In mid-2003, AdEdge was selected to implement three full-scale arsenic treatment demonstration projects with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) using its granular ferric oxide technology. At the Rimrock, Ariz., location, implementation began in September 2003 including engineering submittals and permitting by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. Upon completing site preparations and construction in early March 2004, AdEdge Technologies installed a new 100-gpm Adsorption Package Unit (APU) arsenic treatment system at the Montezuma Haven well site.
AdEdge Technologies installs a new 100-gpm Adsorption Package Unit arsenic treatment system at the Montezuma Haven well site in Rimrock, Ariz.
A joint study by AWWARF (American Water Works Association Research Foundation) and the U.S. EPA, POU/POE Implementation feasibility study for arsenic treatment, shows that the use of POU/POE solutions for arsenic removal is both efficacious and cost-effective.
The looming deadline for municipal systems to ensure an arsenic MCL (maximum contaminant level) of less than 10 ppb is a difficult--if not financially impossible--target for small systems across the US.
In early 2004, AdEdge was pre-qualified and invited to participate in an arsenic pilot study of commercial adsorption-based treatment technologies with Damon S. Williams & Associates (DSWA). As an outcome of the successful piloting and preliminary work with the engineer, AdEdge was chosen by Centennial Contractors to perform full-scale arsenic treatment using its granular ferric oxide adsorption technology at the New River Elementary School site in New River, Ariz., 15 miles north of Phoenix.
Full-scale arsenic treatment delivers clean water to New River Elementary School in Arizona
Many of these homeowners were unaware that arsenic was present in their wells and only became aware because they were either selling or buying a home.
on Private Wells Throughout the U.S. Place Homeowners at a Higher Risk
Emerging commercial technologies are replacing the "old standards" for small water system (SWS) applications. In contrast to large community systems, competitive economics, simple operation and low waste production will drive changes in technology and engineering. Some out-of-the-box thinking will be necessary in the shift to provide simpler, packaged or preengineered arsenic treatment systems.
Arsenic Treatment for Small Public Water Systems
What research is being done at University's throughout the US? Colleges and universities across the U.S. are continuing their efforts in educating the population on the subject of arsenic. Both public and private universities are contributing their time, money, and expertise in areas of arsenic research such as geochemistry, health effects, and treatment options. Research programs, such as the ones listed below, are just a glimpse of the ongoing studies for arsenic. Ongoing research is necessary in order to continue to develop efficient and cost-effective solutions for the far-reaching problem of arsenic contamination.
University Research Programs
Research on arsenic can be broken down into three general areas -- health effects, treatment options and cost evaluations.There are more than 1,000 published research papers on health effects alone. This section provides an over-view of the most prominent research related to these areas which have impacted EPA’s decisions. There also are links to research organizations that can provide access to the specific projects conducted.
Historical and On-going Research
Current Legislative Issues
In addition to officially sponsored research projects being performed throughout the world (see Section V for more information on research), many universities, government organizations and industry professionals are active in providing solutions to this issue. The following papers have been presented on arsenic treatment, health effects or policy issues at various tradeshows and conferences throughout the United States.
White papers on Arsenic
Consumers unwilling to drink arsenic contaminated water are demanding a more rapid implementation. Publicly owned utilities, however, will be held hostage from implementing a more rapid solution due to government approval cycles, annual budgets, required biding processes and slow implementation schedules. As a result, in-home treatment systems, which immediately can be installed, are a very popular treatment option for individual homeowners. Other advantages such as low implementation/operating costs and improved flexibility make the POU/POE approach option appealing.
Current Solutions and Practices