Effect of water matrices on removal of veterinary pharmaceuticals by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes

Journal of Environmental Sciences

Volumn 23, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 1299-1307

  Dolar, Davor ^a   Vuković, Ana ^a   Ašperger, Danijela ^a   Košutić, Krešimir ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB   (Croatia)

Author keywords

Rejection; RO NF treatment; Veterinary pharmaceuticals; Water matrix

Indexed keywords

CIPROFLOXACIN (CIPRO); DEXAMETHASONES; EFFECT OF WATER; ELECTROSTATIC REPULSION; ION ADSORPTION; LOW CONCENTRATIONS; MEMBRANE SURFACE; MILLI-Q WATER; NATURAL ORGANIC MATTERS; PHARMACEUTICAL WASTEWATER; REJECTION; RO MEMBRANE; RO/NF TREATMENT; SIZE EXCLUSION; SULFAMETHOXAZOLE; TAP WATER; TRIMETHOPRIM; VETERINARY PHARMACEUTICALS; WATER FLUX; WATER MATRICES; WATER MATRIX;

ADSORPTION; BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; NANOFILTRATION; NANOFILTRATION MEMBRANES; OSMOSIS; REVERSE OSMOSIS; WASTEWATER; WATER FILTRATION;

OSMOSIS MEMBRANES;

VETERINARY DRUG;

CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); DRUG; FILTRATION; MEMBRANE; ORGANIC MATTER; OSMOSIS; WASTEWATER;

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; CHEMISTRY; FILTRATION; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; METHODOLOGY; OSMOSIS; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER POLLUTANT;

FILTRATION; MEMBRANES, ARTIFICIAL; OSMOSIS; VETERINARY DRUGS; WATER POLLUTANTS, CHEMICAL; WATER PURIFICATION;

EID: 80051685519     PISSN: 10010742     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1001-0742(10)60545-1     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. APHA (American Public Health Association), AWWA (American Water Works Association), WEF (Water Environmental Federation), 1995. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (19th ed.). Washington DC, USA.
2. Babid S, Asperger D, Mutavdzid D, Horvat AJM, Kastelan-Macan M Solid phase extraction and HPLC determination of veterinary pharmaceuticals in wastewater. Talanta 2006, 70:732-738.
3. Bellona C, Drewes JE, Xu P, Amy G Factors affecting the rejection of organic solutes during NF/RO treatment - a literature review. Water Research 2004, 38:2795-2809.
4. Boussu K, Zhang Y, Cocquyt J, Van der Meeren P, Volodin A, Van Haesendonck C, et al. Characterization of polymeric nanoiiltration membranes for systematic analysis of membrane performance. Journal of Membrane Science 2006, 278:418-427.
5. Hrvatske V, 2009. Water Management Strategy. Zagreb. ISBN 978-953-7672-00-3.
6. Hydranautics, A Nitto Denko Corporation LFC Low Fouling Composite Membrane Series. Retrieved on August 19 http://www.membranes.com/docs/tab/TAB102.pdf.
7. Kemper N Review: Veterinary antibiotics in the aquatic and terrestrial environment. Ecological Indicators 2008, 8:1-13.
8. Kosuti CK, Dolar D, Kunst B On experimental parameters characterizing the reverse osmosis and nanoiiltration membranes' active layer. Journal Membrane Science 2006, 282:109-114.
9. KosutiC K, Kunst B RO and NF membrane fouling and cleaning and pore size distribution variations. Desalination 2002, 150:113-120.
10. Lopez-Munoz MJ, Sotto A, Arsuaga JM, Van der Bruggen B Influence of membrane, solute and solution properties on the retention of phenolic compounds in aqueous solution by nanoiiltration membranes. Separation and Purification Technology 2009, 66:194-201.
11. Martínez-Carballo E, González-Barreiro C, Scharf S, Gans O Environmental monitoring study of selected veterinary antibiotics in animal manure and soils in Austria. Environmental Pollution 2007, 148:570-579.
12. Matsuura T Synthetic Membranes and Membrane Separation Processes 1993, 221. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton.
13. Nghiem LD, Manis A, Soldenhoff K, Schäfer AI Estrogen hormone removal from wastewater using NF/RO membranes. Journal of Membrane Science 2004, 242:37-45.
14. Plakas KV, Karabelas AJ, Wintgens T, Melin T A study of selected herbicides retention by nanoiiltration membranes-The role of organic fouling. Journal of Membrane Science 2006, 284:291-300.
15. Radjenovic J, Petrovio M, Ventura F, Barcelo D Rejection of pharmaceuticals in nanoiiltration and reverse osmosis membrane drinking water treatment. Water Research 2008, 42:3601-3610.
16. Sourirajan S, Matsuura T Reverse Osmosis/Ultrafiltration Process Principles 1985, 79-81. National Research Council Canada, Ottawa.
17. Teixeira MR, Rosa MJ The impact of the water background inorganic matrix on the natural organic matter removal by nanoiiltration. Journal of Membrane Science 2006, 279:513-520.
18. Thanuttamavong M, Yamamoto K, Oh JI, Choo KH, Choi SJ Rejection characteristics of organic and inorganic pollutants by ultra low-pressure nanofiltraton of surface water for drinking water treatment. Desalination 2002, 145:257-264.
19. Van der Bruggen B, Daems B, Wilms D, Vandecasteele C Mechanism of retention and flux decline for the nanoiiltration of dye baths from the textile industry. Separation and Purification Technology 2001, 22-23:519-528.
20. Van der Bruggen B, Vandecasteele C Modelling of the retention of uncharged molecules with nanoiiltration. Water Research 2002, 36:1360-1368.
21. Wang L, Albasi C, Faucet-Marquis V, Pfohl-Leszkowicz A, Dorandeu C, Marion B, et al. Cyclophosphamide removal from water by nanoiiltration and reverse osmosis membrane. Water Research 2009, 43:4115-4122.
22. Watkinson AJ, Murby EJ, Costanzo SD Removal of antibiotics in conventional and advanced wastewater treatment: Implication for environmental discharge and wastewater recycling. Water Research 2007, 41:4164-4176.
23. Xu P, Drewes JE, Kim TU, Bellona C, Amy G Effect of membrane fouling on transport of organic contaminants in NF/RO membrane applications. Journal of Membrane Science 2006, 279:165-175.
24. Zhang Y, Van der Bruggen B, Chen GX, Braeken L, Vandecasteele C Removal of pesticides by nanoiiltration: effect of the water matrix. Separation and Purification Technology 2004, 38:163-172.