Arsenik Kirliliği Bakımından Harran Ovası Yeraltı Sularının Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Suda özellikle yeraltı suyunda arsenik (As) kirliliği, majör sağlık sorunlarına yol açmaktadır. Arsenik konsantrasyonu içme suyunda düşük konsantrasyonda bulunsa bile ciddi sağlık etkilerine sebep olabilir ve bunun sonucunda son zamanlarda As giderim metotları önem kazanmıştır. Bu çalışmada, Ortadoğu’nun en büyük yeraltı suyu rezervlerine sahip olan Harran Ovası’nda yer alan on kuyuda Ekim ve Mart aylarında As konsantrasyonu izlenmiştir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, As ile kirlenmiş bir yeraltı suyunun doğru arıtım metoduyla iyileştirilmesi için uygun arıtım metodunu seçmektir. Analizlere göre, As konsantrasyonunu sınır değerini (10 ppb) aşan hiçbir kuyu yoktur. Sonuçlar göstermektedir ki, Ekim ayındaki As konsantrasyonu Mart ayındakinden daha düşüktür. Mart ayında, en yüksek As konsantrasyonu Yaygılı kuyusunda 4,12 ppb olarak tespit edilmiştir. Ozanlar kuyusu Ekim ve Mart aylarında <0,5 ppb değerleriyle en düşük As konsantrasyonuna sahiptir. Ekim ayında en yüksek As konsantrasyonu 2,39 ppb olup Çamlıdere kuyusundadır. Çamlıdere ve Yaygılı kuyuları için As giderim metotları araştırılmış ve giderim metotları (koagülasyon ve flokülasyon, adsorpsiyon, membran prosesleri, ileri oksidasyon prosesleri, elektrokoagülasyon, biyoçar) tartışılmıştır. Değerlendirmenin sonunda, en iyi As giderim metodunun avantajları düşünüldüğünde biyoçar uygulaması olabileceği öngörülmektedir.

Keywords

• Arsenik,biyoçar,yeraltısuyu,Harran Ovası,giderim metotları

Project Number

18081

Assessment of Harran Plain Groundwater in Terms of Arsenic Contamination

Abstract

Arsenic (As) contamination in water, especially in groundwater, has led to major health problems. Due to the recognition that As at low concentrations in potable water causes crucial health effects, As removal methods have gained significant importance in recent years. In this study, As concentration was monitored in October and March in ten observation wells located in Harran Plain, which has the largest groundwater reserves in the Middle East. The main aim of this study is to select the proper treatment method for remediation of a groundwater resource polluted with As. According to the analyses, there was no well that exceeded the limit for As concentration (10 ppb). The results revealed that As concentrations in October were lower than in March. In March, the highest As concentration was observed in Yaygılı well with the value of 4.12 ppb. Ozanlar well had the lowest As concentration with the value of <0.5 ppb. In October, the highest As concentration was 2.39 ppb in Çamlıdere well. For Çamlıdere and Yaygılı wells, As removal methods (coagulation and flocculation, adsorption, membrane processes, advanced oxidation processes, electrocoagulation, biochar) were investigated and discussed. As a result of the assessment, it was estimated that the best available As removal method could be biochar application considering its advantages.

Keywords

• Arsenic,biochar,groundwater,Harran Plain,removal methods

Supporting Institution

HÜBAK

Project Number

18081

Thanks

This study was supported by Harran University Scientific Research Council (HUBAK) with the project number of 18081.

References

1. American Public Health Association (APHA), American Water Works Association, 1995. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, USA.
2. Baba, A., Saroglu, F., Akkuş, İ., Ozel, N., Yesilnacar, M.I., 2019. Geological and hydrogeochemical properties geothermal systems in the southeastern region of Turkey. Geothermics, 78, 255-271.
3. Bakshi, S., Banik, C., Rathke S.J., Laird, D.A., 2018. Arsenic sorption on zero-valent iron-biochar complexes. Water Research, 137, 153-163.
4. Choonga, T.S.Y., Chuaha, T.G., Robiaha, Y., Koaya, F.L.G., Aznib, I., 2007. Arsenic toxicity, health hazards and removal techniques from water: an overview. Desalination, 217, 139-166.
5. Derin, P., 2019. Karaali (Şanlıurfa) Jeotermal Sahasının Ağır Metal Kirliliği Açısından Araştırılması. Harran Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Şanlıurfa, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 73 s., (yayımlanmış).
6. DSI, 1972. Harran Ovası Hidrojeolojik Etüt Raporu,
7. DSI Genel Müdürlüğü Matbaası, Ankara, 49 s.
8. DSI, 2003. Harran Ovasında Tuzluluk ve Drenaj Problemi, Özet Rapor. Devlet Su İşleri, Şanlıurfa, 10 s.

9. Eguez, H.E., Cho, E.H., 1987. Adsorption of arsenic on activated charcoal, The Journal of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, 39, 38–41.
10. Frank, P., Clifford, D., 1986. Arsenic III oxidation and removal from drinking water. US Environ Protection Agency Report. EPA-600-52-86/021.
11. Hering, J.G., Elimelech, M., 1995. International perspective on arsenic in groundwater: problems and treatment strategies. Proc. AWWA, Annual Conference.
12. Jain, C.K. and Ali, I., 2000. Arsenic: occurrence, toxicity and speciation techniques. Water Research, 34 (17), 4304-4312.
13. Kang, M., Kawasaki, M., Tamada, S., Kamei, T., Magara, Y., 2000. Effect of pH on the removal of arsenic and antimony using reverse osmosis membranes. Desalination, 131, 293-298.
14. McNeill, L.S., Edwards, M., 1995. Soluble arsenic removal at water treatment plants. Journal American Water Works Association (AWWA), 87, 105-113.
15. Mollah, M.Y.A., Morkovsky, P., Gomes, J.A.G., Kesmez, M., Parga, J., Cocke, D.L., 2004. Fundamentals, present and future perspectives of electrocoagulation. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 114, 199-210.
16. Niazi, N.K., Bibi I., Shahid, M., 2018. Arsenic removal by perilla leaf biochar in aqueous solutions and groundwater: An integrated spectroscopic and microscopic examination. Environmental Pollution, 232, 31-41.
17. Nidheesh, P.V., Singh, T.S.A., 2017. Arsenic removal by electrocoagulation process: Recent trends and removal mechanism. Chemosphere, 81, 418-432.
18. Qambrani, N.A., Rahman, M.M., Won, S., 2017. Biochar properties and eco-friendly applications for climate change mitigation, waste management, and wastewater treatment: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 79, 255–273.
19. Robertson, F.N., 1989. Arsenic in ground water under oxidizing conditions, south-west United States. Environmental Geochemistry Health, 11, 171–176.
20. Saitúa, H., Campderrós, M., Cerutti, S., Pérez, A., 2005. Padilla effect of operating conditions in removal of arsenic from water by nanofiltration membrane. Desalination, 172, 173–180.
21. Ucar, C., Baskan, M.B., Pala, A., 2013. Arsenic removal from drinking water by electrocoagulation using iron electrodes. Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, 30, 1889-1895.
22. Vasudevan, S., Lakshmi, J., Sozhan, G., 2010. Studies relating to removal of arsenate by electrochemical coagulation: optimization, kinetics, coagulant characterization. Separation Science and Technology, 45, 1313-1325.
23. WHO (World Health Organization), 2011. Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44584/9789241548151_eng.pdf?sequence=1 10 October 2019.
24. Yeşilnacar, M.I., Güllüoğlu, M.S., 2008. Hydrochemical characteristics and the effects of irrigation on groundwater quality in Harran Plain, GAP Project, Turkey. Environmental Geology, 54, 183-196.
25. Yuan, T., Luo, Q.F., Hu, J.Y., Ong, S.L., Ng, W.J., 2003. A study on arsenic removal from household drinking water. Journal of Environmental Science and Health; Part A, 38, 1731-1744.
26. Yuan, H., Lu, T., Wang, Y., Chen Y., Lei, T., 2016. Sewage sludge biochar: Nutrient composition and its effect on the leaching of soil nutrients. Geoderma, 267, 17–23.
27. Zouboulis, A., Katsoyiannis, I., 2002. I. Removal of arsenates from contaminated water by coagulation–direct filtration. Separation Science and Technology, 37, 2859-2873.