The arsenic content of sulphate of aluminum used for water purification

Survival, Water, Medical Field Manuals

Military Manuals

Bennett, Arthur Norton

Document text

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  ILLINOIS 
LIBRARY 

VM<5 


THE  ARSENIC  CONTENT  OF  SULPHATE  OF 
ALUMINIUM  USED  FOR  WATER 
PURIFICATION 


BY 

ARTHUR  NORTON  BENNETT 

B.  S.  University  of  Illinois,  1907 


THESIS 

Submitted  in  Partial  Fulfillment  of  the  Requirements  for  the 

Degree  of 
MASTER  OF  SCIENCE 

IN  CHEMISTRY 
IN 

THE  GRADUATE  SCHOOL 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 
1915 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2013 


http://archive.org/details/arseniccontentofOObenn 


UNIVERSITY   OF  ILLINOIS 
THE  GRADUATE  SCHOOL 


.June  5.  191  5 


I  HEREBY  RECOMMEND  THAT  THE  THESIS  PREPARED  UNDER  MY  SUPER- 
VISION BY   ^ETHJ.R..iID£T.0.N...3EUlIE.T.I  _   

ENTITLED  fEHB-.. ARSMTQ  fiOTTCWP  OTP  SIITiPTTATR  OF  ALUMTffTTIM  

 HSED....ED£....:MEH....PIJE.n,.XCA^.IQ]S..   

BE  ACCEPTED  AS  FULFILLING  THIS  PART  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS  FOR  THE 

degree  of  Mas..l.e.r......Q.f. ...jS.c.i.e;nc.e.  _  _  _ 


In  Charge  of  Thesis 


Head  of  Department 


Recommendation  concurred  in  :* 


Committee 
on 

Final  Examination* 


Required  for  doctor's  degree  but  not  for  master's. 


CONTENTS 


Introduction  1 

Historical  2 

Method  of  Analysis  8 

Analytical  11 

Conclusion  16 


\3l5 
^3 


INTRODUCTION. 


Specifications  requiring  arsenic  free  sulfate  of 

* 

aluminium  for  water  treatment  by  several  European  purification 
*Jour.  f.  Gasbel,  1913  (Sept) 

plants  suggested  to  us  that  it  would  be  advisable  to  make 
determinations  of  the  arsenic  content  of  the  sulfate  of  aluminium 
used  in  this  country  and  particularly  of  that  used  in  the  state 
of  Illinois. 

It  is  well  known  that  products  which  are  manufactured 
with  the  aid  of  commercial  sulfuric  acid  quite  generally  contain 
more  or  less  arsenic,  depending  upon  the  purity  of  the  acid  used. 
The  poisonous  character  of  arsenic  compounds,  even  when  present 
in  small  amounts,  makes  it  of  general  interest  and  importance  to 
have  definite  knowledge  of  the  presence  or  absence  of  arsenic  in 
any  substance  which  enters  directly  or  indirectly  into  foods  or 
drinks.    Sulfuric  acid  is  used  in  the  manufacture  of  sulfate  of 
aluminium  and  it  is  thus  quite  essential,  particularly  to  those 
who  are  in  public  health  work,  to  know  whether  arsenic  in  any 
considerable  amounts  is  being  added  to  drinking  water  in  the 
process  of  purification  with  this  chemical. 


-2- 

HISTORICAL. 

We  have  been  unable  to  find  any  definite  published 
data  relating  to  the  arsenic  content  of  sulfate  of  aluminium. 
G.  A,  Soper,  several  years  ago  made  an  investigation  of  this 
problem  and  referred  to  his  results  while  discussing  a  paper  by 
E.  E.  Wall*  on  "Water  Purification  at  St.  Louis,  Missouri". 

*Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  60,  202-9. 

Mr.  Soper  was  discussing  in  particular  the  use  of  sulfate  of  iron 
in  water  treatment  and  spoke  in  the  following  manner:  "There  is  a 
final  point  which  the  speaker  hesitates  to  mention,  but  inasmuch 
as,  before  this  society,  it  will  probably  be  taken  in  the 
conservative  spirit  in  which  it  is  intended,  and  may  lead  to 
useful  inquiries,  it  may  be  referred  to  briefly.     It  concerns 

the  composition  of  the  sulfate  of  iron  used  •  What  are  the 

impurities  in  this  sulfate?    How  much  arsenic  is  there  in  this 
sulfate?    Some  years  ago  the  speaker  had  occasion  to  examine 
specimens  of  sulfate  of  aluminium  from  a  good  many  filter  plants 
and  found  arsenic  in  nearly  all  of  them.     It  is  true,  that  usually 
the  arsenic  was  not  present  in  large  quantities,  but  it  was 
easily  discoverable,  and  in  some  of  the  samples  it  was  present  in 
sufficient  amount  to  be  of  more  than  passing  interest.  The 
arsenic,  of  course,  came  from  the  sulfuric  acid  used  in  making 
the  sulfate  of  aluminium,  the  sulfuric  acid  having  been  produced 


-3- 


from  pyrites  which  contained  arsenic." 

From  Mr.  Soper's  first  remark  it  is  evident  he  realized 
that,  due  to  the  increasing  public  prejudice  against  the  use  of 
any  material  containing  arsenic  or  ether  similar  poison,  a  great 
injustice  might  he  worked  upon  both  the  manufacturer  and  the 
plants  that  use  sulfate  of  aluminium  for  water  treatment  by 
giving  widespread  publicity  to  this  matter,  at  least,  before  all 
phases  of  the  problem  had  been  thoroughly  investigated.    We,  too, 
are  of  this  same  opinion  and  so  have  refrained  from  mentioning 
the  names  of  any  manufacturers  whose  product  we  have  examined  and 
have  also  omitted  the  names  of  all  filter  plants  outside  the 
state  of  Illinois. 

We  have  found  but  one  other  reference  to  the  arsenic 
content  of  water  treatment  materials.     In  further  discussion  of 
the  same  paper  and  relative  to  sulfate  of  iron,  Mr.  E.  E.  Wall 
in  reply  to  Mr.  Sopor's  statements  said:     "The  writer  has  a  copy 

of  a  report    in  which  it  is  stated  that  no  arsenic  was 

found  in  any  of  the  samples  tested  and  that  the  small  quantity  of 
arsenic  in  the  sulfuric  acid  used  in  cleaning  steel  is,  without 
doubt,  removed  in  the  cleaning  tubs  in  the  form  of  arsenureted 
hydrogen,  thus  leaving  the  liquors  from  which  copperas  is  made, 
free  from  arsenic.    Even  if  there  should  be  a  minute  quantity  of 
arsenic  in  the  sulfate  of  iron,  it  is  scarcely  possible  that 
this  could  remain  in  the  water  after  treatment  with  the  quantity 


-4- 


cf  lime  used  at  St.  Louis."    The  explanation  of  the  absence  of 
arsenic  in  sulfate  of  iron  due  to  its  loss  as  arsine  is  quite 
feasible  but  such  is  not  the  case  with  sulfate  of  aluminium. 

We  have  not  been  able  to  learn  that  anything  has  been 
done  in  this  country  to  regulate  the  amount  of  arsenic  in  sulfate 
of  aluminium.    The  purification  plants  (at  least  in  the  state  of 
Illinois)  have  made  no  effort  to  obtain  an  arsenic  free  article. 
The  manufacturers  of  sulfate  of  aluminium  keep  more  or  less 
accurate  records  of  the  arsenic  content  of  their  product.  We 
have  found  only  one  producer  who  advertises  "arsenic  free  alum". 
Neither  the  government  nor  any  of  the  states  have  promulgated 
legislation  regulating  this  product,  although  there  is  a  regulatio 
concerning  arsenic  in  other  substances  entering  into  foods.  The 
government  has  set  a  limit  for  arsenic  in  coal  tar  dyes  and  in 
baking  powder  of  one  part  in  700,000.    This  very  low  limit, 
particularly  when  it  is  considered  that  only  relatively  small 
amounts  of  these  substances  are  used  in  food  preparation,  shows 
that  considerable  importance  is  attached  to  the  presence  of 
arsenic  and  its  compounds. 

MANUFACTURE. 

Sulfate  of  aluminium  or  filter  alum  as  it  is  commonly 
called,  is  manufactured  by  digesting  finely  ground  bauxite,  AlgO^, 
HgO,  with  the  required  amount  of  sulfuric  acid.    After  the  reactio: 
is  complete  the  liquor  is  passed  through  filter  presses  or  some 


-5- 


other  filtration  medium  to  remove  silica  and  other  insoluble 
impurities.    The  clarified  solution  is  then  run  into  evaporating 
pans  and  the  excess  water  driven  off.     It  is  then  allowed  to  cool 
and  solidify  after  which  it  is  broken  or  ground  to  the  desired 
degree  of  fineness  required  by  the  trade.    This  product  consists 
largely  of  the  normal  sulfate,  Alg(S04)3,  18  H^O,  with  a  small 
amount  of  a  basic  sulfate,  so  that  there  is  an  excess  of  Al^O^ 
over  that  amount  required  to  combine  with  the  S0_  present.  All 

3 

specifiaations  for  this  product  call  for  at  least  17$  AlgOg.  The 
following  is  a  typical  analysis.     Total  AlgO^,  17.5%;  Free  AI2O3, 
1.5$;  Total  S03,  38.5$,  Fe203,   .50$;  Water  of  crystallization, 
40$. 

There  is  a  sulfate  of  aluminium  on  the  market  containing 
22$  AlgOg.    This  is  made  by  driving  off  sufficient  of  the  water 
of  crystallization  to  make  the  required  percentage  of  AlgOg.  To 
prepare  this  product  approximately  60$  of  the  water  of  crystalliza- 
tion would  have  to  be  driven  off  to  raise  the  AlgOg  content  from 
17$  to  g2$.     Its  chief  advantage  consists  in  saving  effected  in 
transportation  charges. 

It  is  readily  seen  from  the  process  of  manufacture  that 
practically  all  of  the  arsenic  present  in  the  sulfuric  acid  will 
appear  in  the  finished  product.    The  arsenic  content  of  the 
sulfuric  acid  depends  upon  two  factors;  first,  the  amount  of 
arsenic  present  in  the  raw  material  from  which  it  is  manufactured, 
and  second,  the  method  of  manufacture. 


-6- 


The  three  principle  materials  from  which  sulfuric  acid 
is  manufactured  are  pyrites,  (J^Sg),  zinc-blende  (Zn3)  and  sulfur. 
The  arsenic  in  pyrites  varies  from  very  small  amounts  to  quite 
appreciable  quantities  so  that  sulfuric  acid  manufactured  from 
this  material  may  vary  widely  in  arsenic  content.  Zinc-blende 
and  sulphur  are  both  comparatively  free  from  arsenic  and  yield 
an  acid  containing  but  little  arsenic.    Sulfuric  acid  manufactured 
by  the  old  lead  chamber  process  contains  a  large  percentage  of 
the  arsenic  present  in  the  raw  materials  unless  special  means  for 
removing  it  have  been  taken.     In  the  contact  process  arsenic 
interferes  with  the  catalytic  action  of  the  platinum,  so  that  it 
must  be  removed  from  the  gases  before  they  are  passed  over  the 
catalyser.    Thus  the  contact  process  furnishes  an  acid  practically 
free  from  arsenic. 

One  water  purification  plant*  manufactures    its  own 

*Eng.  Record,  71,  576. 

sulfate  of  aluminium  effecting  a  considerable  saving  in  the  cost 
of  the  product.    In  this  case  it  is  not  necessary  to  produce  the 
product  in  the  solid  form.    After  the  action  of  the  sulfuric 
acid  upon  the  bauxite  is  complete  the  mixture  is  ready  for  use. 
In  this  way  the  filtration,  evaporation  and  crushing  of  the  product 
are  eliminated. 


METHOD  OF  USING. 
Sulfate  of  aluminium  is  used  for  the  purpose  of  clarify- 


ing  turbid  waters  and  for  removing  the  soluble  coloring  materials. 
It  is  added  to  the  water  at  the  rate  of  from  1  grain  to  5  or  6 
grains  per  gallon  depending  upon  the  character  of  the  water  treated 
Aluminium  hydroxide  is  formed  by  reaction  with  alkaline  salts 
present  in  the  water  according  to  the  following  equations: 
A12(S04)3  +  3  CaHg(C03)2  =  2  Al(OH)s  ♦  3  CaS04  ♦  6  COg 
A12(S04)3  ♦  3  MgH  (CO   )     =  2  A1(0H)     ♦  3  MgSO     ♦  6  C02 
A12(S04)3  ♦  6  KaHC03=  2  Alg(0H)3  ♦  3  NOgS04  +  6  C02 

On  settling , this  aluminium  hydroxide  floe  mechanically  carries 
down  the  suspended  matter  including  bacteria.     The  coloring  matter 
which  is  largely  organic  is  precipitated  with  the  probable 
formation  of  an  aluminium  lake. 

SAMPLES, 

In  order  that  our  results  might  be  of  greatest  value  by 

as 

showing  the  condition  of  the  sulfate  of  aluminium/it  is  actually 
used,  we  first  obtained  as  many  samples  as  possible  directly  from 
the  water  purification  plants  in  Illinois.     Twenty-six  plants  use 
sulfate  of  aluminium  in  treating  water.    The  purpose  of  our 
investigation  was  explained  to  the  managers  of  each  plant.  They 
were  asked  to  co-operate  with  us  by  furnishing  a  sample  of  the 
product  used,  together  with  the  name  of  the  manufacturer  or  dealer 
supplying  the  same.    Twenty-two  of  the  plants  very  promptly 
complied  with  our  request,  and  in  nearly  every  case,  expressed 
decided  interest  in  the  subject  with  a  wish  to  know  the  results  of 


-8- 


our  investigation. 

Owing  to  expense  of  transportation  practically  all  of 
the  sulfate  of  aluminium  used  in  Illinois  is  supplied  by  three 
manufacturers.     In  order  to  make  our  study  more  complete  we  have 
extended  the  scope  of  our  investigations  and  have  secured  samples 
from  practically  all  of  the  large  manufacturers  of  sulfate  of 
aluminium  in  the  country.    In  some  cases  the  samples  came  directly 
from  the  producer  and,  in  others,  from  the  water  treatment  plants. 
The  specimens  were  carefully  sampled,  ground  and  analyzed  in 
duplicate  by  the  following  methods. 

METHODS  OF  AUALYSIS. 
The  method  used  in  obtaining  most  of  the  data  given  is 
a  modified  Gutzeit  Method,  developed  by  Claude  R.  Smith*  in  his 

*U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  of  Chem. ,  Circular  No.  102. 

work  on  coal  tar  dyes  and  other  food  constituents.     The  results 
obtained  by  this  method  were  in  several  cases  checked  by  the 
Marsh -Berz el ius  Method**  and  were  found  to  agree.    The  Gutzeit 

**U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  of  Chem.,  Circular  No.  99. 

Method  has  been  investigated  by  Sanger  and  Black***  and  others 

***J.  Soc.  Chem.  Ind.,  26,  1115.  (1907) 


for  quantitative  work,  and,  when  proper  care  is  taken  in  the 


-9- 


manipulation,  has  been  found  to  give  satisfactory  results.  The 
chief  modification  proposed  by  Smith  is  the  use  of  paper  sensitized 
with  mercuric  bromide  instead  of  mercuric  chloride,  which  had 
previously  been  generally  used.    The  bromide  gives  more  permanent 
stains  and  the  standards  can  be  kept  longer.     The  method  depends 
upon  the  formation  of  a  dark  orange  stain  when  the  generated 
arsine  is  brought  in  contact  with  the  sensitized  paper.  The 
apparatus  used  is  essentially  as  described  by  Smith.    The  generator 
is  a  50  cc.  wide  mouth  Erlenmeyer  flask.    This  is  connected  with 
two  upright  tubes  8  cm.  in  length  and  1  cm.  in  diameter,  the 
lower  containing  lead  acetate  paper  and  the  upper  filled  with 
cotton  moistened  with  5%  lead  acetate  solution.    Fitted  into  the 
upper  tube  by  means  of  a  rubber  stopper  is  a  capillary  tube  3  mm. 
in  internal  diameter  and  12  cm.  in  length.     This  capillary  is 
constricted  at  two  points  about  3  l/2  cm.  from  each  end.     By  this 
means  the  sensitized  paper  is  held  in  the  center  of  the  tube  thus 
producing  stains  of  equal  length  on  both  sides  of  the  paper.  Under 
uniform  conditions,  the  length  of  the  stain  varies  with  the  amount 
of  arsenic  present.    A  series  of  standard  stains  prepared  from 
known  amounts  of  arsenic  are  used  for  comparison.    A  convenient 
series  is  made  from  2,  5,  7.5,  10  and  15  micro-milligrams.  The 
amount  of  arsenic  in  the  weight  of  sulfate  of  aluminium  taken  is 
determined  by  matching  the  stain  it  produces  with  the  standards; 
it  is  then  a  matter  of  simple  calculation  to  determine  the 
percentage  arsenic  content  or  the  parts  per  million  of  arsenic. 


-10- 


A  one  gram  sample  will  contain  as  many  parts  per  million  of 
arsenic  as  there  are  micro -milligrams  of  stain  obtained.  For 
example,  if  one  gram  of  sulfate  of  aluminium  produces  a  stain 
which  matches  the  5  micro -milligram  standard  stain,  then  that 
sample  contains  5  parts  per  million.    One  part  per  million  is 
equivalent  to  ,0001  of  one  per  cent.    A  stain  representing  between 
five  and  twenty-five  micro-milligrams  gives  the  most  satisfactory 
results.    A  stain  between  these  limits  can  be  obtained  by  varying 
the  weight  of  sulfate  of  aluminium  used. 

The  sensitized  paper  is  made  from  heavy,  close-textured 
drafting  paper,  cut  into  strips  2.5  mm.  by  1£  cm.     These  strips 
are  soaked  for  an  hour  in  a  bfo  alcoholic  solution  of  mercuric 
bromide.    The  excess  solution  is  squeezed  off  and  the  strips 
allowed  to  dry. 

For  the  analysis  of  samples  containing  more  than  30  parts 
per  million  AS2O3  another  method  proposed  by  Smith,*  was  used. 

*U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Bur.  of  Chem.,  Circular  No.  102. 

The  generated  arsine  is  passed  into  mercuric  chloride  solution. 
(10  cc.  of  5%  EgClg  diluted  to  100  cc.)    According  to  Smith 
probably  several  different  arsenides  of  mercury  and  some  free 
arsenic  are  formed.    These  are  oxidized  by  the  excess  of  mercuric 
chloride  slowly  in  the  cold  and  rapidly  on  heating,  forming 
arsenous  acid  and  mercurous  chloride.    The  mercurous  chloride  can 
be  filtered  off  and  weighed  and  the  arsenous  acid  in  the  filtrate 


-11- 


determined  by  titration  with  iodine.     In  this  way  checks  are 
obtained  in  the  one  determination.     The  equation  used  for  the 
calculation  of  arsenic  from  the  weight  of  mercurous  chloride 
obtained  is : 

2  AsH3  +  12  HgCl2  +  3  H20    =  12  HgCl  +  As203  ♦  12  HC1. 
Thus  1  AsgOg  is  equivalent  to  12  HgCl. 

As  an  alternative  the  conglomerate  precipitate  can  be 
titrated  by  means  of  iodine.     Sufficient  potassium  iodide  is 
added  to  form  the  soluble  double  potassium  mercuric  iodide  and 
then  an  excess  of  standard  iodine  solution.    YThen  all  the 
precipitate  has  gone  into  solution  the  excess  iodine  is  titrated 
with  standard  thiosulfate.    The  iodine  absorption  represents  the 
oxidation  of  arsine  to  arsenic  acid  in  which  1  As  is  equivalent 
to  8  I. 

As  usual  all  reagents  used  were  tested  to  prove  their 
freedom  from  arsenic • 

DETERMINATION  OF  ARSENIC. 
Five  grams  of  finely  ground  sulfate  of  aluminium  are 
dissolved  in  the  generating  flask  in  30  cc.  sulfuric  acid  (1-4) 
with  the  aid  of  heat.    Four  or  five  drops  of  a  40$  solution  of 
stannous  chloride  in  concentrated  hydrochloric  acid  are  added  and 
the  solution  cooled.    Four  or  five  grams  of  arsenic  free  moss  zinc 
are  now  added  and  the  lead  acetate  tubes  and  capillary  containing 
the  sensitized  strip  are  connected .    The  evolution  of  gas  is 


-12- 


allowed  to  proceed  for  at  least  one  hour.     The  stain,  after 
drying,  is  then  compared  with  the  standards.    A  steady,  "brisk 
hut  not  violent  evolution  of  gas  should  he  maintained.     This  can 
he  regulated  hy  varying  the  acidity,  volume  of  solution,  amount 
of  zinc  and  temperature.    After  a  little  experience  very  uniform 
results  can  he  obtained.     In  the  determination  of  larger  amounts 
of  arsenic  it  is  necessary  to  allow  the  evolution  of  gas  to 
proceed  for  two  or  three  hours. 

The  results  from  the  samples  obtained  from  the  Illinois 
purification  plants  are  given  in  Table  L,  those  from  outside  the 
state  in  Table  II.    In  all  cases  the  arsenic  is  recorded  as 
arsenic  trioxide,  AsgO^.    Twenty-four  samples  from  Illinois  plants 
and  seventeen  from  sources  outside  the  state  were  analyzed. 

The  results  obtained  by  analyzing  sulfate  of  aluminium 
used  in  Illinois  clearly  show  that  arsenic  in  exceedingly  small 
amounts  is  always  present.    We  find  a  minimum  of  0.8  parts  per 
million  (.00008$)  and  a  maximum  of  4.0  parts  per  million  (.00004$) 
of  arsenic  as  AsgOg  in  the  sulfate  of  aluminium  used  by  Illinois 
water  purification  plants.     If  a  water  were  treated  with  sulfate 
of  aluminium  containing  the  maximum  amount  of  arsenic  found,  at  a 
rate  of  6  grains  of  alum  per  gallon,  an  amount  which  is  very 
seldom  exceeded,  and  if  all  the  arsenic  were  soluble  and  remained 
in  the  filtered  water,  since  arsenic  is  not  a  cumulative  poison, 
a  person  must  drink  1285  gallons  of  the  treated  water  at  one  time 
to  obtain  a  medicinal  dose  of  2  milligrams.    From  this  it  is 


-13- 


TABLE  I. 

ARSENIC  AS  AssOa  IH  SULFATE  OF  ALUMINIUM  USED  III  ILLINOIS. 


City  Arsenic  as  Ase03 


Pts 

•  per  million 

Percent 

Gallons 

Cairo 

1.6 

.00016 

3213 

Carlinville 

1.8 

. 00018 

2856 

Charleston 

1,8 

.00012 

4283 

Chicago  and 

Rogers  Park 

1.4 

. 00014 

3671 

E.  St.  Louis  and 

Granite  City- 

.8 

.00008 

6425 

Dec  atur 

1.4 

.00014 

3671 

Elgin 

1.6 

.00016 

3213 

Evanst on 

1.4 

.00014 

3671 

Ft.  Sheridan 

1.2 

. 00012 

4283 

Hamilton 

1.4 

. 00014 

3671 

Kankakee 

.8 

.00008 

6425 

Kenilworth 

1.4 

.00014 

3671 

Lawrenceville 

3.0 

.00030 

1713 

Macomb 

1.6 

.00016 

3213 

Moline 

1.0 

.00010 

5140 

Mt .  Carmel 

2.0 

.00020 

2570 

Mt.  Vernon 

1.2 

.00012 

4283 

Pana 

1.2 

.00012 

4283 

Quincy** 

1.0 

.00010 

5140 

Quincy** 

4.0 

.00040 

1285 

Rock  Island 

2.0 

.00020 

2570 

Rock  Island 

Arsenal** 

1.6 

.00016 

3213 

Rock  Island 

Arsenal** 

1.0 

.00010 

5140 

Streator 

3.4 

.00034 

1512 

*Gallons  of  water  containing  a  minimum  medicinal  dose  of  2  mg.  when 

the  water  is  treated  with  6  grains  of  sulfate  of  aluminium  per 
gallon,  provided  that  all  the  arsenic  remains  in  solution. 

**Two  samples  from  different  manufacturers. 


-14- 


readily  seen  that  the  arsenic  content  of  sulfate  of  aluminium 
used  in  Illinois  is  of  no  significance. 


TABLE  II. 


ARSENIC  IN  SULFATE  OF  ALUMINIUM  OBTAINED  FROM  SOURCES 
OUTSIDE  THE  STATE  OF  ILLINOIS. 


Sample  No.  Arsenic  as  Ase03 


Pts.  per  mil. 

Percent 

Gallon* 

1 

0.5 

.00005 

10280 

2 

1.2 

.00012 

4283 

3 

1.2 

.00012 

4283 

4 

1.4 

.00014 

3671 

5 

2.6 

.00026 

1977 

6 

2.6 

.00026 

1977 

7 

4.0 

.0004 

1285 

8 

4.0 

.0004 

1285 

9 

5.0 

.0005 

1028 

10 

20.0 

.0020 

257 

11 

27.0 

.0027 

190 

12 

31.0 

.0031 

166 

13 

49.0 

.0049 

105 

14 

280.0 

.0280 

18 

15 

941.0 

.0941 

5.5 

16** 

1240.0 

.124 

4.0 

17 

1240.0 

.124 

4.0 

*Gallons  of  water  containing  a  minimum  medicinal  dose  of  2  mg. 
when  the  water  is  treated  with  6  grains  of  alum  per  gallon, 
provided  that  all  the  arsenic  remains  in  solution. 

**Nos.  16  and  17  were  obtained  from  the  same  plant  and  are 
probably  from  the  same  lot. 


Somewhat  to  our  surprise  the  samples  obtained  from 
sources  outside  the  state  showed  a  wider  range  in  arsenic  content. 
In  one  case  there  was  0.5  parts  per  million  (.00005$),  and  in 


-15- 


nine  cases  there  was  more  than  in  the  highest  Illinois  sample, 
the  maximum  "being  1240  parts  per  million  of  arsenic  as  Ass03 
(  .124$), 

If  a  water  were  treated  with  alum  containing  1240  parts 
per  million  AS3O3  at  the  rate  of  6  grains  per  gallon  and 
provided  all  the  arsenic  remained  in  solution,  0,13  parts  per 
million  of  arsenic  as  AS2O3  would  he  added  and  a  medicinal  dose 
of  2  mg.  would  be  contained  in  four  gallons.    This  would  he  quite 
an  appreciable  amount  and  is  more  than  should  be  added  in  water 
purification.    However,  owing  to  the  insolubility  of  the  arsenites 
and  arsenates  of  calcium,  magnesium,  aluminium  and  iron,  a  large 
part  of  the  arsenic  would  be  removed  with  the  precipitated 
aluminium  hydrate.     To  determine  the  extent  of  this  removal,  if 
any,  several  experiments  were  carried  out. 

Two  liters  of  water  were  treated  at  the  rate  of  6  grains 
per  gallon  with  sulfate  of  aluminium  containing  941  parts  per 
million  of  AS2O3.    By  this  treatment  188  micro  milligrams  of 
AS2O3  were  added.    Forty  micro  milligrams  of  AS2O3  were  recovered 
from  the  filtered  water  and  144  from  the  sludge.     Thus  only  22$ 
of  the  arsenic  remained  in  solution. 

Some  water  was  treated  at  the  rate  of  20  grains  per 
gallon  with  sulfate  of  aluminium  containing  1240  parts  per  million 
of  AS2O3.    Only  12$  remained  in  solution. 

A  sample  of  filtered  water  was  obtained  from  the 
filtration  plant  using  this  latter  alum.    It  had  been  treated  at 


-16- 


the  rate  of  200  Ids.  of  sulfate  of  aluminium  per  million  gallons 
or  at  the  rate  of  1.4  grains  per  gallon.    Prom  this  water  only 
7%  of  the  arsenic  originally  added  was  recovered  from  the 
solution.     The  untreated  water  gave  no  test  for  arsenic.     Thus  a 
removal  of  9Z>fo  of  the  arsenic  was  effected  by  the  purification 
process. 

CONCLUSION 

Sulfate  of  aluminium  used  for  water  treatment,  as  far 
as  our  investigation  shows,  contains  arsenic  in  amounts  varying 
from  traces  (0.5  parts  per  million)  to  1240  parts  per  million. 
Sulfate  of  aluminium  used  by  water  purification  plants  in 
Illinois  does  not  contain  a  significant  amount  of  arsenic.  Some 
sulfate  of  aluminium  used  elsewhere  contains  a  much  larger 
amount  of  arsenic,  but  since  at  least  75%  of  the  arsenic  added 
in  the  treatment  of  water  v/ith  sulfate  of  aluminium  is  removed 
with  the  precipitated  aluminium  hydrate,  there  is  a  strong 
probability  that  in  no  case  a  sufficient  quantity  of  arsenic 
would  be  added  to  the  filtered  water  to  have  therapeutic 
significance.    However,  since  sulfate  of  aluminium  containing  an 
insignificant  amount  of  Ass03  can  be  readily  obtained,  the 
manufacturers should  make  an  effort  to  keep  the  arsenic  content 
of  their  product  at  a  minimum  and  water  works  officials  should 
demand  an  article  practically  free  from  arsenic. 


-17- 


A2JDEBBBM 

Mr,  M.  3.  Litch,  Franklin  H.  Zalbfleisch  Company, 
and  the  General  Chemical  Company  very  kindly  consented  to 
check  our  analyses  of  several  samples  of  sulfate  of  aluminium. 
Five  samples  were  submitted  for  analysis.     They  varied  in 
arsenic  content  from  the  minimum  to  the  maximum  amount  found. 
The  following  results  were  obtained. 

Ass03  -  Parts  per  million. 
Our  analysis  Check  analysis 


1  0.5  0.6 

2  1.4  2.5 

3  1.4  1.8 

4  4.0  3.0 

5  1240.0  1550.0 


With  the  possible  exception  of  No.  2,  these  checks 
are  very  satisfactory.    When  less  than  2  parts  per  million  of 
Ass03  are  present  the  limit  of  accuracy  of  the  Sutzeit  method 
is  0.2  parts  per  million;  with  from  2  to  5  parts  per  million 
the  limit  is  0.5;  with  1000  or  more  parts  per  million  the  limit 
of  accuracy  varies  from  100  to  200  parts  per  million  depending 
upon  the  method  used. 

Any  error  due  to  sampling  can  be  eliminated  in  this 
case  as  only  small  samples  were  used  and  they  were  thoroughly 
mixed • 


-18- 


We  wish  to  express  our  appreciation  of  the  assistance 
rendered  by  the  manufacturers  and  water  works  officials  who 
furnished  us  samples  for  examination. 

We  wish  further  to  thank  Professor  Edward  Bartow,  who 
suggested  the  problem,  for  his  helpful  interest  and  advice 
throughout  the  progress  of  the  investigation. 


xm 


WSMWm^m  vma  mm  nR 


§  ^1  -fK     |w  IP 

m  fe$$S$/i>  $^J8g-'A  |*%Sl8  P^S" 

/  v.-^^.-j/  \%%&J  \:'.s>^m