UV disinfection of coliform bacteria in the Ganga water

PREPARED UNDER THE GUIDANCE OFDR. ARUN KUMAR

ASSTT PROFESSOR IIT DELHI

Prepared by:

Purbashree Sarmah(2014CEV2092)

Surya Sujathan(2014CEV2094)

Madhur Chachondia(2014CEV2586)

Ganga water facing water quality deterioration:

◦ River’s importance in Indian culture ◦ dense population residing at its banks◦ faces several forced and unforced human activities

In the sites it was observed that the TVC values were relatively higher in holy places (Sood et al., 2008)

In this review paper, effectiveness of Ultraviolet irradiation on coliform bacteria inactivation in the Ganga water is reviewed.

INTRODUCTION

Figure1: Example of UV Disinfection Equipment (USEPA, 2006, UV Disinfection Guidance Manual; Severn Trent Services)

METHOD USED: UV Disinfection Method Germicidal action mainly due to UV-C light on

microorganisms. Consists of UV reactors that efficiently delivers the

required dose for microbial inactivation. The microbial response is given by the 1st order kinetic

Equation as shown below:

 

Where

 N0 = Concentration of infectious microorganisms before exposure to UV light

N = Concentration of infectious microorganisms after exposure to UV light

UV reactors made of open/closed channel vessels containing:◦ UV lamps◦ lamp sleeves◦ UV sensors◦ temperature sensors

Our sample where E coli was present in maximum quantity of about 27CFU if we apply all the best options we may get up to 4 log reduction.

Parameters Various option from different journals

Best option(log reduction up to 4)

Challenge Pre treatment

UV Light Generation and Propagation

UV-LEDs,high-pressure mercury vapor lamp with side glowing optical fiber, LP, MP, PUV with pulsed xenon source

PUV with pulsed xenon source with side glowing optical fibre

Costly than other methods. Maintenance is difficult

Sedimentation, Filtration

UV Dose-Response UV-LEDs with 10.8, 13.8, 56.9 mJ/cm2, High-pressure mercury vapor lamp with17.2 mW/cm2, PUV with 3 mJ/cm2

PUV with 3 mJ/cm2 Costly Sedimentation, Filtration

Wavelength 265nm, 280nm, 310 nm, 254 nm, 200nm, 270 nm

254 nm Difficult to maintain Sedimentation, Filtration

Turbidity 14 NTU, 0.67 NTU, 10 NTU, 0 NTU, 2.2 NTU, 6.5 NTU, 10.2 NTU

0-10 NTU Water should be filtered until getting the required standard

Sedimentation, Filtration

PRESENT STATUS

Table 1: Final table for different parameters affecting UV disinfection from different journals

To achieve better disinfection following may can be adopted:

◦ Optical fibre can be used to ensure uniform distribution within the UV reactor.

◦ Pre treatment such as coagulation, sedimentation and filtration can be adopted to reduce high turbidity and organic matter present in Ganga water.

◦ UV reactors can be improved to make process more economical so as to improve its popularity compared to chlorine disinfection.

POSSIBILITY OF IMPROVEMENT

FUTURE SCOPE

Ample quantitative information is needed to study the effect of micro-organism-related factors like :

◦ Different environmental species encountered in water◦ DNA repair mechanism ◦ Differences in spectral sensitivity in various micro-organisms

Further research is required in accurate analysis of water flows and UV intensity over UV reactors, using CFD so as to achieve simple, reliable and cheap in situ process control systems.

Further research can be done on the optimum use of optical fibre to achieve more economy.

► UV disinfection is best method for disinfection as it requires no chemical consumption thus:

o Saves large scale storage space o Transportation and managing costo Safety hazards related issues

► High removal of 99.99% can be attained if used under optimum operational conditions.

► Does not give toxic byproducts such as trihalomethanes.► But it is not very cost effective compared to chlorine disinfection .► It cannot give any residual because of which it is more popular only for

POU systems.

CONCLUSION

AnchalSood, Kamal Deep Singh, PiyushPandey, Shivesh Sharma, 2008, “Assessment of bacterial indicators and physicochemical parameters to investigate pollution status of Gangetic river system of Uttarakhand (India)”, Ecological Indicators 8 ( 2008 ) 709 – 717

Andreza B. Silva, Nelson M. Lima Filho, Maria A.P.F. Palha, Sandra M. Sarmento, 2012, “Kinetics of water disinfection using UV-C radiation”, Fuel 110 (2013) 114–123

BrahmiMounaouer, HassenAbdennaceur; “Ultraviolet Radiation for Microorganism Inactivation in Wastewater”, 2011, Journal of Environmental Protection, 2012, 3, 194-202.

Dunn, J., Ott, W., Clark, W., 1995. Pulsed-light treatment of food and packaging. Food Technol.49, 95–98. Gang Lu, Chaolin Li *, YinggangZheng, Qian Zhang, Juan Peng, Ming Fu, 2008, “A novel fiber optical device for ultraviolet

disinfection of water”, Environmental Science and Engineering Research Center, Shenzhen Graduate School, Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, PR China.

Gates, F.L., 1930. A study of the bactericidal action of ultraviolet light, III: the absorption of ultraviolet light by bacteria.J.Gen.Physiol.13, 31–42.

Halliday, D., R. Resnick. 1978. Physics. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Hoyer, O., 2004. Water disinfection with UV radiation—requirements and realization. In: Proceedings of the European

Conference UV Karlsruhe, UV radiation. Effects and Technologies, September 22–24, 2003, Karlsruhe Kumiko Oguma, Ryo Kita, Hiroshi Sakai, MichioMurakami, Satoshi Takizawa, 2013, “Application of UV light emitting

diodes to batch and flow-through water disinfection systems” Desalination 328 (2013) 24–30. Linden, K.G., Shin, G., Sobsey, M.D., 2001. Comparative effectiveness of UV wavelengths for the inactivation of

Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts in water.Water Sci. Technol.43, 171–174.

REFERENCES

Meulemans, C.C.E. 1986. The basic principles of UV-sterilization of water. In: Ozone +Ultraviolet Water Treatment, Aquatec Amsterdam, Paris: International OzoneAssociation.

Miller, R., Jeffrey, W., Mitchell, D., Elasri, M., 1999. Bacterial responses to ultraviolet light.Am. Soc.Microbi ol.65, 535–541.

Oguma, K., Katayama, H., Ohgaki, S., 2002. Photoreactivation of Escherichia coli after low- or medium-pressure UV disinfection determined by an endonuclease sensitive site assay. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 68, 6029–6035.

Parker, J.A., and J.L. Darby. 1995. Particle-associated coliform in secondary effluents: Shielding from ultraviolet light disinfection. Water Environment Research 67:1065–1075.

Raymond E.Cantwell, Ron Hofmann, “Inactivation of indigenous coliform bacteria in unfiltered surface water by ultraviolet light”, 2008, Elsevier Ltd. WATER RESEARCH 42 (2008) 2729 – 2735.

Robert G. Qualls, Michael P. Flynn, J. Donald Johnson , 2013, “ The role of suspended particle in ultraviolet disinfection”, Journal (Water Pollution Control Federation), Vol. 55, No. 10 (Oct., 1983), pp. 1280-1285

Ruby Pandey, DivyaRaghuvanshi, D.N Shukla,2014, “Assessment of Physico-Chemical Parameters of River Ganga at Allahabad With Respect To WQI”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization) Vol. 3, Issue 9, September 2014

T.Wang, S.J.MacGregor , J.G. Anderson, G.A. Woolsey, 2005, “Pulsed ultra-violet inactivation spectrum of Escherichia coli”, The Robertson Trust Laboratory for Electronic Sterilisation Technologies, University of Strathclyde, Royal College, 204 George Street, Glasgow G1 1XW, UK

USEPA, 2006, “Ultraviolet Disinfection Guidance Manual for the final long term 2 enhanced surface water treatment rule”, Office of Water (4601), EPA 815-R-06-007

W.A.M. Hijnen, E.F. Beerendonk, G.J. Medema, 2005, “Inactivation credit of UV radiation for viruses, bacteria and protozoan (oo)cysts in water: A review”, Kiwa Water Research Ltd., P.O. Box 1072, 3430 BB Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.

REFERENCES contd..