Abstract
Secondary effluent from a sampling of municipal wastewater was treatedby an ozone-ceramic biofilter (O3-CBF) system following treatments with coagulation,sedimentation and sand filtration. The system was operated under an ozoneconsumption dose of 5 mg/L and different HRTs of CBF (10–30 min) for overeight months. The mean removals of CODMn, DOC, UV254, and chroma were 31.0,24.0, 42.2 and 79.3%, respectively, under a CBF HRT of 10 min. Further increasingHRT did not lead to a remarkable improvement in pollutant removal. Ames testsecondary effluent. The mutagenic activity in TA98-S9 was decreased from 2.97 to1.45 (MR/L) by O3, and to 1.3 (MR/L) by the following CBF treatment. 105 ~ 108count/L of total bacteria and 102 ~ 105 count/L of E. coli were detected in the conventionaltreatment effluent, which could not satisfy the hygienical requirements forreclamation. Batch O3 tests demonstrated that complete inactivation of E. coli couldbe achieved at an ozone dose of 12 mg/L.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Camel, V. and Bermond, A. (1998). The use of ozone and associated oxidation processes in drinking water treatment. Water Res. 32(11), 3208–3222.
Carlson, K.H., Amy, G.L. (2001). Ozone and biofiltration optimization for multiple objectives. J. AWWA, January, 88–98.
Facile, N., Barbeau, B., Prévost, M. and Koudjonou, B. (2000). Evaluation bacterial aerobic spores as a surrogate for Giardia and Cryptosporidium inactivation by ozone. Water Res. 34(12), 3238–3246.
Farré, M. and Barceló, D. (2003). Toxicity testing of wastewater and sewage sludge by biosensors, bioassays and chemical analysis. Trends Anal. Chem. 22(5), 299–309.
Ferguson D.W., McGuire M.J., Koch B., Wolfe R.L., and Aieta E.M. (1990). Comparing pre-ozone and ozone for controlling taste and odor compounds, disinfection by-products, and microorganisms. J. AWWA 82(4), 181–191.
Lacy, W.J. and Rice, R.G. (1977). The status and future of ozone for water and wastewater treatment in the United States. In Proceedings Wasser Berlin 77. Int. Symp. Ozon and Wasser, pp. 76–79.
Lazarova, V., Savoye, P. and Janex, M.L. (1999). Advanced wastewater disinfection technologies – State of the art and perspectives. Wat. Sci. Tech. 40(4–5), 203–213.
Maron, D.M. and Ames, B.N (1983). Revised methods for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutat. Res. 113, 173–215.
Masten, S.J. and Daves, S.H.R. (1994). There are more than 40 municipal wastewater treatment plants in the United States that have ozonation facilities. Environ. Sci. Technol. 28(4), 181–184.
von Gunten U., Driedger A., Gallard H. and Salhi E. (2001). By-products formation during water disfinfenction: A tool to assess disinfection efficiency? Water Res. 35(8), 2095–2099.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jiang, Y., Zhang, Y., Cao, N., Zhou, J., Yang, M., Hirotsuji, J. (2010). Ozone Used as a Technology for Reducing the Risk of Wastewater Reuse. In: Sumi, A., Fukushi, K., Honda, R., Hassan, K. (eds) Sustainability in Food and Water. Alliance for Global Sustainability Bookseries, vol 18. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9914-3_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9914-3_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9913-6
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9914-3
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)