Chlorine Dioxide Water Treatment Replacement Applications with Hydrogen Peroxide
For over 50 years, pre-chlorinating the influent has been the standard treatment program to keep hydrogen sulfide (H2S) from entering wastewater treatment plants. Due
to regulations and safety concerns, however, an increasing number of
POTW's have revisited their approach and found a different answer -
hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). Documented results at numerous municipal treatment facilities have proven that H2O2
can replace Chlorine Dioxide Water Treatment Replacement Applications
with Hydrogen Peroxidewith little to no cost increases and notable
benefits to downstream plant operations.
Reasons for Increasing Use of Hydrogen Peroxide for Sulfide Control
Reasons for the shift from chlorine to H2O2 include:
- Efficient reaction of H2O2 with H2S
- Lower cost of H2O2 compared to sodium hypochlorite
- Industry trend to eliminate gas chlorine and its associated risks
Efficient reaction of Hydrogen Peroxide with Hydrogen Sulfide
At the pH of municipal wastewaters (typically around 7), the oxidative reaction of H2O2 with sulfide is as follows, yielding elemental sulfur and water.
Therefore, 1 mg/L H2O2 (100%) is theoretically required to oxidize 1 mg/L H2S
(a 1:1 dose ratio). In practice, slightly higher dose ratios (e.g.
1.2-1.5 : 1) are typically required for effective headworks H2S
control. The reaction efficiency depends on many factors, the most
important of which are available reaction time and duration of control.
The optimal range is typically between 5-20 minutes and 1-2 hours.
Operating outside of this range is most likely the reason why dose
ratios reported in some of literature are 4-8 times the theoretical
requirement. However, as the examples below show (see Figure 1),
practical ratios much closer to theoretical are attainable if one can
operate nearer to the optimal range.
Figure 1. Effective H2O2 : Sulfide dose ratios for various headworks applications
Location | Effective | Available | Aqueous Sulfide Level |
Dose Ratio | Reaction | Before (mg/L) | After (mg/L) | Removal % |
San Jose, CA | 1.4 | 5 - 10 min | 2 - 4 | 0.3 - 0.5 | 80 - 90 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
MWRA (Boston, MA) | 1.3 | 8 - 10 min | 3 - 5 | 0.2 - 0.3 | 90 - 95 |
One concern expressed with changing to H2O2
is what becomes of the excess chemical. Unlike chlorine or
hypochlorite, it does not react with ammonia or the many organics
present in the wastewater. In fact, it naturally decomposes to
dissolved oxygen (D.O.) and water. This added D.O. has practical value
in helping to control sulfide generation in downstream primary
clarifiers, an aspect not afforded by chlorine or hypochlorite. The
decomposition reaction of H2O2 is often referred to as the "preventative" mechanism and is represented as:
Lower cost of hydrogen peroxide compared to sodium hypochlorite
A
typical first response when searching for alternatives to gas chlorine
might be to change to sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), which is not a
PSM-listed material. This is not a perfect substitution, however, as
NaOCl costs about five times chlorine on an active basis. As a result,
other non-chlorine H2S control agents must be considered. In this case, H2O2 becomes the best option as the standard strengths of H2O2 used at wastewater treatment facilities (35% and 50%) are exempt from the PSM ruling. Furthermore, it has been proven that H2O2 is considerably cheaper than NaOCl, with the actual costs being closer to chlorine (see Figure 2) for headworks H2S control.
Figure 2. Comparative costs for headworks odor control chemicals - (typical costs to treat 200 lbs/day of liquid-phase H2S, e.g., 5 mg/L in 5 mgd)
Oxidizer | Practical Weight | Typical | Requirement | Effective Cost |
Ratio (as 100%) | Unit Cost | (per day) | ($ per day) |
Chlorine (1-ton cylinders) | 6 - 8 : 1 | $250/Ton | 0.6 - 0.8 Tons | $150 - $180 |
Sodium Hypochlorite (12.5%, 1.1 lbs/gal) | 6 - 8 : 1 | $0.40/Gal | 960 - 1,280 Gal | $380 - $510 |
Hydrogen Peroxide(50%, 5.0 lbs/gal) | 1.2 - 1.5 : 1 | $3.45/Gal | 48 - 60 Gal | $165 - $210 |
Note:
The costs indicated above for hydrogen peroxide include supply of
storage and handling equipment, maintenance and technical support.
Industry trend to eliminate gas chlorine and its associated risks.
Various
regulatory agencies have been making concerted efforts to increase
safety. For example, OSHA's Process Safety Management (PSM) standard,
29 CFR 1910.119, requires that facilities undergo comprehensive
preparedness for catastrophic releases of certain toxic materials. This
involves an analysis of process hazards, standard operating procedures,
employee training, incident investigations, emergency planning and
response, and periodic compliance audits. As a toxic compressed gas,
chlorine is subject to these regulations if stored in quantities >
1,500 lbs. This includes the standard industry packaging unit - one-ton
cylinders. Continuing the use of chlorine gas becomes less attractive,
especially when the costs for POTWs to comply with just this one law run
in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. As a result, treatment
facilities turn to non PSM-listed materials as alternatives in an effort
to keep costs down.
Summary
The trend over the past 15+
years at major municipalities is to replace chlorine with hydrogen
peroxide for odor control at treatment plants. Hydrogen peroxide is a
proven cost effective method for controlling sulfide problems at
headworks and primary treatment operations within the plant. It is more
cost effective than sodium hypochlorite and has the added benefit of
eliminating the safety, health and regulatory concerns associated with
gas chlorine.
Back to top
Get More Information
Contact USP Technologies for more information on our products and services: