Science & Technology 2014 48

1998549

2 1256 1262

10.1021/es403781z

2-s2.0-84892711528

24341862

Muthukumaran

Nguyen

D. A.

Nguyen

Performance evaluation of different ultrafiltration membranes for the reclamation and reuse of secondary effluent

Desalination 2011 279

1998549

1-3 383 389

10.1016/j.desal.2011.06.040

2-s2.0-80052368809

Liu

J. L.

Wong

M. H.

Pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs): a review on environmental contamination in China

Environment International 2013 59

1998549

208 224

10.1016/j.envint.2013.06.012

2-s2.0-84880169877

10.

Akhoundi

Nazif

Life-cycle assessment of tertiary treatment technologies to treat secondary municipal wastewater for reuse in agricultural irrigation, artificial recharge of groundwater, and industrial usages

Journal of Environmental Engineering 2020 146

1998549

10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0001690

11.

Arega

Chavan

R. B.

Electrocoagulation followed by ion exchange or membrane separation techniques for recycle of textile wastewater

Advance Research in Textile Engineering 2018 3

1998549

12.

Arias

D. M.

Solé-Bundo

Garfí

Ferrer

García

Uggetti

Integrating microalgae tertiary treatment into activated sludge systems for energy and nutrients recovery from wastewater

Bioresource Technology 2018 247

1998549

513 519

10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.123

2-s2.0-85030261722

13.

Bruggen

B. V. D.

Integrated membrane separation processes for recycling of valuable wastewater streams: nanofiltration, membrane distillation, and membrane crystallizers revisited

Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2013 52

1998549

31 10335 10341

10.1021/ie302880a

2-s2.0-84881445476

14.

Chon

Cho

Kim

S. J.

Jang

The role of a combined coagulation and disk filtration process as a pre- treatment to microfiltration and reverse osmosis membranes in a municipal wastewater pilot plant

Chemosphere 2014 117

1998549

20 26

10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.05.042

2-s2.0-84907098795

15.

Jehawi

Abdullah

S. R. S.

Kurniawan

S. B.

Ismail

N. I.

Idris

Sbani

N. H. A.

Muhamad

M. H.

Hasan

H. A.

Performance of pilot hybrid reed bed constructed wetland with aeration system on nutrient removal for domestic wastewater treatment

Environmental Technology and Innovation 2020 19, article 100891

1998549

10.1016/j.eti.2020.100891

16.

Rashid

Park

W. K.

Selvaratnam

Binary culture of microalgae as an integrated approach for enhanced biomass and metabolites productivity, wastewater treatment, and bioflocculation

Chemosphere 2017 194

1998549

67 75

10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.11.108

2-s2.0-85035796961

17.

Segneanu

A. E.

Orbeci

Lazau

Sfrloaga

Vlazan

Bandas

Grozescu

Wastewater Treatment Methods 2013

Intech Open

18.

Rueda-Marquez

J. J.

Levchuk

Ibanez

P. F.

Sillanpa

A critical review on application of photocatalysis for toxicity reduction of real wastewaters

Journal of Cleaner Production 2020 258, article 120694

1998549

10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120694

19.

Abdel-Raouf

Al-Homaidan

A. A.

Ibraheem

I. B. M.

Microalgae and wastewater treatment

Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences 2019 19

1998549

3 257 275

10.1016/j.sjbs.2012.04.005

2-s2.0-84863199246

20.

Shinde

G. B.

Vaidya

R. S.

Govindarajan

Raut

N. B.

Integrated Approach for Wastewater Treatment - a Focus on Energy Generation

ETWMT-09: Indo-Italian Conference on Emerging Trends in Waste Management Technologies

2009

Pune, India

676 681

21.

Hollender

Zimmermann

S. G.

Koepke

Krauss

Mcardell

C. S.

Ort

Singer

Von Gunten

Siegrist

Elimination of Organic Micropollutants in a Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgraded with a Full-Scale Post-Ozonation Followed by Sand Filtration

Environmental Science & Technology 2009 43

1998549

20 7862 7869

10.1021/es9014629

2-s2.0-70450221098

22.

Zhao

Yang

Wang

Liu

Zheng

Surface ammonium loading rate shifts ammonia-oxidizing communities in surface water-fed rapid sand filters

FEMS Microbiology Ecology 2020 96

1998549

10.1093/femsec/fiaa179

23.

Saini

Kalra

Kaur

The purification of wastewater on a small scale by using plants and sand filter

Applied Water Science 2021 11

1998549

10.1007/s13201-021-01406-4

24.

Falsanisi

Liberti

Notarnicola

Ultrafiltration (UF) pilot plant for municipal wastewater reuse in agriculture: impact of the operation mode on process performance

Water 2010 2

1998549

4 872 885

10.3390/w2040872

2-s2.0-85051372564

25.

Wang

Fan

Pan

Tian

Rong

Tertiary treatment of secondary effluent using ultrafiltration for wastewater reuse: correlating membrane fouling to rejection of effluent organic matter and hydrophobic pharmaceuticals

Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology 2019 5

1998549

4 672 683

10.1039/C9EW00022D

2-s2.0-85063587408

26.

Shi

Huang

Zhu

Shi

Role of concentration polarization in cross flow micellar enhanced ultrafiltration of cadmium with low surfactant concentration

Chemosphere 2019 237, article 124859

1998549

10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.124859

2-s2.0-85072271951

31549667

27.

Shi

Lei

Huang

Shi

Zhou

Ultrafiltration of oil-in-water emulsions using ceramic membrane: roles played by stabilized surfactants

Colloids and Surfaces, A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects 2019 583, article 123948

1998549

10.1016/j.colsurfa.2019.123948

2-s2.0-85072174019

28.

Warsinger

D. M.

Chakraborty

Tow

E. W.

Plumlee

M. H.

Bellona

Loutatidou

Karimi

Mikelonis

A. M.

Achilli

Ghassemi

Padhye

L. P.

Snyder

S. A.

Curcio

Vecitis

C. D.

Arafat

H. A.

Lienhard

A review of polymeric membranes and processes for potable water reuse

Progress in Polymer Science 2018 81

1998549

209 237

10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2018.01.004

2-s2.0-85043272965

29.

Yang

Monnot

Ercolei

Moulin

Membrane-based processes used in municipal wastewater treatment for water reuse: state-of-the-art and performance analysis

Membranes 2020 10

1998549

6 131

10.3390/membranes10060131

30.

Benitez

F. J.

Acerol

J. L.

Leal

A. I.

Gonzalez

The use of ultrafiltration and nanofiltration membranes for the purification of cork processing wastewater

Journal of Hazardous Materials 2009 162

1998549

2-3 1438 1445

10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.06.036

2-s2.0-57649220702

18650003

31.

Pollice

Lopez

Laera

Rubino

Lonigro

Tertiary filtered municipal wastewater as alternative water source in agriculture: a field investigation in Southern Italy

Science of the total Environment 2004 324

1998549

1-3 201 210

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2003.10.018

2-s2.0-1842786779

32.

Lintzos

Chatzikonstantinou

Tzamtzis

Malamis

Influence of the backwash cleaning water temperature on the membrane performance in a pilot SMBR unit

Water 2018 10

1998549

3 238

10.3390/w10030238

2-s2.0-85042527061

33.

Shon

H. K.

Vigneswaran

Kim

I. S.

Cho

Ngo

H. H.

Fouling of ultrafiltration membrane by effluent organic matter: a detailed characterization using different organic fractions in wastewater

Journal of Membrane Science 2006 278

1998549

1-2 232 238

10.1016/j.memsci.2005.11.006

2-s2.0-33646893043

34.

Boehler

Zwickenpflug

Hollender

Ternes

Joss

Siegrist

Removal of micropollutants in municipal wastewater treatment plants by powder-activated carbon

Water Science and Technology 2012 66

1998549

10 2115 2121

10.2166/wst.2012.353

2-s2.0-84870356601

22949241

35.

Gliniak

Lis

Polek

Wołosiewicz-Głąb

Advanced oxidation treatment of composting leachate of food solid waste by ozone-hydrogen peroxide

Ecological Engineering 2019 20

1998549

5 203 208

10.12911/22998993/105474

2-s2.0-85064916209

36.

Kårelid

Larsson

Bjorlenius

Pilot-scale removal of pharmaceuticals in municipal wastewater: comparison of granular and powdered activated carbon treatment at three wastewater treatment plants

Journal of Environmental Management 2017 193

1998549

491 502

10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.02.042

2-s2.0-85014089196

37.

Mailler

Gasperi

Coquet

Deshayes

Zedek

Cren-Olivé

Cartiser

Eudes

Bressy

Caupos

Moilleron

Chebbo

Rocher

Study of a large scale powdered activated carbon pilot: removals of a wide range of emerging and priority micropollutants from wastewater treatment plant effluents

Water Research 2015 72

1998549

315 330

10.1016/j.watres.2014.10.047

2-s2.0-84927781754

38.

Margot

Kienle

Magnet

Weil

Rossi

Alencastro

L. F. D.

Abegglen

Thonney

Chèvre

Schärer

Barry

D. A.

Treatment of micropollutants in municipal wastewater: ozone or powdered activated carbon?

Science of the Total Environment 2013 461

1998549

480 498

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.05.034

2-s2.0-84878918924

39.

Meinel

Ruhl

A. S.

Sperlich

Zietzschmann

Jeke

Pilot-scale investigation of micropollutant removal with granular and powdered activated carbon

Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 2015 226

1998549

1 2260

10.1007/s11270-014-2260-y

2-s2.0-84919933234

40.

Snyder

S. A.

Adham

Redding

A. M.

Cannonc

F. S.

DeCarolis

Oppenheimer

Werta

E. C.

Yoond

Role of membranes and activated carbon in the removal of endocrine disruptors and pharmaceuticals

Desalination 2007 202

1998549

1-3 156 181

10.1016/j.desal.2005.12.052

2-s2.0-33751529304

41.

Verdugo

E. M.

Gifford

Glover

Cuthbertson

A. A.

Trenholm

R. A.

Kimura

S. Y.

Liberatore

H. K.

Richardson

S. D.

Stanford

B. D.

Summers

R. S.

Dickenson

E. R. V.

Controlling disinfection byproducts from treated wastewater using adsorption with granular activated carbon: impact of pre-ozonation and pre-chlorination

Water Research 2020 9, article 100068

1998549

10.1016/j.wroa.2020.100068

42.

Guillossou

Roux

J. L.

Brosillon

Mailler

Vulliet

Morlay

Rocher

F. N. V.

Gaspéri

Benefits of ozonation before activated carbon adsorption for the removal of organic micropollutants from wastewater effluents

Chemosphere 2020 245, article 125530

1998549

10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.125530

43.

Valde

Sanchez-Polo

Rivera-Utrilla

Zaror

C. A.

Effect of ozone treatment on surface properties of activated carbon

Langmuir 2002 18

1998549

6 2111 2116

10.1021/la010920a

2-s2.0-0037133865

44.

Beijer

Björlenius

Shaik

Lindberg

R. H.

Brunström

Brandt

Removal of pharmaceuticals and unspecified contaminants in sewage treatment effluents by activated carbon filtration and ozonation: evaluation using biomarker responses and chemical analysis

Chemosphere 2017 176

1998549

342 351

10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.02.127

2-s2.0-85014414522

28273541

45.

Xia

Zhang

Jiang

Wang

Yin

Complex odor control based on ozonation/GAC advanced treatment: optimization and application in one full-scale water treatment plant

Environmental Sciences Europe 2020 32

1998549

1 50

10.1186/s12302-020-00313-w

46.

Xiong

Cui

Feng

Liu

Deng

Xing

Gao

Chen

Mineralization of phenol by ozone combined with activated carbon: performance and mechanism under different pH levels

Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 2020 1, article 100005

1998549

10.1016/j.ese.2019.100005

47.

Wang

Zhang

Hou

Catalytic ozonation of bio-treated coking wastewater in continuous pilot- and full-scale system: efficiency, catalyst deactivation and in-situ regeneration

Water Research 2020 183, article 116090

1998549

10.1016/j.watres.2020.116090

32645581

48.

Itzel

Baetz

Hohrenk

L. L.

Gehrmann

Antakyali

Schmidt

T. C.

Tuerk

Evaluation of a Biological Post-Treatment after Full-Scale Ozonation at a Municipal Wastewater Treatment

Water Research 2019 170, article 115316

1998549

10.1016/j.watres.2019.115316

49.

Szabová

Hencelová

Sameliaková

Marcová

Staňová

A. V.

Grabicová

Bodík

Ozonation: effective way for removal of pharmaceuticals from wastewater

Monatshefte fuer Chemie 2020 151

1998549

5 685 691

10.1007/s00706-020-02600-x

50.

Zhu

I. X.

Wang

Wieland

Ozone-enhanced biologically active filtration for wastewater reuse

Journal of American Water Works Association 2015 107

1998549

12 E685 E692

10.5942/jawwa.2015.107.0165

2-s2.0-84958248951

51.

Kasprzyk-Hordern

Ziółek

Nawrocki

Catalytic ozonation and methods of enhancing molecular ozone reactions in water treatment

Applied Catalysis B: Environmental 2003 46

1998549

4 639 669

10.1016/S0926-3373(03)00326-6

2-s2.0-0344736645

52.

Flores-Payán

Herrera-López

E. J.

Navarro-Laboulais

López-López

Parametric sensitivity analysis and ozone mass transfer modeling in a gas- liquid reactor for advanced water treatment

Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 2015 21

1998549

1270 1276

10.1016/j.jiec.2014.05.044

2-s2.0-84920706160

53.

Alvares

A. B. C.

Diaper

Parsons

S. A.

Partial oxidation by ozone to remove recalcitrance from wastewaters – a review

Environmental Technology. 2001 22

1998549

4 409 427

10.1080/09593332208618273

2-s2.0-0035310022

11329804

54.

Reaume

M. J.

Biofiltration polishing of ozone treated secondary municipal wastewater treatment plant effluent, [Ph.D. thesis] 2012

Windsor, Ontario, Canada

University of Windsor

55.

Mecha

A. S.

Onyango

M. S.

Ochieng

Momba

M. N. B.

Impact of ozonation in removing organic micro-pollutants in primary and secondary municipal wastewater: effect of process parameters

Water Science and Technology 2016 74

1998549

3 756 765

10.2166/wst.2016.276

2-s2.0-84982292029

27508381

56.

Carpintero-Tepole

Brito-de la Fuente

Torrestiana-Sánchez

Microfiltration of oil in water (O/W) emulsions: effect of membrane microstructure and surface properties

Chemical Engineering Research and Design 2017 126

1998549

286 296

10.1016/j.cherd.2017.08.023

2-s2.0-85032002558

57.

Hoslett

Massara

T. M.

Malamis

Ahmad

Boogaert

I. V. D.

Katsou

Ahmad

Ghazal

Simons

Wrobel

Jouhara

Surface water filtration using granular media and membranes: a review

Science of the Total Environment 2018 639

1998549

1268 1282

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.247

2-s2.0-85047454836

29929294

58.

Suresh

Pugazhenthi

Uppaluri

Fly ash based ceramic microfiltration membranes for oil-water emulsion treatment: parametric optimization using response surface methodology

Journal of Water Process Engineering 2016 13

1998549

27 43

10.1016/j.jwpe.2016.07.008

2-s2.0-84982816864

59.

Lei

Effect of ozonation on recalcitrant chemical oxygen demand (COD), color, and biodegradability of hardwood Kraft pulp (KP) bleaching effluent

BioResources 2014 9

1998549

1 1236 1245

Treatability Studies on the Optimization of Ozone and Carbon Dosages for the Effective Removal of Contaminants from Secondary Treated Effluent

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Reagents

2.2. Process Description

2.3. Effluent Quality Parameters and Analysis

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Characterization of Source Water

3.2. Effect of pH

3.3. Effect of Removing COD and BOD5

3.4. Solids and Turbidity

3.5. Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

4. Conclusion

Footnotes

Data Availability

Conflicts of Interest

Acknowledgments

References

3.3. Effect of Removing COD and BOD₅