Experimental and Modeling Assessment of Sulfate and Arsenic Removal from Mining Wastewater by Nanofiltration
-
Sachin V. Jadhav
Abstract
The application of nanofiltration membranes to remove sulfate and arsenic from wastewaters was investigated. The influence of operating parameters on the rejection and permeate flux was determined. The nanofiltration experiments carried out with NF90 and NF270 membranes showed a high rejection of sulfate (~90 %) and arsenic (~97 %) under the given set of experimental conditions. Better permeate flux values were obtained by NF270 membrane with a minor drop in rejections, but it proved to be better in water recovery. In FESEM analysis, the sulfate deposition on the membrane surface confirmed its well-known precipitation in desalination types of equipment. The experimental results were successfully predicted by using theoretical framework available in the literature. The simulation was carried out by using Levenberg–Marquardt with Gauss–Newton algorithm in MATLAB and the prime important parameters, viz. membrane resistance
Acknowledgements
The authors sincerely acknowledge the Academy of Finland (New-Indigo ERA-NET, GREENTECH-project), DST-Govt of India, SULKA-project (European Regional Development fund) and HYMEPRO-project (Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation, Tekes) for the financial support. GDY acknowledges support from R.T. Mody Distinguished Professor endowment and J.C. Bose National Fellowship of DST (Govt of India).
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
References
Ahmed, A.L., M.F. Chong, and S. Bhatia. 2005. “Mathematical Modeling and Simulation of the Multiple Solutes System for Nanofiltration Process.” Journal of Membrane Sciences 253: 103–115.10.1016/j.memsci.2005.01.005Search in Google Scholar
Alarcon-Herrera, M.T., J. Bundschuh, B. Nath, H.B. Nicolli, M. Gutierrez, V.M. Reyes-Gomez, D. Nunez, I.R. Martín-Dominguez, and O. Sracek. 2013. “Co-Occurrence of Arsenic and Fluoride in Groundwater of Semi-Arid Regions in Latin America: Genesis, Mobility and Remediation.” Journal of Hazardous Materials 262: 960–969.10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.08.005Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Al-Rashdi, B.A.M., D.J. Johnson, and N. Hilal. 2013. “Removal of Heavy Metal Ions by Nanofiltration.” Desalination 315: 2–17.10.1016/j.desal.2012.05.022Search in Google Scholar
Al-Zoubi, H., N. Hilal, N.A. Darwish, and A.W. Mohammad. 2007. “Rejection and Modelling of Sulphate and Potassium Salts by Nanofiltration Membranes: Neural Network and Spiegler–Kedem Model.” Desalination 206: 42–60.10.1016/j.desal.2006.02.060Search in Google Scholar
Bhattacharjee, C., and S. Datta. 2003. “Analysis of Polarized Layer Resistance during Ultra filtration of PEG-6000: An Approach Based on filtration Theory.” Separation and Purification Technology 33: 115.10.1016/S1383-5866(02)00142-9Search in Google Scholar
Bhattacharya, A., and P. Ghosh. 2004. “Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis Membranes: Theory and Application in Separation of Electrolytes.” Reviews in Chemical Engineering 20: 111–173.10.1515/REVCE.2004.20.1-2.111Search in Google Scholar
Camacho, L.M., M. Gutierrez, M.T. Alarcon-Herrera, M.L. Villalba, and S. Deng. 2011. “Occurrence and Treatment of Arsenic in Groundwater and Soil in Northern Mexico and Southwestern USA.” Chemosphere 83: 211–225.10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.12.067Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Caraco, N.F., J. Cole, and G.E. Likens. 1989. “Evidence for Sulphate-Controlled Phosphorus Release from Sediments of Aquatic Systems.” Nature 341: 316–318.10.1038/341316a0Search in Google Scholar
Chakraborti, D., M.M. Rahman, B. Das, M. Murrill, S. Dey, and S.C. Mukherjee. 2010. “Status of Groundwater Arsenic Contamination in Bangladesh: A 14-Year Study Report.” Water Research 44: 5789–5802.10.1016/j.watres.2010.06.051Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Chakrabortty, S., M. Pal, M. Roy, and P. Pal. 2015. “Water Treatment in a New flux-Enhancing, Continuous Forward Osmosis Design: Transport Modelling and Economic Evaluation Towards Scale Up.” Desalination 365: 329–342.10.1016/j.desal.2015.03.020Search in Google Scholar
Chakrabortty, S., M. Sen, and P. Pal. 2014. “Arsenic Removal from Contaminated Groundwater by Membrane-Integrated Hybrid Plant: Optimization and Control Using Visual Basic Platform.” Environmental Science and Pollution Research 21: 3840–3857.10.1007/s11356-013-2382-6Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Curcio, E., X. Ji, A.M. Quazi, S. Barghi, G.D. Profio, E. Fontananova, T. Macleod, and E. Drioli. 2010. “Hybrid Nanofiltration–Membrane Crystallization System for the Treatment of Sulfate Wastes.” Journal of Membrane Sciences 360: 493–498.10.1016/j.memsci.2010.05.053Search in Google Scholar
Do, V.T., C.Y. Tang, M. Reinhard, and J.O. Leckie. 2012. “Effects of Hypochlorous Acid Exposure on the Rejection of Salt, Polyethylene Glycols, Boron and Arsenic (V) by Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis Membranes.” Water Research 46 (16): 5217–5223.10.1016/j.watres.2012.06.044Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Dolar, D., A. Vuković, D. Ašperger, and K. Košutić. 2011. “Effect of Water Matrices on Removal of Veterinary Pharmaceuticals by Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis Membranes.” Journal of Environmental Sciences 23 (8): 1299–1307.10.1016/S1001-0742(10)60545-1Search in Google Scholar
Drioli, E., and E. Curcio. 2007. “Membrane Engineering for Process Intensification: A Perspective.” Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 82: 223–227.10.1002/jctb.1650Search in Google Scholar
Figoli, A., A. Cassano, A. Criscuoli, M.S.I. Mozumder, M.T. Uddin, M.A. Islam, and E. Drioli. 2010. “Influence of Operating Parameters on the Arsenic Removal by Nanofiltration.” Water Research 44 (1): 97–104.10.1016/j.watres.2009.09.007Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Gy., S., B. Henriques, M. Gi, A. Ramos, and C. Alvarez. 2012. “Design of Experiments as a Tool for LC–MS/MS Method Development for the Trace Analysis of the Potentially Genotoxic 4-Dimethylaminopyridine Impurity in Glucocorticoids.” Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 70: 251–258.10.1016/j.jpba.2012.07.006Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Hilal, N., M. Al-Abri, H. Al-Hinai, and M. Abu-Arabi. 2008. “Characterization and Retention of NF Membranes Using PEG, HS and Polyelectrolytes.” Desalination 221: 284–293.10.1016/j.desal.2007.01.085Search in Google Scholar
Holl, W.H. 2010. “Mechanisms of Arsenic Removal from Water.” Environmental Geochemistry and Health 32: 287–290.10.1007/s10653-010-9307-9Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Hug, S.J., O.X. Leupin, and M. Berg. 2008. “Bangladesh and Vietnam: Different Groundwater Compositions Require Different Approaches to Arsenic Mitigation.” Environmental Science & Technology 42: 6318–6323.10.1021/es7028284Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Jadhav, S.V., E. Bringas, G.D. Yadav, V.K. Rathod, I. Ortiz, and K.V. Marathe. 2015. “Arsenic and Fluoride Contaminated Groundwaters: A Review of Current Technologies for Contaminants Removal.” Journal of Environmental Management 162: 1–20.10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.07.020Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Katsoyiannis, I.A., and A.I. Zouboulis. 2006. “Comparative Evaluation of Conventional and Alternative Methods for the Removal of Arsenic from Contaminated Groundwaters.” Reviews on Environmental Health 21 (1): 25–41.10.1515/REVEH.2006.21.1.25Search in Google Scholar
Kosutic, K., L. Furac, L. Sipos, and B. Kunst. 2005. “Removal of Arsenic and Pesticides from Drinking Water by Nanofiltration Membranes.” Separation and Purification Technology 42: 137–144.10.1016/j.seppur.2004.07.003Search in Google Scholar
Kosutic, K., and B. Kunst. 2002. “RO and NF Membranes Fouling and Cleaning and Pore Size Distribution Variations.” Desalination 150: 113–120.10.1016/S0011-9164(02)00936-0Search in Google Scholar
Kosutic, K., I. Novak, L. Sipos, and B. Kunst. 2004. “Removal of Sulfates and Other Inorganics from Potable Water by Nanofiltration Membranes of Characterized Porosity.” Separation and Purification Technology 37: 177–185.10.1016/S1383-5866(03)00206-5Search in Google Scholar
Krieg, H.M., S.J. Modise, K. Keizer, and H.W.J.P. Neomagus. 2004. “Salt Rejection in Nanofiltration for Single and Binary Salt Mixtures in View of Sulphate Removal.” Desalination 171: 205–215.10.1016/j.desal.2004.05.005Search in Google Scholar
Manchalwar, S.M., V.A. Anthati, and K.V. Marathe. 2010. “Simulation of Micellar Enhanced Ultrafiltration by Multiple Solute Model.” Journal of Hazardous Materials 184: 485–492.10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.08.060Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Pal, P., S. Chakrabortty, and L. Linnanen. 2014. “A Nanofiltration–Coagulation Integrated System for Separation and Stabilization of Arsenic from Groundwater.” Science of the Total Environment 476–477: 601–610.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.01.041Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Pal, P., S. Chakraborty, and M. Roy. 2012. “Arsenic Separation by a Membrane-Integrated Hybrid Treatment System: Modeling, Simulation, and Techno-Economic Evaluation.” Separation and Purification Technology 47: 1091–1101.10.1080/01496395.2011.652754Search in Google Scholar
Reddy, K.J., and T.R. Roth. 2013. “Arsenic Removal from Natural Groundwater Using Cupric Oxide.” National Ground Water Association 51 (1): 83–91.10.1111/j.1745-6584.2012.00926.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
Richards, L.A., B.S. Richards, H.M.A. Rossiter, and A.I. Schafer. 2009. “Impact of Speciation on Fluoride, Arsenic and Magnesium Retention by Nanofiltration/Reverse Osmosis in Remote Australian Communities.” Desalination 248: 177–183.10.1016/j.desal.2008.05.054Search in Google Scholar
Richards, L.A., B.S. Richards, and A.I. Schafer. 2011. “Renewable Energy Powered Membrane Technology: Salt and Inorganic Contaminant Removal by Nanofiltration/Reverse Osmosis.” Journal of Membrane Sciences 369: 188–195.10.1016/j.memsci.2010.11.069Search in Google Scholar
Russell, J.M., and J.P. Werne. 2009. “Climate Change and Productivity Variations Recorded by Sedimentary Sulfur in Lake Edward, Uganda/D. R. Congo.” Chemical Geology 264: 337–346.10.1016/j.chemgeo.2009.03.020Search in Google Scholar
Saitua, H., M. Campderros, S. Cerutti, and A.P. Padilla. 2005. “Effect of Operating Conditions in Removal of Arsenic from Water by Nanofiltration Membrane.” Desalination 172: 173–180.10.1016/j.desal.2004.08.027Search in Google Scholar
Sanches-Andrea, I., J.L. Sanz, M.F.M. Bijmans, and A.J.M. Stams. 2014. “Sulfate Reduction at Low Ph to Remediate Acid Mine Drainage.” Journal of Hazardous Materials 269: 98–109.10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.12.032Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Schaep, J., B.V.D. Bruggen, C. Vandecasteele, and D. Wilms. 1998. “Influence of Ion Size and Charge in Nanofiltration.” Separation and Purification Technology 14: 155–162.10.1016/S1383-5866(98)00070-7Search in Google Scholar
Schaep, J., C. Vandecasteele, W. Mohammad, and R. Bowen. 2001. “Modelling the Retention of Ionic Components for Different Nanofiltration Membranes.” Separation and Purification Technology 22–23: 169–179.10.1016/S1383-5866(00)00163-5Search in Google Scholar
Slezak, A., B. Turczynski, and Z. Nawrat. 1989. “Modification of the Kedem–Katchalsky–Zelman Model Equations of the Transmembrane Transport.” Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics 14: 205–218.10.1515/jnet.1989.14.3.205Search in Google Scholar
Yeh, H.M., and T.W. Cheng. 1993. “Resistance-In-Series for Membrane Ultrafiltration in Hollow Fibers of Tube-And-Shell Arrangement.” Separation and Purification Technology 28: 1341–1355.10.1080/01496399308018041Search in Google Scholar
Yu, Y., C. Zhao, Y. Wang, W. Fan, and Z. Luan. 2013. “Effects of Ion Concentration and Natural Organic Matter on Arsenic(V) Removal by Nanofiltration under Different Transmembrane Pressures.” Journal of Environmental Sciences 25 (2): 302–307.10.1016/S1001-0742(12)60044-8Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Review
- Role of Different Feedstocks on the Butanol Production Through Microbial and Catalytic Routes
- Research Articles
- Experimental Study of Batch Reactor Performance for Ethyl Acetate Saponification
- Photocatalytic Activity of TiO2 Thin Films: Kinetic and Efficiency Study
- Experimental and Modeling Assessment of Sulfate and Arsenic Removal from Mining Wastewater by Nanofiltration
- CFD-DEM Numerical Simulation and Experimental Validation of Heat Transfer and Two-Component Flow in Fluidized Bed
- Numerical and Experimental Study on a Microfluidic Concentration Gradient Generator for Arbitrary Approximate Linear and Quadratic Concentration Curve Output
- Zn2+, Fe2+, Cu2+, Mn2+, H+ Ion-exchanged and Raw Clinoptilolite Zeolite Catalytic Performance in the Propane-SCR-NOx Process: A Comparative Study
- Adsorption of Congo Red Dye from Aqueous Solutions by Montmorillonite as a Low-cost Adsorbent
- Modeling and Evaluating Zeolite and Amorphous Based Catalysts in Vacuum Gas Oil Hydrocracking Process
- Short Communication
- The Possibility of Hybrid-Bioreactor Heating by the Microwave Radiation
Articles in the same Issue
- Review
- Role of Different Feedstocks on the Butanol Production Through Microbial and Catalytic Routes
- Research Articles
- Experimental Study of Batch Reactor Performance for Ethyl Acetate Saponification
- Photocatalytic Activity of TiO2 Thin Films: Kinetic and Efficiency Study
- Experimental and Modeling Assessment of Sulfate and Arsenic Removal from Mining Wastewater by Nanofiltration
- CFD-DEM Numerical Simulation and Experimental Validation of Heat Transfer and Two-Component Flow in Fluidized Bed
- Numerical and Experimental Study on a Microfluidic Concentration Gradient Generator for Arbitrary Approximate Linear and Quadratic Concentration Curve Output
- Zn2+, Fe2+, Cu2+, Mn2+, H+ Ion-exchanged and Raw Clinoptilolite Zeolite Catalytic Performance in the Propane-SCR-NOx Process: A Comparative Study
- Adsorption of Congo Red Dye from Aqueous Solutions by Montmorillonite as a Low-cost Adsorbent
- Modeling and Evaluating Zeolite and Amorphous Based Catalysts in Vacuum Gas Oil Hydrocracking Process
- Short Communication
- The Possibility of Hybrid-Bioreactor Heating by the Microwave Radiation