See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241682906

Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Treatment of

Drinking Water and Wastewater: A Review

Article in Ozone Science and Engineering · January 2012

DOI: 10.1080/01919512.2012.640251

CITATIONS READS

29 167

5 authors, including:

Barry L. Loeb Sylvie Baig

International Ozone Associaton DEGREMONT
9 PUBLICATIONS 58 CITATIONS 40 PUBLICATIONS 494 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Ozone Technology Progress View project

Sostaqua View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Barry L. Loeb on 03 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Ozone: Science & Engineering
The Journal of the International Ozone Association

ISSN: 0191-9512 (Print) 1547-6545 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/bose20

Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Treatment of

Drinking Water and Wastewater: A Review

Barry L. Loeb , Craig M. Thompson , Joseph Drago , Hirofumi Takahara &

Sylvie Baig

To cite this article: Barry L. Loeb , Craig M. Thompson , Joseph Drago , Hirofumi Takahara &
Sylvie Baig (2012) Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Treatment of Drinking Water and Wastewater:
A Review, Ozone: Science & Engineering, 34:1, 64-77, DOI: 10.1080/01919512.2012.640251

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01919512.2012.640251

Published online: 24 Jan 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 628

View related articles

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=bose20

Download by: [68.1.66.102] Date: 03 February 2017, At: 09:40

Ozone: Science & Engineering, 34: 64–77
Copyright © 2012 International Ozone Association
ISSN: 0191-9512 print / 1547-6545 online
DOI: 10.1080/01919512.2012.640251
Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Treatment of Drinking Water
and Wastewater: A Review
Barry L. Loeb,1 Craig M. Thompson,2 Joseph Drago,2 Hirofumi Takahara,3 and Sylvie Baig4
1
Cincinnati, OH 45252, USA
2
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, San Francisco, CA 94197, USA
3
Japan Ozone Association, Tokyo 103-0006, Japan
4
Degremont, SA, 92500, Rueil-Malmaison, France
One question often raised when ozone professionals gather is
“How much ozone capacity is installed?” Although the use of ozone
for industrial purposes is growing, the largest use for ozone resides
in the use of treatment of municipal drinking and wastewater. It is
very difficult to summarize ozone capacity for industrial applications
as much data are kept confidential. A number of reports have been
published over the years on installed ozone capacity. Ozone capacity
estimation is a moving target as plants are built and others removed
from service for a number of reasons. This paper summarizes, using
data available, ozone capacity for drinking water and wastewater.
Focus is on the United States, Canada, Europe and Japan. IOA mem-
bers and member companies are encouraged to submit additional data
to enable this summary to be as accurate and relevant as possible.
Keywords Ozone, Ozone Installations, France, Netherlands,
Germany, United States, Canada
USE OF OZONE FOR DRINKING AND
WASTEWATER IN EUROPE/ASIA—INTRODUCTION
Several years ago, the IOA-EA3G Group surveyed ozone
generator suppliers in order to develop a market survey on the
use of ozone and its distribution throughout the EA3G region.
The results of this survey will be discussed later in this sec-
tion. First, some comments are offered on the development of
ozone in selected regions.
Regional Developments
France. France is considered as the cradle of ozonation
with test of water disinfection beginning in 1886. By 1990,
Received 5/24/2011; Accepted 11/9/2011
Address correspondence to Barry L. Loeb, 9731 Pebble View
Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45252, USA. E-mail: blloeb@fuse.net
64 B.L. Loeb et al.
over 700 ozonation plants were in operation in France, pri-
marily for drinking water (Le Paulouë and Langlais, 1999).
The first major application of ozone for drinking water in
France (and the world) was in Nice in 1906 where ozone
was used to disinfect 22,500 m3 /day of slow sand filtered
water from the Vesubie River. Ozone-treated water was first
delivered to Paris in 1909. The early ozone generators were
water-cooled plate type. The growth of ozone in France
continued with major plant installations, for example:
• Neuilly Sur Marne (Paris) 1988. 600,000 m3 /d
water; 140 kg/h O3 (7,400ppd)
• Choisy le Roi (Paris) 1994. 900,000 m3 /d water;
180 kg/h O3 (9,500ppd)
The greater Paris area has 12 water plants with a total ozone
capacity greater than 500 kg/h (26,500 ppd). Ozone remains
the choice for drinking water disinfection in France with
most major cities using this treatment. Thus, future growth
is modest although there continue to be facility upgrades.
Germany. Full-scale ozonation plants were built in
Germany beginning in the 1950s (Langlais et al., 1991). Some
plants ozonate water before it is reinjected into the aquifer.
Drinking water quality as required in line with the German
Drinking Water Act often cannot be reached without the
use of ozone (Böhme, 1999). Municipal water supplies in
Germany use ozone to remove humic substances, undesired
odors and taste. To date, there are more than 100 water utili-
ties using ozone. The major use of ozone for water treatment
in Germany however is for the treatment of swimming pool
water. Swimming pool treatment is responsible for more than
55% of the sale of individual ozone generators, although these
tend to be of smaller capacity.
Netherlands. For groundwater treatment, eight plants
have been upgraded with ozonation for disinfection and to
January–February 2012
 TABLE 1. Groundwater Plants in The Netherlands Installing Ozone (Kruithof, 2007)

O3 Dose Ozone New

√
Location Source Objective mg/L) Abandoned ( ) Approach

Dordrecht ground water color 1.5

Ameland ground water color ≤5
√
Helvoirt ground water color 3 –
Zwijndrecht bank filtrate taste & odor 1.5
√
Zwolle bank filtrate taste & odor 1.5 GAC
√
Katwijk dune filtrate color; T&O 2 PAC
√
Haamstede dune filtrate org. micro’s 1 GAC
√
Ouddorp dune filtrate org. micro’s 3 GAC

remove color, taste and odor and micropollutants. Although
the primary objective was achieved, regrowth caused five
companies to stop ozonation again or to replace ozonation
by activated carbon use (Table 1). In addition, more than
20 groundwater and river bank filtration plants have installed
UV equipment for post disinfection (Kruithof, 2007)
In surface water treatment, six plants have installed
ozonation for primary disinfection and organic contami-
nant control. Assimilable organic compounds produced by
ozonation enhance biological activity in a subsequent acti-
vated carbon filtration step. The impact of bromate formation
has prevented the realization of additional ozone projects.
Three companies cancelled their ozonation projects; two
have replaced them by either primary disinfection by UV
light or primary disinfection and organic contaminant con-
trol by advanced oxidation based on UV/H2 O2 treatment.
A list of surface water plants using ozonation is shown in
Table 2.
The first three facilities were constructed to address organic
micropollutants caused by industrial and agricultural runoff.
The last three were constructed to address issues of pesti-
cides and the ability to inactivate Cryptosporidium. The major
drawback for growth of ozone in The Netherlands is bromate
formation as a standard of 5 µg/L is proposed. To address
this issue, processes involving UV/H2 O2 treatment have been
developed. As a result, the application is ozone in ground
water treatment in the Netherlands is not expected to grow
significantly.
EA3 G Market Survey
At the end of 2004, the IOA-EA3 G Board of Directors con-
ducted a survey to acquire data on the evolution of the ozone
market over the past years with the aim to anticipate future
technical and scientific strategies (Baig, 2005). The survey
was carried out through inquiry addressed to the ozone gener-
ator suppliers within the IOA-EA3 G membership. The compi-
lation of the sales reports shows a 6% growth rate of the ozone
installations in terms of production capacity over the period
1990–2004. The survey included the following for each sale.
• Generator capacity (kg/h);
• Use: drinking water, wastewater, air/odor,
waste/soil, aquaria/zoo/aquaculture, chemicals/
pharmaceuticals, textile, food/agriculture, swim-
ming pool. Cooling tower, medical, electronics,
other;
• Installation location (country);
• Contract year.
A summary of the raw data is presented in Table 3.
Figure 1. shows the growth rate of ozone generators since
1969. Growth rate since 1990 has been about 6%. Along with
an increase in capacity has been the growth of the mean capac-
ity of ozone generators sold, as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2
shows that there has been over a fourfold increase of mean
ozone generator capacity from 1970.
TABLE 3. Ozone Installations in EA3 G Region from 1969–2004

Number of Ozone Capacity

TABLE 2. Surface Water Treatment Plants in The Netherlands
Application Contracts (kg/h)
Using Ozone
Drinking water 652 14,381
Location Source O3 Dose (mg/L) Industrial wastewater 71 1124
Municipal wastewater 9 751
Dordrecht Rhine→Meuse 1.5 Industrial 71 1697
Rotterdam Rhine→Meuse 3.2 Pulp and paper 24 3040
Amsterdam Bethunepolder 2.2 Cooling towers 57 86
Terneuzen Meuse 2.5 Food & Beverage 6 6
Enschede Twente Canal 2 Others/unknown 4 160
Amsterdam Rhine 1.5 Total 894 21246

Review of Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Water Treatment January–February 2012 65

 FIGURE 1. Variation of the percentage of total capacity of ozone generators installed during 1969–2004.

FIGURE 2. Variation of the mean capacity of ozone generators per installation during 1970–2004.

Another interesting trend (Figure 3) is that although drink-
ing water treatment consists of the greatest use for ozone,
other markets are making inroads. The preceding figures do
not give a total picture of growth of water treatment facilities
in the EA3G region as many projects have been sold to North
America. Of interest, as shown in Table 4 is the threefold
increase in projects sold to Asia and the decrease in projects
sold in Europe.
USE OF OZONE FOR DRINKING AND
WASTEWATER IN JAPAN
Drinking Water
Japan has more than 17,000 water treatment plants produc-
ing more than 16 billion m3 of treated water (JWWA, 2008).
These are plants supplying more than 100 people through a
distribution system. Public water works which are designed to
supply water to less than 50,000 residents constitute 97.5% of
the total water works in Japan, and of them 93.7% are serving
a population of less than 5,000. The majority of water supplies
in Japan today are “small-scaled.” Forty-five percent of the
plants are privately owned. This section focuses on the some
2,300 large and mid-scale plants. The percentage of plants
using ozonation is about 2% with about 11% of the total water
being treated with ozone. This indicates that ozone is being
favored in the larger installations.
In the early 1930s, a first trial of ozone application for drink-
ing water treatment began in Japan with two cities in Northern
Kyusyo. The application was stopped due to high humidity and
the expensive cost of electricity (Matsumoto and Watanabe,
1999). Starting in the 1960s the industrialization of Japan

66 B.L. Loeb et al. January–February 2012

 FIGURE 3. Variation of the percentage of ozone generators sold for drinking water treatment.

TABLE 4. Variation of the Distribution in Water Treatment in EA3 G caused many issues with drinking water as the water supply
Region was being contaminated by discharge of industrial wastewater
and untreated domestic wastewater. Odor complaints were
North
becoming more numerous (Ishii and Sato, 2003).
1990 Asia Europe America
A more recent first installation and practical application of
Drinking Water 7 51 28 ozone for drinking water treatment was the Kanzaki water
Industrial Wastewater 0 1 0 treatment plant, Hyogo prefecture in 1973 (Takahara et al.,
2009). To date, more than 50 water treatment plants have
Total: 326.45 kg/h. installed ozonation as an advanced process for the removal
of taste, color and odor and for the control of THM formation.
North These plants are operating in a satisfactory manner. However,
2000 Asia Europe America in Japan, activated carbon filtration (BAC) is required by a
ministerial ordinance after ozonation resulting in a higher cost
Drinking Water 20 7 16
for the advanced purification facility (Takahara et al., 2009).
Industrial Wastewater 2 2 0
As of 2004, there was approximately 42,000 lb/day
(800 kg/h) ozone capacity in operation for drinking water
Total: 1309.342 kg/h.
treatment in Japan (See also Figure 4). Eighty-five percent of

FIGURE 4. Growth of municipal water treatment plants in Japan using ozone (color figure available online).

Review of Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Water Treatment January–February 2012 67

TABLE 5. Use of Ozone in Japan Water Treatment Plants • Advanced oxidation (O3 /H2 O2 ) was evaluated
for reduction of odorous substances and control
Percent of of bromate formation. A dosage of 2.5–5 mole
Ozonation Target Applications H2 O2 /mole O3 was effective in enhanced reduc-
Odor 35 tion of odorous substance and control of bromate
THM Reduction 27 formation.
Color 11 • While operating under the constant control of dis-
NH3 N 13 solved ozone concentration, it was shown that
MBAS 6 the ozone consumption rate greatly depends upon
Cryptosporidium 2 the water temperature. The water temperature also
Pesticides 2 affects transformation of bromide ion to bromate.
Mn 2 When water temperature was less than 10 o C, bro-
Fe 1 mate ion was not produced even if bromide ion
Taste 1 existed in high concentration.

the capacity was from domestically produced ozone genera-
tors. Figure 4 shows the growth of municipal water treatment
plants beginning with the Kanzaki plant.
The most common use of ozone for drinking water treat-
ment in Japan is odor reduction followed by THM removal.
The distribution of ozone use in Japan water treatment plants
is shown in Table 5 (Ishii et al., 2003) (color figure available
online).
Future Research
A joint research team sponsored by the Japan Water Works
Association and the Japan Ozone Association has been assem-
bled and has conducted field testing to determine an optimum
method for drinking water treatment (Takahara et al., 2009).
This work was prompted by the relatively higher cost for
ozonation in Japan due to the requirement for BAC filtration
after ozonation. Conclusions of the research to date are:
• Bio-filtration has the ability to decompose alde-
hydes nearly equal to BAC, even in the winter
season.
Wastewater
The initial use of ozone for wastewater treatment oper-
ations was in the treatment of night soil (Matsumoto and
Watanabe, 1999). Many years ago, sewerage systems in Japan
were incomplete. To minimize environmental pollution from
domestic wastewater, some local authorities began to collect
human waste separately from other domestic effluent. They
were collected by vacuum cars and treated by anaerobic diges-
tion followed by aerobic treatment such as a trickling filter
or biological activated sludge treatment. Ozonation had been
applied to remove color and reduce COD in the effluent.
For many years, treatment of night soil was the largest
consumer of ozone in Japan. More recently, applications for
conventional wastewater treatment as well as drinking water
have been developed.
Since 1990, there has been a very substantial growth in
the number of ozone facilities for municipal wastewater treat-
ment, as shown in Figure 5. In the 1980s only three ozonation
facilities were installed, but the pace increased in the 1990s
during which about three facilities were added every year.
Facilities were installed chiefly in the two major industrial
areas, Tokyo and Kansai (Kyoto, Osaka). Figure 6 shows the

FIGURE 5. Growth of municipal wastewater treatment plants in Japan using ozone (color figure available online).

68 B.L. Loeb et al. January–February 2012

 FIGURE 6. Installation of ozone generators by sector in Japan from 1970 to 2004, (Hashimoto et al., 2009) (color figure available online).

installation of ozone generation capacity by sector, based on treatment capacity ozonation facilities. As shown in Figure 7,
survey made by Hashimoto et al., 2009. oxygen-fed systems have dominated since the late 1990s.
Ozonation of wastewater is used for reclamation of efflu-
ent and final discharge. In a recent survey, the use for ozone Future
was tabulated and shown in Table 6. When ozone is used for
The issue of micropollutants will result in increasing of
final discharge, it is mainly installed as an alternate to chlorine
ozone for wastewater treatment and its usage is expected
disinfection and/or decolorization.
to increase. However, in the Japanese Sewerage Design
Table 7 gives a breakdown of how ozone-treated reclaimed
Standard, only disinfection by ozone is mentioned. The Japan
wastewater is being used.
Sewage Works Agency has set up a Technology Evaluation
The design capacity of plants for final discharge is now
Committee to evaluate new technologies for ozone treatment
treating more than 100,000 m3 /day (26 MGD). Plants for
of municipal wastewater.
reclamation are generally less than 10,000 m3 /day capac-
ity. Ozone dosage ranges from 10–15 mg/L for reclamation
and 5–10 mg/L for final discharge. For reclamation, decol- UNITED STATES – MUNICIPAL DRINKING WATER
orization is necessary requiring the higher dosage. For feed OZONATION
gas, oxygen-fed systems tended to be installed in larger
The first significant installation of ozone in the United
States for drinking water plant occurred in 1940 in Whiting,
TABLE 6. Reasons for Installing Ozonation for Wastewater in Japan Indiana, which employed ozone for control of tastes and odors
(Rice, 1999). In the early 1980s, the City of Los Angeles,
Use for Ozone Percentage
California began studying the use of ozone for coagulation
Reclamation 69 assistance and to increase the filtration rate to as high as
Final Discharge 13 13.5 gallons per minute per square foot (2.4 times the nor-
Final Discharge and Reclamation 18 mally approved rate). The world largest potable water plant
(600 mgd∼ 95,000 m3 /h) went on line in 1987 in Los Angeles
having installed the capacity to produce 10,000 lbs/day of
TABLE 7. Usage of Reclaimed Wastewater from Ozonation in ozone from oxygen. Los Angeles became the first potable
Japan water plant to install its own cryogenic source of oxygen.
During this period the ability of ozone to reduce the chlo-
Application Percentage rine demand of water, thereby reducing the formation of halo-
genated disinfection byproducts was recognized and several
Landscaping 35
plants were built. The Safe Drinking Water Acts Amendments
Lavatory flushing 30
of 1986 addressed the inactivation of pathogenic microorgan-
Sprinkling systems 19
isms, namely Giardia cysts, enteric viruses and Legionella
Recreational 6
bacteria (Rice, 1999). Other regulations that encouraged engi-
Maintenance uses 4
neers to consider ozone were the Ground Water Disinfection
Industrial 2
Rule (1999), the Disinfectants/Disinfection By-products rule
Other 4
and the Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.

Review of Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Water Treatment January–February 2012 69

 FIGURE 7. Installation of ozone generator by feed gas in Japan (color figure available online).

The outbreak of Cryptosporidium in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin in 1993 prompted research into the inactiva-
tion of this microorganism by ozone, and several papers were
published in Ozone: Science & Engineering. Plants began to
be constructed or modified to handle Cryptosporidium. There
was a setback, however, when the USEPA set the CT require-
ments for Cryptosporidium inactivation in cold water (winter
conditions) to be very high. This led to further research and
the introduction of UV technologies for Cryptosporidium
inactivation and other disinfection objectives. However, this
caused only a minor reduction in the growth rate of ozone
system installations due to the many other benefits that
ozone offered water treatment operators. A sample of larger
ozone plant installations in the United States is shown in
Table 8.
In the United States, we are very fortunate to have a
very comprehensive running database of operating ozone
facilities. This database was maintained by Dr. Rip Rice until
about 2000, and has been maintained by Craig Thompson of
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants since 2000 (Thompson, 2011). A
summary of the growth of ozone facilities in the United States
since 1980 is shown in Figure 8. By the end of 2010, the
installed ozone capacity for treating drinking water exceeds
525,000 lb/day!
Figure 8 shows a consistent trend of ozone production
capacity and number of facilities until about 2000. Since 2000,
the growth rate of new ozone facilities is about 8%. Starting
in 2000–2002, the growth rate of installed ozone capacity
has averaged about 25% indicating that larger systems are
being installed at WTPs having significantly greater treat-
ment capacities. Also of interest is the number of plants under
upgrades, either maintaining current ozone system capacity or
increasing capacity. Many of these plants were older air-fed,
low frequency generators; others that are oxygen-fed plants
are upgrading with new technology to reduce electrical energy
consumption and oxygen consumption by operating at higher
ozone concentration. Table 9 lists some selected plants that
have been or are being upgraded.

TABLE 8. Examples of Large Ozone Facilities in the United States

O3 capacity
Plant Location Year (ppd) Feed Gas Objective
Los Angeles Aqueduct Los Angeles, CA 1987 10,000 Cryo Oxygen Filtration Rate, coagulation
Filtration Plant
Elm Fork WTP Dallas, TX 1993 15,000 VPSA T&O, SWTR, CT
Canal Road WTP Elizabethtown, NJ 1996 3,000 Air SWTR, T&O, color, TOC
Linnwood WTP Milwaukee, WI 1998 6,900 LOX Cryptosporidium
E. M. Johnson WTP Raleigh, NC 1999 6,300 LOX CT, T&O, DBP
Tolt River WTP Seattle, WA 2000 6,600 LOX Cryptosporidium
East Side WTP Dallas, TX 2003 28,000 LOX
AM Smith WTP Las Vegas, NV 2003 20,000 LOX THM, Cryptosporidium
Jensen WTP Los Angeles, CA 2003 18,750 LOX CT, DBP
Walnut Hill WTP Boston, MA 2003 13,600 LOX CT
Hillsborough WTP Tampa, FL 2006 9,000 LOX
Weymouth WTP La Verne, CA 2009 13,400 LOX
Skinner WTP Tamecula, CA 2010 18,000 LOX CT, DBP

70 B.L. Loeb et al. January–February 2012

 600 15.0

500 12.5
Ozone Capacity & Number of Plants

Ozone Capacity (1,000 lbs)

400 Number of Plants 10.0

WTPs with System Upgrade

Total Capacity
Total WTP Capacity (BGD)
300 7.5

200 5.0

100 2.5

0 0.0
1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013
Year

FIGURE 8. Growth of ozone facilities and ozone capacity in the USA from 1980–present. Data from Thompson (2011) (color figure available
online).

TABLE 9. Selected Examples of Ozone Plant Upgrades

Capacity
Original (ppd)
Plant Location Operation Upgrade Original Upgraded Reason for Upgrade
LAAFP Los Angeles, CA 1987 1996–2010 10,000 13,000 Capacity increase
Haworth WTP Hackensack, NJ 1989 2012 2,700 2,700 Air→LOX; new technology
Ashland WTP Lincoln, NE 1994 2010 1,050 2,600 Air→LOX; capacity increase
Rio Vista WTP Santa Clara, CA 1995 2011 2,000 5,000 Capacity increase; new technology
Bollman WTP Concord, CA 1999 2011 3,060 4,080 Capacity increase; new technology
River Mountain WTP Las Vegas, NV 2002 2005 6,000 10,000 Capacity increase due to drought
Henrico County WTP Richmond, VA 2004 2009 3,000 6,000 Capacity increase

Figure 9 shows the application of ozone in major water
treatment plants (>1000 ppd) erected beginning in 1990.
The largest applications of ozone are to establish CT or
for removal of taste and odor followed by Cryptosporidium
inactivation.
ozone has changed, and plants with ozone in conjunction with
UV are being considered so as to reduce the ozone demand
required for Cryptosporidium inactivation. It is also antici-
pated that plants will continue to upgrade, installing newer
high concentration ozone technology to reduce operating
costs and to reduce the plant footprint.

Future
Based on presentations by consulting engineers at recent UNITED STATES – MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER
IOA and AWWA conferences, there is no reason to believe OZONATION
that ozone for drinking water in the United States is reach-
ing maturity. Several plants with expected startup dates up to The use of ozone in wastewater treatment gained accep-
2013 have been identified, particularly in Texas. The role of tance in the United States during the 1970s and early 1980s,

Review of Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Water Treatment January–February 2012 71


FIGURE 9. Use of ozone in major (>1000 lb/day O3 ) water
treatment plants erected since 1990 (color figure available online).
when the USEPA encouraged new and innovative technolo-
gies by providing construction funds (up to 75%) for new
wastewater treatment facilities. Table 10 provides a historical
summary of the number of known and planned wastewater
ozone plants by time period (Drago et al., 2007). Forty-
nine ozone wastewater systems were put into service between
1975 and 2004, although only seven of these systems are
known to be currently operating in 2007. In addition, upgrades
of three existing ozone wastewater systems and two projects
in which ozone is being reinstalled in wastewater plants that
previously used ozone are scheduled for 2006–2008. One new
installation, currently under design, was expected to start up
in 2009.
As can been seen from Table 10, most of the
wastewater ozone installations occurred during the first 10-
year (1975–1984) period, when USEPA Clean Water grant
funding was available. The median WWTP plant size using
ozone was 2 MGD and the median ozone capacity was
400 pounds per day (lb/day). During the subsequent 20 years
(1985–2004), the median plant size for the six WWTPs adding
ozone facilities increased to 14 MGD, with a median ozone
capacity of about 2,000 lb/day. The ozone systems at five
WWTPs were expanded and/or upgraded at least once during
the 30-year period (1975–2004).
TABLE 10. Historical Wastewater Facilities Using Ozone (Drago et al., 2007)
System
New Expansions/
Period (Years) Installations Retrofits
1975–1984 43 1 44
1985–1994 4 2
1995–2004 2 2
2005–20101 1 5
1 Based on available information.
72 B.L. Loeb et al.
The bulk of these systems were air fed with about 15 using
oxygen for the feed gas; these were primarily the higher
capacity systems. Oxygen fed system capacity ranged from
200 lb/day to 2,130 lb/day with an average capacity of
740 lb/day. These systems often were associated with plants
employing oxygen active sludge processes, such as UNOX,
where excess oxygen was available.
Many of the plants were idled, with only 20 plants oper-
ating in 1989. The other plants were shut down because
of equipment problems or contract disputes, or had been
replaced for economic reasons. The air-fed plants were the
most troublesome.
There is a renewed interest as regulations become more
stringent, water shortages become more frequent, and pub-
lic perception of the quality of the nation’s waters changes.
Several potential ozone applications at municipal wastewater
treatment plants include (Oneby et al., 2010):
1. Disinfection of secondary effluent;
2. Sludge conditioning;
3. Odor control;
4. Preoxidation of primary effluent.
The four ozone application points are shown in a general-
ized process flow diagram in Figure 10. Ozone is an effective
disinfectant in wastewater applications, proven by scores of
installations. Research indicates ozonating return activated
sludge (RAS) can reduce sludge production and improve set-
tling and dewatering. As demonstrated in various other air
treatment applications, ozone can be used to reduce odor that
may impact adjacent properties by treating air collected from
unit processes particularly from the headworks and prelimi-
nary treatment processes, both of which can generate strong
noxious odors. Preoxidation of primary effluent can improve
biological removal of refractory or non-biodegradable organic
compounds in the secondary treatment process.
Of the four application points listed, disinfection of sec-
ondary effluent is found in U.S. municipal applications.
In addition to disinfection, ozone reduces color and increases
dissolved oxygen (DO) levels. These additional benefits may
apply to parameters listed in a facility’s NPDES permit.
Table 11 lists several WWTPs that are currently operat-
ing. All except one of these plants have been upgraded and
essentially all are now operating with oxygen feed.
Total Median Flow Median Ozone
Projects Capacity (MGD) Capacity (lb/day)
2 400
6 21 1,900
4 14 1,800
7 60 2,000
January–February 2012
 Comments on two of the plants:
• El Paso, TX, Fred Hervey Water Reclamation
Plant treats wastewater for recharge. The com-
plete treatment program combines a conven-
tional activated sludge process with powdered
activated carbon (PAC). Advanced treatment pro-
cesses include lime treatment, recarbonation, ter-
tiary filtration, granular activated carbon adsorp-
tion and ozonation. The treated effluent is used
for irrigation and cooling water at a nearby power
plant with the remaining effluent being injected
into an aquifer at a depth of 800 feet.
• The Gwinnett County, GA, plant features a con-
ventional activated sludge process followed by a
tertiary treatment train which consists of chemical
clarification followed by granular media filtra-
tion, pre-ozone, GAC adsorption and post ozone.
A second phase of expansion will use membrane
filtration in place of granular media filtration.
Table 12 lists ozone wastewater facilities which are under
construction or in startup. The two Indianapolis facilities
were originally operated in the 1980s but shut down for eco-
nomic and operational reasons. They are being refitted with
new technology ozone generators, with ozone being used
for final disinfection. As of this writing the ozone system
improvements are substantially complete, and system startup
is on-hold until the high-purity oxygen supply is completed to
permit starting operation of the upgraded ozone facility.
The Clark County Water Reclamation District owns and
operates several WWTPs. The main facility includes the

O3
3 Odor control

1 Disinfection
4 Pre-oxidation
Screenings Primary O3
Grit Removal Clarification O3 Filtration Disinfection
Secondary Treatment

RAS

Sludge Conditioning 2 O3 WAS

Sludge Digestion Sludge Dewatering

FIGURE 10. Potential ozone applications at municipal wastewater plants (Oneby et al., 2010) (color figure available online).

TABLE 11. Currently Operating Ozone Facilities Constructed between 1975 and 1985 (Drago et al., 2007)

Ozone Ozone
Year Installed ADWF1 Production Ozone Dose Treatment
Location (Upgraded) m /h/(mgd)
3
Feed Gas kg/h/(lb/d) mg/L Objective
Mahoning 1978 1,300 (8.0) Air 7.6 (400) 4 Disinfection
County, Ohio (1995) 9.5 (500)
Springfield, 1978 4,700 (30) Cryo 77 (4,100) 3 Disinfection
Missouri (2000) 45 (2,400)
Frankfort, 1980 1,100 (7.0) Air 11 (600) 4–8 Disinfection
Kentucky (2007) 6,300 (40) LOX 19 (1,000)
Hagerstown, 1982 1,300 (8.0) PSA 19 (1,000) 10 Disinfection
Maryland1 (1990) 1,900 (12) 26 (1,400)
El Paso 1985 1,600 (10) LOX 17 (900) 5.4 Disinfection,
Texas (2008) 17 (900) Reuse
Trion 1997 1,300 (8.0) LOX 34 (1,800) 27 Color,
Georgia Disinfection
Gwinnett County, 2003 2,600 (17) LOX 51 (2,700) 2.7 (pre) Disinfection,
Georgia (2006) 7,900 (50) 89 (4,700) 1.3 (post) Reuse
1 Scheduled to be removed from service in November 2010 and replaced with UV as part of a plant upgrade due to hydraulic constraints.
Note: 1). Average Dry Weather Flow.

Review of Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Water Treatment January–February 2012 73

TABLE 12. Ozone Facilities under Construction in 2009

ADWF1 Feed Ozone Production Ozone Ozone Treatment

Location Project Type m3 /h/(mgd) Gas kg/h/(lb/d) Dose mg/L Objective
Indianapolis, Indiana Upgrade 17,000 (110) VSA 230 (12,000) 6 Disinfection
Indianapolis, Indiana Upgrade 17,000 (110) VSA 230 (12,000) 6 Disinfection
Clark County, Nevada New 4,700 (30) LOX 114 (6,000) 8 Disinfection, Reuse

Note: 1). Average Dry Weather Flow.

central plant (CP) plus an adjacent advanced water treat- In May 2000, seven people died, and approximately
ment facility (AWT). The AWT is being augmented with a 2,500 residents fell ill after Walkerton’s drinking water sup-
4,700 m3 /h (30 mgd) demonstration facility to test a treatment ply was contaminated with E. coli bacteria. This tragedy
train incorporating membrane filtration and ozone disinfection prompted a review of water treatment practices. To assist in
for improved effluent quality. The current plan is to expand this, the Ontario government in October 2004 established the
the demonstration facility to 24,000 m3 /h (150 mgd) (Oneby Walkerton Clean Water Centre to help the government take
et al., 2010). practical solutions to ensure clean water for all Ontarians.
Clark County made a conscious decision to proactively To fulfill this mandate, the Centre works to continuously
create a high quality effluent for protection of the region’s advance the training and education of Ontario’s drinking
drinking water supply. Selection of the membrane filtration water systems operators and owners especially those serving
and ozone treatment train for the demonstration project was rural and remote communities.
based on the following: The Walkerton Clean Water Centre works with the
• Enhanced phosphorus removal; Ministry of the Environment and different stakeholders to
• Improved removals of pathogenic bacteria and identify and prioritize drinking water research needs that
viruses; the Centre could sponsor independently or in partnership
• Removal of PPCPs, EDCs and other microcontam- with other agencies. The Centre opened a comprehensive
inants. Technology Demonstration facility dedicated to train opera-
tors of the drinking water systems in Ontario (Jasim et al,
In this plant, ozone will be applied after membrane filtra- 2007, 2008). A list of ozone installations in Canada as of
tion of the effluent. 1999 is shown in Table 13. Table 14 summarizes recent ozone
With the issue of micropollutants being highly visible, it is installations.
expected that the market for ozone in municipal wastewater
treatment will grow at an aggressive rate as water pro-
fessionals recognize the multifaceted beneficial role ozone Wastewater
can play in addressing this and other issues. Oxygen-fed The issue of bacteria, viruses, harmful pharmaceutical
ozone generators are much more reliable and much more drugs and industrial chemicals in municipal wastewater has
efficient than 20 years ago. New gas transfer and contac-
tor designs, including using Venturi-injectors have reduced TABLE 13. Summary of Ozone Installations in Canada as of 1999
the cost to introduce ozone into the wastewater as well (Larocque, 1999)
as improved system reliability and maintainability.
Municipal
Drinking Municipal Industrial
Location Water Wastewater Water
USE OF OZONE FOR DRINKING AND
WASTEWATER IN CANADA British Columbia 1 0 3
Alberta 2 0 5
Drinking Water
Saskatchewan 1 0 2
The first commercial application of ozone on a sustained Manitoba 3 0 2
basis for the treatment of drinking water can be traced back Ontario 15 6 8
to 1954 when Ste. Therese, Quebec installed Otto Plate-type Quebec 40 2 10
ozone generators, imported from France, for the disinfection Nova Scotia 2 0 3
of drinking water (Larocque, 1999). New Brunswick 1 0 1
There was a slow growth of ozone installations until 1979, Prince Edward Island 0 0 0
when the city of Montreal installed 9600 lb/day ozone capac- Newfoundland 2 0 1
ity (182 kg/h). This installation was an air-fed system with Yukon & Territories 1 0 1
medium frequency ozone generators, which were updated in Total Canada 68 8 36
the late 1990s.

74 B.L. Loeb et al. January–February 2012

TABLE 14. Recent Installations of Ozone for Drinking Water in to be huge – perhaps in the neighborhood of 100,000 ppd
Canada (1800 kg/h).
Ozone
Installation Capacity
Plant Location Date (ppd) THE FUTURE FOR OZONE TREATMENT OF
DRINKING WATER AND WASTEWATER
AH Weeks WTP Windsor, ON 2001 2200
Coquitlam WTP Vancouver, BC 2002 6180 A report Water Technology Markets 2010 – Key
Burlington WTP Burlington, OH 2003 2650 Opportunities and Emerging Trends was published by Global
Ville de Oka Quebec 2004 ? Water Intelligence (GWI) in 2009 with contribution from IOA
WTP corporate members.
Portage la Prairie Manitoba 2004 ? The report first reviews the drivers affecting the water
WTP sector in order to point out the related trends in the water
technology market. The Drivers section is followed by sev-
eral technical sections, one of them being dedicated to
been of great concern to water treatment professions in “Disinfection” technologies (or Oxidation technologies) cov-
Quebec for quite some time. In the early 1990s, the Montreal ering ultraviolet systems, ozonation, chlorination and some
waste water treatment station, along with various partners, Advanced Oxidation Processes.
began studying two different chlorine-free processes for dis- The water technologies covered in the report are shown
infection; ozonation and ultraviolet radiations. In 1997, a joint to enjoy strong growth prospects although the water indus-
committee of representatives from the plant, the provincial try as a whole is expected to grow slowly at an average
environmental department and the municipal and regional rate of 5.6% between 2007 and 2016. Of interest for IOA
affairs department were given a mandate to analyze all current members, oxidation technologies (excluding chlorination) are
research, conduct pilot projects and recommend the best disin- among the technologies enjoying the strongest growth rates
fection method for Montreal. In November, 2008 the commit- with membranes, sludge management and automatic meter-
tee concluded that ozonation was the most effective oxidant ing. Figure 11 shows the project market for ozonation and
for eliminating bacteria, viruses and harmful chemicals and AOP equipment through 2016.
was less harmful to marine life. The global ozone market is estimated at USD 361 mil-
In January, 2008 it was announced that Montreal plans lion in 2010 and is expected to exceed US$ 597 million
to be the first metropolis in the world to disinfect all of by 2016 according to a CAGR of 9.6%. Figure 12 shows
its waste water using ozonation. The city is seeking fund- the details on distribution according to the sub-markets by
ing to add a $200 million (Canada) ozonation facility to its application. (These results seem surprising and warrant more
current treatment plant. The Montreal plant is responsible for study). As a result, the ozone market reaches $3.33 Billion for
treating 45% to 50% of Quebec’s total wastewater. The tim- the period 2010–2016. The top 3 ozone geographical markets
ing for the completion of the plant and the ozone capacity includes East Asia Pacific (34.9%), North America (26.5%)
has not yet been announced; the ozone capacity is expected and Western Europe (22.1%) (Figure 13). This offers valuable

0.7
Ozonation
Advanced oxidation CAGR 7.6%
0.6

0.5
USD billions

0.4

CAGR 31.9%
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

FIGURE 11. Ozonation and AOPs equipment market forecast 2007–2016.

Review of Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Water Treatment January–February 2012 75

 300
Drinking water
Municipal wastewater
Industrial water applications
250

USD millions
200

150

100

50
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

FIGURE 12. Global ozone market forecast per application field 2007–2016.

0.60%
frica
aha ran A
S ub-S
ia 1.50%
h As
Sout
2.90%
Asia
/Ce ntral
urope
ern E 5.60%
East th Af
rica
/Nor
le East
Midd 5.80%
ibean
a& Carr
Americ
Latin pe 22.10%
Euro
tern
Wes
26.50%
rica
Ame
North
ic 34.90%
sia Pacif
East A
0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00%

FIGURE 13. Forecast of ozone market distribution per geographical area 2010–2016.

insight into how efforts should be devoted in the coming years Böhme, A., “Ozone Technology of German Industrial Enterprises”, Ozone
and offers outstanding perspectives for new IOA development Sci. Eng., 21(2):163–176 (1999).
Drago, J. A., Y.C. Leong, and C.M. Thompson “Municipal Wastewater
in Asia. Ozonation Practice in the United States: Past, Present and Future,”
Proceedings of the 2007 World Congress on Ozone and Ultraviolet
Technologies, Los Angeles, Int’l Ozone Assn., Scottsdale, AZ.
MANUSCRIPT UPDATE (2007).
Global Water Intelligence, “Water Technology Markets 2910: Key
This paper will evolve as more up-to-date and accurate data Opportunities and Emerging Trends”, ISBN 978-0-9547705-9-4
(2009).
are received from worldwide installations. For latest updates,
Hashimoto, T., H. Nazazawa, T. Murakimi, “State of Ozonation to Municipal
seek out Ozone News or contact the author. Wastewater Treatment in Japan”, Proceedings of 19th Ozone World
Congress, Tokyo, Japan, Paper 4-K-1 (2009).
Ishii, K., and K. Sato, “Current Situation and Future Estimation of Ozonation
REFERENCES in Water Treatment in Japan”, Proceedings of 18th Ozone World Congress,
Las Vegas, NV, 652–667 (2003).
Baig, S., “Ozone Market Survey”. Proceedings of IOA 2005 World Congress, Japan Water Works Association (JWWA), “Water Supply in Japan”, www.
Strasbourg, France, pp SW2.1–2 (2005). jwwa.or.jp/english (2008).

76 B.L. Loeb et al. January–February 2012

Jasim, S. Y., S. Ndiongue, B. Johnson, L. Schweitzer, and D. Borikar,
“The Effect of Ozone on Cold Water Coagulation”, Proceedings of IOS
2007 World Congress, Los Angeles CA: 100–111 (2007).
Jasim, S.Y., S. Ndiongue, B. Johnson, L. Schweitzer, and D. Borikar, “The
Effect of Ozone on Cold Water Coagulation”, Ozone Sci. Eng., 30(1):
27–33 (2008).
Kruithof, J., “State of the Art of the Use of Ozonation, UV Treatment and
Related AOP’s in Dutch Drinking Water Treatment”, Proceedings
of IOA 2007 World Congress, Los Angeles, CA, pp 23–34
(2007).
Langlais, B., D. Reckhow, D. Brink, Ozone in Water Treatment: Application
and Engineering, (Denver, CO, USA: AWWA Research Foundation,
1991) pp 4–8.
Larocque, R., “Ozone Applications in Canada – A State of the Art Review”,
Ozone Sci. Eng., 21(2):119–126 (1999).
Review of Worldwide Ozone Capacity for Water Treatment
View publication stats
Le Paulouë, J. and B. Langlais, “State of the Art of Ozonation in France”,
Ozone Sci. Eng., 21(2):153–162 (1999).
Matsumoto, N. and K. Watanabe, “Foot Prints and Future Steps of Ozone
Applications in Japan”, Ozone Sci. Eng., 21(2):127–138 (1999).
Oneby, M.A., C.O Bromley, J.H. Borchard, and D.S. Harrison, “Ozone
Treatment of Secondary Effluent at US Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Plants” Ozone Sci. Eng., 32(1):43–55 (2010).
Rice, R.G., “Ozone in the United States of America – State of the Art”, Ozone
Sci. Eng., 21(2):99–118 (1999).
Takahara, H., Y. Kato, S. Nakayama, Y. Kobayashi, Y. Kudo, H. Tsuno, and
I. Somiya, “Estimation of an Appropriate Ozonation System in Water
Purification Plant”, Proceedings of 19th Ozone World Congress, Tokyo,
Japan, Paper 17–2 (2009).
Thompson, C., Communication, “WTP Ozone Database” (2011),
CraigThompson@KennedyJenks.com.
January–February 2012 77