The removal of xenobiotic compounds from wastewater through the use of biological processes and advanced oxidation technologies

Dissertação apresentada para obtenção do Grau de Doutor em Engenharia Química e Bioquímica pela Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia

Analysis of chromium behaviour and speciation during the electrodialytic process

The interest in chromium (Cr) arises from the widespread use of this heavy metal in various industrial processes that cause its release as liquid, solid and gaseous waste into the environment. The impact of Cr on the environment and living organisms primarily depends on its chemical form, since Cr(III) is an essential micronutrient for humans, other animals and plants, and Cr(VI) is highly toxic and a known human carcinogen. This study aimed to evaluate if the electrodialytic process (ED) is an appropriate treatment for Cr removal, through a critical overview of Cr speciation, before and after the ED experiments, to assess possible Cr(III)-Cr(VI) interconversions during the treatment. ED was the treatment technique applied to two types of matrices containing Cr: chromate copper arsenate (CCA) contaminated soil and municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) fly ash. In order to study Cr remediation, three EDR set-ups were used: a new set-up, the combined cell (2/3C or 3/2C), with three compartments, alternating current between two anodes and different initial experimental conditions, one set-up with three compartments (3C cell) and the other set-up with two compartments (2C cell). The Cr removal rates obtained in this study were between 10-36% for the soil, and 1-13% for the fly ash. The highest Cr removal rates were achieved in the 26 days experiments: 36% for the soil, 13% for the fly ash. Regarding the 13 days experiments, the highest Cr removal rates were attained with the 2/3C set-up: 24% for the soil, 5% for the fly ash. The analysis of Cr(VI) was performed before and after ED experiments to evaluate eventual changes in Cr speciation during the treatment. This analysis was conducted by two methods: USEPA Method 3060A, for the extraction of Cr(VI); and Hach Company Method 8023, for the detection of Cr(VI). Despite the differences in Cr total concentration, both matrices presented a similar speciation, with Cr(III) being the main species found and Cr(VI) less than 3% of Cr total, before and after the treatment. For fly ash, Cr(VI) was initially below the detection limit of the method and remained that way after the treatment. For soil, Cr(VI) decreased after the treatment. Oxidation of Cr(III) to Cr(VI) did not occur during the ED process since there was no increase in Cr(VI) in the matrices after the treatment. Hence, the results of this study indicate that ED is an appropriate technique to remediate matrices containing Cr because it contributes to Cr removal, without causing Cr(III)-Cr(VI) interconversions.

Removal of organic contaminants from wastewater using the electrodialytic process

Pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) are widely used on a daily basis. After their usage they reach the wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). These compounds have different physico-chemical characteristics, which makes them difficult to completely remove in the WWTPs, througth conventional treatments. Currently, there is no legislation regarding PPCPs thresholds in effluent discharge. But, even at vestigial concentrations, these compounds enclose environmental risks due to, e.g., endocrine disruption potential. There is a need of alternative techniques for their removal in WWTPs. The main goal of this work was to assess the use of electrodialytic (ED) process to remove PPCPs from the effluent to be discharged. A two-compartment ED cell was used testing (i) the effluent position in the cell (anode and cathode compartment); (ii) the use of anion (AEM) and cation exchange membrane (CEM); (iii) the treatment period (6, 12 and 24 hours); (iv) effluent recirculation and current steps; (v) the feasibility of sequential treatments. Phosphorus (P) removal from effluent and energetic costs associated to the process were also evaluated. Five PPCPs were studied – caffeine (CAF), bisphenol A (BPA), 17 β-estradiol (E2), ethinyl estradiol (EE2) and oxybenzone (MBPh). The ED process showed to be effective in the removal when effluent is in the anode compartment. Oxidation is suggested to be the main removal process, which was between 88 and 96%, for all the compounds, in 6 hours. Nevertheless, the presence of intermediates and/or by-products was also observed in some cases. Effluent recirculation should have a retention time in the ED cell big enough to promote removal whereas the current steps (effluent in anode compartment) slightly increased removal efficiencies (higher than 80% for all PPCPs). The sequential set of ED treatment (effluent in anode compartment) showed to be effective during both periods with a removal percentage between 80 and 95% and 73 to 88% in the case of AEM and CEM, respectively. Again, the main removal process is strongly suggested to be oxidation in the anode compartment. However, there was an increase of BOD5 and COD, which might be explained by effluent spiking, these parameters limiting the effluent discharge. From these treatments, the use of AEM, enhanced the P removal from effluent to minimize risk of eutrophication. Energetic costs of the best set-up (6 hours) are approximately 0,8€/m3 of wastewater, a value considered low, attending to the prices of other treatment processes.