Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/dwesd-5-193-2012
https://doi.org/10.5194/dwesd-5-193-2012

  30 May 2012

30 May 2012

Review status: this preprint was under review for the journal DWES. A revision for further review has not been submitted.

Subsurface arsenic removal column tests: from the laboratory to the field

D. H. Moed1, D. van Halem1, J. Q. J. C. Verberk1, J. A. M. van Paassen2, and L. C. Rietveld1 D. H. Moed et al.
  • 1Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Stevinweg 1, 2628 CN Delft, The Netherlands
  • 2Vitens, Oude Veerweg 1, 8019 BE Zwolle, The Netherlands

Abstract. Previous laboratory column experiments have given evidence of competitive effects between different groundwater constituents in the process of subsurface arsenic removal, a process in which arsenic is removed from groundwater by injecting water with oxygen into the subsurface. The presence of phosphate and other anions significantly limited arsenic removal. To investigate the influence of phosphate in natural groundwater, pumping stations in Loosdrecht (the Netherlands) and Subotica (Serbia) both with low phosphate concentrations (<0.1 mg l−1) and considerable arsenic concentrations (30 and 110 μg l−1) were chosen, to perform experiments identical to the previous laboratory work. Despite of the absence of phosphate, the subsurface arsenic removal process performed poorly in Subotica, with 50% arsenic breakthrough occurring after 2 to 4 column pore volumes of abstracted water. In Loosdrecht subsurface arsenic removal showed more promising results, 50% breakthrough after 6 to 7 pore volumes, while having a lower pH than Subotica and similar silicate concentrations. The water composition of both locations gives reason to suggest that natural organic matter has a limiting effect on subsurface arsenic removal as well. The presented results have shown the complexity of factors influencing subsurface arsenic removal, making it very challenging to select appropriate sites.

D. H. Moed et al.

 
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
 
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

D. H. Moed et al.

D. H. Moed et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 941 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
586 292 63 941 101 70
  • HTML: 586
  • PDF: 292
  • XML: 63
  • Total: 941
  • BibTeX: 101
  • EndNote: 70
Views and downloads (calculated since 01 Feb 2013)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 01 Feb 2013)

Cited

Saved

Latest update: 25 Jul 2021