These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A field study evaluation for mitigating biofouling with chlorine dioxide or chlorine integrated with UV disinfection.
    Author: Rand JL, Hofmann R, Alam MZ, Chauret C, Cantwell R, Andrews RC, Gagnon GA.
    Journal: Water Res; 2007 May; 41(9):1939-48. PubMed ID: 17383708.
    Abstract:
    The drinking water industry is continually seeking innovative disinfection strategies to control biofouling in transmission systems. This research, conducted in collaboration with the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) in California, compared the efficacy of chlorine dioxide (ClO2) to free chlorine (Cl2) with and without pre-treatment with low-pressure ultraviolet (UV) light for biofilm control. An additional goal was to determine disinfection by-product (DBP) formation with each disinfection strategy. Annular reactors (ARs) containing polycarbonate coupons were used to simulate EBMUD's 90-mile aqueduct that transports surface water from a source reservoir to treatment facilities. ARs were dosed with chemical disinfectants to achieve a residual of 0.2 mg/L, which is a typical value mid-way in the aqueduct. The experiment matrix included four strategies of disinfection including UV/ClO2, ClO2, UV/Cl2 and Cl2. Two ARs acted as controls and received raw water (RW) or UV-treated water. The data presented show that the UV/ClO2 combination was most effective against suspended and attached heterotrophic (heterotrophic plate count, HPC) bacteria with 3.93 log and 2.05 log reductions, respectively. ClO2 was more effective than Cl2 at removing suspended HPC bacteria and similarly effective in biofilm bacterial removal. UV light alone was not effective in controlling suspended or biofilm bacteria compared to treatment with ClO2 or Cl2. Pre-treatment with UV was more effective overall for removal of HPC bacteria than treating with corresponding chemical disinfectants only; however, it did not lower required chemical dosages. Therefore, no significant differences were observed in DBP concentrations between ARs pre-treated with UV light and ARs not pre-treated. Disinfection with ClO2 produced fewer total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs) than chlorination but did produce low levels of chlorite. These data indicate that replacing Cl2 with ClO2 would further control microbiological re-growth and minimize TTHM and HAA formation, but may introduce other DBPs.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]