Rejection of malathion by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes exposed to foulant and two clean-in-place procedures

This research tested the treatment efficacy of an Energy Savings Nanofiltration 1 Low Fouling (ESNA 1-LF) nanofiltration (NF) and an Energy Saving Polyamide 2 (ESPA2) reverse osmosis (RO) membrane for removing malathion from water. Both membranes are of composite polyamide construction. The study in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Water science & technology. Water supply Vol. 24; no. 4; pp. 1196 - 1206
Main Authors: Mikelonis, Anne M., Orme, Christopher J., Nilkar, Amit S., Szabo, Jeffrey G., Reese, Stephen J.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England IWA Publishing 02.03.2024
Subjects:
Cellulose acetate
Clean energy
clean-in-place
Composite materials
Contact angle
Drinking water
Energy conservation
Experiments
Exposure
Hydrophobicity
INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Malathion
Membranes
Molecular structure
Nanofiltration
Nanotechnology
Oxidation
pesticide
Pesticides
Polyamide resins
Polyamides
Rejection
Reverse osmosis
Secondary wastewater
Toxicity
Wastewater
Water treatment
United States > US
reverse osmosis
malathion
clean-in-place
pesticide
nanofiltration
ISSN:1606-9749, 1607-0798, 1607-0798
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This research tested the treatment efficacy of an Energy Savings Nanofiltration 1 Low Fouling (ESNA 1-LF) nanofiltration (NF) and an Energy Saving Polyamide 2 (ESPA2) reverse osmosis (RO) membrane for removing malathion from water. Both membranes are of composite polyamide construction. The study included measuring malathion rejection using both pristine membranes and membranes exposed to a simulated secondary wastewater effluent foulant before and after two types of clean-in-place procedures. Across all conditions studied, malathion rejection ranged from 84 to 95% for the ESNA1-LF NF membrane and 77 to 94% for the ESPA2 RO membrane. Contact angle measurements were also collected for each membrane exposure condition. While the contact angle measurements indicated changes to the hydrophobicity of the selective layer of the membranes, they did not correlate to changes in the performance of malathion rejection. As expected, it was observed that malathion rejection improved with the introduction of foulant. Also, the clean-in-place procedures helped restore flux while maintaining malathion rejection.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
USDOE
INL/JOU-23-73902-Rev000
AC07-05ID14517
These authors contributed equally to this work.
ISSN:1606-9749
1607-0798
1607-0798
DOI:10.2166/ws.2024.043