Clark and De Gage[2] found that the use of smaller amounts of coagulant
during the period of combined disinfection and coagulation resulted in
an increase of nearly 25 per cent in the quantity of water passed
through the filter between washings, and also in a material reduction of
the cost of chemicals, which averaged $2.62 per million gallons for
combined disinfection and coagulation as against $4.86 for coagulation
alone. The water used in these experiments was obtained from the
Merrimac River at Lawrence.
The effect of hypochlorite on the reduction of algæ growths on slow sand
filters was first noticed by Houston during the treatment of the Lincoln
supply in 1905. Two open service reservoirs were fed with treated water
and were themselves dosed from time to time. "Previous to 1905 they
developed seasonally most abundant growths, but during the hypochlorite
treatment it was noticed that they remained bright, clear, and
remarkably free from growths" (Houston[3]).
Ellms,[4] of Cincinnati, has also noted the effect of hypochlorite on
algæ. When the bleach was added to the coagulated water the destruction
of the plankton was not as satisfactory as had been anticipated and it
was found that large doses destroyed the coating of the sand particles
and rendered the filters less efficient. The use of bleach in the
filtered water basin was more successful and cleared it of troublesome
growths.
In 1916, during the treatment of the London Supply with bleach (dosage
0.5 p.p.m. of available chlorine), Houston made further observations on
this point. The Thames water, taken at Staines, had previously been
stored for considerable periods in reservoirs, but this necessitated
lifting the water by pumps which consumed large quantities of coal that
were urgently needed for national purposes. As a war measure, the
storage was eliminated and the water treated with hypochlorite at
Staines and allowed to flow by gravitation to the various works where
the slow sand filters are situated. The treatment resulted in a marked
reduction in the growths of algæ, the reduction in the area of filters
cleaned in 1916 (June to September) as compared with 1915 being as
follows:
Percentage
Filter Works. Reduction
(Approximate).
Grand Junction (Hampton) 6
Grand Junction (Kew) 43
East London (Sunbury) 30
Kempton Park 33
West Middlesex 56
A portion of this reduction can probably be attributed to the
elimination of storage.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account