Novel Material for the Removal of PCBs and Mercury from Water Chad Haehle, Ryan Lecus, Marcia Silva, David Garman UWM Water Technology Accelerator

Introduction 1987 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement PCBs and Mercury Area of Concern due to industrialization PCBs and Mercury Environmental and health hazards Bioaccumulation Goal: Examine adsorption properties of novel material for removal of PCBs and Mercury PCBs – Batch experiments Mercury – Column experiments

Pcb: methods Batch experiments US-EPA 608 method for extraction Aroclor 1242 solution prepared to exceed solubility limit in water 30 mg of the sorbent material added to 300 mL of aroclor solution Stirred at 700 rpm for 1 hour 5 mL aliquots at 5, 10, 20, 30, and 60 min US-EPA 608 method for extraction Methylene chloride and KD concentration Extracts analyzed with Shimadzu GCMS-QP2010

Pcb: results Majority of adsorption occurs within 5 minutes Maximum percent removal: 90% in 10 min

Mercury: methods Figure 1: Brooks Rand MERX-T Equipment Diagram Continuous flow column Peristaltic pump Effluent flow rate of 0.08 mL/s Influent concentration of 3.59 ng/L of Total Mercury Collect every 10 pore volumes EPA Method 1631 for analysis using MERX-T Figure 1: Brooks Rand MERX-T Equipment Diagram

Mercury: results Continuous Flow Column pH adjustment Theoretical Exchange Capacity 100 grams of material for 240 grams Hg2+ Continuous Flow Column Saturated at 70th pore volume pH adjustment 20 mL of 0.1 M NaOH for 11 grams Figure 2: Breakthrough Curve of Novel Material at pH 4

summary Novel material has implications for industrial scale use Laboratory tests are ongoing PCBs Higher affinity to adsorbent material when solution reaches max solubility Adsorption occurs rapidly Relatviely small quantity of novel material needed to remove aroclor 1242 Mercury pH adjustment of material increased to drinking water levels Study on speciation of mercury at different pHs Ways different species interact with novel material

REferences Qualls, Theresa, H.J. Harris, and Victoria Harris. The Condition of the Bay of Green Bay/Lake Michigan. U of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute, 2013. The State of the Bay. “Mercury in the Environment.” USGS, Oct. 2000. Web. Draft Remedial Investigation for Lower Fox River, Wisconsin. Rep. no. 3-3584-300. ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation, 1999. United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Method 1631, Revision E.” Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry. Aug. 2002. Chojnacki, A., K. Chojnacka, J. Hoffmann, and H. Gorecki. “The Application of Natural Zeolites for Mercury Removal: From Laboratory Tests to Industrial Scale.” Elsevier (2004).