university of colorado research project review panel conference call december 2 2009 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
University of Colorado Research Project Review Panel Conference Call December 2, 2009 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
University of Colorado Research Project Review Panel Conference Call December 2, 2009

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 12

University of Colorado Research Project Review Panel Conference Call December 2, 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 160 Views
  • Uploaded on

Evaluation of Enhanced Ceramic Water Filtration (ECWF) for Microbial and Chemical Contaminant Removal for Households in Developing Countries. University of Colorado Research Project Review Panel Conference Call December 2, 2009. Introductions. Research Team: Chris Schulz, CDM

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'University of Colorado Research Project Review Panel Conference Call December 2, 2009' - benjamin


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
university of colorado research project review panel conference call december 2 2009

Evaluation of Enhanced Ceramic Water Filtration (ECWF) for Microbial and Chemical Contaminant Removal for Households in Developing Countries

University of Colorado Research Project

Review Panel Conference Call

December 2, 2009

introductions
Introductions

Research Team:

  • Chris Schulz, CDM
  • Angela Bielefeldt, CU
  • Scott Summers, CU
  • Lauren Panasewicz, CU

Review Panel:

  • Ned Breslin, WFP
  • Susan Murcott, MIT
  • Daniele Lantagne, CDC
  • Robyn Wilmouth, PATH
  • Mark Sobsey, UNC
agenda
Agenda
  • Project Overview (PPT Presentation)
  • ECWF Technology – Features, Benefits and Drawbacks
  • CU Research Plan – Scope and Schedule
  • Collaboration with HWTS Networks and Field Studies
  • Project Review Panel Communications
review panel discussion questions
Review Panel Discussion Questions
  • What are the benefits and limitations of ECWF system?
  • Does the CU research plan meet accepted standards for demonstrating treatment performance?
  • What types of field studies should be considered to demonstrate sustainability of ECWF system?
  • What grant funding options are available to complete CU research and follow-on field studies?
  • Are there opportunities to perform ECWF field testing with ongoing WFP, PATH and NGO projects?
  • Should a CWF research network be established to coordinate research activities and share information?
estimated mean risk of illness by hwts type and study duration
Estimated mean risk of illness by HWTS type and study duration

Ceramic Water Filters

“With the current available evidence, ceramic filters are the most effective form of HWTS in the long-term; disinfection-only interventions appear to have poor if any long-term public health benefit.”

Paul Hunter

School of Medicine, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK,

ES&T, 2009

Hunter, P.A., ES&T, 2008

benefits of standard cwf system
Benefits of Standard CWF System
  • Proven reduction of bacteria and protozoa
  • Proven reduction of diarrheal disease
  • Acceptability to users
  • Produces clear, cooler filtered water
  • No chemicals or chlorine taste
  • Affordable, one-time cost
drawbacks of standard cwf system
Drawbacks of Standard CWF System
  • Lower effectiveness against viruses
  • Does not remove arsenic, fluoride or nitrite
  • Potential for filtered water recontamination
  • Potential for filter breakage
  • Filter must be cleaned/scrubbed
  • Low flowrate (1-2 L/hr) and limited raw water storage (8-10 L)
  • Multiple refills to meet family needs
  • Often unattractive appearance
potential additional benefits of enhanced cwf system
Potential Additional Benefits of Enhanced CWF System
  • Higher flowrate (6-8 L/hr) and more raw water storage (20 L)
  • Effective removal of viruses, arsenic, fluoride, nitrate and T&O
  • Multiple barrier treatment (3 stages)
  • Reduced risk of stagnant water and recontamination
  • Reduced risk of filter breakage
  • Reduced filter cleaning/scrubbing
  • Attractive, appealing design
  • Upgradable option for CWF
drawbacks of enhanced cwf system
Drawbacks of Enhanced CWF System
  • Higher unit cost
  • Annual disposal and replacement of purity pack
  • Taller and heavier unit
  • Initial installation is more complicated
  • Uncertain tradeoff between CWF element scrubbing and clogged purity pack cleaning
cdm funded ecwf research project
CDM-Funded ECWF Research Project
  • Objective: Evaluate ECWF for chemical and microbial contaminant removal at higher filtration loading rates
  • Research Approach:
    • Phase 1: Evaluate enhanced hydraulic capacity
      • Side-by-side round-robin testing of CWF, ECWF, ECWF w/ PP
      • Hydraulic performance testing using fill and draw method
    • Phase 2: Evaluate extended treatment capacity
      • Selection of optimal purity pack media (ZVI/sand blend) using RSSCTs
      • Long-term contaminant break-through testing using continuous overflow arrangement
      • TCLP testing for spent purity pack leaching