4.7 Article

Analysis and evaluation of chlorinated persistent organic compounds and PAHs in sludge in Korea

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 74, Issue 3, Pages 441-447

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.09.059

Keywords

Sludge; PCDD/Fs; PCBS; OCPs; PAHs; Chlorophenols

Funding

  1. Korean Government (MOEHRD) [KRF-2006331-D00280]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The concentrations of 12 POPs listed in the Stockholm convention, chlorophenols (CPs) and PAHs were investigated in sludge samples from wastewater and sewage treatment plants (WWTPs and STPs). The concentrations of PCDD/Fs in the wastewater sludge ranged from 0.189 to 1092 ng-TEQ kg(-1) dry wt., and most of the sludge samples had levels below the EU guideline for the land application of PCDD/Fs (<100 ng-TEQ kg(-1) dry wt.) except one sample. Co-PCB congeners were analyzed from four WWTPs, with total concentrations ranging from 0.265 to 26.6 ng-TEQ kg(-1) dry wt., which were similar to the results obtained from previous studies. The levels of PCDD/Fs and Co-PCBs varied according to the main source of the influent to each WWTP and the paper industry was the main source of these compounds in the sludge due to the chlorine bleaching process. In case of OCPs, HCB and p,p'-DDE were detected at relatively high levels in the sludge samples compared to other target compounds, ranging from 1.30 to 21.5 mu g kg(-1) dry wt. and 0.758 to 14.8 mu g kg(-1) dry wt., respectively. Different OCP distribution patterns were observed according to sludge types. with HCB and DDTs being dominant in the sludge from WWTPs and STPs, respectively. The total levels of PAHs and CPs ranged from 1.24 to 44.9 mg kg(-1) dry wt. and 0.340 to 3.85 mg kg(-1) dry wt., respectively. The PAHs and CPs were also shown to have various distribution patterns. possibly due to the different wastewater sources to the WWTPs. (0 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available