Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241682906
CITATIONS READS
29 167
5 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Barry L. Loeb on 03 February 2017.
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
One question often raised when ozone professionals gather is over 700 ozonation plants were in operation in France, pri-
“How much ozone capacity is installed?” Although the use of ozone marily for drinking water (Le Paulouë and Langlais, 1999).
for industrial purposes is growing, the largest use for ozone resides
in the use of treatment of municipal drinking and wastewater. It is
The first major application of ozone for drinking water in
very difficult to summarize ozone capacity for industrial applications France (and the world) was in Nice in 1906 where ozone
as much data are kept confidential. A number of reports have been was used to disinfect 22,500 m3 /day of slow sand filtered
published over the years on installed ozone capacity. Ozone capacity water from the Vesubie River. Ozone-treated water was first
estimation is a moving target as plants are built and others removed delivered to Paris in 1909. The early ozone generators were
from service for a number of reasons. This paper summarizes, using
data available, ozone capacity for drinking water and wastewater.
water-cooled plate type. The growth of ozone in France
Focus is on the United States, Canada, Europe and Japan. IOA mem- continued with major plant installations, for example:
bers and member companies are encouraged to submit additional data
to enable this summary to be as accurate and relevant as possible. • Neuilly Sur Marne (Paris) 1988. 600,000 m3 /d
water; 140 kg/h O3 (7,400ppd)
Keywords Ozone, Ozone Installations, France, Netherlands, • Choisy le Roi (Paris) 1994. 900,000 m3 /d water;
Germany, United States, Canada 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
USE OF OZONE FOR DRINKING AND the choice for drinking water disinfection in France with
WASTEWATER IN EUROPE/ASIA—INTRODUCTION most major cities using this treatment. Thus, future growth
is modest although there continue to be facility upgrades.
Several years ago, the IOA-EA3G Group surveyed ozone Germany. Full-scale ozonation plants were built in
generator suppliers in order to develop a market survey on the Germany beginning in the 1950s (Langlais et al., 1991). Some
use of ozone and its distribution throughout the EA3G region. plants ozonate water before it is reinjected into the aquifer.
The results of this survey will be discussed later in this sec- Drinking water quality as required in line with the German
tion. First, some comments are offered on the development of Drinking Water Act often cannot be reached without the
ozone in selected regions. 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-
Regional Developments ties using ozone. The major use of ozone for water treatment
France. France is considered as the cradle of ozonation in Germany however is for the treatment of swimming pool
with test of water disinfection beginning in 1886. By 1990, 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.
Received 5/24/2011; Accepted 11/9/2011
Address correspondence to Barry L. Loeb, 9731 Pebble View Netherlands. For groundwater treatment, eight plants
Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45252, USA. E-mail: blloeb@fuse.net have been upgraded with ozonation for disinfection and to
remove color, taste and odor and micropollutants. Although EA3 G Market Survey
the primary objective was achieved, regrowth caused five At the end of 2004, the IOA-EA3 G Board of Directors con-
companies to stop ozonation again or to replace ozonation ducted a survey to acquire data on the evolution of the ozone
by activated carbon use (Table 1). In addition, more than market over the past years with the aim to anticipate future
20 groundwater and river bank filtration plants have installed technical and scientific strategies (Baig, 2005). The survey
UV equipment for post disinfection (Kruithof, 2007) was carried out through inquiry addressed to the ozone gener-
In surface water treatment, six plants have installed ator suppliers within the IOA-EA3 G membership. The compi-
ozonation for primary disinfection and organic contami- lation of the sales reports shows a 6% growth rate of the ozone
nant control. Assimilable organic compounds produced by installations in terms of production capacity over the period
ozonation enhance biological activity in a subsequent acti- 1990–2004. The survey included the following for each sale.
vated carbon filtration step. The impact of bromate formation
has prevented the realization of additional ozone projects. • Generator capacity (kg/h);
Three companies cancelled their ozonation projects; two • Use: drinking water, wastewater, air/odor,
have replaced them by either primary disinfection by UV waste/soil, aquaria/zoo/aquaculture, chemicals/
light or primary disinfection and organic contaminant con- pharmaceuticals, textile, food/agriculture, swim-
trol by advanced oxidation based on UV/H2 O2 treatment. ming pool. Cooling tower, medical, electronics,
A list of surface water plants using ozonation is shown in other;
Table 2. • Installation location (country);
The first three facilities were constructed to address organic • Contract year.
micropollutants caused by industrial and agricultural runoff. A summary of the raw data is presented in Table 3.
The last three were constructed to address issues of pesti- Figure 1. shows the growth rate of ozone generators since
cides and the ability to inactivate Cryptosporidium. The major 1969. Growth rate since 1990 has been about 6%. Along with
drawback for growth of ozone in The Netherlands is bromate an increase in capacity has been the growth of the mean capac-
formation as a standard of 5 µg/L is proposed. To address ity of ozone generators sold, as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2
this issue, processes involving UV/H2 O2 treatment have been shows that there has been over a fourfold increase of mean
developed. As a result, the application is ozone in ground ozone generator capacity from 1970.
water treatment in the Netherlands is not expected to grow
significantly.
TABLE 3. Ozone Installations in EA3 G Region from 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- These are plants supplying more than 100 people through a
ing water treatment consists of the greatest use for ozone, distribution system. Public water works which are designed to
other markets are making inroads. The preceding figures do supply water to less than 50,000 residents constitute 97.5% of
not give a total picture of growth of water treatment facilities the total water works in Japan, and of them 93.7% are serving
in the EA3G region as many projects have been sold to North a population of less than 5,000. The majority of water supplies
America. Of interest, as shown in Table 4 is the threefold in Japan today are “small-scaled.” Forty-five percent of the
increase in projects sold to Asia and the decrease in projects plants are privately owned. This section focuses on the some
sold in Europe. 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
USE OF OZONE FOR DRINKING AND favored in the larger installations.
WASTEWATER IN JAPAN In the early 1930s, a first trial of ozone application for drink-
ing water treatment began in Japan with two cities in Northern
Drinking Water Kyusyo. The application was stopped due to high humidity and
Japan has more than 17,000 water treatment plants produc- the expensive cost of electricity (Matsumoto and Watanabe,
ing more than 16 billion m3 of treated water (JWWA, 2008). 1999). Starting in the 1960s the industrialization of Japan
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).
Wastewater
the capacity was from domestically produced ozone genera- The initial use of ozone for wastewater treatment oper-
tors. Figure 4 shows the growth of municipal water treatment ations was in the treatment of night soil (Matsumoto and
plants beginning with the Kanzaki plant. Watanabe, 1999). Many years ago, sewerage systems in Japan
The most common use of ozone for drinking water treat- were incomplete. To minimize environmental pollution from
ment in Japan is odor reduction followed by THM removal. domestic wastewater, some local authorities began to collect
The distribution of ozone use in Japan water treatment plants human waste separately from other domestic effluent. They
is shown in Table 5 (Ishii et al., 2003) (color figure available were collected by vacuum cars and treated by anaerobic diges-
online). tion followed by aerobic treatment such as a trickling filter
or biological activated sludge treatment. Ozonation had been
Future Research applied to remove color and reduce COD in the effluent.
For many years, treatment of night soil was the largest
A joint research team sponsored by the Japan Water Works
consumer of ozone in Japan. More recently, applications for
Association and the Japan Ozone Association has been assem-
conventional wastewater treatment as well as drinking water
bled and has conducted field testing to determine an optimum
have been developed.
method for drinking water treatment (Takahara et al., 2009).
Since 1990, there has been a very substantial growth in
This work was prompted by the relatively higher cost for
the number of ozone facilities for municipal wastewater treat-
ozonation in Japan due to the requirement for BAC filtration
ment, as shown in Figure 5. In the 1980s only three ozonation
after ozonation. Conclusions of the research to date are:
facilities were installed, but the pace increased in the 1990s
• Bio-filtration has the ability to decompose alde- during which about three facilities were added every year.
hydes nearly equal to BAC, even in the winter Facilities were installed chiefly in the two major industrial
season. 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).
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.
The outbreak of Cryptosporidium in Milwaukee, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants since 2000 (Thompson, 2011). A
Wisconsin in 1993 prompted research into the inactiva- summary of the growth of ozone facilities in the United States
tion of this microorganism by ozone, and several papers were since 1980 is shown in Figure 8. By the end of 2010, the
published in Ozone: Science & Engineering. Plants began to installed ozone capacity for treating drinking water exceeds
be constructed or modified to handle Cryptosporidium. There 525,000 lb/day!
was a setback, however, when the USEPA set the CT require- Figure 8 shows a consistent trend of ozone production
ments for Cryptosporidium inactivation in cold water (winter capacity and number of facilities until about 2000. Since 2000,
conditions) to be very high. This led to further research and the growth rate of new ozone facilities is about 8%. Starting
the introduction of UV technologies for Cryptosporidium in 2000–2002, the growth rate of installed ozone capacity
inactivation and other disinfection objectives. However, this has averaged about 25% indicating that larger systems are
caused only a minor reduction in the growth rate of ozone being installed at WTPs having significantly greater treat-
system installations due to the many other benefits that ment capacities. Also of interest is the number of plants under
ozone offered water treatment operators. A sample of larger upgrades, either maintaining current ozone system capacity or
ozone plant installations in the United States is shown in increasing capacity. Many of these plants were older air-fed,
Table 8. low frequency generators; others that are oxygen-fed plants
In the United States, we are very fortunate to have a are upgrading with new technology to reduce electrical energy
very comprehensive running database of operating ozone consumption and oxygen consumption by operating at higher
facilities. This database was maintained by Dr. Rip Rice until ozone concentration. Table 9 lists some selected plants that
about 2000, and has been maintained by Craig Thompson of have been or are being upgraded.
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
500 12.5
Ozone Capacity & Number of Plants
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).
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 ozone has changed, and plants with ozone in conjunction with
treatment plants (>1000 ppd) erected beginning in 1990. UV are being considered so as to reduce the ozone demand
The largest applications of ozone are to establish CT or required for Cryptosporidium inactivation. It is also antici-
for removal of taste and odor followed by Cryptosporidium pated that plants will continue to upgrade, installing newer
inactivation. 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,
TABLE 10. Historical Wastewater Facilities Using Ozone (Drago et al., 2007)
System
New Expansions/ Total Median Flow Median Ozone
Period (Years) Installations Retrofits Projects Capacity (MGD) Capacity (lb/day)
1975–1984 43 1 44 2 400
1985–1994 4 2 6 21 1,900
1995–2004 2 2 4 14 1,800
2005–20101 1 5 7 60 2,000
1 Based on available information.
O3
3 Odor control
1 Disinfection
4 Pre-oxidation
Screenings Primary O3
Grit Removal Clarification O3 Filtration Disinfection
Secondary Treatment
RAS
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.
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.
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
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).