Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Authors
  • Keywords
  • Date
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 6
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The partial solution for the growing contamination of the environment is the implementation of new technologies. The most of the currently operated systems for surface and groundwaters treatment as well as for wastewater treatment characterize with complex technological arrangements based on a number of unit operations. In water-wastewater management membrane processes are more often applied, especially those in which the difference of pressure at both membrane sites is used as a driving force. As an example of such application is the use of nanofi ltration for groundwaters treatment at Water Treatment Plant Zawada near Dębica or the treatment of municipal landfi ll leachate and industrial wastewater at Eko Dolina Waste Utilization Plant in Łężyce near Gdynia (reverse osmosis unit capacity of 120 m /d). Municipal wastewater treatment based on membrane technologies has already been implemented at domestic wastewater treatment plant. It is especially profi table, when the load of contaminant present in a wastewater varies within a year. In the case of membrane systems use, this issue can be neglected. As an example of membrane based system may serve WWTP in Rowy n/Ustka started up in 2013 and modernized in 2017. The latest trends and developments of selected suppliers of membrane systems are also presented.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Krystyna H. Konieczny
Małgorzata Wszelaka-Rylik
Bartłomiej Macherzyńsk
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Fluorine and sodium chloride are common elements present in the water environment. According to WHO guidelines fluoride content in water cannot be not higher than 1.5 mgF-/dm3. Elevated fluoride content was observed all over the world and it leads to many health issues. It can be removed with the usage of various methods (ion exchange, membrane processes, adsorption, precipitation). In this paper fluoride removal with nanofiltration usage was described. Tests were performed with the application of Amicon 86400 filtration cells. Two types of commercial nanofiltration membranes NP010P and NP030P (Microdyn Nadir) were used. Transmembrane pressure was established as 0.3 MPa. For lower fluoride concentrations (5 mgF-/dm3) NF process allowed to decrease fluoride content under level 1.5 mgF-/dm3. Removal efficiency decreased with increasing fluoride content. Membrane NP030P showed better separation properties. Sodium chloride influenced removal efficiency as well as fluoride adsorption on/in membranes during the process. According to obtained data, better hydraulic properties exhibited membrane NP010P. For both membranes decrease in permeate flux in comparison to pure water was noticed what was observed. Relative permeability was lowered even to 0.32.
Go to article

Bibliography

  1. Akuno, M. H., Nocella, G., Milia, E. P. & Gutierrez, L. (2019). Factors influencing the relationship between fluoride in drinking water and dental fluorosis: A ten-year systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Water and Health, 17(6), pp. 845–862. DOI: 10.2166/wh.2019.300
  2. Ali, I., Alothman, Z. A. & Sanagi, M. M. (2015). Green Synthesis of Iron Nano-Impregnated Adsorbent for Fast Removal of Fluoride from Water. Journal of Molecular Liquids, 211, pp. 457–465. DOI: 10.1016/j.molliq.2015.07.034
  3. Ayala, L. I. M., Paquet, M., Janowska, K., Jamard, P., Quist-Jensen, C. A., Bosio, G. N., Mártire, D. O., Fabbri, D. & Boffa, V. (2018). Water Defluoridation: Nanofiltration vs Membrane Distillation. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 57(43), pp. 14740–14748. DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.8b03620
  4. Banasiak, L. J. & Schäfer, A. I. (2009). Removal of boron, fluoride and nitrate by electrodialysis in the presence of organic matter. Journal of Membrane Science, 334(1–2), pp. 101–109. DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2009.02.020
  5. Bannoud, A. H. & Darwich, Y. (2007). Elimination des ions fluorures et manganèses contenus dans les eaux par nanofiltration. Desalination, 206(1–3), pp. 449–456. DOI:10.1016/j.desal.2006.02.071
  6. Bhatnagar, A., Kumar, E. & Sillanpää, M. (2011). Fluoride removal from water by adsorption - A review. Chemical Engineering Journal, 171(3), pp. 811–840. DOI:10.1016/j.cej.2011.05.028
  7. Bowen, W. R., Mohammad, A. W. & Hilal, N. (1997). Characterisation of nanofiltration membranes for predictive purposes - Use of salts, uncharged solutes and atomic force microscopy. Journal of Membrane Science, 126(1), pp. 91–105. DOI:10.1016/S0376-7388(96)00276-1
  8. Carvalho, A. L., Maugeri, F., Silva, V., Hernández, A., Palacio, L. & Pradanos, P. (2011). AFM analysis of the surface of nanoporous membranes: Application to the nanofiltration of potassium clavulanate. Journal of Materials Science, 46(10), pp. 3356–3369. DOI:10.1007/s10853-010-5224-7
  9. Cassano, A., Bentivenga, A., Conidi, C., Galiano, F., Saoncella, O. & Figoli, A. (2019). Membrane-based clarification and fractionation of red wine lees aqueous extracts. Polymers, 11(7), pp. 1–16. DOI:10.3390/polym11071089
  10. Chatterjee, S. & De, S. (2014). Adsorptive removal of fluoride by activated alumina doped cellulose acetate phthalate (CAP) mixed matrix membrane, Sepparation and Purification Technology, 125, pp. 223–238. DOI:10.1016/j.seppur.2014.01.055
  11. Chen, C., Han, B., Li, J., Shang, T., Zou, J. & Jiang, W. (2001). A new model on the diffusion of small molecule penetrants in dense polymer membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 187(1–2), pp. 109–118. DOI:10.1016/S0376-7388(00)00689-X
  12. Chibani, A., Barhoumi, A., Ncib, S., Bouguerra, W. & Elaloui, E. (2019). Fluoride removal from synthetic groundwater by electrocoagulation process: parameters ad energy evaluation. Desalination and Water Treatment, 157, pp. 100–109. DOI:10.5004/dwt.2019.24087
  13. Damtie, M. M., Woo, Y. C., Kim, B., Hailemariam, R. H., Park, K. D., Shon, H. K., Park, C. & Choi, J. S. (2019). Removal of fluoride in membrane-based water and wastewater treatment technologies: Performance review. Journal of Environmental Management, 251, pp. 1–24. DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109524
  14. Diawara, C. K., Paugam, L., Pontié, M., Schlumpf, J. P., Jaouen, P. & Quéméneur, F. (2005). Influence of chloride, nitrate, and sulphate on the removal of fluoride ions by using nanofiltration membranes. Separation Science and Technology, 40, pp. 3339–3347. DOI:10.1080/01496390500423706
  15. Elimelech, M., Zhu, X., Childress, A. E. & Hong, S. (1997). Role of membrane surface morphology in colloidal fouling of cellulose acetate and composite aromatic polyamide reverse osmosis membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 127(1), pp. 101–109. DOI:10.1016/S0376-7388(96)00351-1
  16. Epsztein, R., Shaulsky, E., Dizge, N., Warsinger, D.M. & Elimelech, M. (2018). Role of ionic charge density in Donnan exclusion of monovalent anions by nanofiltration. Environmental Science and Technology, 52, pp. 4108–4116. DOI:10.1021/acs.est.7b06400
  17. Fierro, D., Boschetti-de-Fierro, A. & Abetz, V. (2012). The solution-diffusion with imperfections model as a method to understand organic solvent nanofiltration of multicomponent systems. Journal of Membrane Science, 413–414, pp. 91–101. DOI:10.1016/j.memsci.2012.04.027
  18. Gomes, A.C., Cabral Goncalves, I. & de Pinho, M.N, The role of adsorption on nanofiltration of azo dyes (2005). Journal of Membrane Science, 255, pp. 157–165. DOI:10.1016/j.memsci.2005.01.031
  19. He, J., Yang, Y., Wu, Z., Xie, C., Zhang, K., Kong, L. & Liu, J. (2020). Review of fluoride removal from water environment by adsorption. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 8(6), pp. 1–101. DOI:10.1016/j.jece.2020.104516
  20. Hirose, M., Ito, H. & Kamiyama, Y. (1996). Effect of skin layer surface structures on the flux behaviour of RO membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 121(2), pp. 209–215. DOI:10.1016/S0376-7388(96)00181-0
  21. Hoinkis, J., Valero-Freitag, S., Caporgno, M. P. & Pätzold, C. (2011). Removal of nitrate and fluoride by nanofiltration - A comparative study. Desalination and Water Treatment, 30(1–3), pp. 278–288. DOI:10.5004/dwt.2011.2103
  22. Hong, S.U., Malaisamy, R. & Bruening, M.L. (2007). Separation of fluoride from other monovalent anions using multilayer polyelectrolyte nanofiltration membranes, Langmuir, 23, 1716 –1722. DOI:10.1021/la061701y
  23. Hu, K. & Dickson, J. M. (2006). Nanofiltration membrane performance on fluoride removal from water. Journal of Membrane Science, 279(1–2), pp. 529–538. DOI:10.1016/j.memsci.2005.12.047
  24. Kambarani, M., Bahmanyar, H., Mousavian, M. A. & Mousavi, S. M. (2016). Crossflow filtration of sodium chloride solution by a polymeric nanofilter: Minimization of concentration polarization by a novel backpulsing method. Iranian Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, 80, pp. 135–141. DOI:10.30492/IJCCE.2016.23595
  25. Klimonda, A. & Kowalska, I. (2019). Application of polymeric membranes for the purification of solutions containing cationic surfactants. Water Science and Technology, 79(7), pp. 1241–1252. DOI:10.2166/wst.2019.115
  26. Kowalik-Klimczak, A., Zalewski, M. & Gierycz, P. (2016). Removal of Cr(III) ions from salt solution by nanofiltration: Experimental and modelling analysis. Polish Journal of Chemical Technology, 18(3), pp. 10–16. DOI:10.1515/pjct-2016-0042
  27. Krieg, H. M., Modise, S. J., Keizer, K. & Neomagus, H. W. J. P. (2004). Salt rejection in nanofiltration for single and binary salt mixtures in view of sulphate removal. Desalination, 171, pp. 205–215. DOI:10.1016/j.desal.2004.05.005
  28. Labarca, F. & Bórquez, R. (2020). Comparative study of nanofiltration and ion exchange for nitrate reduction in the presence of chloride and iron in groundwater. Science of the Total Environment, 723, pp. 1–12. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137809
  29. Lee, S., Lee, E., Elimelech, M. & Hong, S. (2011). Membrane characterization by dynamic hysteresis: Measurements, mechanisms, and implications for membrane fouling. Journal of Membrane Science, 366, pp. 17–24. DOI:10.1016/j.memsci.2010.09.024
  30. Ma, W. F., Liu, W. J. & Chen, G. W. (2009). Factors influencing the removal of fluoride from groundwater by Nanofiltration. 3rd International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering, ICBBE 2009, pp. 1–5. DOI:10.1109/ICBBE.2009.5162848
  31. Madaeni, S. S. & Salehi, E. (2009). Adsorption of cations on nanofiltration membrane: Separation mechanism, isotherm confirmation and thermodynamic analysis. Chemical Engineering Journal, 150(1), pp. 114–121. DOI:10.1016/j.cej.2008.12.005
  32. Mnif, A., Ali, M. B. S. & Hamrouni, B. (2010). Effect of some physical and chemical parameters on fluoride removal by nanofiltration. Ionics, 16, pp. 245–253. DOI:10.1007/s11581-009-0368-7
  33. Nasr, A. B., Charcosset, C., Amar, R. B. & Walha, K. (2013). Defluoridation of water by nanofiltration. Journal of Fluorine Chemistry, 150, pp. 92–97. DOI:10.1016/j.jfluchem.2013.01.021
  34. Nechifor, G., Pascu, D.E. & Pascu, M. (2013). Study of adsorption kinetics and zeta potential of phosphate and nitrate ions on a cellulosic membrane. Revue Roumaine de Chimie, 58 (7–8), pp. 591–597
  35. Park, N., Cho, J., Hong, S. & Lee, S. (2010). Ion transport characteristics in nanofiltration membranes: Measurements and mechanisms. Journal of Water Supply: Research and Technology - AQUA, 59(2–3), pp. 179–190. DOI:10.2166/aqua.2010.034
  36. Richards, L. A., Vuachère, M. & Schäfer, A. I. (2010). Impact of pH on the removal of fluoride, nitrate and boron by nanofiltration/reverse osmosis. Desalination, 261(3), pp. 331–337. DOI:10.1016/j.desal.2010.06.025
  37. Salgado, C., Carmona, F.J., Palacio, L., Hernández, A. & Prádanos, P. (2016). Fouling study of nanofiltration membranes for sugar control in grape must: Analysis of resistances and the role of osmotic pressure. Separation Science and Technology, 51(3), pp. 525–541. DOI:10.1080/01496395.2015.1094490
  38. Shen, J. & Schäfer, A. (2014a). Removal of fluoride and uranium by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis: A review. Chemosphere, 117(1), pp. 679–691. DOI:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.09.090
  39. Shen, J. & Schäfer, A. (2015). Factors affecting fluoride and natural organic matter (NOM) removal from natural waters in Tanzania by nanofiltration/reverse osmosis. Science of the Total Environment, 527–528, pp. 520–529. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.037
  40. Shu, L., Waite, T. D., Bliss, P. J., Fane, A. & Jegatheesan, V. (2005). Nanofiltration for the possible reuse of water and recovery of sodium chloride salt from textile effluent. Desalination, 172, pp. 235–243. DOI:10.1016/j.desal.2004.07.037
  41. Shurvell, T., Keir, G., Jegatheesan, V., Shu, L. & Farago, L. (2014). Removal of ametryn through nanofiltration and reverse osmosis. Desalination and Water Treatment, 52, pp. 643–649. DOI:10.1080/19443994.2013.829594
  42. Silva, F. C. (2018). Fouling of Nanofiltration Membranes, IntechOpen, London 2018, DOI:10.5772/intechopen.75353
  43. Steele, D. (1966). Group la: the Alkali Metals Li, Na, K, Rb, Cs, Fr, Pergamon, Tallahassee 1966. DOI:10.1016/b978-0-08-011853-6.50010-2
  44. Szmagara, A. & Krzyszczak, A. (2019). Monitoring of fluoride content in bottled mineral and spring waters by ion chromatography. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 202, pp. 27–34. DOI:10.1016/j.gexplo.2019.03.008
  45. Tahaikt, M., El Habbani, R., Ait Haddou, A., Achary, I., Amor, Z., Taky, M., Alami, A., Boughriba, A., Hafsi, M. & Elmidaoui, A. (2007). Fluoride removal from groundwater by nanofiltration. Desalination, 212(1–3), pp. 46–53. DOI:10.1016/j.desal.2006.10.003
  46. Teixeira, M. R., Rosa, M. J. & Nyström, M. (2005). The role of membrane charge on nanofiltration performance. Journal of Membrane Science, 265(1–2), pp. 160–166. DOI:10.1016/j.memsci.2005.04.046
  47. Tsuru, T., Nakao, S.I. & Kimura, S. (1991). Calculation of ion rejection by extended nernst-planck Equation with charged reverse osmosis membranes for single and mixed electrolyte solutions. Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan, 24(4), pp. 511–517. DOI:10.1252/jcej.24.511
  48. Van der Bruggen, B. & Vandecasteele, C. (2001). Flux decline during nanofiltration of organic components in aqueous solution. Environmental Science Technology, 35, pp. 3535–3540. DOI: 10.1021/es0100064
  49. Van Der Bruggen, B., Braeken, L. & Vandecasteele, C. (2002). Flux decline in nanofiltration due to adsorption of organic compounds. Separation and Purification Technology, 29(1), pp. 23–31. DOI:10.1016/S1383-5866(01)00199-X
  50. Vieira, G.S, Moreira, F.K.V., Matsumoto, R.L.S., Michelon, M., Filho, F.M. & Hubinger, M.D. (2018). Influence of nanofiltration membrane features on enrichment of jussara ethanolic extract (Euterpe edulis) in anthocyanins. Journal of Food Engineering, 226, pp. 31–41. DOI:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2018.01.013
  51. Vinati, A., Mahanty, B. & Behera, S. K. (2015). Clay and clay minerals for fluoride removal from water: A state-of-the-art review. Applied Clay Science, 114, pp. 340–348. DOI:10.1016/j.clay.2015.06.013
  52. Vigneswaran, S. & Kwon, D.-Y. (2015). Effect of ionic strength and permeate flux on membrane fouling: analysis of forces acting on particle deposit and cake formation. Environmental Engineering, 19, pp. 1604–1611. DOI:10.1007/s12205-014-0079-0
  53. Wang, Y., Shu, L., Jegatheesan, V. & Gao, B. (2010). Removal and adsorption of diuron through nanofiltration membrane: The effects of ionic environment and operating pressures. Separation and Purification Technology, 74(2), pp. 236–241. DOI:10.1016/j.seppur.2010.06.011
  54. WHO, Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality, 2017 (4th ed.), World Health Organization, 763 Geneva
  55. Xi, B., Wang, X., Liu, W., Xia, X., Li, D., He, L., Wang, H., Sun, W., Yang, T. & Tao, W. (2014). Fluoride and Arsenic Removal by Nanofiltration Technology from Groundwater in Rural Areas of China: Performances with Membrane Optimization. Separation Science and Technology (Philadelphia), 49, pp. 2642–2649. DOI:10.1080/01496395.2014.939761
  56. Xu, H., Xiao, K., Yu, J., Huang, B., Wang, X., Liang, S., Wei, C., Wen, X. & Huang, X. (2020). A simple method to identify the dominant fouling mechanisms during membrane filtration based on piecewise multiple linear regression. Membranes, 10(8), 1–14. DOI:10.3390/membranes10080171
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Martyna Grzegorzek
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Wrocław University of Science and Technology,Wrocław, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the suitability of the nanofi ltration (NF) process to recover the regenerating agent (NaOH) from spent solutions contaminated with organic compounds. NaOH recovery from 2 spent regenerant solutions after cleaning ultrafiltration (UF) membranes (polymeric 30 kDa, ceramic 300 kDa) fouled with natural humic water was carried out using 2 types of NF membranes: NP010P (Na2SO4 rejection: 35–75%) and NP030P (Na2SO4 rejection: 80–95%). It has been shown that the use of the NP030P membrane allows for very high separation effi ciency of organic compounds (up to 97% of color intensity reduction) from the tested solutions. It was also observed that the effectiveness of the process, in addition to the type of membrane used, also depends on the time of NF process – along with the elapsed time of the process, the hydraulic and separation properties of the tested membranes deteriorated. The obtained results showed that the use of both tested NF membranes allows for the recovery of NaOH to a degree that allows its re-use.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Agnieszka Urbanowska
Małgorzata Kabsch-Korbutowicz
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

There is often a need to improve the taste of mineral water by reducing the sulphate ion content. It was found that for such an effect, nanofiltration (NF) process can be used. In the case, the proposed formula was assumed obtaining a mineral water with reduction of H2S and SO42- content through the following processes: stripping - UF/MF or rapid fi ltration - nanofiltration - mixing with raw water or filtration through calcium bed. The paper shows the results of the tests, with use of mineral waters and nanofiltration. Commercial nanofiltration membranes NF-270 Dow Filmtec and NF-DK GE Infrastructure Water&Process Technologies were applied. NF was carried out for mixed water from both water intakes (1 and 2), recovery of 50%, at transmembrane pressure of 0.8-1.2 MPa in the dead-end fi ltration mode. In addition, the permeate obtained in NF was filtered through a column fi lled with 1.0-3.0 mm limestone rock, in order to improve the composition of mineral water. The tested mineral water is the sulphate-chloride-sodium-calcium-magnesium in nature and contains 991 mg/L of SO42- and 2398 mg/L of TDS, while the permeate after NF showed the chloride - sodium hydrogeochemical type (TDS: 780-1470 mg/L, sulfate 10-202.7 mg/L, calcium 23-39.7 mg/L, magnesium 11-28 mg/L). As a result of water treatment in the NF process, high reduction of SO42- ions was obtained (79-98.7%), while the TDS was reduced in 51-64%. Because the process of NF allows for relatively high reduction of bivalent ions, a significant reduction in calcium ion content (84-88%) and magnesium (84-89%) has been also obtained. Monovalent ions were reduced to a lesser extent, i.e. sodium in 46% and bicarbonates in 39-64.1%. Despite obtaining the positive effect of the sulphate ions content reduction, the NF process significantly changed the mineralogy composition of water. The permeate filtration (DK-NF membrane) on the CaCO3 deposit led to a correction of the hydrogeochemical type of water from chloridesodium to chloride-bicarbonate-sodium. The concentration of calcium ions was increased by 60.5% and was 28.2 mg/L, and bicarbonate ions by 7.78% (increased to 195 mg/L). Based on a morphological assessment of the deposits in the SEM image and their chemical composition, the presence of gypsum crystals was detected on the surface of the NF-270 membrane. The deposits formed on the NF-DK membrane were of a completely different character as aggregations of iron and aluminium oxides/hydroxides were found. Such significant mineralogical differences between the secondary deposits crystallising on the surface of the membranes point to the impact of several factors, including membrane characteristics, concentration polarisation, mass transport mechanisms, etc.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Michał Bodzek
Mariola Rajca
Barbara Tomaszewska
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper describes the effectiveness of mycoestrogen removal in an integrated ozonation - nanofiltration system for water treatment. The results were compared to those obtained for ozonation and nanofiltration carried out as single processes. It has been found that the effectiveness of mycoestrogen removal in the integrated system was higher than that observed for single ozonation. During ozonation, the removal of micropollutants was affected by the dose of an oxidizing agent and type of treated water. As far as nanofiltration is concerned, its effectiveness both in the integrated system and as a single process was similar. Nevertheless, it is advisable to precede nanofiltration with ozonation because of membrane efficiency.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

M. Dudziak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

A number of inorganic compounds, including anions such as nitrate(V), chlorate(VII), bromate (V),

arsenate(III) and (V), borate and fluoride as well as metals forming anions under certain conditions, have been

found in potentially harmful concentrations in numerous water sources. The maximum allowed levels of these

compounds in drinking water set by the WHO and a number of countries are very low (in the range of µg/l to a

few mg/l), thus the majority of them can be referred to as charged micropollutants. Several common treatment

technologies which are nowadays used for removal of inorganic contaminants from natural water supplies, represent serious exploitation problems. Membrane processes such as reverse osmosis (RO), nanofiltration (NF),

ultrafiltration (UF) and microfiltration (MF) in hybrid systems, Donnan dialysis (DD) and electrodialysis (ED)

as well as membrane bioreactors (MBR), if properly selected, offer the advantage of producing high quality

drinking water without inorganic anions.

I

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

M. Bodzek
K. Konieczny

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more