Grantee Research Project Results
2020 Progress Report: Solving the Arsenic Problem in Rural California
EPA Grant Number: SU839960Title: Solving the Arsenic Problem in Rural California
Investigators: Gadgil, Ashok , Tseng, Winston , Kumar, Arkadeep , Nahata, Mohit , Hernandez, Dana , Bandaru, Siva , Duffy, Lucas , Majmudar, Jay
Institution: University of California - Berkeley
EPA Project Officer: Callan, Richard
Phase: I
Project Period: October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2020 (Extended to September 30, 2021)
Project Period Covered by this Report: October 1, 2019 through September 30,2020
Project Amount: $25,000
RFA: P3 Awards: A National Student Design Competition Focusing on People, Prosperity and the Planet (2019) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: P3 Awards , P3 Challenge Area - Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Objective:
An estimated 55,000 people in California rely on public water systems that are out of compliance with respect to arsenic. Low income, mostly minority communities bear a disproportionate burden of these high arsenic carcinogen levels in drinking water, which are above the EPA – Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 10 parts per billion (ppb). This project’s technical challenge is to effectively remove arsenic from contaminated groundwater at a high throughput to meet the water demands of rural California.
Iron Electrocoagulation (Fe-EC) systems have shown to effectively remove high concentrations of arsenic from contaminated groundwater sources. Fe-EC relies on the controlled electrolytic dissolution of an Fe anode in an electrochemical cell to form Fe precipitates that adsorb the contaminant of concern. However, Fe-EC is limited by slow Fe(II) oxidation kinetics due to the depletion of dissolved oxygen in the bulk solution. A promising solution, called Air Cathode Assisted Iron Electrocoagulation (ACAIE), is based on Fe-EC, but also induces the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) at the cathode to produce large amounts of hydrogen peroxide, H2O2, in-situ, a more powerful oxidant than oxygen. Thus, the process overcomes the problem of oxygen depletion through the abundance of H2O2 in the reactor. In the process, As(III) is oxidized to As(V), a more readily adsorbed form of inorganic arsenic. The arsenic laden iron sludge is then settled out, producing arsenic-safe drinking water.
Our specific objectives are to: 1) Demonstrate arsenic removal from very high initial concentrations of 1,500 ppb of As(III), which is the more difficult species of inorganic arsenic to remove, to below the EPA-MCL in a synthetic groundwater matrix mimicking the composition of contaminated aquifers in California, 2) Design and optimize a compact, stacked continuous flow system that produces 600 LPH of arsenic-safe water, 3) Initiate efforts for subsequent Community-Engaged Research by reaching out to central valley communities in rural California, and 4) Conduct an economic analysis to estimate the total cost of removing arsenic from the water at a community-scale plant in California.
Progress Summary:
The output to date is the design and build of a 2 liter per minute flow-through ACAIE reactor module that is robust, capable of operating at high throughput, and is leak-proof. At scale-up, this modular design will produce arsenic-safe drinking water at a rate of 600 liters per minute. Another output is the publication that demonstrates the efficacy of ACAIE to remove high levels of As(III), at 1,500 ppb, to much below the EPA-MCL of 10 ppb.
With regards to the P3 educational approach, another output has been the introduction of this project through a graduate course taught by Prof. Gadgil called “Design, Evaluate, and Scale Developmental Technologies,” cross-listed between the School of Engineering and the School of Business at UC Berkeley. As deliverables, the team prepared a presentation and a report on their findings at the end of the course, as well as recommendations on steps to successfully deploy ACAIE in California.
In practice, our initial cost assessment indicates that ACAIE can be an affordable solution to residents of rural California, especially in the cases where households spend 10 percent of their income on bottled water to avoid drinking from contaminated sources. In the long-term, this technology can reduce the number of arsenic-related diseases, and thus lessen the burden of disease, and increase economic prosperity in communities that currently rely on
arsenic-contaminated groundwater.
Future Activities:
Our first objective is to complete testing of 600 LPH ACAIE continuous-flow system in the laboratory. Subsequently, with support from our community partners, we will conduct a field test of ACAIE system in Central Valley of California. During the field test, we will: 1) collect user feedback from the community and system operator, 2) iterate the design of the system and retest, 3) conduct a higher resolution cost analysis and confirm feasibility, and 4) redesign the system from economic and community feedback, and test the system for remote monitoring.
Journal Articles on this Report : 1 Displayed | Download in RIS Format
Other project views: | All 8 publications | 1 publications in selected types | All 1 journal articles |
---|
Type | Citation | ||
---|---|---|---|
|
Bandaru SR, van Genuchten CM, Kumar A, Glade S, Hernandez D, Nahata M, Gadgil A. Rapid and Efficient Arsenic Removal by Iron Electrocoagulation Enabled with in Situ Generation of Hydrogen Peroxide. Environmental science & technology 2020;54(10):6094-103. |
SU839960 (2020) SU839960 (Final) |
Exit |
Supplemental Keywords:
electrochemistry, surface chemistry, iron nanoparticles, safe drinking water, public health, cancer prevention, environmental justice, environmental educationRelevant Websites:
Progress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractP3 Phase II:
Solving the Arsenic Problem in Rural California | 2022 Progress ReportThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.