Next Article in Journal
Using DPSIR and Balances to Support Water Governance
Previous Article in Journal
Sustainably Managing Reservoir Storage: Ancient Roots of a Modern Challenge
Article Menu
Issue 2 (February) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Water 2018, 10(2), 119; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10020119

Comparing Mixed-Media and Conventional Slow-Sand Filters for Arsenic Removal from Groundwater

1
Water Technology Research Group, NHL-Stenden University of Applied Sciences, Rengerslaan 10, 8917 DD Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
2
Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences, Agora 1, 8934 CJ Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
3
Centre of Expertise Water Technology, Agora 4, 8934 CJ Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
4
Department of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Campus João David Ferreira Lima, s/n, Trindade, Florianópolis-SC 88040-900, Brazil
5
Wageningen University and Research Centre, Droevendaalsesteeg 4, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 13 November 2017 / Revised: 22 December 2017 / Accepted: 8 January 2018 / Published: 29 January 2018
Full-Text   |   PDF [2832 KB, uploaded 31 January 2018]   |  

Abstract

Arsenic contamination of groundwater is a major public health concern worldwide. The problem has been reported mainly in southern Asia and, especially, in Bangladesh. Slow-sand filters (SSF) augmented with iron were proven to be a simple, low-cost and decentralized technique for the treatment of arsenic-contaminated sources. In this research, three pilot-scale SSF (flowrate 6 L·h−1) were tested regarding their capability of removing arsenic from groundwater in conditions similar to those found in countries like Bangladesh (70 µg As(III) L−1, 26 °C). From the three, two filters were prepared with mixed media, i.e., sand mixed with corrosive iron matter (CIM filter) and iron-coated sand (ICS filter), and a third conventional SSF was used as a reference. The results obtained showed that the CIM filter could remove arsenic below the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline concentration of 10 µg·L−1, even for inlet concentrations above 150 µg·L−1. After 230 days of continuous operation the arsenic concentration in the effluent started increasing, indicating depletion or saturation of the CIM layer. The effluent arsenic concentration, however, never exceeded the Bangladeshi standard of 50 µg·L−1 throughout the whole duration of the experiments. View Full-Text
Keywords: arsenic; groundwater; slow sand filer; corrosive iron matter; iron-coated sand arsenic; groundwater; slow sand filer; corrosive iron matter; iron-coated sand
Figures

Graphical abstract

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Śmiech, K.M.; Tolsma, A.; Kovács, T.; Dalbosco, V.; Yasadi, K.; Groendijk, L.; Agostinho, L.L.F. Comparing Mixed-Media and Conventional Slow-Sand Filters for Arsenic Removal from Groundwater. Water 2018, 10, 119.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top