Rejection properties of pesticides with a hollow fiber NF membrane (HNF-1)

Membrane Treatment of Potable Water for Pesticides Removal

“…LogK ow values of trace organic molecules vary between -3 and 7, with the higher values characterizing hydrophobic compounds (usually for logK ow >2). Kiso et al (2000Kiso et al ( , 2002 systematically investigated the relationship between logK ow versus retention and adsorption of a number of aromatic and non-phenylic pesticides, using flat sheet and hollow fiber nanofiltration membranes. While no significant correlation was identified between retention and logK ow , there was a rather good correlation between the adsorption and the characteristic logK ow values of the pesticides tested (Kiso et al, , 2002.…”

“…Kiso et al (2000Kiso et al ( , 2002 systematically investigated the relationship between logK ow versus retention and adsorption of a number of aromatic and non-phenylic pesticides, using flat sheet and hollow fiber nanofiltration membranes. While no significant correlation was identified between retention and logK ow , there was a rather good correlation between the adsorption and the characteristic logK ow values of the pesticides tested (Kiso et al, , 2002. Moreover, it was found that the presence of a phenyl group in a molecule increases its adsorption capacity (aromatic pesticides), while alkyl groups can have negative effects on the interaction between a phenyl group and the membrane .…”

“…Because of this advances in membrane technology, RO has been gradually finding applications in the treatment of a variety of domestic, industrial, and hospital wastewaters. In the past three decades, the need for a complete assessment of the RO, and of the later developed NF process, regarding removal of pesticide residues from various aquatic matrices, led to an extensive research effort in many laboratories (Berg et al, 1997;Devitt et al, 1998a;Van der Bruggen et al, 1998Kiso et al, 2000Kiso et al, , 2002Košutić et al, 2002Košutić et al, , 2005Zhang et al, 2004;Causserand et al, 2005;Bhattacharya et al, 2006;Plakas et al, 2006;Sarkar et al, 2007;Plakas & Karabelas, 2008Ahmad et al, 2008aAhmad et al, , 2008bComerton et al, 2008;Caus et al, 2009;Benítez et al, 2009;Pang et al, 2010;Wang et al, 2010), pilot (Baier et al, 1987;Duranceau et al, 1992;Agbekodo et al, 1996;Berg et al, 1997;Hofman et al, 1997;Wittmann et al, 1998;Bonné et al, 2000;Boussahel et al, 2000Boussahel et al, , 2002Chen et al, 2004) as well as to industrial scale experiments (Agbekodo et al, 1996;Wittmann et al, 1998;Ventresque et al, 2000;Cyna et al, 2002). A fairly large number of commercially available NF/RO membranes have been tested for the removal of an even larger number of herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and miscellaneous pesticides from various water matrices.…”

Micropollutant Degradation Mechanism

“…In past research, it has been demonstrated that some micropollutants such as pesticides (e.g., atrazine) can be effective by NF membranes Kiso et al, 2000;Cho et al, 1999;Kiso et al, 2002). Pesticide rejection by NF and RO membranes is thought to be influenced by compound physical-chemical properties (e.g., molecular size, solubility, diffusivity, polarity, hydrophobicity, and charge), membrane properties (e.g., permeability, pore size, hydrophobicity, and charge), and membrane operating conditions (e.g., flux, transmembrane pressure, and recovery).…”

“…Van der Bruggen et al (Van der Bruggen et al, 1998;Van der Bruggen et al, 1999) demonstrated that molecular weight and size were the most critical mechanisms for pesticide removal using different kinds of NF membranes. Kiso et al (Kiso et al, 2000;Kiso et al, 2002) studied the rejection of alkyl phthalates, nonphenylic pesticides, and aromatic pesticides by flat-sheet and hollow fine fibre types membranes. Both RO and NF were used in their studies.…”