Activated Carbon Adsorption Of Trace Organic Compounds

Many water treatment plants need to remove objectionable trace organic compounds, and activated carbon adsorption is often the best available technology. Utilities face the challenge of having to choose from a large variety of activated carbons, and iodine number or BET surface area values are often utilized in the selection process. Although neither parameter correlates well with adsorption capacities, alternative activated carbon selection criteria based on fundamental adsorbent and adsorbate properties are lacking to date. The first objective of this research was to systematically evaluate the effects of activated carbon pore structure and surface chemistry on the adsorption of two common drinking water contaminants: the relatively polar fuel oxygenate methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) and the relatively nonpolar solvent trichloroethene (TCE). The second objective was to develop simple descriptors of activated carbon characteristics that facilitate the selection of suitable adsorbents for the removal of organic contaminants from drinking water.Originally published by AwwaRF for its subscribers in 2003 This publication can also be purchased and downloaded via Pay Per View on Water Intelligence Online - click on the Pay Per View icon below

This report reviews the Army's evaluation of carbon filters for use in the baseline incineration PAS, as well as the Army's change management process (the Army's tool for evaluating major equipment and operational changes to disposal facilities). In preparing this report, members of the Stockpile Committee evaluated exhaust gas emissions testing at the two operating baseline incineration systems, JACADS and the TOCDF; evaluated the development of the dilute SOPC carbon filter simulation model; and evaluated the conceptual design of a modified PAS with an activated carbon filter. The two major risk assessments conducted for each continental disposal site that use the baseline system, namely, (1) the quantitative risk assessment, which evaluates the risks and consequences of accidental agent releases, and (2) the health risk assessment, which evaluates the potential effects of nonagent emissions on human health and the environment, were also examined.