ENVO Arsenic and Flouride removal from potable water

Saleem,

Thank you for responding. I am seeking out low cost fluoride removal as well but have yet to come up with something satisfactory. In my case I am looking for P.O.S.(point of entry) or an in-line filtration system of which R.O. is not desirable for cost and other reasons mentioned below. I am looking to filter my bathing water hence the reason for temperature related questions.

I have heard and read that red clay is being used to remove fluoride which may be a low-cost alternative to alumina, charcoal and reverse osmosis. You may already be aware of these trial technologies...http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:FPOVywA1ccAJ:www.thinkcycle.org/tc-filesystem/download/development_by_design_2002/publication:_terafil_water_filter_for_sustainable_drinking_water_programme/Terafil%2520Water%2520Filter-final%2520paper.doc+red+clay+removes+fluoride&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://wedc.lboro.ac.uk/conferences/pdfs/20/Padmasir.pdf (sorry, i don't know why the pictures and illustrations are not shown)

Reverse osmosis does indeed remove fluoride and arsenic but I have come to learn that it is not an idyllic solution. R.O. removes all minerals good or bad indiscriminately and reverses the molecular spin of the molecule creating what is called "aggressive" water. While it will not poison you with a contaminant, true, when consumed for longer than 6 months this water will create mineral deficiency leading to sickness and decreased/suppressed cognitive ability and immune system function. When water is forced through the R.O. membrane the smaller lighter molecules tend to get caught behind the membrane and only the larger heavier molecules get forced through. But from a biological stand point it is the smaller lighter molecules that are of the most health benefit to the body. Additionally the plastic membranes used in R.O. systems are made from a type of plastic that leaches toxins into the water. This is why a post filter of carbon or carbon/kdf is always used.

I deeply sympathize with India and many other country's plight to remove fluoride and other contaminants from the water. How ironic that here in the U.S. fluoride and arsenic are being ADDED to our water at a cost to tax payers and a profit for nuclear, coal and phosphate fertilizer industries.

Best of luck to you,
Mary

USA

On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 11:55 PM, saleem asraf syed imdaadullah <saleemasraf@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Madam,

Fluoride removal by activated alumina is beig done on a wide scale across India, But no follow up study is done to find out the result by any agencies in India. So, adsorption in temperatures much higher than 80 degrees F is to be eshtablished yet. Fluoride and Arsenic removal are two very typical problems I have faced personally. Both can be fully removed by Reverse Osmosis , but because of prohibitive installation cost no body is going for it. And using chemicals and resins are not foolproof. If you have some other suggestions, we can apply them.

 Auro aqua safe sachet

pls read http://www.affws.in/auroaquasafe

pls watch video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79KDgzBcCWk

............

FOUR KALSHI FILTER AT VILLAGE( Removes Iron, Fluoride, Arsenic)

Description 

A homemade, four-pitcher filter unit, one of the simplest and most inexpensive ways treat drinking water. The first pitcher contains coarse sand. The second contains  activated alumina, third pitcher contains activated carbon, and the fourth collects the filtered water. 

A sari cloth is sometimes used as an additional filter between the top 2 kalshi. 

Benefits

• Simple
• Excellent microbial removal, Iron Removal,Fluoride and Arsenic Removal
• Can be constructed of local materials
• Cost:Minimum

Drawbacks

• Fragile
• Low flow (1-2 litres / hr.)
• Irregular flow rate, requires frequent cleaning
• Availability of activated alumina

Cost :Rs.500/=

Operating & Maintenance: replacement of activated alumina after two months

CONTACT : Saleem Asraf Syed Imdaadullah, 09899300371(Delhi)

                     Rakib Hussain (Mobile: 9859171561,Guwahati.)
The following filter named IFA cost around Rs.1200/. Its for a family of five person.

ENVO PROJECTS,NEW DELHI. www.saleemindia.blogspot.com

we are far better off than others.....Thank Allah

 

 

Subject: we are far better off than others.....Thank Allah

 

Again and Again ............ VOTED THE BEST EMAIL OF THIS YEAR If you think you are unhappy, look at them If you think your salary is low, how about her? If you think you don't have many friends...   When you feel like giving up, think of this man If you think you suffer in life, do you suffer as much as he does? If you complain about your transport system, how about them? If your society is unfair to you, how about her?   Enjoy life how it is and as it comes Things are worse for others and is a lot better for us There are many things in your life that will catch your eye but only a few will catch your heart....pursue those...            This email needs to circulate forever...:

 

FeCl3 was found to be generally superior to the other two coagulants in removing all the parameters like color TSS COD

source : http://civil.eng.usm.my/awam07/sample%20paper.doc

Three types of coagulants were examined using standard jar test apparatus, i.e., aluminum sulphate (alum), ferric chloride (FeCl₃) and ferrous sulphate (FeSO₄). The effects of agitation speed, settling time, pH, coagulant dosages and temperature were exermined. At 300 rpm of rapid mixing and 50 rpm of slow mixing and 60 minutes settling time, higher removals of suspended solids (over 95%), colour (90%) and COD (43%) were achieved at pH 4 and 12. FeCl₃ was found to be superior compared with other coagulants. At pH 4 and 12, fair removal of suspended solids was observed at reasonably lower amount of coagulant, i.e., 600 mg/L. However, about 2500 mg/L of coagulant was required to achieve good removals at pH 6. Better removals were achieved at higher temperature.

The coagulation-flocculation process was employed for the treatment of reactive dye wastewaters, with ferric chloride hexahydrate employed as the coagulant. The process was found to be very effective with a more than 99.5% colour removal. Typical representatives of monochlorotriazine reactive dyes, with azo and anthraquinone chromophores, were CI Reactive Red 45 and CI Reactive Green 8, which were chosen as the model dyes. In order to determine the optimum pH range and coagulant concentration, a series of jar tests was done. Further experiments were conducted using a square flocculation tank with turbine impeller applying rapid and slow mix operations. The optimisation of initial rapid mixing, which has an important role in the overall coagulation process efficiency, was carried out. The optimum combination of velocity gradient and time of rapid mix was suggested for reactive dye wastewater treatment. Sedimentation curves for both model dyes were also obtained.

.

FeCl₃ was found to be generally superior to the other two coagulants in removing all the parameters.

FeCl₃ at pH 4 (at a coagulant dosage of 600 mg/L) and pH 6 (at a coagulant dosage of 2500 mg/L).

exhibited better performance with 90% and 97% removals, respectively.

 

Table 2:Removal of suspended solids, colour and COD at different pH values and dosages of coagulants.

pH	Results	Suspended Solids			Colour			COD
		Alum	FeCl3	FeSO4	Alum	FeCl3	FeSO4	Alum	FeCl3	FeSO4
4	Optimum/ economical dosage (mg/L)	600	600	600	600	600	600	600	600	600
	Initial* concentration	1106	1106	1068	6450	6460	7275	2660	2565	3320
	Final** concentration	282	59	582	2554	626	5485	1862	1472	1291
	% Removal	74.5	94.7	45.5	60.4	90.3	24.6	30	42.6	61.1
6	Optimum/ economical dosage (mg/L)	2500	2500	2500	2500	2500	2500	2500	2500	2500
	Initial* concentration	983	786	878	7005	7100	7003	3015	2980	3066
	Final** concentration	291	8	506	3159	249	5953	2204	1648	2422
	% Removal	70.4	99	42.4	54.9	96.5	15	26.9	44.7	21
12	Optimum/ economical dosage (mg/L)	600	600	600	600	600	600	600	600	600
	Initial* concentration	1106	932	1068	6460	6658	7270	3210	3565	3320
	Final** concentration	90	52	197	2558	1738	2690	2793	2777	2825
	% Removal	91.9	94.4	81.6	60.4	73.9	63	13	22.1	14.9

 

 

 

COD removal efficiency of poly-silicate-aluminium-ferric chloride (PSAFC) and polyferric chloride (PFC) coagulant increased with increasing dose of coagulants, and that the performance of PSAFC and PFC coagulants was superior to PAC coagulant. This difference in efficiency may also be attributed to the copolymers of Si(IV), Al(III) and Fe(III). However, compared with PFC, PSAFC can easily reach high COD removal efficiency below coagulant dose 0.3 g/L. Thus, from the economic point of view, PSAFC is more suitable for treatment of wastewater effluent from dye manufacturing

 

 

Source :http://civil.eng.usm.my/awam07/sample%20paper.doc