Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4491/eer.2016.157

Rejection rate and mechanisms of drugs in drinking water by nanofiltration technology  

Ge, Sijie (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Beijing Forestry University)
Feng, Li (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Beijing Forestry University)
Zhang, Liqiu (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Beijing Forestry University)
Xu, Qiang (Dan F. Smith Department of Chemical Engineering, Lamar University)
Yang, Yifei (School of Municipal and Environmental Engineering, Shandong Jianzhu University)
Wang, Ziyuan (Dan F. Smith Department of Chemical Engineering, Lamar University)
Kim, Ki-Hyun (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hanyang University)
Publication Information
Environmental Engineering Research / v.22, no.3, 2017 , pp. 329-338 More about this Journal
Abstract
Nanofiltration (NF) technology is a membrane-based separation process, which has been pervasively used as the high-effective technology for drinking water treatment. In this study, a kind of composite polyamide NF thin film is selected to investigate the removal efficiencies and mechanisms of 14 trace drugs, which are commonly and frequently detected in the drinking water. The results show that the removal efficiencies of most drugs are quite high, indicating the NF is an effective technology to improve the quality of drinking water. The removal efficiencies of carbamazepine, acetaminophen, estradiol, antipyrine and isopropyl-antipyrine in ultrapure water are $78.8{\pm}0.8%$, $16.4{\pm}0.5%$, $65.4{\pm}1.8%$, $71.1{\pm}1.5%$ and $89.8{\pm}0.38%$, respectively. Their rejection rates increase with the increasing of their three-dimensional sizes, which indicates that the steric exclusion plays a significant role in removal of these five drugs. The adsorption of estradiol with the strongest hydrophobicity has been studied, which indicates that adsorption is not negligible in terms of removing this kind of hydrophobic neutral drugs by NF technology. The removal efficiencies of indomethacin, diclofenac, naproxen, ketoprofen, ibuprofen, clofibric acid, sulfamethoxazole, amoxicillin and bezafibrate in ultrapure water are $81{\pm}0.3%$, $86.3{\pm}0.5%$, $85.7{\pm}0.4%$, $93.3{\pm}0.3%$, $86.6{\pm}2.5%$, $90.6{\pm}0.4%$, $59.7{\pm}1.7%$, $80.3{\pm}1.4%$ and $80{\pm}0.5%$, respectively. For these nine drugs, their rejection rates are better than the above five drugs because they are negatively charged in ultrapure water. Meanwhile, the membrane surface presents the negative charge. Therefore, both electrostatic repulsion and steric exclusion are indispensable in removing these negatively charged drugs. This study provides helpful and scientific support of a highly effective water treatment method for removing drugs pollutants from drinking water.
Keywords
Drinking water; drugs; Nanofiltration; Removal efficiency; Removal mechanism;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Bengani P, Kou Y, Asatekin A. Zwitterionic copolymer self-assembly for fouling resistant, high flux membranes with size-based small molecule selectivity. J. Membrane Sci. 2015;493:755-765.   DOI
2 Shahmansouri A, Bellona C. Nanofiltration technology in water treatment and reuse: Applications and costs. Water Sci. Technol. 2015;71:309-319.   DOI
3 Moulik S, Vadthya P, Kalipatnapu YR, Chenna S, Sundergopal S. Production of fructose sugar from aqueous solutions: Nanofiltration performance and hydrodynamic analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2015;92:44-53.   DOI
4 Elazhar F, Touir J, Elazhar M, et al. Techno-economic comparison of reverse osmosis and nanofiltration in desalination of a Moroccan brackish groundwater. Desalin. Water Treat. 2015;55:2471-2477.   DOI
5 Ravikumar YVL, Kalyani S, Satyanarayana SV, Sridhar S. Processing of pharmaceutical effluent condensate by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membrane techniques. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 2014;45:50-56.   DOI
6 Song J, Zhang M, Figoli A, et al. Arsenic removal using a sulfonated poly (ether ether ketone) coated hollow fiber nanofiltration membrane. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 2015;1:839-845.   DOI
7 Yang H, Wang X. Mechanism of removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products by nanofiltration membranes. Desalin. Water Treat. 2015;53:2816-2824.   DOI
8 Teh CY, Budiman PM, Shak KPY, Wu TY. Recent advancement of coagulation-flocculation and its application in wastewater treatment. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2016;55:4363-4389.   DOI
9 Suriyanon N, Permrungruang J, Kaosaiphun J, Wongrueng A, Ngamcharussrivichai C, Punyapalakul P. Selective adsorption mechanisms of antilipidemic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug residues on functionalized silica-based porous materials in a mixed solute. Chemosphere 2015;136:222-231.   DOI
10 Lin YL, Lee CH. Elucidating the rejection mechanisms of PPCPs by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2014;53:6798-6806.   DOI
11 Wu F, Feng L, Zhang L. Rejection prediction of isopropylantipyrine and antipyrine by nanofiltration membranes based on the Spiegler-Kedem-Katchalsky model. Desalination 2015;362:11-17.   DOI
12 Feng G, Chu H, Dong B. Fouling effects of algogenic organic matters during nanofiltration of naproxen. Desalination 2014;350:69-78.   DOI
13 Nghiem LD, Schafer AI, Elimelech M. Pharmaceutical retention mechanisms by nanofiltration membranes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005;39:7698-7705.   DOI
14 Yangali-Quintanilla V, Sadmani A, McConville M, Kennedy M, Amy G. Rejection of pharmaceutically active compounds and endocrine disrupting compounds by clean and fouled nanofiltration membranes. Water Res. 2009;43:2349-2362.   DOI
15 Nordvang RT, Luo J, Zeuner B, et al. Separation of 3′-sialyllactose and lactose by nanofiltration: A trade-off between charge repulsion and pore swelling induced by high pH. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2014;138:77-83.   DOI
16 Acero JL, Javier Benítez F, Real FJ, Rodriguez E. Influence of membrane, pH and water matrix properties on the retention of emerging contaminants by ultrafiltration and nanofiltration. Desalin. Water Treat. 2016;57:11685-11698.   DOI
17 Ang WL, Nordin D, Mohammad AW, Benamor A, Hilal N. Effect of membrane performance including fouling on cost optimization in brackish water desalination process. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2017;117:401-413.   DOI
18 Suarez A, Fernandez P, Iglesias JR, Iglesias E, Riera FA. Cost assessment of membrane processes: A practical example in the dairy wastewater reclamation by reverse osmosis. J. Membrane Sci. 2015;493:389-402.   DOI
19 Sethi S, Wiesner MR. Cost modeling and estimation of crossflow membrane filtration processes. Environ. Eng. Sci. 2000;17: 61-79.   DOI
20 Xu L, Shahid S, Shen J, Emanuelsson E, Patterson DA. A wide range and high resolution one-filtration molecular weight cut-off method for aqueous based nanofiltration and ultrafiltration membranes. J. Membrane Sci. 2017;525:304-311.   DOI
21 Guardabassi L, Petersen A, Olsen JE, Dalsgaard A. Antibiotic resistance in Acinetobacter spp. isolated from sewers receiving waste effluent from a hospital and a pharmaceutical plant. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998;64:3499-3502.
22 Mahlangu TO, Schoutteten KVKM, D'Haese A, et al. Role of permeate flux and specific membrane-foulant-solute affinity interactions (${\Delta}$ Gslm) in transport of trace organic solutes through fouled nanofiltration (NF) membranes. J. Membrane Sci. 2016;518:203-215.   DOI
23 Mompelat S, Le Bot B, Thomas O. Occurrence and fate of pharmaceutical products and by-products, from resource to drinking water. Environ. Int. 2009;35:803-814.   DOI
24 Diaz-Cruz MS, Barcelo D. Trace organic chemicals contamination in ground water recharge. Chemosphere 2008;72: 333-342.   DOI
25 Barnes KK, Kolpin DW, Furlong ET, Zaugg SD, Meyer MT, Barber LB. A national reconnaissance of pharmaceuticals and other organic wastewater contaminants in the United States - I) Groundwater. Sci. Total Environ. 2008;402:192-200.   DOI
26 Focazio MJ, Kolpin DW, Barnes KK, et al. A national reconnaissance for pharmaceuticals and other organic wastewater contaminants in the United States - II) Untreated drinking water sources. Sci. Total Environ. 2008;402:201-216.   DOI
27 Schaider LA, Rudel RA, Ackerman JM, Dunagan SC, Brody JG. Pharmaceuticals, perfluorosurfactants, and other organic wastewater compounds in public drinking water wells in a shallow sand and gravel aquifer. Sci. Total Environ. 2014;468:384-393.
28 Padhye LP, Yao H, Kung'u FT, Huang CH. Year-long evaluation on the occurrence and fate of pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and endocrine disrupting chemicals in an urban drinking water treatment plant. Water Res. 2014;51:266-276.   DOI
29 Kolpin DW, Furlong ET, Meyer MT, et al. Pharmecueticals, hormons, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000: A national reconnaissance. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002;36:1202-1211.   DOI
30 Clara M, Kreuzinger N, Strenn B, Gans O, Kroiss H. The solids retention time - A suitable design parameter to evaluate the capacity of wastewater treatment plants to remove micropollutants. Water Res. 2005;39:97-106.   DOI
31 Guardabassi L, Wong DMLF, Dalsgaard A. The effects of tertiary wastewater treatment on the prevalence of antimicrobial resistant bacteria. Water Res. 2002;36:1955-1964.   DOI
32 Weng XD, Ji YL, Ma R, Zhao FY, An QF, Gao CJ. Superhydrophilic and antibacterial zwitterionic polyamide nanofiltration membranes for antibiotics separation. J. Membrane Sci. 2016;510:122-130.   DOI
33 Crane M, Watts C, Boucard T. Chronic aquatic environmental risks from exposure to human pharmaceuticals. Sci. Total Environ. 2006;367:23-41.   DOI
34 Shirley J, Mandale S, Kochkodan V. Influence of solute concentration and dipole moment on the retention of uncharged molecules with nanofiltration. Desalination 2014;344:116-122.   DOI