Journal of Hazardous Materials 235236 (2012) 257264

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Hazardous Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhazmat

Removal of natural organic matter and arsenic from water by

electrocoagulation/otation continuous ow reactor
Bozo Dalmacija, Jasmina Agbaba, Malcolm Watson,
Emilijan Mohora , Srdjan Roncevic,
Milena Dalmacija
Elvira Karlovic,
University of Novi Sad Faculty of Sciences, Department of Chemistry, Biochemistry and Environmental Protection, Trg D. Obradovica 3, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia

h i g h l i g h t s






A continuous electrocoagulation/otation reactor was designed built and operated.

Highest NOM removal according to UV254 was 77% relative to raw groundwater.
Highest NOM removal accordance to DOC was 71%, relative to raw groundwater.
Highest As removal archived was 85% (6.2 g/l), relative to raw groundwater.
Specic reactor energy and electrode consumption was 1.7 kWh/m3 and 66 g Al/m3 .

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 20 February 2012
Received in revised form 25 July 2012
Accepted 28 July 2012
Available online 7 August 2012
Keywords:
Electro-coagulationotation
Groundwater
Arsenic removal
Natural organic matter

a b s t r a c t
The performance of the laboratory scale electrocoagulation/otation (ECF) reactor in removing high concentrations of natural organic matter (NOM) and arsenic from groundwater was analyzed in this study.
An ECF reactor with bipolar plate aluminum electrodes was operated in the horizontal continuous ow
mode. Electrochemical and ow variables were optimized to examine ECF reactor contaminants removal
efciency. The optimum conditions for the process were identied as groundwater initial pH 5, ow
rate = 4.3 l/h, inter electrode distance = 2.8 cm, current density = 5.78 mA/cm2 , A/V ratio = 0.248 cm1 . The
NOM removal according to UV254 absorbance and dissolved organic matter (DOC) reached highest values
of 77% and 71% respectively, relative to the raw groundwater. Arsenic removal was 85% (6.2 g As/l) relative to raw groundwater, satisfying the drinking water standards. The specic reactor electrical energy
consumption was 17.5 kWh/kg Al. The specic aluminum electrode consumption was 66 g Al/m3 . According to the obtained results, ECF in horizontal continuous ow mode is an energy efcient process to
remove NOM and arsenic from groundwater.
2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Natural organic matter (NOM) in water is a major concern
and should be removed from drinking water from a number
of reasons. NOM affects organoleptic properties of water (color,
taste and odor); reacts with most disinfectants used in water
treatment, thus reducing their disinfection power, inuencing
disinfectant demand and disinfection process design; produces disinfection by-products (DBPs) of various kinds, affects the stability
and removal of inorganic particles; heavily inuences coagulant
demand; affects corrosion processes; and affects biostability and
biological regrowth in distributions systems [1]. NOM often reduces
the removal of target substances through its adsorption onto

Corresponding author. Tel.: +381 63 7599130; fax: +381 21 485 2728.

E-mail address: emohora@ifc.org (E. Mohora).
0304-3894/$ see front matter 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.07.056

adsorbents and/or the formation of a complex with the target substances [2]. Recently, that presence of NOM in surface water was
reported to negatively inuence removal of As(V) by electrocoagulation/otation (EFC) treatment [3].
Coagulation using metal based coagulants is the essential process in the conventional treatment of drinking water [4]. In this
process coagulating agents and other additives are dosed to produce larger aggregates which can be separated physically. The
process depends on variety of factors, including but not limited
to, pH, coagulant type and dosage and the type and concentration
of NOM. This is a multi stage process that requires considerable
land area and continual supply of chemicals. A more cost-effective
method to clean a wide range of polluted water on site and with
minimum additives is required for sustainable water management
[1]. ECF has been suggested as an alternative. It is the process
whereby a sacricial metal anode doses treated water electrochemically, while the cathode reaction provides afford hydrogen which

258

E. Mohora et al. / Journal of Hazardous Materials 235236 (2012) 257264

is involved in the otation process. ECF is characteristic for its ease

of operation, reduced production of sludge, the oc formed tends to
be much larger, less maintenance and no need for handling chemicals [57]. ECF has attracted great attention as an eco-friendly
and efcient process, although it has some demerits, such as the
need to replace electrodes at regular intervals due to their dissolution, high cost of electricity, anode passivation and hydroxides
which may tend to solubilize in some cases [8]. Recent technical
improvements, combined with the growing need for small scale
decentralized water and waste water treatment facilities, have led
to a re-evolution of the ECF [9]. A literature survey indicates that
most of the studies on NOM removal by ECF process have been carried out in batch treatment mode using model water [1013]. Only
modest attention has been paid to the ECF treatment of groundwater containing a high NOM concentration and in the continuous
ow mode.
Arsenic is classied as a Group I carcinogenic substances to
humans based on epidemiological evidence [14]. The World Health
organization (WHO) has established 10 g/l as maximum arsenic
concentration for drinking water [15]. Arsenic in groundwater
occurs in two oxidation states As(III) (arsenite) and As(V) (arsenate). As(III) is more mobile in groundwater and 2560 times
more toxic than As(V). Various treatment technologies have been
applied to remove arsenic including coagulation with precipitation with iron and aluminum salts, adsorption onto activated
alumina, activated carbon and activated bauxite, ion exchange and
reverse osmosis. Those technologies showed a medium to low
As(III) removal efciency and also required pH regulation as it inuences arsenic speciation and surface change of adsorbents. Authors
thus recommended to oxidize As(III) to As(V) for effective arsenic
removal. However, in the presence of NOM the oxidation step
applied prior to As(III) removal could lead to the formation of toxic
oxidation by products [16]. ECF is offering advantage to oxidize
As(III) in As(V) and improve its removal without required oxidation
step [3]. Literature results on arsenic removal by ECF showed that
5 out of 7 studies were based on batch processes [2]. Most of them
have used model water and there are only 2 studies concerning
groundwater polluted by arsenic [17,18].
Therefore, the objective of the present study was to evaluate
treatability of groundwater with a high concentration of NOM and
arsenic using an ECF reactor in horizontal continuous ow mode
with bipolar plate aluminum electrodes. The effects of different
ECF reactor operational parameters on NOM and As removal efciency like inter-electrode distance, A/V ratio, the initial pH of the
raw groundwater, current density, electrode passivation and the
ow rate were studied, with the goal of optimizing reactor removal
efciency rate for specic energy and electrode consumption.

Table 1
Characteristics of the raw groundwater.
Parameters

No. of measurements (n)

Value 

pH
Conductivity (S/cm)
DOC (mg C/l)
UV254 (cm1 )
SUVA (l mg1 m1 )
Arsenic (g/l)

10
10
30
30
30
15

7.4
1310
9.31
0.444
4.64
5.4

0.3
36
0.51
0.026
0.11
16.4

 standard deviation based on n measurements.

1730 SB, 030 V, 03 A), ampere-meter, voltmeter, and sampling

setup. The electrode dimensions were 14 cm 13 cm 0.3 cm and
aluminum purity was 99.5%. The distances between the plate electrodes varied from 1.2 cm to 2.8 cm, and were numbered in the
reactor from 3 to 5.
In general, each experimental run lasted for 90 min. During the
experiments, raw groundwater from the water tank was pumped
into the EFC reactor by centrifugal pump. The reactor operated at
ow rates 4.3 l/h, 6.4 l/h and 10.3 l/h. In order to minimize electrode oxidation and passivation, the direction of the power supply
was changed at 90 min time intervals. Due to the geometry of the
laboratory ECF reactor used, within the single unit coagulation,
occulation, otation and settling occurred in parallel. The treated
groundwater was collected after a desired period of time from the
reactor efuent ow and ltered through Whatman No: 42 lter
paper before analyses. Efuent groundwater samples were analyzed for NOM, Astotal , pH and temperature. Before and after each
experimental run electrodes weight was measured.
2.3. Analytical methods and calculations
2.3.1. NOM analyses
UV254 absorbance measurements were performed before and
after ECF treatment in accordance with standard methods [20] by
UNICAM SP600 UV spectrophotometer at a wavelength of 254 nm
with a 1 cm quartz cell.
After ltration through a 0.45 m membrane lter, the groundwater samples were analyzed before and after ECF treatment for
DOC content using an Elementar LiquiTOCII, with oxidation by combustion at 850 C.
2.3.2. Arsenic analyses
Arsenic analyses were carried by Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (PerkinElmer AAnalyst 700) according to the standard
method EPA 7010 (Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry, Rev. 0, Feb. 2007).

2. Materials and methods

DC

2.1. Groundwater samples

All experiments were performed with groundwater samples

collected in the Central Banat region (Republic of Serbia), where
groundwater is used as a principle water supply source. Its principle
characteristic is listed in Table 1. This groundwater contains undesirable components like a high concentration of NOM and arsenic
as a consequence of its origin [19].

A
P

E
ECF

2.2. Experimental setup and procedure

All experiments were carried out in a bipolar laboratory ECF
continuous ow reactor (Fig. 1). It consists of 30 l water tank, centrifugal pump, 4.5 l Plexiglas laboratory scale ECF reactor with a
horizontal continuous ow, DC power supply source (model DF

Fig. 1. Diagram of the experiment: T water tank, P centrifugal pump, ECF bipolar continuous ow electro-coagulationotation reactor, E aluminum electrodes,
DC power supply, A ampere-meter, V voltmeter, S sampling points.

E. Mohora et al. / Journal of Hazardous Materials 235236 (2012) 257264

259

2.3.3. pH and conductivity

pH measurements were carried out on a WTW InoLab portable
instrument. Conductivity measurements were carried out on a
Hanna model HI 933000.
2.3.4. Calculations
NOM removal efciency was calculated as:
 (%) =

C0 Ct
100
C0

(1)

where C0 initial concentration, Ct concentration after ECF treatment time t. The ECF reactor electrical energy consumption (E) was
calculated using the commonly used equation:
E = UItECF

(2)

where E is in kWh, U is the applied potential (in V), I is the operating current in ampere (A) and tECF is the ECF treatment time. The
amount of Al(III) released into the treated groundwater during ECF
treatment was estimated by applying Faradays law:
mt =

ItECF M
nF

(3)

where mt the dissolved aluminum (g), n is the number of electrons in the redox reaction, F is Faradays constant and M is the
molecular weight of Al. Current efciency was calculated as:
CE =

me
100
mt

(4)

The calculation is based on the comparison of experimental

weight loss of the aluminum electrodes me during ECF treatment and the theoretical amount of aluminum dissolution mt
according to Faradays law. The specic electrical energy consumption (Seec ) is calculated as a function of aluminum electrode weight
consumption during ECF in kWh/kg Al [21,22]
Seec =

nFU
MCE 3.6 103

(5)

3. Results and discussion

3.1. A/V ratio effect
The ratio between the total active electrode area (A) and the
volume of groundwater in the reactor (V) is (crude) measure of the
potential for delivering coagulant and bubbles to the ECF system
(on a volumetric bases) [27]. It was reported that an optimal reactor operating current density exists for a xed A/V ratio [21]. The
effect of A/V ratio on NOM removal efciency was studied between
0.12 cm1 and 0.31 cm1 by adding electrodes to the ECF reactor from 3 to 5, and the groundwater volume was kept constant.
The ECF treatment was carried out at the constant applied potential of 20 V, ow rate 4.3 l/h, inter-electrode distance of 1.2 cm,
initial pH 7.7, and groundwater conductivity of 1270 S/cm. The
results obtained (Fig. 2) show that increasing the A/V ratio above
value of 0.248 cm1 or addition of more than four electrodes into
the ECF reactor does not improve NOM removal efciency. This
is associated with the considerable decrease of the operating current density as a consequence of A/V ratio increase for the constant
potential applied during experimental run. For A/V ratio value
0.248 cm1 the ECF reactor in its steady state achieved the highest NOM removal efciency of 60% (relative to raw groundwater)
based on UV254 absorbance.
The obtained results demonstrate that additional electrodes in
the ECF reactor for the constant applied potential do not assure a
steady increase in the NOM removal efciency. Therefore, the most
favorable A/V ratio of 0.248 cm1 , or four aluminum electrodes in
the ECF reactor, was selected for the following experimental work.

Fig. 2. Effect of A/V on NOM removal efciency based on UV254 absorbance. The
ECF treatment was carried out at U = 20 V, Q = 4.3 l/h, d = 1.2 cm, pH 7.7, conductivity = 1270 S/cm, DOC0 = 9.31 0.51 mg C/l.

3.2. Effect of initial groundwater pH

It has been reported that the initial pH of the treated water is
important operating factor inuencing NOM removal efciency by
ECF [23]. The effect may be twofold, rst on the distribution of
aluminum hydrolysis product and secondly, the effect of a passivation layer formed especially in the high initial pH of the anode
surface [24,25]. To examine this effect, raw groundwater samples
were adjusted to the desired pH by adding sodium hydroxide or
hydrochloric acid. The ECF treatment was carried out at constant
applied potential of 20 V, ow rate 3.6 l/h, interelectrode distance
1.2 cm, and groundwater conductivity of 1284 S/cm.
The results obtained (Fig. 3) indicate that at initial groundwater pH 5.0, the ECF reactor took approximately 10 min to achieve
a steady state based on UV254 absorbance and approximately
50 min based on DOC. The initial groundwater specic ultraviolet absorbance (SUVA) at 254 nm value was 4.64 0.11 l mg1 m1
(Table 1). This indicates that a large part of the NOM present in the
raw groundwater consists of hydrophobic organic compounds with
high molecular masses and a high degree of aromaticity, which can
be easily removed by coagulation [1,2831]. The remainder of the
DOC is harder to remove, and thus takes longer to reach a steady
state. The average value of NOM removal efciency achieved based
on UV254 absorbance and DOC for the reactor steady state was 74%
and 66%, respectively. However, at initial groundwater pH of 7.0,
the EFC reactor took approximately 60 min to achieve a relatively
steady state treatment regime. The NOM removal efciency for
the reactor steady state regime time based on UV254 absorbance
and DOC was 63% and 54% respectively. These results conrm
previously reported studies performed with the model waters containing high NOM concentration and in batch treatment mode, that
the ECF process is more efcient when the initial treated water pH
is adjusted to 5 [1013]. Therefore, for the following experimental
work the pH value of the raw groundwater was adjusted to 5.
3.3. Effect of inter electrode distance (d)
NOM removal efciency and energy consumption was analyzed
as a function of inter electrode distance (d). The inter electrode
distance varied at values of d = 1.2 cm, 2.0 cm and 2.8 cm. The ECF

260

E. Mohora et al. / Journal of Hazardous Materials 235236 (2012) 257264

b
b

Fig. 3. Variation of DOC (a) and UV254 absorbance (b) as a function of initial groundwater pH value and time. The ECF treatment was carried out at
U = 20 V, Q = 3.6 l/h, d = 1.2 cm, conductivity (pH = 7.0) = 1284 S/cm, conductivity
(pH = 5.0) = 1750 S/cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 , DOC0 = 9.31 0.51 mg C/l.

treatment was carried out at constant applied potential of 17 V,

ow rate 3.6 l/h, initial groundwater pH 5, and conductivity of
1750 S/cm.
In general, a closer inter electrode distance is desirable, because
electrical resistance (IR drop) increases with inter-electrode distance increase [18,26]. Results obtained show that ECF reactor
took approximately 10 min (Fig. 4a) to achieve steady state based
on UV254 absorbance and 30 min according to DOC (Fig. 4b). As
explained above (Section 3.2), the organic carbon responsible for
UV254 absorbance is more readily removed than the rest of the
DOC. The highest NOM removal efciency (Fig. 4a and b) and lowest
specic energy consumption (Fig. 4c) unexpectedly was achieved
for the highest inter electrode distance studied (2.8 cm). This is in
contrast with the results Feng et al. obtained [12], however Yildiz
et al. reported highest NOM removal efciency for the inter electrode distance of 5 cm [10,11]. The NOM removal efciency based
on UV254 absorbance and DOC was 77% and 69%, respectively. The
result can be explained that otation of hydrogen bubbles produced at the cathode as NOM removal path was more stabile and
ocks were easy to be oated when the inter electrode distance
was 2.8 cm. Interelectrode distances 1.2 cm and 2 cm were closed to

Fig. 4. NOM removal efciency based on UV254 absorbance (a), DOC (b) and specic
energy consumption (c) as a function of ECF treatment time and inter electrode distance. The ECF treatment was carried out at U = 17 V, Q = 3.6 l/h, initial groundwater
pH 5.0, conductivity = 1750 S/cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 ,DOC0 = 9.31 0.51 mg C/l.

E. Mohora et al. / Journal of Hazardous Materials 235236 (2012) 257264

261

Fig. 5. Effect of current density on the performance of the ECF reactor based on
UV254 absorbance (a) and DOC (b) as a function of treatment time. The ECF treatment
was carried out at Q = 6.4 l/h, d = 2.8 cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 , initial groundwater pH 5.0,
conductivity = 1750 S/cm, DOC0 = 9.31 0.51 mg C/l.

obstruct adequate mass transport in the reactor reducing its NOM

removal efciency rate and creating instability of the removal efciency over the treatment time (Fig. 4a). Thus, d = 2.8 cm as a most
favorable was selected for the following experiments.
3.4. Current density effect (i) on NOM and arsenic removal
In any EFC process the current density is the most important operational parameter setting the nal removal and dening
the specic energy and electrode consumption and so eventually the ultimate operating cost for the process [23]. The ECF
reactors NOM and arsenic removal was studied by conducting
experiments at current density values: 5.71 mA/cm2 , 5.78 mA/cm2 ,
11.80 mA/cm2 while ow rate, inter electrode distance, number of
electrodes and initial pH were kept constant (Q = 6.4 l/h, d = 2.8 cm,
A/V = 0.248 cm1 , initial groundwater pH 5.0).
Obtained results (Fig. 5) show that ECF reactor took approximately 10 min to achieve steady state according to UV254 and
30 min according to DOC. NOM in water are large organic molecules
that carry a negative charge giving them colloidal characteristics.
ECF is based on the fact that the stability of the colloids is inuenced

Fig. 6. Variation of treated groundwater temperature as a function of the operating current density and ECF treatment time. The ECF treatment was carried out
at Q = 6.4 l/h, d = 2.8 cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 , initial groundwater pH 5.0, conductivity = 1750 S/cm, DOC0 = 9.31 0.51 mg C/l.

by electric charges. Therefore if additional electrical charge is

supplied to the charged particles via ECF reactors electrodes,
the surface charge of NOM molecules is neutralized and several
molecules combine into larger and separable agglomerates. The
increase of the operating current density caused a decrease in reactor DOC removal efciency. It is a known fact that operating current
density in ECF processes directly determines the coagulant dosage
and the rate of bubble generation, which inuences both mixing
and mass transfer in the reactor. It is reported that at low operating
currents settling dominates, and as the current increases, the pollutant fraction that is removed by otation increases, although the
coagulant appears to be used less effectively [6]. Therefore at higher
operating current densities, bubble densities increase, resulting in a
greater upwards momentum ux and thus faster removal of NOM
and coagulant by otation from the active reactor volume to the
surface. Finally we could conclude that for higher operating current
densities more aluminum was available per unit of time in the ECF
reactor volume but its residence time in the active reactor volume
was shorter, which caused the decline of NOM removal efciency.
The inuence of the used operating current density on the variation of efuent groundwater pH value and temperature was studied
too (Figs. 6 and 7). For operating current densities of 5.71 mA/cm2 ,
5.78 mA/cm2 and 11.80 mA/cm2 over 90 min of ECF treatment, the
pH value of the efuent groundwater increased relative to the raw
groundwater by 6.9%, 11%, 31%, and the efuent groundwater temperature increased by 13.6% 12% and 34%, respectively. Initial water
pH value affects either distribution of aluminum hydrolyses products or structure of NOM directly [24,25]. When pH value is higher,
NOM takes more negative charge, and process needs more Al3+ to
neutralize the negative charge reducing removal efciency [12].
Therefore, it is evident that ECF process under higher operating
current density boost water pH increase over the treatment time
reducing NOM removal efciency.
The highest reactor NOM removal efciency obtained according to UV254 absorbance and DOC was 77% and 71% respectively,
and was achieved for a current density of 5.78 mA/cm2 . The
specic reactor energy and electrode consumption for operating
current density of 5.78 mA/cm2 were 2.01 kWh/m3 , 80 g Al/m3 ,
respectively. In addition, the specic reactor electrical energy consumption (Seec ) was 17.5 kWh/kg Al.

262

E. Mohora et al. / Journal of Hazardous Materials 235236 (2012) 257264

Fig. 7. Variation of treated groundwater pH as a function of the operating current density and ECF treatment time. The ECF treatment was carried
out at Q = 6.4 l/h, d = 2.8 cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 , pH 5.0, conductivity = 1750 S/cm,
DOC0 = 9.31 0.51 mg C/l.

The arsenic removal efciency achieved for operating current

density of 5.78 mA/cm2 was 80% relative to the raw groundwater
(residual Astotal concentration in the efuent groundwater sampled after 90 min of treatment was 9.2 g/l). Mechanisms of arsenic
removal by EC involve oxidation of As(III) in As(V) and subsequent
surface complexation with aluminum hydroxides [3].
This study evidently conformed that operating current density
is the key ECF reactor operational parameter dening coagulant
dose, variation of treated water pH and temperature over treatment
time, inuencing the dominant NOM separation mode and nally
dening the NOM and As removal efciency rate. Thus, the following experimental work was carried out using a current density of
5.78 mA/cm2 .
3.5. Effect of ow rate on NOM and arsenic removal
The effect of ow rate on ECF reactor NOM and arsenic removal
efciency was analyzed by conducting experiments at ow rate values: 4.3 l/h, 6.4 l/h, 10.3 l/h, or residence times 62.8 min, 42.1 min,
26.3 min, while the other selected parameters were kept constant
(d = 2.8 cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 , initial groundwater pH 5.0, U = 17 V,
i = 5.78 mA/cm2 , conductivity = 1750 S/cm).
The ow rate does not appear to have a large effect on NOM
removal by ECF reactor (Fig. 8) and after 1590 min of treatment,
the average UV254 absorbance reductions were 7277%, depending
on the ow rate values (4.310.3 l/h). The best NOM removal (77%)
results were obtained with a ow rate of 4.3 l/h.
The effect of the ow rate on efuent groundwater pH and temperature was also analyzed. In general, increase of the reactor ow
rate slows treated groundwater temperature and pH increase over
the treatment time. For the reactor ow rates of 4.3 l/h, 6.4 l/h,
10.3 l/h, treated water temperature has increased by 13%, 8.9% and
6%, relative to the raw groundwater temperature, for 90 min of
the treatment. In parallel, efuent water pH has increased by 17%
10% and 9%, relative to the initial groundwater pH value that was
adjusted to 5.
The impact of ow rate on Astotal removal was studied (Fig. 9).
The increase of the ow rate reduces reactors Astotal removal efciency. For ow rates of 4.3 l/h, 6.4 l/h and 10.3 l/h, the reduction in
arsenic content was 85%, 77% and 75%, respectively. A minimum
Astotal residual concentration of 5.3 g/l was obtained at a ow

Fig. 8. Effect of ow rate on ECF reactor NOM removal efciency based on

UV254 absorbance as a function of treatment time. The ECF treatment was carried
out at d = 2.8 cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 , pH 5.0, U = 17 V, i = 5.78 mA/cm2 , conductivity = 1750 S/cm, DOC0 = 9.31 mg C/l.

rate of 4.3 l/h in the efuent groundwater sampled after 90 min of

treatment.
3.6. Effect of passivation
One of the greatest operational issues with ECF is electrode passivation. This passive layer increases the applied potential and leads
to a waste of energy in ECF processes [1]. It is reported that 120 mg/l
is the critical NOM concentration in the treated water at which the
passive layer starts to form, from a point 5 min into treatment, on
the surface of the anode, preventing delivery of enough coagulant
[11]. The variation of the operating current as a function of applied
potential and treatment time has been analyzed.
The results obtained at 20 V (Fig. 10) show a signicant decrease
of 20% in the operating current, relative to the initial value, during
the 90 min of ECF treatment. This is attributed to aluminum anode
passivation. For voltages of 17 and 15 V, the current value change

Fig. 9. Astotal concentration as a function of ECF reactor ow rate. The ECF treatment was carried out at d = 2.8 cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 , pH 5.0, U = 17 V, i = 5.78 mA/cm2 ,
conductivity = 1750 S/cm, DOC0 = 9.31 0.51 mg C/l.

E. Mohora et al. / Journal of Hazardous Materials 235236 (2012) 257264

263

applied potential 17 V, inter electrode distance 2.8 cm, ow rate

4.3 l/h, A/V ratio 0.248 cm1 , initial groundwater pH value 5 and
60 mg/l Cl was present in the treated groundwater. The specic reactor energy and electrode consumption were 1.7 kWh/m3
and 66 g Al/m3 , respectively. The specic reactor electrical energy
consumption (Seec ) was 17.5 kWh/kg Al. ECF reactor took approximately 10 min to achieve steady state according to UV254 and
30 min according to DOC.
This study showed that ECF treatment is a promising purication
technology for the treatment of groundwater containing high concentrations of NOM and arsenic. Outputs of this study will be helpful
for further application in designing economically and environmentally sustainable ECF continuous ow reactors for the treatment of
raw groundwater polluted with NOM and As for small settlements.

Acknowledgements

Fig. 10. Variation of the operating current as a function of applied potential and treatment time. The ECF treatment was carried out at Q = 6.4 l/h,
d = 1.2 cm, A/V = 0.248 cm1 , initial groundwater pH 5.0, conductivity = 1750 S/cm,
DOC0 = 9.31 0.51 mg C/l.

This research was nanced by the Ministry of Education and

Science of the Republic of Serbia (Project No. III43005) and the
Provincial Secretariat for Science and Technological Development
of the Government of Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, Republic
of Serbia (Project No. APV 114-451-1985)

References
over 90 min of treatment was insignicant, decreasing by only 4%
relative to the initial value.
A recent study indicated that the electrolyte should contain
a minimum of 60 mg/l Cl to breakdown the anodic passivation
layer during ECF treatment [25]. In order to explore passivation,
60 mg/l Cl (as NaCl) was added to the raw groundwater. The NOM
removal achieved according to UV254 absorbance was not significantly improved compared to the results for treatment without
Cl addition. However, the operating current did not vary over the
90 min of treatment, indicating the breakdown of the anodic passivation layer, which was more important. Arsenic removal efciency
was 85% (residual Astotal concentration obtained was 6.2 g/l). The
presence of 60 mg/l Cl in the treated groundwater reduced reactor specic energy consumption by 15% (1.7 kWh/m3 ) and specic
aluminum consumption by 17% (66 g Al/m3 ), compared with the
results of groundwater treatment without addition of supporting
electrolyte in the same reactor operational conditions.
4. Conclusions
In this study NOM and arsenic removal was analyzed using the
laboratory scale continuous ow ECF reactor with bipolar plate
aluminum electrodes. The effects of the reactors various operational parameters on NOM and arsenic removal efciency as well
as energy efciency and electrode consumption were studied.
It was found that adding more than four electrodes to the ECF
reactor resulted in a decline in NOM removal efciency. NOM
removal is more efcient when the pH of the groundwater was
adjusted to 5. Increase of the operating current density caused a
slight decrease in NOM removal efciency. Effect from ow rate
on NOM removal efciency was not observable, however, increase
the ow rate was found to decrease Astotal removal efciency. A
concentration of 60 mg/l Cl in treated groundwater containing
9.31 0.51 mg C/l of NOM was sufcient for anode passivation layer
breakdown.
The highest achieved NOM removal according to UV254
absorbance and DOC was 77% and 71%, respectively, (relative to raw
groundwater) as well as arsenic removal efciency of 85% (6.2 g
As/l), meeting the drinking water standards of 10 g/l. The ECF reactor operational parameters were: current density 5.78 mA/cm2 ,

[1] D. Ghernaout, B. Ghernaout, A. Kellil, Natural organic matter and enhanced

coagulation as a link between coagulation and electrocoagulation, Desalin.
Water Treat. 2 (2009) 20032222.
[2] Y. Seida, Y. Nakano, Removal of humic substances by layered double hydroxide
containing iron, Water Res. 5 (34) (2000) 14871494.
[3] V. Pallier, G.F. Cathalifaud, B. Serpaud, Inuence of organic matter on arsenic
removal by continuous ow electrocoagulation treatment of weakly mineralized waters, Chemosphere 8 (2011) 2128.
[4] M.M. Emamjomeh, M. Sivakumar, Review of pollutants removed by electrocoagulation and electrocoagulation/otation processes, J. Environ. Manage. 90
(2009) 16631679.
[5] C. Riocordel, A. Darchen, D. Hadjiev, Electrocoagulationelectrootation as a
surface water treatment for industrial uses, Sep. Purif. Technol. 74 (2010)
342347.
[6] P.K. Holt, G.W. Barton, M. Wark, C.A. Mitchell, A quantitative comparison
between chemical dosing and electrocoagulation, Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 211 (2002) 233248.
[7] M.Y.A. Mollah, P. Morkovsky, J.A.G. Gomes, M. Kesmez, J. Parga, D.L. Cocke,
Fundamentals, present and future perspectives of electrocoagulation, J. Hazard.
Mater. 114 (2004) 199210.
[8] N.S. Kumar, S. Goel, Factors inuencing arsenic and nitrate removal from drinking water in a continuous ow electrocoagulation process, J. Hazard. Mater. 173
(2010) 528533.
[9] P.K. Holt, G.W. Barton, C.A. Mitchell, The future for electrocoagulation as a
localised water treatment technology, Chemosphere 59 (2005) 355367.
[10] Y.S. Yildiz, A.S. Koparal, S. Irdemez, B. Keskinler, Electrocoagulation of synthetically prepared waters containing high concentration of NOM using iron cast
electrodes, J. Hazard. Mater. B139 (2007) 373380.
[11] Y.S. Yildiz, A.S. Koparal, B. Keskinel, Effect of initial pH and supporting electrolyte on the treatment of water containing high concentration of humic
substances by electrocoagulation, Chem. Eng. J. 138 (2008) 6372.
[12] Q.Y. Feng, X. Li, Y. Cheng, Z. Lai, Removal of humic acid from groundwater by
electrocoagulation, J. China Univ. Mining Technol. 17 (2007) 520, 513-515.
[13] M. Vespsalainen, M. Ghiasvand, J. selin, J. Pienimaa, E. Repo, M. Pulliainen, M.
Sillanpaa, Investigation of the effects of temperature and initial sample pH on
natural organic matter (NOM) removal with electrocoagulation using response
surface methods (RSM), Sep. Purif. Technol. 69 (2009) 255326.
[14] IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer), IARC Monographs on the
Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk to Humans: Overall Evaluations of Carcinogenicity: An Updating of IARC Monographs, vol. 142 (7), International Agency
for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France, 1987, pp. 100206.
[15] World Health Organization, Guidelines for drinking water quality, vol.1, 2006,
pp. 306.
[16] P.R. Kumar, S. Sanjeev, C.K. Khilar, S.P. Mahajan, Removal of arsenic from water
by electrocoagulation, Chemosphere 5 (9) (2004) 12451252.
[17] J.R. Paraga, D.L. Cocke, J.K. Valenzuela, J.A. Gomez, M. Kesmez, G. Irwin, H.
Moreno, M. Weir, Arsenic removal via electrocoagulation from heavy metal
contaminated groundwater in La Magunera, Mexico, J. Hazard. Mater. B124
(2005) 247254.
[18] J.F. Martinez-Villafane, C.M. Ocampo, A.M. Garcia-Lara, Energy and electrode
consumption analyses of electrocoagulation for the removal of arsenic from
underground water, J. Hazard. Mater. 172 (2009) 16171622.

264

E. Mohora et al. / Journal of Hazardous Materials 235236 (2012) 257264

[19] A. Tubic, J. Agbaba, B. Dalmacija, I.I. Tumbas, M. Dalmacija, Removal of arsenic

and natural organic matter from groundwater using ferric and alum salts: a case
study of central Banat region (Serbia), J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 45 (2010)
363369.
[20] AWWAAPHAWEF Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 20th edition, American Public Health Association/American
Water Works Association/Water Environment Federation, Washington, DC,
1998.
[21] N. Mameri, A.R. Yeddou, H. Lounici, D. Belhocine, H. Grib, B. Bariou, Deuoridation of septentrional Sahara water of North Africa by electrocoagulation
process using bipolar aluminium electrodes, Water Res. 32 (1998) 16041612.
[22] D. Ghosh, C.R. Medhi, H. Solonki, M.K. Purkait, Decolorization of cri stal violet
Solution by electrocoagulation, J. Environ. Prot. Sci. 2 (2008) 2535.
[23] G. Chen, X.M. Chen, P.L. Yue, Electrocoagulation and electrootation of restaurant wastewater, J. Environ. Eng. 126 (2000) 858863.
[24] A.S. Koparal, Y.S. Yildiz, B. Keskinel, N. Demircioglu, Effect of initial pH on
the removal of humic substances from wastewater by electrocoagulation, Sep.
Purif. Technol. 59 (2008) 175182.
[25] G. Mouedhen, M. Feki, M.D.P. Wery, H.F. Ayedi, Behaviour of aluminium electrodes in electrocoagulation process, J. Hazard. Mater. 150 (2008) 124135.

[26] C. Phalakornkule, S. Polgumhang, W. Tongdaung, Performance of an electrocoagulation process in treating direct dye: batch and continuous upow
processes, World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 57 (2009) 277282.
[27] P.K. Holt, Electrocoagulation: unravelling and synthesizing the mechanisms
behind a water treatment process, PhD thesis, Faculty of Engineering, The
University of Sydney, 2003.
[28] T. Karanl, M.A. Schlautoman, I. Erdogan, Survey of DOC and UV measurement
practices with implications for SUVA determination, JAWWA 94 (12) (2002)
68.
[29] J.J. Molnar, J.R. Agbaba, B.D. Dalmacija, T.M. Klasnja, M.B. Dalmacija, M.M.
Kragulj, A comparative study of the effects of ozonation and TiO2 -catalyzed
ozonation on the selected chlorine disinfection by-product precursor content
and structure, Sci. Total Environ. 425 (2012) 169175.
[30] J.K. Edzvald, J.E. Tobiason, Enhanced coagulation: US requirements and a
broader view, Water Sci. Technol. 4 (1999) 4754.
[31] N. Her, G. Amy, D. Foss, J. Cho, Y. Yoon, P. Kosenka, Optimization of method
for detecting and characterizing NOM by HPLC-size exclusion chromatography with UV and on-line DOC detection, Environ. Sci. Technol. 36 (2002)
10691076.