Arsenic in Argentina: technologies for arsenic removal from

groundwater sources, investment costs and waste management

practices

Marta I. Littera,b,c*, Ana M. Ingallinellac,d, Valentina Olmosc,e, Marianela Savioc,f,

Gonzalo Difeoc,g, Lía Bottoc,h, Elsa Mónica Farfán Torresc,i, Sergio Taylorc,j, Sofía

Frangiec,g, Jorge Herkovitsc,k, Isidoro Schalamukc,l, María José Gonzálezl, Eliana

Berardozzic,m, Fernando S. García Einschlagc,n, Prosun Bhattacharyao,p, Arslan Ahmado,q,r

a Gerencia Química, Comisión Nacional de Energía Atómica, CONICET, San Martín,

Prov. de Buenos Aires, Argentina

b Instituto de Investigación e Ingeniería Ambiental, Universidad Nacional de General

San Martín, Campus Miguelete, San Martín, Prov. of Buenos Aires, Argentina

c Red de Seguridad Alimentaria de CONICET, Argentina

d Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Argentina,

e Facultad de Farmacia y Bioquímica, UBA, Argentina,

f INCITAP y Depto. Química, FCEyN-UNLPam, Argentina

g INTI Química, Argentina

h CEQUINOR-CCT La Plata-CICPBA-UNLP, Argentina

i INIQUI - Universidad Nacional de Salta, Argentina

j Autoridad del Agua, Prov. de Buenos Aires, Argentina

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: marta.litter@gmail.com (Marta I. Litter)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

1

k Instituto de Ciencias Ambientales y Salud, Fundación PROSAMA, CONICET,

Argentina

l INREMI-CICPBA-UNLP-CONICET, Argentina

m INIFTA-CCT La Plata, Dto. Hidráulica-Facultad de Ingeniería, UNLP, Argentina

n INIFTA-CCT La Plata, Fac. Cs. Exactas-UNLP, Argentina,

o KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden

p University of Southern Queensland, Australia

q KWR Water Cycle Research Institute, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands

r Department of Environmental Technology, Wageningen University and Research

(WUR), Wageningen, The Netherlands

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

Fig. S1. Material recovered from wastes of water treatment plants, used to remove As

from water through adsorption technologies. A view of the plant is included.

Fig. S2. Community initiative of local drillers of Bangladesh in the search of safe

sediments for installation of tubewells based on the color of the sediments (von

Brömssen et al., 2007).

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

Fig. S3. RO plant in Venado Tuerto (Santa Fe) (Olivieri and Pagliano, 2010).

Fig. S4. Rural device for As removal, designed by INTI-Química, based on the

coagulation-filtration technology.

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

Fig. S5. Map of the rural schools in Chaco where devices for As removal have been

installed.

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

Fig. S6. Experimental plant in School Nº 1, Punta Indio, Buenos Aires.

Fig. S7. Small scale prototype based on the ZVI technique developed at the Hydraulic

Department, Engineering Faculty of UNLP.

Fig. S8. Pilot plant based on the ZVI technique designed for field tests.

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

Fig. S9. Treatment plants installed in the Chaco Salteño by UNSa-INIQUI/CONICET.

Fig. S10. Bottles with TiO2 impregnated in the wall or containing materials impregnated

with TiO2 (Meichtry et al., 2007).

School No. 4627 Palo a Pique

Access to the school

Tanks installed outsideInstallation of new tanks in the kitchen

Installation of the system

Assembly of the filters

76

77

78

79

80

81

8

2

82

34

Fig. S11. Applicable technologies for As abatement according to the water source quality and the population size (Instituto

Nacional de Tecnología Industrial, 2009).

9

5

83

84

67

Fig. S12. Dewatered sludges from the As removal plant of Lezama, Buenos Aires

(Crisanto, 2012).

Table S1

Wastes generated in As removal processes (Clancy et al., 2013).

Process Wastes Type of wastes

Coagulation-adsorption-

filtration

Solids deposited in a

sedimentation tank

Backwashing of filters

Very dilute semiliquid

with ca. 2-8% solids

Ionic exchange Exhausted resins

Regeneration agents

Solid and liquid

10

8

85

86

87

88

89

90

910

Membrane technologies Exhausted membranes

Liquids from chemical

cleanings

Solid-liquid from

chemical cleanings

Activated alumina Regeneration agents and

exhausted adsorbents

Liquid and solid

Iron based adsorbents Washings

Exhausted adsorbents

Liquid and solid

Fig. S13. Open field close to the Lezama treatment plant of sewage (Crisanto, 20125).

11

11

91

92

93

94

95

1213

Fig. S14. Concrete pieces and mechanical tests.

Fig. S15. Rhinella arenarum embryo showing multiple sublethal teratogenic effects

produced by different phsicochemical agents. Asymetries, delayed development,

reduction of body size, microcephaly, axial incurvations, agenesis (gills), aberrant cell

proliferation processes, hydropesy and other effects are observed (Herkovits, 2015).

Thus, ecotoxicological studies allow to recognize the effluent toxicity before and after

its treatment; their discharge in inland waters should not overcome values clearly

established to warrant the life protection in the receiving body. Regarding the disposal

of solid wastes, their toxicity can be evaluated from the toxicity of their leachates

(Herkovits and Pérez Coll, 2003).

12

Fig. 16 Embrion de Rhinella arenarum que ejemplifica multiplesefectos teratogenicos subletales producidos por diferentes agentes

fisico-quimicos Asimetrías Retraso en el Desarrollo Reducción en el tamaño

corporal Microcefalia Incurvaciones axiales Agenesia (branquias) Procesos de

proliferación celular Hidropesia, etc.

14

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

1516

References

Clancy, T.M, Hayes, K.F., Raskin, L. 2013. Arsenic Waste Management: A critical

Review of Testing and Disposal of Arsenic-Bearing Solid Wastes Generated

during Arsenic Removal from Drinking Water, Environ. Sci. Technol., 47,

10799–10812.

Crisanto, T. 2012. Tratamiento y disposición final de residuos de plantas of remoción de

arsénico por procesos de coagulación-adsorción-filtración. Master Thesis,

Universidad Tecnológica Nacional, Buenos Aires.

Herkovits, J. 2015. Ecotoxicología: Una decisión necesaria para el manejo sustentable

de cuencas hídricas. Ing. Sanit. Amb. 125, 25–35.

Herkovits, J., Pérez-Coll, C.S. 2003. AMPHITOX: A Standardized Set of Toxicity

Tests employing Amphibian Embryos. Its Potential for Customized Hazard

Assessment. In: Linder, G., Krest, S., Sparling, D., Little, E.E. (Eds.) Multiple

Stressor Effects in Relation to Declining Amphibian Populations. ASTM

International, pp. 46–60.

Instituto Nacional of Tecnología Industrial (INTI). 2009. Modelo de intervención para

el abatimiento de arsénico en aguas de consumo. Informe INTI Química, Centro

de investigación y desarrollo en química.

https://www.inti.gob.ar/quimica/pdf/asenagua.pdf (Accessed November, 2017).

13

17

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

1819

Meichtry, J.M., Lin, H., de la Fuente, L., Levy, I.K., Gautier, E.A., Blesa, M.A., Litter,

M.I. 2007. Low-cost TiO2 photocatalytic technology for water potabilization in

plastic bottles for isolated regions. Photocatalyst fixation, J. Solar Energy Eng.

129, 119–126.

Olivieri, V., Pagliano, A. 2010. Evaluation of the reverse osmosis plant of the

Cooperativa de Obras Sanitarias de Venado Tuerto, Provincia de Santa Fe.

Personal communication.

von Brömssen, M., Jakariya, M.D., Bhattacharya, P., Ahmed, K.M., Hasan, M.A.,

Sracek, O., Jonsson, L., Lundell, L., Jacks, G. 2007. Targeting low-arsenic

aquifers in groundwater of Matlab Upazila, Southeastern Bangladesh. Sci. Total

Environ. 379, 121–132.

14

20

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

2122