Application of jug filters for the treatment of model well water

Puszczało, Ewa; Marszałek, Anna; Kamińska, Gabriela

doi:10.5004/dwt.2021.27846

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, in fact, total human exposure to pollutants occurring in the water environment (water supply, swimming pool, surface, and others) is intensified, and therefore the number of pollutants in individual elements should be minimized. An effective solution for an improvement of the quality of water at home is the use of pitcher filtration [17][18][19]. Filter manufacturers declare that depending on the type of filter, the taste, and smell of water can be improved and some pollutants such as chlorine, pesticides and heavy metals can be removed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tap Water Purification Using Pitcher Filters

Puszczało

Kamińska

Marszałek

2022

Architecture, Civil Engineering, Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to the high risk of exposure to various contaminants in drinking water, pitcher filtration is rapidly growing in popularity worldwide as a cheap and easy method to remove pollutants from drinking water. On the other hand, an evaluation of the real-time performance of pitchers is not possible for usual consumers. This study presents the performance of pitcher filtration in the removal of copper, chlorine, and chloroform from tap drinking water. Pitchers were packed with Aquaphor cartridges JS500, A5, and B25. Experiments were performed with model solutions, which were prepared from hard drinking water (7.5 mval/L, pH=7) spiked with copper, hypochlorite sodium, and chloroform. It was found that pitcher filtration is a very effective method for the removal of pollutants such as heavy metals, chlorine, and disinfectants byproducts. The concentration of copper, chlorine, and chloroform in filtrates did not exceed the maximum admissible values. Cartridges JS500, A5, and B25 reduced chlorine at a comparable level – almost 100%. During the whole experimental period, removal of chloroform was slightly better for JS500 (100%) and A5 (100%) cartridges than for B25 (91.4–97.7%).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%