An old automotive industrial site located at Mexico City with many years of operation and contaminated with heavy oil hydrocarbons, particularly spent oils, was assessed for restoration using the surfactant enhanced s...An old automotive industrial site located at Mexico City with many years of operation and contaminated with heavy oil hydrocarbons, particularly spent oils, was assessed for restoration using the surfactant enhanced soil washing (SESW) process. The main goal of this study was to characterize the contaminated soil in terms of TPHs, BTEX, PAHs, and metals contents as well as microbiologically (total heterotrophs and specific degrading microorganisms). We also aimed to determine the surfactant type and concentration to be used in the SESW process for the automotive waste oil contaminated soil. At the end, sixteen kg of contaminated soil were washed and the produced wastewater (approximately 40 L) was characterized in terms of COD, BOD;solids, and other physico-chemical parameters. The soil contained about 14,000 mg of TPH/kg soil (heavy fraction), 0.13 mg/kg of benzo (k) fluoranthene and 0.07 mg/kg of benzo (a) pyrene as well as traces of some metals. Metals concentrations were always under the maximum concentration levels suggested by Mexican regulations. 15 different surfactants were used to identify the one with the capability to achieve the highest TPH removal. Surfactants included 5 anionics, 2 zwitterionic, 5 nonionics and 3 natural gums. Sulfopon 30 at a concentration of 0.5% offered the best surfactant performance. The TPH removals employing the different surfactants were in the range from 38% to 68%, in comparison to the soil washing with water (10% of TPH removal). Once the surfactant was selected, 70 kg of soil were washed and the resulting water contained approximately 1300 mg/L of COD, 385 mg/L of BOD (BOD/COD = 0.29), 122 mg/L of MBAS, and 212 mg/L of oil and greases, among other contaminants.展开更多
UV radiation and ozonation were investigated as disinfection alternatives for the wastewater treatment plant. The inactivation of total and fecal coliforms using ozone and ultraviolet radiation as separate treatments ...UV radiation and ozonation were investigated as disinfection alternatives for the wastewater treatment plant. The inactivation of total and fecal coliforms using ozone and ultraviolet radiation as separate treatments was evaluated. Different ozone concentrations (3 to 40 mg O3/L) were applied and UV fluencies ranging from 8.5 to 12 mJ/cm2 at different pH values (from 5 to 9) were tested. Best results were obtained for ozone doses near 20 mg/min with removals of 72% and 78% of fecal and total coliforms, respectively. The ozone also was capable of oxidizing organic matter in the effluent measured as COD (the highest removal obtained was 36% for 20 mg O3/min). Maximum bacterial resistance was observed at pH 7 in both cases. The UV light offered a high bacterial inactivation (over 80%) and the lowest bacterial inactivation was observed at pH 7. Finally, we obtained the electric energy per order (EEO, kWh/m3/order), defined as the electric energy (kW-h) required to degrade a contaminant by one order of magnitude in a unit volume of contaminated water, being noteworthy that EEO values for the UV process resulted were lower than those determined for the process with ozone in all the water flow tested.展开更多
文摘An old automotive industrial site located at Mexico City with many years of operation and contaminated with heavy oil hydrocarbons, particularly spent oils, was assessed for restoration using the surfactant enhanced soil washing (SESW) process. The main goal of this study was to characterize the contaminated soil in terms of TPHs, BTEX, PAHs, and metals contents as well as microbiologically (total heterotrophs and specific degrading microorganisms). We also aimed to determine the surfactant type and concentration to be used in the SESW process for the automotive waste oil contaminated soil. At the end, sixteen kg of contaminated soil were washed and the produced wastewater (approximately 40 L) was characterized in terms of COD, BOD;solids, and other physico-chemical parameters. The soil contained about 14,000 mg of TPH/kg soil (heavy fraction), 0.13 mg/kg of benzo (k) fluoranthene and 0.07 mg/kg of benzo (a) pyrene as well as traces of some metals. Metals concentrations were always under the maximum concentration levels suggested by Mexican regulations. 15 different surfactants were used to identify the one with the capability to achieve the highest TPH removal. Surfactants included 5 anionics, 2 zwitterionic, 5 nonionics and 3 natural gums. Sulfopon 30 at a concentration of 0.5% offered the best surfactant performance. The TPH removals employing the different surfactants were in the range from 38% to 68%, in comparison to the soil washing with water (10% of TPH removal). Once the surfactant was selected, 70 kg of soil were washed and the resulting water contained approximately 1300 mg/L of COD, 385 mg/L of BOD (BOD/COD = 0.29), 122 mg/L of MBAS, and 212 mg/L of oil and greases, among other contaminants.
文摘UV radiation and ozonation were investigated as disinfection alternatives for the wastewater treatment plant. The inactivation of total and fecal coliforms using ozone and ultraviolet radiation as separate treatments was evaluated. Different ozone concentrations (3 to 40 mg O3/L) were applied and UV fluencies ranging from 8.5 to 12 mJ/cm2 at different pH values (from 5 to 9) were tested. Best results were obtained for ozone doses near 20 mg/min with removals of 72% and 78% of fecal and total coliforms, respectively. The ozone also was capable of oxidizing organic matter in the effluent measured as COD (the highest removal obtained was 36% for 20 mg O3/min). Maximum bacterial resistance was observed at pH 7 in both cases. The UV light offered a high bacterial inactivation (over 80%) and the lowest bacterial inactivation was observed at pH 7. Finally, we obtained the electric energy per order (EEO, kWh/m3/order), defined as the electric energy (kW-h) required to degrade a contaminant by one order of magnitude in a unit volume of contaminated water, being noteworthy that EEO values for the UV process resulted were lower than those determined for the process with ozone in all the water flow tested.
