Skip to main content

Evaluation of iron and manganese removal effectiveness by treatment plant modules based on water pollution index; a comprehensive approach

Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering volume 19, pages 1005–1013 (2021)Cite this article

A Correction to this article was published on 15 July 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Groundwater is a viable alternative when access to surface water resources is limited. Iron and manganese are known ions in soil and naturally in groundwater sources. However, human activities also are responsible. To identifying the best module for removing manganese and iron in the water treatment plant (WTP) of Mazandaran, 516 samples were taken from raw and treated water. The concentration of manganese, iron, was measured by atomic absorption spectrophotometry, and turbidity was used with the nephelometry method. The water pollution index (WPI) was applied for categorizing the status of pollution in treated water. The effect of seasonal temperature and backwashing (At flow rates of 3.5, 9.2, and 15.3 m h-1) on the sand filter efficiency was also investigated. The highest concentrations of manganese, iron, and turbidity in raw water were 0.744, 6.70 mg L-1, and 41.8 NTU, and in treated water were 0.67, 1.09 mg L-1, and 5.58 NTU, respectively. The mean concentration of manganese and iron in raw and treated water were 0.24 ± 0.1, 0.93 ± 0.91, 0.105 ± 0.06 and 0.18 ± 0.14 mg L-1 respectively. The WPI statuses in drinking water were excellent for manganese and iron in 95.74 and 53.88 % of the samples and very poor in 1.16 and 12.01 % of the samples, respectively, and its classification for drinking water for manganese and iron was excellent ˃ good ˃ extremely polluted ˃ polluted and the concentration of iron was more than manganese in treated water. The study of temperature’s effect on sand filters showed that the removal efficiency in warm seasons was higher than in cold seasons. Also, the turbulence in the backwash with the 9.2 m h− 1 rates, is lesser than other speeds, and in this flow, after 270 s, the turbidity decreases to less than 10 NTU. Spearman correlation comparison showed that the parameters amounts after filtration decreased significantly (p ≤ 0.0001) in comparison to raw water. The results showed that module #1 that used open-aeration and chlorine as oxidations, was most effective in removing iron and manganese. In the end, the WTP couldn’t diminish the parameters completely and need subsidiary units.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Graph 1
Graph 2

Change history

References

  1. Abolli S, et al. Comparing groundwater fluoride level with WHO guidelines and classifying at-risk age groups; based on health risk assessment. Int J Environ Anal Chem. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2020.1863389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Postawa A, et al. Best practice guide on the control of iron and manganese in water supply. London: IWA Publishing; 2013.

  3. Singh KP, et al. Chemometric analysis of groundwater quality data of alluvial aquifer of Gangetic plain, North India. Anal Chim Acta. 2005;550(1–2):82–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Abolli S, et al. Survey of drinking water quality of household water treatment and public distribution network in Garmsar city, under the control of water safety plan. Iran J Health Environ. 2019;12(3):477–88.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Abolli S, et al. Water safety plan: A novel approach to evaluate the efficiency of the water supply system in Garmsar. Desalin Water Treat. 2021;211:210–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fathabad AE, et al. Determination of heavy metal content of processed fruit products from Tehran’s market using ICP-OES: a risk assessment study. Food Chem Toxicol. 2018;115:436–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gage B. Biological iron and manganese removal, pilot and full scale applications. in 2001 Ontario Water Works Association Conference, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; 2001.

  8. Yavuz H, Say R, Denizli A. Iron removal from human plasma based on molecular recognition using imprinted beads. Mater Sci Eng C. 2005;25(4):521–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Namdeo M, Bajpai S. Chitosan–magnetite nanocomposites (CMNs) as magnetic carrier particles for removal of Fe (III) from aqueous solutions. Colloids Surf A. 2008;320(1–3):161–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Marsidi N, Hasan HA, Abdullah SRS. A review of biological aerated filters for iron and manganese ions removal in water treatment. J Water Process Eng. 2018;23:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Radfard M, et al. Drinking water quality and arsenic health risk assessment in Sistan and Baluchestan, Southeastern Province, Iran. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J. 2019;25(4):949–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Zakeri HR, et al. Chemical coagulation-electro fenton as a superior combination process for treatment of dairy wastewater: performance and modelling. Int J Environ Sci Technol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-021-03149-w.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yousefi M, et al. Data on corrosion and scaling potential of drinking water resources using stability indices in Jolfa, East Azerbaijan, Iran. Data in brief. 2018;16:724–31.

  14. Diaz-Alarcón J, et al. Removal of iron and manganese in groundwater through magnetotactic bacteria. J Environ Manag. 2019;249:109381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Casalini LC, et al. Manganese removal efficiencies and bacterial community profiles in non-bioaugmented and in bioaugmented sand filters exposed to different temperatures. J Water Process Eng. 2020;36:101261.

  16. Agency USEP, Method 180.1: Determination of turbidity by nephelometry. Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; 1993.

  17. Suriadikusumah A, et al. Analysis of the water quality at Cipeusing river, Indonesia using the pollution index method. Acta Ecol Sin. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chnaes.2020.08.001

  18. Hossain M, Patra PK. Water pollution index–A new integrated approach to rank water quality. Ecol Ind. 2020;117:106668.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kwakye-Awuah B, et al. Adsorptive removal of iron and manganese from groundwater samples in ghana by zeolite Y synthesized from bauxite and kaolin. Water. 2019;11(9):1912.

  20. Aziz HA, Smith PG. Removal of manganese from water using crushed dolomite filtration technique. Water Res. 1996;30(2):489–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Jensen DL, et al. Speciation of dissolved iron (II) and manganese (II) in a groundwater pollution plume. Environ Sci Technol. 1998;32(18):2657–64.

  22. Sarin P, et al. Iron release from corroded iron pipes in drinking water distribution systems: effect of dissolved oxygen. Water Res. 2004;38(5):1259–69.

  23. Aschner M, et al. Manganese and its role in Parkinson’s disease: from transport to neuropathology. Neuromol Med. 2009;11(4):252–66.

  24. Barloková D, Ilavský J. Removal of iron and manganese from water using filtration by natural materials. Pol J Environ Stud. 2010;19(6):1117–22.

  25. Yang H, et al. Removal of manganese from groundwater in the ripened sand filtration: Biological oxidation versus chemical auto-catalytic oxidation. Chem Eng J. 2020;382:123033.

  26. Štembal T, et al. Removal of ammonia, iron and manganese from groundwaters of northern Croatia—pilot plant studies. Process Biochem. 2005;40(1):327–35.

  27. de Souza ÁHC, et al. Backwash process in a sand filter prototype used in irrigation. Agric Eng Int CIGRJ. 2019;21(1):109–14.

  28. Wołowiec M, et al. The properties of sludge formed as a result of coagulation of backwash water from filters removing iron and manganese from groundwater. SN Appl Sci. 2019;1(6):639.

  29. Milanović A, et al. Assessment of polluting effects and surface water quality using water pollution index: a case study of Hydro-system Danube-Tisa-Danube. Serbia Carpathian J Earth Environ Sci. 2011;6(2):269–77.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Effendi H. River water quality preliminary rapid assessment using pollution index. Procedia Environ Sci. 2016;33(1):562–7.

  31. Adimalla N. Application of the Entropy Weighted Water Quality Index (EWQI) and the Pollution Index of Groundwater (PIG) to assess groundwater quality for drinking purposes: a case study in a rural area of Telangana State, India. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2021;80:31–40

  32. Saleh HN, et al. Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk assessment of heavy metals in groundwater wells in Neyshabur Plain, Iran. Biol Trace Elem Res. 2019;190(1):251–61.

  33. Yousefi M, et al. Data on water quality index for the groundwater in rural area Neyshabur County, Razavi province, Iran. Data Brief. 2017;15:901–7.

  34. Drechsel P, et al. Reducing health risks from wastewater use in urban and peri-urban sub-Saharan Africa: applying the 2006 WHO guidelines. Water Sci Technol. 2008;57(9):1461–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Sobsey MD, et al. Point of use household drinking water filtration: a practical, effective solution for providing sustained access to safe drinking water in the developing world. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42(12):4261–67.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is the result of a master’s degree thesis. The authors of this study sincerely appreciate the consideration of Tehran University of Medical Sciences and the Water and Wastewater Engineering Organization of Mazandaran Province.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Nima Kalvani, Alireza Mesdaghinia, Kamyar Yaghmaeian, Sommayeh Saadi & Mahmood Alimohammadi

  2. Center for Water Quality Research (CWQR), Institute for Environmental Research (IER), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Alireza Mesdaghinia & Mahmood Alimohammadi

  3. Centre for Solid Waste Management (CSWM), Institute for Environmental Research (IER), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Kamyar Yaghmaeian

  4. Health Center of Garmsar, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

    Samaneh Abolli

  5. Health Equity Research Center (HERC) Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Mahmood Alimohammadi

  6. Civil, Water and Environmental Engineering Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University, 19839-69411, Tehran, Iran

    Abdollah Rashidi Mehrabadi

Authors
  1. Nima Kalvani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alireza Mesdaghinia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kamyar Yaghmaeian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Samaneh Abolli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sommayeh Saadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mahmood Alimohammadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Abdollah Rashidi Mehrabadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mahmood Alimohammadi or Abdollah Rashidi Mehrabadi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors of this study explain that there is no conflict of interest with each other.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: The order of author(s) was incorrect in the original article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kalvani, N., Mesdaghinia, A., Yaghmaeian, K. et al. Evaluation of iron and manganese removal effectiveness by treatment plant modules based on water pollution index; a comprehensive approach. J Environ Health Sci Engineer 19, 1005–1013 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40201-021-00665-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40201-021-00665-2

Keywords

  • Water
  • Manganese
  • Iron
  • WPI
  • Mazandaran