Application of surrogates, indicators, and high-resolution mass spectrometry to evaluate the efficacy of UV processes for attenuation of emerging contaminants in water

Sylvain Merel, Tarun Anumol, Minkyu Park, Shane A Snyder

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In response to water scarcity, strategies relying on multiple processes to turn wastewater effluent into potable water are being increasingly considered by many cities. In such context, the occurrence of contaminants as well as their fate during treatment processes is a major concern. Three analytical approaches where used to characterize the efficacy of UV and UV/H2O2 processes on a secondary wastewater effluent. The first analytical approach assessed bulk organic parameters or surrogates before and after treatment, while the second analytical approach measured the removal of specific indicator compounds. Sixteen trace organic contaminants were selected due to their relative high concentration and detection frequency over eight monitoring campaigns. While their removal rate ranges from approximately 10 to >90%, some of these compounds can be used to gauge process efficacy (or failure). The third analytical approach assessed the fate of unknown contaminants through high-resolution time-of-flight (TOF) mass spectrometry with advanced data processing and demonstrated the occurrence of several thousand organic compounds in the water. A heat map clearly evidenced compounds as recalcitrant or transformed by the UV processes applied. In addition, those chemicals with similar fate were grouped together into clusters to identify new indicator compounds. In this manuscript, each approach is evaluated with advantages and disadvantages compared.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)75-85
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Hazardous Materials
Volume282
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 3 2015

Fingerprint

Waste Water
Mass spectrometry
Mass Spectrometry
mass spectrometry
Impurities
pollutant
Water
Effluents
Wastewater
Drinking Water
Hot Temperature
Organic compounds
Potable water
water
Gages
effluent
wastewater
Monitoring
gauge
organic compound

Keywords

  • Contaminant
  • Fluorescence
  • Indicator
  • Mass spectrometry
  • Reuse
  • Surrogates

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis
  • Pollution
  • Waste Management and Disposal
  • Environmental Chemistry
  • Environmental Engineering

Cite this

@article{7dbde2bc185c43b2822aff35626f4c35,
title = "Application of surrogates, indicators, and high-resolution mass spectrometry to evaluate the efficacy of UV processes for attenuation of emerging contaminants in water",
abstract = "In response to water scarcity, strategies relying on multiple processes to turn wastewater effluent into potable water are being increasingly considered by many cities. In such context, the occurrence of contaminants as well as their fate during treatment processes is a major concern. Three analytical approaches where used to characterize the efficacy of UV and UV/H2O2 processes on a secondary wastewater effluent. The first analytical approach assessed bulk organic parameters or surrogates before and after treatment, while the second analytical approach measured the removal of specific indicator compounds. Sixteen trace organic contaminants were selected due to their relative high concentration and detection frequency over eight monitoring campaigns. While their removal rate ranges from approximately 10 to >90{\%}, some of these compounds can be used to gauge process efficacy (or failure). The third analytical approach assessed the fate of unknown contaminants through high-resolution time-of-flight (TOF) mass spectrometry with advanced data processing and demonstrated the occurrence of several thousand organic compounds in the water. A heat map clearly evidenced compounds as recalcitrant or transformed by the UV processes applied. In addition, those chemicals with similar fate were grouped together into clusters to identify new indicator compounds. In this manuscript, each approach is evaluated with advantages and disadvantages compared.",
keywords = "Contaminant, Fluorescence, Indicator, Mass spectrometry, Reuse, Surrogates",
author = "Sylvain Merel and Tarun Anumol and Minkyu Park and Snyder, {Shane A}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.09.008",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "282",
pages = "75--85",
journal = "Journal of Hazardous Materials",
issn = "0304-3894",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Application of surrogates, indicators, and high-resolution mass spectrometry to evaluate the efficacy of UV processes for attenuation of emerging contaminants in water

AU - Merel, Sylvain

AU - Anumol, Tarun

AU - Park, Minkyu

AU - Snyder, Shane A

PY - 2015/1/3

Y1 - 2015/1/3

N2 - In response to water scarcity, strategies relying on multiple processes to turn wastewater effluent into potable water are being increasingly considered by many cities. In such context, the occurrence of contaminants as well as their fate during treatment processes is a major concern. Three analytical approaches where used to characterize the efficacy of UV and UV/H2O2 processes on a secondary wastewater effluent. The first analytical approach assessed bulk organic parameters or surrogates before and after treatment, while the second analytical approach measured the removal of specific indicator compounds. Sixteen trace organic contaminants were selected due to their relative high concentration and detection frequency over eight monitoring campaigns. While their removal rate ranges from approximately 10 to >90%, some of these compounds can be used to gauge process efficacy (or failure). The third analytical approach assessed the fate of unknown contaminants through high-resolution time-of-flight (TOF) mass spectrometry with advanced data processing and demonstrated the occurrence of several thousand organic compounds in the water. A heat map clearly evidenced compounds as recalcitrant or transformed by the UV processes applied. In addition, those chemicals with similar fate were grouped together into clusters to identify new indicator compounds. In this manuscript, each approach is evaluated with advantages and disadvantages compared.

AB - In response to water scarcity, strategies relying on multiple processes to turn wastewater effluent into potable water are being increasingly considered by many cities. In such context, the occurrence of contaminants as well as their fate during treatment processes is a major concern. Three analytical approaches where used to characterize the efficacy of UV and UV/H2O2 processes on a secondary wastewater effluent. The first analytical approach assessed bulk organic parameters or surrogates before and after treatment, while the second analytical approach measured the removal of specific indicator compounds. Sixteen trace organic contaminants were selected due to their relative high concentration and detection frequency over eight monitoring campaigns. While their removal rate ranges from approximately 10 to >90%, some of these compounds can be used to gauge process efficacy (or failure). The third analytical approach assessed the fate of unknown contaminants through high-resolution time-of-flight (TOF) mass spectrometry with advanced data processing and demonstrated the occurrence of several thousand organic compounds in the water. A heat map clearly evidenced compounds as recalcitrant or transformed by the UV processes applied. In addition, those chemicals with similar fate were grouped together into clusters to identify new indicator compounds. In this manuscript, each approach is evaluated with advantages and disadvantages compared.

KW - Contaminant

KW - Fluorescence

KW - Indicator

KW - Mass spectrometry

KW - Reuse

KW - Surrogates

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921933349&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921933349&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.09.008

DO - 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.09.008

M3 - Article

C2 - 25262385

AN - SCOPUS:84921933349

VL - 282

SP - 75

EP - 85

JO - Journal of Hazardous Materials

JF - Journal of Hazardous Materials

SN - 0304-3894

ER -