Specific Fluorescent Fingerprint of Organic Matter in Advanced Water Treatment and its Molecular Weight

Abstract:

In this research, the UV absorbance values of wavelength at 210 and 254 nm, excitation emission fluorescent matrix were measured for source water and treated water in CCL (Cheng Ching Lake) water treatment plant during five months. The whole data produced from EEFM was analyzed by PARAFAC operated in MATLAB software. The variation of molecular weight for organic matter was measured by HPLC (high performance liquid chromatography) with UV and fluorescent detectors. Observed from the variation of UV210/UV254, high value in treated water compared with source water was found. More molecular weight less than 5 k Da was formed in the treated water with relative to source water. Also, both major components in source water were located at wavelengths of excitation/emission of 250/410 nm and 230/330 nm and those in treated water were 240/410 nm and 220/290 nm. Also, the fluorescent intensity, long excitation wavelength was higher than short excitation wavelength in source water. This phenomena was opposite with treated water.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 448-453)
• Pages: 317-321
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.448-453.317
• Online since: October 2013
• Authors: Jing Wen Cao, Shao Wei Liao, Chung Yi Chung, Hwa Sheng Gau, Chun Yen Chiu, Wen Liang Lai*
• Keywords: Excitation Emission Fluorescent Matrix (EEFM), Molecular Weight, Parallel Factor Analysis

References

[1] W. Chen, P. Westerhoff, J.A. Leenheer, K. Booksh, Fluorescence Excitation-Emission Matrix Regional Integration to Quantify Spectra for Dissolved Organic Matter, Environmental science & technology, 37 (2003) 5701-5710.

DOI: 10.1021/es034354c

[2] C.A. Stedmon, S. Markager, R. Bro, Tracing dissolved organic matter in aquatic environments using a new approach to fluorescence spectroscopy, Marine Chemistry, 82 (2003) 239-254.

DOI: 10.1016/s0304-4203(03)00072-0

[3] S. Peldszus, C. Halle, R.H. Peiris, M. Hamouda, X. Jin, R.L. Legge, H. Budman, C. Moresoli, P.M. Huck, Reversible and irreversible low-pressure membrane foulants in drinking water treatment: Identification by principal component analysis of fluorescence EEM and mitigation by biofiltration pretreatment, Water research, 45 (2011).

DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.07.022

[4] Å. Rinnan, J. Riu, R. Bro, Multi-way prediction in the presence of uncalibrated interferents, Journal of Chemometrics, 21 (2007) 76-86.

DOI: 10.1002/cem.1037

[5] L.G. Thygesen, Å. Rinnan, S. Barsberg, J.K.S. Møller, Stabilizing the PARAFAC decomposition of fluorescence spectra by insertion of zeros outside the data area, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 71 (2004) 97-106.

DOI: 10.1016/j.chemolab.2003.12.012

[6] G.J. Hall, J.E. Kenny, Estuarine water classification using EEM spectroscopy and PARAFAC-SIMCA, Analytica chimica acta, 581 (2007) 118-124.

DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2006.08.034

[7] N. Her, G. Amy, H.R. Park, M. Song, Characterizing algogenic organic matter (AOM) and evaluating associated NF membrane fouling, Water research, 38 (2004) 1427-1438.

DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2003.12.008

[8] N. Her, G. Amy, J. Sohn, U. Gunten, UV absorbance ratio index with size exclusion chromatography (URI-SEC) as an NOM property indicator, Journal of Water Supply: Research and Technology—AQUA, 57 (2008) 35.

DOI: 10.2166/aqua.2008.029

[9] R. Bro, M. Vidal, EEMizer: Automated modeling of fluorescence EEM data, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 106 (2011) 86-92.

DOI: 10.1016/j.chemolab.2010.06.005