318
C. Bhagat et al.
• It is very difficult to remove antibiotics from water because it is a highly polar
substance.
• Conventional treatment is not able to degrade the pollutants and hence generating
the new solid waste after treatment (Homem and Santos 2011).
• Activated sludge processes in conventional treatment are not capable to handle a
high concentration of antibiotics (Leung et al. 2012).
• Advanced removal treatment processes like ozonation and photocatalysis are not
feasible for large scale treatment because of economic constraints.
• The membrane processes are efficient but they have not degraded the residues of
the antibiotics, and hence they form high concentrated retentate, very difficult to
decompose.
• Sorption processes are most efficient techniques for removal of the antibiotic
contaminants but the formation of sludge after treatment create disposal problems.
• Constructed wetlands cannot handle the high hydraulic loading rate and hence
not used for a populated area.
13.6 Summery
Day by day, the frequency of detection of antibiotics traces in the water system
is increasing as the use of antibiotics is extensive in all sectors. These antibiotics
residue are enduring and having high resistance to decomposition, hence deposition
is increasing in the different environmental matrices. These residues are harmful to
the human as well as an ecosystem or aquatic life at its detectable limit (i.e., at very
low concentration). Due to this, the several removal techniques come into the picture
to resolve antibiotics contamination problems efficiently and effectively. Treatment
units used in conventional WWTPs and DWTPs are coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and biological process (ASP or trickling filter or biological
reactor barrier), and they have partially removed these contaminants (Mutiyar and
Mittal 2013; Dong et al. 2016; Leung et al. 2012) and need to develop new efficient
and effective techniques.
Because of the fractious nature of effluent which contains antibiotics contamination, the used AOTPs come out as a substitute. In the last decades, photocatalysis
and ozonation are frequently tested techniques. Ozonation technique has an advantage that it can effectively work even though there is fluctuation in flow rate and
composition of WW, but the demerits are the high cost and energy requirement.
Sometimes there may be a low rate of mineralization for longer times that leads
to the generation of new by-products which is more dangerous than the parental
compounds (Balcıo˘ glu and Ötker 2003; Li et al. 2008). Photocatalysis is also most
employed removal techniques for antibiotics contamination (Cao et al. 2016). This
technique generally used semiconductor like zinc oxide (ZnO) and titanium dioxide
(TiO 2 ). ZnO is a better option for TiO 2 because the photodegradation mechanism is
C. Bhagat et al.
• It is very difficult to remove antibiotics from water because it is a highly polar
substance.
• Conventional treatment is not able to degrade the pollutants and hence generating
the new solid waste after treatment (Homem and Santos 2011).
• Activated sludge processes in conventional treatment are not capable to handle a
high concentration of antibiotics (Leung et al. 2012).
• Advanced removal treatment processes like ozonation and photocatalysis are not
feasible for large scale treatment because of economic constraints.
• The membrane processes are efficient but they have not degraded the residues of
the antibiotics, and hence they form high concentrated retentate, very difficult to
decompose.
• Sorption processes are most efficient techniques for removal of the antibiotic
contaminants but the formation of sludge after treatment create disposal problems.
• Constructed wetlands cannot handle the high hydraulic loading rate and hence
not used for a populated area.
13.6 Summery
Day by day, the frequency of detection of antibiotics traces in the water system
is increasing as the use of antibiotics is extensive in all sectors. These antibiotics
residue are enduring and having high resistance to decomposition, hence deposition
is increasing in the different environmental matrices. These residues are harmful to
the human as well as an ecosystem or aquatic life at its detectable limit (i.e., at very
low concentration). Due to this, the several removal techniques come into the picture
to resolve antibiotics contamination problems efficiently and effectively. Treatment
units used in conventional WWTPs and DWTPs are coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and biological process (ASP or trickling filter or biological
reactor barrier), and they have partially removed these contaminants (Mutiyar and
Mittal 2013; Dong et al. 2016; Leung et al. 2012) and need to develop new efficient
and effective techniques.
Because of the fractious nature of effluent which contains antibiotics contamination, the used AOTPs come out as a substitute. In the last decades, photocatalysis
and ozonation are frequently tested techniques. Ozonation technique has an advantage that it can effectively work even though there is fluctuation in flow rate and
composition of WW, but the demerits are the high cost and energy requirement.
Sometimes there may be a low rate of mineralization for longer times that leads
to the generation of new by-products which is more dangerous than the parental
compounds (Balcıo˘ glu and Ötker 2003; Li et al. 2008). Photocatalysis is also most
employed removal techniques for antibiotics contamination (Cao et al. 2016). This
technique generally used semiconductor like zinc oxide (ZnO) and titanium dioxide
(TiO 2 ). ZnO is a better option for TiO 2 because the photodegradation mechanism is