Author Archive

Improving oil retrieval methods

Environmental impacts of oil spills

Accidental oil spills are unavoidable during the acquisition, processing and distribution of petroleum products. Oil can pollute the oceans through a range of processes, such as land run off, tanker discharges and vessel accidents. Oil spills impact humans, plants and wildlife, including fish, mammals and birds.

In many cases, the environmental recovery after an oil spill is fairly swift and complete within ten years; however, some long-term environmental effects can be measured decades after a large oil spill.

Oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico, April 29th 2010 (Image from NASA Goddard Space Flight Center)

Oil spill remediation techniques

Remediation techniques to manage oil spills are often both expensive and lengthy. Conventional clean-up techniques after oil spills range from in situ burning; mechanical methods, such as booms, vacuums and skimming; chemical dispersants; and/or the use of sorbent materials. Each of these methods presents its own advantages and disadvantages depending on the scenario of the oil spill.

One of the most versatile, cost effective and fruitful methods is to use porous sorbent materials to remove oil from the water surface. We can find natural oil sorbents such as wood, cotton, milkweed, and wool, among others. The efficiency of the sorbent material is related to its hydrophobicity, porosity, sorption capacity and rate, and reusability.

Each oil remediation technique comes with its own environmental impact. Many novel synthetic oil sorbents are currently being developed and there is great need for biodegradable and reusable absorbents to manage oil spills – and to minimize the environmental effect of the oil remediation technique.

New methods to separate oil and water: biodegradable synthetic oil sorbent

A study from Boston University recently published in Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology presents knowledge on biodegradable synthetic oil sorbents, allowing for efficient recovery after accidental oil spills.

Electrospun non-woven poly(ε-carporlactone) PCL microfiber meshes are mechanically robust, reusable and biodegradable polymeric oil sorbents capable of  retrieving oil from oil spills in both freshwater and seawater.

Schematic diagram of an electrospun hydrophobic PCL mesh that selectively removes oil from a water-in-oil emulsion.

By simulating oil spills in fresh- and seawater scenarios, researchers examined how well the polymeric oil sorbent could retrieve oil. The PCL is hydrophobic and has >99.5% (oil over water) oil selectivity and has oil absorption capacities of approx. 10 grams of oil/gram of sorbent material. Both the absorption capacity and the oil selectivity remained constant over several oil absorption and vacuum assisted retrieval cycles when removing crude oil or mechanical pump oil.

This study shows the need for biodegradable synthetic oil sorbents which balance porosity and mechanical integrity enabling reuse, and allowing for efficient recovery of oil after an oil spill.


Interested in this research? You can read the full paper for free* using the link below:

Poly(ε-caprolactone) microfiber meshes for repeated oil retrieval
J.S Hersey, S.T Yohe and M. W. Grinstaff
Env. Sci: Water Res. Technol. 2015, 1, 779-786
DOI: 10.1039/C5EW00107B

—————-

About the webwriter

Jesper Agrelius is a MSc student in Environmental Science at Linköping University, Sweden. His main interests regards environmental science, especially climate change and biogeochemistry. You can follow him on Twitter @JesperAgrelius.

—————-

*Access is free through a registered RSC account – click here to register

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

Chlorinated compounds form in tea and coffee

Tea and coffee are the most consumed beverages in the world, but a new study has discovered some unexpected chemistry occurring in our cups.

Contrary to popular belief, boiling the water only removes around 20% of chlorine © Shutterstock

Chlorine is added to water as part of the disinfection process, with a residual amount remaining in the treated water to supress microbial growth. This chlorine reacts with organic molecules in the water to produce chlorinated chemicals known as disinfection byproducts (DBPs), such as chloroform.

Nikolai Kuhnert from Jacobs University, Germany, conducts research on compounds in tea and coffee. He advocates further research into the effects processing has on our food. ‘It illustrates further how little we know on the chemistry of food processing that significantly alters the chemical composition of our daily diet, producing both novel compounds with adverse or beneficial properties for human health.’



Read the full article in Chemistry World!

Read the original research paper in Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology:
Emerging investigators series: formation of disinfection byproducts during the preparation of tea and coffee

Tom Bond, Seeheen C. Tang, Nigel Graham and Michael R. Templeton
Environ. Sci.: Water Res. Technol.
, 2016, Advance Article
DOI:
10.1039/C5EW00222B

*Access is free through a registered RSC account

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

Electrodes enhance H2 production and sludge decomposition in microbial electrolysis

Using microbial electrolysis for hydrogen production

Microbial electrolysis is a method that generates methane or hydrogen from organic material by applying an electric current. Hydrogen is particularly explored as an alternative fuel for passenger vehicles, either in fuel cells to power electric motors or burned in internal combustion engines.

Microbial Electrolysis Cell

A schematic of the general process in a Microbial Electrolysis Cell - here with plant waste as initial resource (Image by Zina Deretsky, National Science Foundation, available as public domain: http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/6590_large_biohydrogen_h.jpg)

Microbial electrolysis and waste activated sludge

A Microbial electrolysis cell is capable of producing hydrogen from waste water or waste biomass. Waste activated sludge (WAS), a byproduct of biological wastewater treatment processes, is an example of how to produce hydrogen (H2) via the method of microbial electrolysis.

The hydrogen from anaerobic fermentation is produced by hydrogen producing bacteria (HPB) and consumed by hydrogen consuming bacteria (HCB) such as methanogens. Unfortunately the H2 production in anaerobic digestion of sludge is often low since the waste sludge have a limited carbohydrate source available for HPB.

The central process of microbial electrolysis cells is when exoelectrogens oxidise the substrates and release an electron to the anode, and then the electron is accepted by H+ to produce hydrogen at the cathode. This process requires a voltage supply to overcome the energy barrier between the two electrodes –although the hydrogen production from waste sludge might increase in a microbial electrolysis cell, the energy efficiency is low because of the extra voltage applied.

Low hydrogen production from anaerobic digestion of sludge has greatly limited the application of biological hydrogen-producing technology.

New research

A recent study published in Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology by Yinghong, Liu and Zhang sheds new light on the topic. By installing a Fe/graphite electrode into an anaerobic digester, the hydrogen production from waste sludge was improved. The electrode accelerated the decomposition of the sludge and also increased the production of short-chain fatty acids. The electric-anaerobic system also inhibited the occurrence of methanogenesis, which led to quite low methane production.

The study by Zhang and colleagues is unique since this was the first time that net energy was harvested from WAS in a hydrogen-producing microbial electrolysis cell with a cost-effective electrode.

Interested in this research? You can read the full paper for free* using the link below:

Enhancement of sludge decomposition and hydrogen production from waste activated sludge in a microbial electrolysis cell with cheap electrodes
Feng Yinghong, Yiwen Liu and Yaobin Zhang
Env. Sci: Water Res. Technol.
2015, advance article
DOI
:10.1039/c5ew00112a

—————-

About the webwriter

Jesper Agrelius is a MSc student in Environmental Science at Linköping University, Sweden. His main interests regards environmental science, especially climate change and biogeochemistry. You can follow him on Twitter @JesperAgrelius.

—————-

*Access is free through a registered RSC account – click here to register

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

Analyzing prioritized indicator compounds of TOrC in wastewater using rapid direct injection method

Trace organic compounds (TOrCs) – potential risks to public health

Running water from tap

TOrCs in drinking water can be present at low levels - with potential harmful risk to public health.

To evaluate drinking water quality, one needs to consider physical, chemical and microbiological parameters. Physical and chemical parameters can be heavy metals, turbidity and trace organic compounds for instance, whilst viruses, parasites and bacteria are microbiological parameters.

Trace organic compounds originate from pesticides, pharmaceuticals, industrial compounds, chlorinated flame retardants and consumer product chemicals such as household chemicals, amongst others. TOrCs in water can be present at low levels but with potential harmful risk to public health. Due to the potential harmful risk, TOrCs are highlighted in the World Health organization (WHO) guidelines for drinking water quality.

Diving into the unknown

Wastewater discharge is the main contributor to TOrCs in drinking water, one reason being that these compounds are poorly attenuated in conventional water treatment processes. There are several hundred identified TOrCs, with numerous new organic chemicals being released daily. To monitor all these compounds is unfeasible, which is the reason we need to establish prioritized indicator compounds.

Rapid direct injection methods

By doing a detailed literature review and using a scoring system, Tarun Anumol and colleagues from University of Arizona present new research where they established 20 prioritized indicator TOrC which can be detected with a rapid direct injection method.

A rapid direct injection method for examining wastewater is beneficial for many reasons:
  • Minimal sample preparation reduces the risk for contamination – conventional analysis of these compounds is challenging with various sample extraction and several human intervention steps, which increase contamination risks and reduce accuracy and reproducibility.
  • Rapid direct injection methods increase efficiency and  functions with low sample volume – the method only needs one injection and < 100 μL sample volume while providing reporting limits of 3-39 ng L-1(302 ng L-1 for sucralose), minimal sample preparation increases efficiency.

By analyzing effluent from four different wastewater treatment plants, the 20 prioritized TOrC were detected in three out of four effluents. Certain of the prioritized TOrCs are also effective indicators for seasonal variability, consumption patterns and treatment process efficiency.

Trace organic compounds to waste-water discharge to drinking water

Trace organic compounds are poorly attenuated in conventional water treatment processes and wastewater discharge is the main contributor to TOrCs in drinking water.

The research by Tarun Anumol and colleagues provides knowledge and guidance towards effective wastewater monitoring schemes to detect trace organic compounds, an important piece of the puzzle towards increased drinking water quality.

You can read the full paper for free* using the link below:

Tarun Anumol, Shimkin Wu, Mauricius Marques dos Santos, Kevin D. Daniels and Shane A. Snyder.
Env. Sci: Water Res. Technol. 2015, Advance Article.
DOI: 10.1039/c5ew00080g.

—————-

About the webwriter

Jesper Agrelius is a MSc student in Environmental Science at Linköping University, Sweden. His main interests regards environmental science, especially climate change and biogeochemistry. You can follow him on Twitter @JesperAgrelius.

—————-

*Access is free through a registered RSC account.

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

Top 10 most accessed Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology articles from April – June 2015

From April – June 2015, our most downloaded Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology articles were:

Casey Forrestal, Zachary Stoll, Pei Xu and Zhiyong Jason Ren
DOI: 10.1039/c4ew00050a

Munmun Mukherjee and Sirshendu De
DOI: 10.1039/c4ew00094c

M. Rodríguez Arredondo, P. Kuntke, A. W. Jeremiasse, T. H. J. A. Sleutels, C. J. N. Buisman and A. ter Heijne
DOI: 10.1039/c4ew00066h

David T. Tan and Danmeng Shuai
DOI: 10.1039/c5ew90011e

Diana N. H. Tran, Shervin Kabiri, Ting Rui Sim and Dusan Losic
DOI: 10.1039/c5ew00035a

Somak Chatterjee and Sirshendu De
DOI: 10.1039/c4ew00075g

A. L. Smith, S. J. Skerlos and L. Raskin
DOI: 10.1039/c4ew00070f

Yufeng Cai, Wenming Shen, Jing Wei, Tzyy Haur Chong, Rong Wang, William B. Krantz, Anthony G. Fane and Xiao Hu
DOI: 10.1039/c4ew00073k

Jacob Lalley, Changseok Han, Gayathri Ram Mohan, Dionysios D. Dionysiou, Thomas F. Speth, Jay Garland and Mallikarjuna N. Nadagouda
DOI: 10.1039/c4ew00020j

Blain Paul, Vyom Parashar and Ajay Mishra
DOI: 10.1039/c4ew00034j

Interesting read? Let us know your thoughts below.

And remember, you can submit directly to Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology!

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)