مطالعات علوم محیط زیست

مطالعات علوم محیط زیست

حذف مواد آلی طبیعی در تصفیه آب آشامیدنی از طریق فرایند انعقاد

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده
مرکز تحقیلات سلامت و محیط زیست، دانشکده بهداشت ، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تبریز
10.22034/jess.2026.423705.2172
چکیده
ماده آلی طبیعی (NOM) از منابع طبیعی مانند مواد گیاخاکی و ترکیبات مصنوعی مانند شوینده ها، حلال ها، آفت کش ها و علف کش ها وارد آب می شوند. ترکیبات آلی به دلیل ویژگیهای خاص به روش های مختلف از قبیل تولید طعم و بوی نامطبوع، واکنش با ترکیبات کلردار و تشکیل فرآورده‌های جانبی گندزدایی (DBPs)، روی کیفیت آب آشامیدنی تاثیر می گذراند. اغلب این ترکیبات همانند تری‌هالومتان‌ها (THMs)، سرطان زا بوده و امکان حذف کامل آنها در فرایندهای تصفیه متداول آب ممکن نمی‌باشد. امروزه غلظت مواد آلی طبیعی در منابع آب‌های شیرین و نیز در پساب‌های فاضلاب خانگی در سراسر دنیا افزایش قابل‌توجهی داشته و یکی از چالش های اصلی در این حوزه به شمار می‌رود و نیاز به اقدامات عاجل و موثر در راستای توسعه فرآیندهای کارآمد تصفیه آب‌های آشامیدنی را توجیه می‌کند. در بررسی مروری حاضر، به مطالعات تحقیقاتی اخیر که با کاربرد انعقاد برای حذف مواد آلی طبیعی از منابع آب آشامیدنی سروکار دارند، پرداخته شده است. انعقاد یکی از پرکاربردترین فرآیندها برای تصفیه آب آشامیدنی به شمار رفته و در سالهای اخیر بهینه‌سازی فرآیند انعقاد در نتیجه برآورده‌سازی الزامات انعقاد پیشرفته به منظور حذف هر چه بیشتر مواد آلی طبیعی از اهمیت ویژه‌ای برخوردار می‌باشد. علاوه بر این، استفاده از روش‌های تلفیقی و فرایندهای ترکیبی از انعقاد و سایر فرآیندهای تصفیه آب، از جمله اکسیداسیون، فیلتراسیون غشایی، فرآیند جذب و غیره برای این منظور ارائه شده است.
کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Removal of natural organic matter in drinking water with coagulation

نویسنده English

Mohammad Ghanbari Ghozikali
Health and Environment Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences
چکیده English

Abstract
Natural organic matter (NOM) enters water from natural sources such as plant material and synthetic compounds such as detergents, solvents, pesticides and herbicides. Due to their specific characteristics, organic compounds affect the quality of drinking water in different ways, such as producing unpleasant taste and smell, reacting with chlorinated compounds and forming disinfection by-products (DBPs). Most of these compounds, like trihalomethanes, are carcinogenic and it is not possible to completely remove them in conventional water treatment processes. Today, the concentration of natural organic matter in fresh water sources as well as domestic wastewater effluents has increased significantly around the world and is considered one of the main challenges. Therefore, effective measures are needed in order to develop of efficient drinking water treatment processes. Coagulation is one of the most widely used processes in drinking water treatment. In recent years, improving the coagulation process and using advanced coagulation to NOM is very important. In this review, recent research studies dealing with the use of coagulation to remove natural organic matter from drinking water supplies have been presented and compared. Furthermore, integration schemes combining coagulation and other water treatment processes such as oxidation, membrane filtration, and adsorption have been presented. metal salts, inorganic and organic polymers of natural or synthetic type and various combination scenarios between them. Inorganic polymeric coagulants have shown better removal capacity for NOM and other organics from waters compared to coagulants such as ferric sulfate or aluminum sulfate. Electrocoagulation (EC) is an established water treatment technology that is widely used for the removal of organic and inorganic contaminants such as pesticides, dyes, heavy metals, etc. from drinking water sources.

Introduction
Natural organic matter (NOM) enters water sources from natural sources such as plant material and synthetic organic compounds such as detergents, solvents, pesticides, and herbicides. Organic compounds affect the quality of drinking water in different ways, such as producing unpleasant taste and smell, reacting with chlorinated compounds and forming disinfection by-products (DBPs). In fact, the presence of NOM in waters sources causes changes in their organoleptic properties and by causing things such as color, taste and smell, it reduces the quality of the water resources in question. Removing NOM from drinking water sources is considered an important issue in protecting the health of a society and ignoring it can be associated with challenges. Therefore, the conditions require that by using reliable and highly efficient water purification technologies, it is possible to remove NOM in water environments and prevent them from increasing their concentration in water sources. The aim of this review is to investigate the processes performed using different coagulation mechanisms and to make a comparative evaluation between them for the removal of NOM in drinking water.

Materials and methods
In the present review article, recent research studies dealing with the removal of natural organic matter from drinking water sources through coagulation are reviewed. In order to investigate the removal of NOM in the treatment of drinking water through the coagulation process, using different coagulants, a review of previous researches was carried out in the form of library studies, and the latest achievements about removing NOM were studied and finally its results were compiled in the form of a review article. In this study, recent research articles published in valid journals in the field of coagulation and removal of natural organic matter from drinking water sources through different coagulants. Also, a comparative evaluation of the efficiency of different coagulants and coagulation techniques to remove NOM from water resources has been done.

Results and discussion
NOM have a complex nature in terms of quantity and quality due to the prevailing spatial and temporal changes. This complex nature of NOM is one of the main challenges facing various water treatment techniques and methods that are used to remove NOM from drinking water sources. Based on this, in order to correctly choose the methods and technologies used in water treatment and to make the necessary predictions for the reactivity of these NOM with the chemicals in water, to specify the type of NOM and their different natures. It is very important and significantly effective in achieving high removal efficiency and reducing the potential f forming disinfection by-products (DBPs) due to the disinfection process. Dosage of coagulants and pH are among the main operational conditions affecting the coagulation process and the overall efficiency of this process depends on these factors. The efficiency of coagulation to remove NOM on the one hand mainly depends on the type and dose of coagulant, pH, mixing conditions and temperature and on the other hand the properties of natural organic substances including particle size, charge and hydrophobicity and the presence of divalent cations and destabilizing anions such as It depends on bicarbonate, chloride and sulfate ions.

Conclusion
One of the most suitable methods of water purification with the aim of removing NOM from drinking water sources is the use of coagulation processes. Optimizing the coagulation process in order to remove as much NOM as possible has been of considerable importance.
Some other achievements of this study include:
- Conventional coagulation process is usually not effective in removing organic materials with lower molecular weight and generally this process is effective in removing organic materials with higher molecular weight.
- The variable composition of NOM poses a serious challenge to conventional coagulation.
In order to remove natural organic materials, different types of coagulants including metal salts, inorganic and organic polymers of natural or synthetic type and different combination scenarios between them.
- In previous studies, inorganic polymeric coagulants showed better removal capacities toward NOM and other organic substances from waters, in comparison with coagulants such as ferric sulfate or aluminum sulfate.
- Many novel composite or hybrid coagulants have been developed via various combination.
Electrocoagulation (EC) is a well-established water treatment technology widely used for the removing of drinking water supplies from organic and inorganic pollutants such as pesticides, dyes, heavy metals, etc.
- Several kinds of metallic and polymeric coagulants are being applied in real case scenarios for the decontamination and treatment of drinking water sources. Nevertheless, despite their high efficiencies to remove NOM and other organic and inorganic contaminants, several issues such as includes residual metals and polymers in the treated effluents, relative high operating costs, pH change, and the generation of large sludge volumes were reported for large scale applications.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Natural Organic Matter (NOM)
Drinking water
Coagulation
Trihalomethanes (THMs)
  1. Adusei-Gyamfi, Junias, et al. 2019. Natural organic matter-cations complexation and its impact on water treatment: A critical review. Water research 160:130-147.
  2. Amy, Gary. 2008. Fundamental understanding of organic matter fouling of membranes. Desalination 231(1-3):44-51.
  3. Ang, WL, et al. 2016. Chitosan as natural coagulant in hybrid coagulation-nanofiltration membrane process for water treatment. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 4(4):4857-4862.
  4. Ayekoe, Chia Yvette Prisca, Didier Robert, and Droh Gone Lanciné. 2017. Combination of coagulation-flocculation and heterogeneous photocatalysis for improving the removal of humic substances in real treated water from Agbô River (Ivory-Coast). Catalysis Today 281:2-13.
  5. Bergamasco, Rosângela, et al. 2011. Performance of a coagulation–ultrafiltration hybrid process for water supply treatment. Chemical Engineering Journal 166(2):483-489.
  6. Bhatnagar, Amit, and Mika Sillanpää. 2017. Removal of natural organic matter (NOM) and its constituents from water by adsorption–a review. Chemosphere 166:497-510.
  7. Boyer, Treavor H. 2015. Removal of dissolved organic matter by magnetic ion exchange resin. Current Pollution Reports 1(3):142-154.
  8. Chekli, L, et al. 2017. Coagulation performance and floc characteristics of polytitanium tetrachloride (PTC) compared with titanium tetrachloride (TiCl4) and ferric chloride (FeCl3) in algal turbid water. Separation and Purification Technology 175:99-106.
  9. Chellam, Shankararaman, and Mutiara Ayu Sari. 2016. Aluminum electrocoagulation as pretreatment during microfiltration of surface water containing NOM: A review of fouling, NOM, DBP, and virus control. Journal of hazardous materials 304:490-501.
  10. Chen, Kai-Yue, et al. 2023. MSynergism of Fe and Al salts for the coagulation of dissolved organic matter: Structural developments of Fe/Al-organic matter associations. Chemosphere 316:137737.
  11. Chen, Wei, et al. 2015. Characterization and coagulation–flocculation performance of a composite coagulant: poly-ferric-aluminum-silicate-sulfate. Desalination and Water Treatment 56(7):1776-1786.
  12. Cheng, Xiaoxiang, et al. 2017. Ferrous iron/peroxymonosulfate oxidation as a pretreatment for ceramic ultrafiltration membrane: Control of natural organic matter fouling and degradation of atrazine. Water research 113:32-41.
  13. Chun, Youngpil, et al. 2015. A case study of fouling development and flux reversibility of treating actual lake water by forward osmosis process. Desalination 357:55-64.
  14. CIOBANU, RAMONA, MARCELA MIHAI, and CARMEN TEODOSIU.  2022. An overview of natural organic matter removal by coagulation in drinking water treatment. Gheorghe Asachi Technical University of Iaşi 68:69-92.
  15. Das, Pranjal P, Mukesh Sharma, and Mihir K Purkait. 2022. Recent progress on electrocoagulation process for wastewater treatment: A review. Separation and Purification Technology 292:121058.
  16. Davis, Christina C, and Marc Edwards. 2014. Coagulation with hydrolyzing metal salts: mechanisms and water quality impacts. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 44(4):30.347-3.
  17. Dayarathne, HNP, et al. 2021. Removal of natural organic matter from source water: Review on coagulants, dual coagulation, alternative coagulants, and mechanisms. Journal of Water Process Engineering 40:101820.
  18. Dermouchi, Aida, et al. 2015. Aspects regarding the electrocoagulation applications in the water and wastewater treatment. Journal of Engineering Studies and Research 21(2):26.
  19. Drikas, Mary, Mike Dixon, and Jim Morran. 2011. Long term case study of MIEX pre-treatment in drinking water; understanding NOM removal. Water research 45(4):1539-1548.
  20. Ghernaout, Djamel. 2020. Water Treatment Coagulation: Dares and Trends. Open Access Library Journal 7(8):1-18.
  21. Gibert, Oriol, et al. 2017. Removal of dissolved organic carbon and bromide by a hybrid MIEX-ultrafiltration system: insight into the behaviour of organic fractions. Chemical Engineering Journal 312:59-67.
  22. Go, Raymond John C, et al. 2021. Natural organic matter removal from raw surface water: Benchmarking performance of chemical coagulants through excitation-emission fluorescence matrix spectroscopy analysis. Water 13(2):146.
  23. Gobena, B, et al .2020. Evaluation of Residual Al3+ and Fe3+ Concentration in Blended Alum-Ferric Chloride Coagulant Use. Int J Water Wastewater Treat 6(3.(
  24. Golea, DM, et al. 2017 .THM and HAA formation from NOM in raw and treated surface waters. Water research 112:226-235.
  25. Gonzalez-Torres, A, et al. 2014. Examination of the physical properties of Microcystis aeruginosa flocs produced on coagulation with metal salts. Water research 60:197-209.
  26. Goslan, Emma H, et al. 2017. Carbonaceous and nitrogenous disinfection by-product formation from algal organic matter. Chemosphere 170:1-9.
  27. Hakizimana, Jean Nepo, et al. 2017. Electrocoagulation process in water treatment: A review of electrocoagulation modeling approaches. Desalination 404:1-21.
  28. Han, Nana, et al. 2015. Removal of sulfonated humic acid through a hybrid electrocoagulation–ultrafiltration process. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 54(21):5793-5801.
  29. Hu, Jingyi, et al. 2014. Anionic exchange for NOM removal and the effects on micropollutant adsorption competition on activated carbon. Separation and Purification Technology 129:25-31.
  30. Hu, WC, et al. 2015.   Enhanced coagulation for treating slightly polluted algae-containing raw water of the Pearl River combining ozone pre-oxidation with polyaluminum chloride (PAC). Desalination and Water Treatment 56(6):1698-1703.
  31. Huang, Xin, et al. 2016. Application of titanium sulfate in a coagulation–ultrafiltration process: a comparison with aluminum sulfate and ferric sulfate. RSC advances 6(55):49469-49477.
  32. Humbert, Hugues, et al. 2007. Combination of coagulation and ion exchange for the reduction of UF fouling properties of a high DOC content surface water. Water research 41.3811-3803: (17).
  33. Humbert, Hugues, et al. 2008. Natural organic matter (NOM) and pesticides removal using a combination of ion exchange resin and powdered activated carbon (PAC). Water research 42(6-7):1635-1643.
  34. Hussain, Sabir, et al. 2019. Coagulation of dissolved organic matter in surface water by novel titanium (III) chloride: mechanistic surface chemical and spectroscopic characterisation. Separation and Purification Technology 213:213-223.
  35. Hussain, Sabir, et al. 2014. Comparison of the coagulation performance of tetravalent titanium and zirconium salts with alum. Chemical Engineering Journal 254:635-646.
  36. Ibrahim, Azreen, Abu Zahrim Yaser, and Junidah Lamaming. 2021. Synthesising tannin-based coagulants for water and wastewater application: A review. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 9(1):105007.
  37. Jarvis, Peter, et al. 2012. Comparison of coagulation performance and floc properties using a novel zirconium coagulant against traditional ferric and alum coagulants. Water research 46(13):4179-418.7.
  38. Jiang, Jia-Qian. 2015. The role of coagulation in water treatment. Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 8:36-44.
  39. Jiang, Yanjun, et al. 2016. Impacts of ferrate oxidation on natural organic matter and disinfection byproduct precursors. Water research. 125-96:114.
  40. Jin, Xin, et al. 2020. Towards a comparison between the hybrid ozonation-coagulation (HOC) process using Al-and Fe-based coagulants: Performance and mechanism. Chemosphere 253:126625.
  41. Jing, Gaogui, et al. 2021. Electrocoagulation for industrial wastewater treatment: an updated review. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology 7(7):1177-1196.
  42. Jung, Chanil, et al. 2015. Removal of humic and tannic acids by adsorption–coagulation combined systems with activated biochar. Journal of hazardous materials 300:808-814.
  43. Karpinska, Anna M, et al. 2013. Applicability of MIEX® DOC process for organics removal from NOM laden water. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 20:3890-3899.
  44. Keeley, J, P Jarvis, and SJ Judd.2012. An economic assessment of coagulant recovery from water treatment residuals. Desalination 287:132-137.
  45. Keeley, James, et al. 2016. Coagulant recovery and reuse for drinking water treatment. Water research 88:502-509.
  46. Keucken, Alexander, et al. 2017. Combined coagulation and ultrafiltration process to counteract increasing NOM in brown surface water. Water 9(9):697.
  47. Kim, Hyun-Chul. 2015. Microfiltration of humic-rich water coagulated with cationic polymer: The effects of particle characteristics on the membrane performance. Journal of Membrane Science 475:349-356.
  48. Knauer, Katja, et al. 2017. The influence of particles on bioavailability and toxicity of pesticides in surface water. Integrated environmental assessment and management 13(4):585-600.
  49. Kristiana, Ina, Cynthia Joll, and Anna Heitz. 2011. Powdered activated carbon coupled with enhanced coagulation for natural organic matter removal and disinfection by-product control: Application in a Western Australian water treatment plant. Chemosphere 83(5):661-667.
  50. Kulishenko, AE, et al. 2020. Features of Application of Aluminum–Iron Composite Coagulants in Purification of Water with High Content of Natural Organic Substances. Journal of Water Chemistry and Technology 42:60-69.
  51. Kundzewicz, Zbigniew W, et al. 2014. Flood risk and climate change: global and regional perspectives. Hydrological Sciences Journal 59(1):1-28.
  52. Li, Shi, et al. 2022. Recent advances on cellulose-based nanofiltration membranes and their applications in drinking water purification: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production 333:130171.
  53. Listiarini, Karina, et al. 2010. Hybrid coagulation–nanofiltration membrane for removal of bromate and humic acid in water. Journal of Membrane Science 365(1-2):154-159.
  54. Ma, Jiangya, et al. 2022. Coagulation performance of Al/Fe based covalently bonded composite coagulants for algae removal. Separation and Purification Technology 285:120401.
  55. Malkoske, Tyler A, Pierre R Bérubé, and Robert C Andrews. 2020. Coagulation/flocculation prior to low pressure membranes in drinking water treatment: a review. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology 6(11):2993-3023.
  56. Matilainen, Anu, et al. 2011. An overview of the methods used in the characterisation of natural organic matter (NOM) in relation to drinking water treatment. Chemosphere. 1442-1431 :( 11)83.
  57. Matilainen, Anu, Mikko Vepsäläinen, and Mika Sillanpää. 2010. Natural organic matter removal by coagulation during drinking water treatment: A review. Advances in colloid and interface science 159(2):189-197.
  58. Mergen, Max RD, et al. 2008. Magnetic ion-exchange resin treatment: Impact of water type and resin use. Water research 42(8-9):1977-1988.
  59. Metsämuuronen, Sari, et al. 2014. Natural organic matter removal from drinking water by membrane technology. Separation & Purification Reviews 43.16-1 :( 1).
  60.  Moussa, Dina T, et al. 2017. A comprehensive review of electrocoagulation for water treatment: Potentials and challenges. Journal of environmental management 186:24-41.
  61. Naceradska, Jana, Lenka Pivokonska, and Martin Pivokonsky. 2019. On the importance of pH value in coagulation. Journal of Water Supply: Research and Technology—AQUA 68(3):222-230.
  62. Ng, Mega, et al. 2013. Understanding effects of water characteristics on natural organic matter treatability by PACl and a novel PACl-chitosan coagulants. Journal of hazardous materials 263:718-725.
  63. Nguyen, Tien Vinh, et al. 2011. Removal of organic matter from effluents by Magnetic Ion Exchange (MIEX®). Desalination 276(1-3):96-102.
  64. Ntwampe, IO, FB Waanders, and JR Bunt. 2016. Reactivity of Fe salts in the destabilization of acid mine drainage employing mixing and shaking techniques without pH adjustment. International Journal of Mineral Processing 146:65-73.
  65. Okoro, Benjamin U, et al. 2021. Natural organic matter (NOM) and turbidity removal by plant-based coagulants: A review. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 9(6):106588.
  66. Oladoja, Nurudeen Abiola. 2015. Headway on natural polymeric coagulants in water and wastewater treatment operations. Journal of Water Process Engineering 6:174-192.
  67. Oladoja, Nurudeen Abiola. 2016. Advances in the quest for substitute for synthetic organic polyelectrolytes as coagulant aid in water and wastewater treatment operations. Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy 3:47-58.
  68. Park, Hanbai, et al. 2016. Water blending effects on coagulation-flocculation using aluminum sulfate (alum), polyaluminum chloride (PAC), and ferric chloride (FeCl3) using multiple water sources. Desalination and Water Treatment 57(16):7511-7521.
  69. Santschi, PH, et al. 2017. Recent advances in the detection of specific natural organic compounds as carriers for radionuclides in soil and water environments, with examples of radioiodine and plutonium. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 171:226-233.
  70. Sapingi, Mohd Sharizal Mohd, Munirah Pishal, and Mohamad Fared Murshed. 2017. Natural organic matters removal efficiency by coagulation. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2017. Vol. 1892. AIP Publishing.
  71. Särkkä, Heikki, Mikko Vepsäläinen, and Mika Sillanpää. 2015. Natural organic matter (NOM) removal by electrochemical methods—A review. Journal of electroanalytical chemistry 755:100-108.
  72. Saxena, Kanika, Urmila Brighu, and Aditya Choudhary. 2018. Parameters affecting enhanced coagulation: a review. Environmental Technology Reviews 7(1):156-176.
  73. Sharp, Emma L, Simon A Parsons, and Bruce Jefferson. 2006. Seasonal variations in natural organic matter and its impact on coagulation in water treatment. Science of the Total Environment 363(1-3):183-194.
  74. Shen, Xue, et al. 2017. Effect of the dosage ratio and the viscosity of PAC/PDMDAAC on coagulation performance and membrane fouling in a hybrid coagulation-ultrafiltration process. Chemosphere 173:288-298.
  75. Sillanpää, Mika, et al. 2018. Removal of natural organic matter in drinking water treatment by coagulation: A comprehensive review. Chemosphere 190:54-71.
  76. Sudoh, Ryou, et al. 2015. Removal of dissolved humic acid from water by coagulation method using polyaluminum chloride (PAC) with calcium carbonate as neutralizer and coagulant aid. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 3(2):770-774.
  77. Sun, Weiguang, et al. 2016. Effect of aluminum speciation on fouling mechanisms by pre-coagulation/ultrafiltration process with different NOM fractions. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 23:17459-17473.
  78. Tahreen, Amina, Mohammed Saedi Jami, and Fathilah Ali. 2020. Role of electrocoagulation in wastewater treatment: A developmental review. Journal of Water Process Engineering 37:101440.
  79. Ulu, Feride, et al. 2015. An evaluation on different origins of natural organic matters using various anodes by electrocoagulation. Chemosphere 125:108-114.
  80. Umar, Muhammad, Felicity Roddick, and Linhua Fan. 2016. Comparison of coagulation efficiency of aluminium and ferric-based coagulants as pre-treatment for UVC/H2O2 treatment of wastewater RO concentrate. Chemical Engineering Journal 284:841-849.
  81. Uyguner, Ceyda Senem, et al. 2007. Evaluation of adsorption and coagulation characteristics of humic acids preceded by alternative advanced oxidation techniques. Desalination 210(1-3):183-193.
  82. Wan, Yang, et al. 2019. Reduction of organic matter and disinfection byproducts formation potential by titanium, aluminum and ferric salts coagulation for micro-polluted source water treatment. Chemosphere 219:28-35.
  83. Wang, Jiangting, et al. 2016. Effect of aluminum speciation and pH on in-line coagulation/diatomite microfiltration process: correlations between aggregate characteristics and membrane fouling. Journal of Molecular Liquids 224:492-501.
  84. Wang, Wendong, et al. 2014. Effects of UV radiation on humic acid coagulation characteristics in drinking water treatment processes. Chemical Engineering Journal 256:137-143.
  85. Wang, Zhenbei, et al. 2017. Insight into the combined coagulation-ultrafiltration process: The role of Al species of polyaluminum chlorides. Journal of Membrane Science 529:80-86.
  86. Watson, Kalinda, Maria José Farré, and Nicole Knight. 2015. Enhanced coagulation with powdered activated carbon or MIEX® secondary treatment: A comparison of disinfection by-product formation and precursor removal. Water research 68:454-466.
  87. Wei, Yanxin, et al. 2016. Characterization and coagulation–flocculation behavior of an inorganic polymer coagulant–poly-ferric-zinc-sulfate. Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 58:351-356.
  88. Xu, Jie, et al. 2016. Evaluation of enhanced coagulation coupled with magnetic ion exchange (MIEX) in natural organic matter and sulfamethoxazole removals: the role of Al-based coagulant characteristic. Separation and Purification Technology 167:70-78.
  89. Xu, Zhizhen, et al. 2013. Hybrid treatment process of using MIEX and high performance composite coagulant for DOM and bromide removal. Journal of Environmental Engineering 139(1):79-85.
  90. Yu, Wen-zheng, et al. 2013. Comparison of FeCl3 and alum pre-treatment on UF membrane fouling. Chemical Engineering Journal 234:158-165.
  91. Yusuf, Ahmed, et al. 2020. A review of emerging trends in membrane science and technology for sustainable water treatment. Journal of Cleaner Production 266:121867.
  92. Zhan, Xiao, et al. 2010. Removal natural organic matter by coagulation–adsorption and evaluating the serial effect through a chlorine decay model. Journal of hazardous materials 183(1-3):279-286.
  93. Zhang, Zhilin, et al. 2014. Comparison of coagulation performance and floc properties of a novel zirconium-glycine complex coagulant with traditional coagulants. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 21:6632-6639.
  94. Zhao, Yanxia, et al. 2017. Polytitanium sulfate (PTS): Coagulation application and Ti species detection. Journal of Environmental Sciences 258:52:250.
  95. Zhao, YX, et al. 2013. Characterization of coagulation behavior of titanium tetrachloride coagulant for high and low molecule weight natural organic matter removal: The effect of second dosing. Chemical Engineering Journal 228:516-525.
  96. Zhao, YX, et al. 2014. Coagulation by titanium tetrachloride for fulvic acid removal: Factors influencing coagulation efficiency and floc characteristics. Desalination 335(1):70-77.
  97. Zhao, YX, et al. 2015. Comparison of a novel polytitanium chloride coagulant with polyaluminium chloride: coagulation performance and floc characteristics. Journal of environmental management 147:194-202.