Toxicity Reduction of Ontario Hydro Radioactive Liquid Waste

  • D. W. Rodgers
  • D. W. Evans
  • L. Vereecken Sheehan

Abstract

The radioactive liquid waste (RLW) system in Ontario Hydro’s pressurised heavy water reactors collects drainage from a variety of sources ranging from floor drains to laundry waste. RLW effluent was intermittently toxic to rainbow trout and Daphnia magna during the first phase of Ontario’s Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement (MISA) Program, apparently as a result of the interaction of a variety of known and unknown organic and inorganic compounds. Accordingly, we employed a treatment-based approach to reducing its toxicity, supplemented by chemical analysis. Two series of toxicity reduction tests were conducted. The first series explored the potential for sorption of the possible toxicants, while the second series incorporated a wider variety of treatments. Of the 24 samples in the first test series, 17 were toxic (D. magna mortality ≥ 50%). Of the toxic samples, only 7 of 17 were still toxic after passage through an activated carbon column, but 5 of 6 samples tested remained toxic after passage through a metal chelating resin column. In the second series, at least one of the treatments was effective in reducing toxicity of all samples which were initially toxic (16 of 24 samples), but no one treatment was effective for all toxic samples. Three treatments (UV/H2O2 photo-oxidation with prior pH adjustment, or passage through a column of either a non-functionalized (N-F) resin or a mixture of N-F resin and a weak base (W-B) anion exchange resin), were effective in reducing the toxicity of more than 50% of the toxic samples; yet roughly 25% of these samples remained toxic after treatment O2 sparging, UV/H2O2 photo-oxidation without prior pH adjustment, and passage through a column of the W-B Resin were less effective, as more than 50% of the samples remained toxic after treatment. Filtering was not effective, as all of the treated samples (9/9) retained their toxicity. There was no obvious correspondence between toxicity and the concentrations of metals (Cu, Zn, Fe, A1 and Cd) nor were any simple relationships apparent between toxicity and Total Organic Carbon or NH3 concentrations. At stations where radioactive liquid wastes are segregated, toxicity was also segregated, suggesting that we may be able to address the problem at source through a combination of Best Management Practices and smaller scale treatment facilities.

Keywords

Total Organic Carbon Rainbow Trout Radioactive Liquid Waste Toxicity Reduction Toxicity Identification Evaluation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association and Water Pollution Control Federation (APHA): 1989, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 17th ed. Washington, D.C..Google Scholar
  2. Bellamy, W.D., Hickman, G.T., Mueller, P.A., Ziemba, N.: 1991. Research J. Water Pollution Control Fed., 63, 120 – 128.Google Scholar
  3. Clayton, R.: 1992, The Chemical Engineer, May 14, 1992, 23 – 26 (1992).Google Scholar
  4. Environment Canada: 1990, Biological test method: Reference method for determining acute lethality of effluents to Daphnia magna. Environmental Protection Publications, Conservation and Protection, Reference Method EPS l/RM/14. Google Scholar
  5. Glaze, W.H., Kang, J.W.: 1988, Amer. Water Works Assn., May 1988, 57 – 63.Google Scholar
  6. Mount, D.I., Anderson-Carnahan, L.: 1988, Methods for Aquatic Toxicity Identification Evaluations, Phase I. toxicity Characterization Procedures. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Duluth, MN, Report EPA-600/3–88/034. Google Scholar
  7. Ollis, D.F., Pelizzetti, E., Seipone, N.: 1991, Environ. Sci. Tech., 25, 1523–1529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy (OMEE): 1995, Effluent Monitoring and Effluent Limits — Electric Power Generation Sector, Ontario Regulation 215/95 made under the Environmental Protection Act.Google Scholar
  9. Ontario Hydro: 1992, A review of Ontario Hydro–s MISA monitoring results. Ontario Hydro, NOCS-IR- 07291-OUO/TISD-07291–0001. Google Scholar
  10. Rodgers, D.W.: 1994, Chemical Speciation and Bioavailability6, 23 – 26.Google Scholar
  11. Rodgers, D.W., Schroder, J., Vereecken Sheehan, L.: 1996, Water, Air and Soil Pollution Google Scholar
  12. Tyldesky, J.D., Knowles, G.: 1989, Paper #62, Water Chemistry of Nuclear Reactor Systems, British Nuclear Energy Society, London.Google Scholar
  13. Velte, J.S.: 1984, Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol33, 598–604.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. W. Rodgers
    • 1
  • D. W. Evans
    • 1
  • L. Vereecken Sheehan
    • 1
  1. 1.Ontario Hydro TechnologiesTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations