Organic Wastewater-Related Contaminants in New Jersey Streams and Their Removal at Drinking-Water. Water- Treatment Plants

Transcription

1 Organic Wastewater-Related Contaminants in New Jersey Streams and Their Removal at Drinking-Water Water- Treatment Plants Jeffrey M. Fischer 1, Paul Stackelberg 2, Kristin Romanok 1, Jacob Gibs 1, and R. Lee Lippincott 3 1 U.S. Geological Survey, 810 Bear Tavern Road, West Trenton, NJ U.S. Geological Survey, 425 Jordan Road, Troy, NY New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, NJ Presented at: NJWMCC Meeting January 23, 2008

2 National Reconnaissance for Contaminants of Emerging Concern Are contaminants of emerging concern entering our aquatic environments? Levels? Mixtures?

3 What are Organic Wastewater- related Contaminants? (OWCs) Manufactured and used in large quantities, Potentially associated with domestic, industrial, or agricultural wastewaters, Diversity of uses and origins, Variety of pathways for entering environment,

4 What OWCs Were Studied? Selected ~110 widely use ones. Antibiotics Tetracyclines (6) Fluroquinones (4) Macrolides (3) Sulfonamides (6) Others (6) Pharmaceuticals Prescription (14) Non-prescription (8) Industrial and household use chemicals Fragrances and Flavorants (8) Flame Retardants (3) Antioxidants (2) Fuel-Related Compounds (4) Detergent Metabolites (7) Plasticizers (3) Disinfectants (2) Solvents and Preservatives (4) Pesticides (12) Plant and Animal Steroids (4) PAHs (6) Other (8)

5 New Jersey Stream Survey Objectives Determine the occurrence, distribution, and concentration of the targeted compounds in New Jersey s streams, Determine whether the concentration of these compounds in streams vary spatially or as a function of anthropogenic sources, Assess point- and nonpoint-source contributions for these compounds in the State s water resources,

6 Are Waste-Water Water Treatment Plants (WWTPs)) a Primary Source of OWCs?

7 New Jersey Stream Study Design Synoptic surface-water survey 30 sites sampled at low flow in Fall Susceptible to point and nonpoint sources Streams or tributaries to streams used for public supply Temporal and flow-condition surveys Seasonal sampling events at 11 sites High- and low-flow conditions

8 2001 Synoptic Survey 30 Sampling Sites Assunpink Trenton Passaic Pine Brook Hohokus Paramus Dead R nr Millington Passaic Little Falls Hohokus Ho-Ho-Kus Singac Singac Passaic R nr Chatham Lamington R (Black R) nr Ironia Peckman West Paterson Rockaway Pine Brook Matchaponix Spottswood Millstone Blackwells Mills Whippany R nr Whippany Raritan Queens Bridge Whippany R nr Pine Brook N. Branch Raritan R nr Chester Beden Bk nr Rocky Hill Ramapo R nr Mahway N. Branch Burnt Hills Wallkill R nr Sussex Musconetcong Riegelsville N. Br. Rancocas Ewanville Lamington Burnt Mills Delaware Trenton Crosswicks Extonville Cupsaw Bk nr Wanaque Maurice R nr Millville Wallkill Sparta Haynes Lake Pine Drainage basins ranged in size from about 6500 mi 2 to less than 4 mi 2 11 sites listed in blue were sampled seasonally

9 Vulnerability Gradient Vulnerability Gradient Water Undeveloped Agricultural Urban Estimated Streamflow Contributed by WWTPs Land Use (in percent)

10 Most Frequently Detected Compounds (synoptic survey) Pharmaceutical/Antibiotic Pesticide Fragrance Flame retardant Fecal Plant/Animal indicatorsteroid Detergent metabolite Other HHCB AHTN

11 Concentrations of Frequently Detected OWCs (synoptic survey) Pharmaceutical Pesticide Fragrance Flame retardant Plant/Animal Steroid Miscellaneous Censored at 0.1 μg/l 1 part per billion HHCB AHTN

12 Effects of Waste-Water Water Treatment Plants Total concentration (spearman =.76; p =.0001) Total number (spearman =.58; p =.0008)

13 Seasonal Variability in Concentration

14 Variability with Flow (p=0.10; R 2 =0.06) (p=0.004; R 2 =0.18)

15 New Jersey Study Major Findings 30 stream sites along vulnerability gradient, 1 or more OWCs detected in 97% (29 of 30) of sites, 60 of ~106 OWCs detected in 1 or more samples, Primary classes of compounds detected include prescription and nonprescription drugs, pesticides, fragrances, flame retardants, and plant and animal steroids, 90% of samples contained more than 1 OWC and 50% of samples contained 11 or more OWCs. Concentrations generally low (sub-ppb) and did not exceed established drinking-water guidelines, healthadvisories, or aquatic-life criteria, Guidelines, advisories, and criteria not established for many of the compounds detected,

16 Fate of Unregulated Organic Compounds in a Drinking- Water Treatment Plant Identify the primary physical or chemical processes that govern the fate of OWCs at a drinking-water treatment plant Are OWCs removed and, if so, are some processes more effective at removing them that others?

17 Plant and Study Design Site 7 Site 8 Sludge decant Filter backwash solids Raw water Screening Raw + Decant Flocculation and Settling Disinfection (NaClO in 2003, O 3 in 2004) Sand/GAC Filtration 2 nd Disinfection (NaClO) Sampled at 6 locations along treatment system Site 1 Raw Water Site 2 Raw & Recycled Site 3 Clarified Site 4 Disinfected Site 5 Filtered Site 6 Finished Clear well (finished water) Sampled before & after switch from chlorine to ozone disinfection

18 Sampling Conditions 2003 & 2004 Time of year 2003 July-Aug 2004 Oct-Nov Stream Flow Analytical Grey Color indicates sampling period

19 Differences in Compound Detections and Concentrations in Raw Water Number of Compounds Detected Total Concentration (ug/l)

20 OWC Removal at Different Treatment Stages For both years approximately 75% of detected OWCs were removed by final treatment stage Ozone was more effective at removing OWCs than chlorine Activated Carbon in filters removed many of remaining OWCs Typically 5 to 8 OWCs detected in finished water 40 Number of Compounds Detected % 10% 30% < -- % of original removed 60% 20% 5 0 Raw Water Raw & Recycle Clarified Disinfection Filtered Finished

21 OWC Concentrations at Different Treatment Stages For conventional treatment most reductions in concentration occurred at activated carbon filters For advanced treatment reductions in concentrations at many stages, but primarily at ozone disinfection and activated carbon filters Minor jump in concentration at final finishing step due to creation of disinfection byproducts 10 Total Concentration (ug/l) Raw Water Raw&Recycle Clarified Disinfected Filtered Finished

22 Individual OWCs in Finished Waters 29 compounds detected in finished water 1 or more times. 5 to 17 compounds detected per sample. Concentrations usually less than 0.05 ug/l. 11 compounds Change in detected frequency of in detection more than using chlorine 20 percent disinfection of samples 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Frequency of Detection Cotinine HHCB Camphor Caffeine Triethyl citrate DEET Tetrachloroethene Isophorone Tris(2-chloroethyl) phospha Carbamazapine Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosph Bisphenol A Tribromomethane 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Change in frequency of detection using ozone disinfection 2003 Chlorine Disinfection Raw Water Finished Water Cotinine HHCB Camphor Caffeine Triethyl citrate DEET Tetrachloroethene Frequency of of Detection Isophorone Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate Carbamazapine is(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate Bisphenol A Tribromomethane 2003 Chlorine Disinfection Frequency of Detection 2004 Ozone Disinfection 2004 Ozone Disinfection

23 Concentrations in Finished Water Concentrations in Finished Water Concentrations in Finished Water Most concentrations < 0.04 ug/l 0.0 DEET Tribromomethane Trimethoprim Tylosin Erythromycin Camphor Triethyl citrate Cotinine AHTN Carbamazapine Isophorone Tetrachloroethene Caffeine Benzophenone Bisphenol A Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate Acetaminophen Dehydronifedipine Trimethoprim Diethoxyoctylphenol Diethoxynonylphenol 4-Nonylphenol Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate Tributyl phosphate Cimetidine Codeine Diltiazem Diphenhydramine Sulfamethoxazole Preliminary/Provisional Results Subject to Revision HHCB Average Concentration (ug/l)

24 Fate of select OWCs at different treatment steps RAW WATER RAW AND RECYCLED WATER CLARIFIED DISINFECTED Median Concentration (ug/l) FILTERED FINISHED WATER Tris(2-butoxyethyl) Phosphate Tris(2-butoxyethyl) Flame phosphate Retardant Median Concentration (ug/l) RAW WATER RAW AND RECYCLED WATER CLARIFIED DISINFECTED FILTERED FINISHED WATER Diethoxynonylphenol Detergent Diethoxynonylphenol Metabolite Many OWCs with high initial concentrations are not detected in finished water

25 Fate of select OWCs at different treatment steps Median Concentration (ug/l) RAW WATER RAW AND RECYCLED WATER CLARIFIED DISINFECTED FILTERED FINISHED WATER Cotinine Nicotine Metabolite Cotinine Median Concentration ug/l (ug/l) RAW WATER RAW AND RECYCLED WATER CLARIFIED DISINFECTED FILTERED FINISHED WATER HHCB Fragrance HHCB Some OWCs are reduced in concentration, but still detected in finished water

26 Fate of select OWCs at different treatment steps Treatment can create disinfection byproducts Concentrations below MCL for total THMs ug/l RAW W ATER RAW AND RECYCLED W ATER CLARIFIED DISINFECTED Tribromomethane FILTERED FINISHED WATER

27 At another treatment plant. Sampled raw and finished water at intake for conventional and advanced treatment plants at same time Sampled for more VOCs, DBPs, and pesticides 37 compounds detected more than 20% time Primarily Pesticides and VOCs Very few detections of OWCs Pesticide VOC OWC PAH DBP

28 Removal in finished water 33 of Original 37detected 85% of non-dbps detected 14 of Original 37detected 25% of non-dbps detected Pesticide VOC OWC PAH DBP

29 Overall reduction of concentrations in finished water of compounds originally detected

30 Concentrations of Disinfection Byproducts increased in Finished Water

31 Major Findings Approximately 150 of 220 Organic Wastewater Compounds (OWCs) were detected in Raw water Treatment process were effective at removing over 80 percent of detected OWCs through: Removal with solids, Reactions with free chlorine or ozone, Sorption on activated carbon A few persist to finished water at low concentrations (<0.05ug/L) 29 compounds were detected in finished water, half of these were detected less than 20% of the time. 5 compounds were detected 40% to 100% of time.

32 Major Findings Ozone was more effective than chlorination at removing compounds and reducing concentrations Activated carbon filters removed many compounds ozone and chlorine missed Similar numbers and types of compounds detected in finished water treated with ozone or chlorine Concentrations in finished water were low (<0.05ug/L), and treatment processes reduced concentrations from 30% to 100%. 5 to 17 compounds were detected in individual samples of finished water 5 compounds detected more than 40% of time in finished water Disinfection Byproducts increased in concentration and frequency of detection in finished water