Journal of the American Oil Chemists Society

, Volume 62, Issue 6, pp 1006–1009 | Cite as

The “Hard” and “Soft” surfactant profile of israel municipal wastewaters

  • Uri Zoller


A study of mapping and field monitoring of Israel’s municipal sewage wastewaters in respect to the content, distribution and the initial nonbiodegradable-biodegradable ratio of surfactants in them has been undertaken over the central and northern parts of the country under in vivo conditions.

Typical concentrations of nonionics (mainly “hard” alkylphenol-based ethoxylates) and anionics (mainly the “soft” LABS) in influents were found to be within the range of 1.1–2.2 and 9.6–10.6 mg/liter respectively. In (treated) effluents, the corresponding concentrations are 0.3–0.45 and 0.3–4.3 mg/liter.

The above is in accordance with current world trends following the switch to biodegradable surfactants. However, the concentrations of nonionic surfactants in the municipal wastewaters are surprisingly low in view of the preferred consumption of “hard” nonionic surfactants in the local market.

It is concluded that 20–40% of all nonionic surfactants discharged into municipal sewage, additional amounts of their metabolites and some of the anionic surfactants, too, find their way into receiving waters, because they resist substantial removal via only primary and secondary treatment.


Surfactant Transesterification Diesel Engine Nonionic Surfactant Municipal Wastewater 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Layman, P.L., Chem. Eng. News 3, January 1, 1982.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Henkel KGaA, JAOCS 59:555A (1982).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Swisher, R.D., Surfactant Biodegradation, Marcel Dekker, 1970.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kravetz, L., H. Chung, K.F. Guin, W.T. Shebs and L.S. Smith, Household and Personal Prod. Ind. 19, 46 and 62 (1982).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Narkis, N., and S. Henefeld-Furie, Water and Sewage Works, 69, March, 1977.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pitter, P., and T. Fuka, Tenside Detergents, 16:298 (1979).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kravetz, L., JAOCS 58:58A (1981).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zoller, U., and R. Romano, Environ. Inter. 9:55 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Idelovitch, E., Munic. Wastewater Reuse News, 49:12 (1981).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cleaning Our Environment—A Chemical Perspective, A report by the Committee on Environmental Improvement, Amer. Chem. Soc., Washington, DC, 1978.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Arlosoroff, S., paper presented at the United Nations Water Conference; Mar del Plata, Argentina, 1977.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eitan, G., paper presented at the 2nd Inter. Conf. on Ecology and Environmental Quality, Jerusalem, May 1983.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zoller, U., and R. Romano, JAOCS 61:971 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haupt, D.H., JAOCS 60:1914 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zoller, U., in Chemistry for Protection of the Environment, Pawlowski et al., eds., Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1984, pp. 161–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Milwidsky, B.M., Practical Detergent Analysis, NcNair-Dorland, New York, 1970, pp. 44–45; 149–150.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Boyer, S.L., K.F. Guin, R.M. Kelley, M.L. Mausner, H.F. Robinson, T.M. Schmitt, C.R. Stahal and E.A. Stezkorn, Environ. Sci. Tech. 11:1167 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kravetz, L., H. Chung, K.F. Guin, W.T. Shebs and L.S. Smith, Tenside Detergents 21:1 (1984).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Oil Chemists 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Uri Zoller
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Chemical StudiesHaifa University - Oranim, The School of Education of the Kibbutz MovementTivonIsrael

Personalised recommendations