Open AccessThis article is
- freely available
Comparing Two Operating Configurations in a Full-Scale Arsenic Removal Plant. Case Study: Guatemala
Water Treatment and Quality Department, Mexican Institute of Water Technology (IMTA), Paseo Cuauhnáhuac 8532, Col Progreso, Jiutepec C.P.62550, Mexico
Azul Company, 16 Calle 9-60, Condado El Naranjo, Mixco, Guatemala
ECO-TEC Company, Carretera a El Salvador km 26.5. Cruce a Santa Elena Barilas, Guatemala City, Guatemala
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 10 April 2013; in revised form: 24 May 2013 / Accepted: 29 May 2013 / Published: 21 June 2013
Abstract: The present study was conducted in Naranjo County located in the municipality of Mixco, Guatemala. The water supply source comes from two wells with a maximum flow of 25.24 and 33.44 L·s−1. The main problem with this source is the high arsenic concentration—between 0.1341 and 0.1671 mg·L−1. The aim of this study was to conduct laboratory tests, basic engineering and supervision of the construction and evaluation of an operations plant using two configurations, A (low-rate sedimentation and ceramic filter) and B (high-rate sedimentation and clinoptilolite filter), to remove arsenic present in water for human use and consumption. This plant supplies water to Naranjo County in Mixco, Guatemala (5000 inhabitants). First, a laboratory Jar Test was performed to evaluate arsenic removal efficiency. And second, a conventional clarification plant was then built (design flow: 25.24 L·s−1). The best results were achieved with configuration B, with the following reagents and dosage as defined by the laboratory tests: 10 mg L−1 ferric chloride as coagulant; 1.8 mg·L−1 CH-polyfocal as flocculant and 0.4 mg L−1 MIT03 as color removal; 1 mg L−1 sodium hypochlorite as oxidant and adjusting pH to ≈7.0 with sodium hydroxide. Once the plant began operating, the efficiency of the treatment process was evaluated. The maximum elimination efficiencies were obtained 100% for turbidity (0 UTN), 89.54% (3.66 UPt-Co) for color and 96.80% (0.005 mg L−1) for arsenic, values that comply with Guatemalan standards. For this case, the relation between Fe(III) dosage/mg and As(V) removal was 1:46.
Keywords: arsenic removal; media filters; treatment plant; water supply
Citations to this Article
Cite This Article
MDPI and ACS Style
Garrido Hoyos, S.E.; Avilés Flores, M.; Ramírez Gonzalez, A.; Grajeda Fajardo, C.; Cardoso Zoloeta, S.; Velásquez Orozco, H. Comparing Two Operating Configurations in a Full-Scale Arsenic Removal Plant. Case Study: Guatemala. Water 2013, 5, 834-851.
Garrido Hoyos SE, Avilés Flores M, Ramírez Gonzalez A, Grajeda Fajardo C, Cardoso Zoloeta S, Velásquez Orozco H. Comparing Two Operating Configurations in a Full-Scale Arsenic Removal Plant. Case Study: Guatemala. Water. 2013; 5(2):834-851.
Garrido Hoyos, Sofía E.; Avilés Flores, Martha; Ramírez Gonzalez, A.; Grajeda Fajardo, Celia; Cardoso Zoloeta, Saúl; Velásquez Orozco, Hayron. 2013. "Comparing Two Operating Configurations in a Full-Scale Arsenic Removal Plant. Case Study: Guatemala." Water 5, no. 2: 834-851.