Implementation of chlorine dioxide disinfection: Effects of the treatment change on drinking water quality in a full-scale distribution system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drinking water utilities may have to consider changing disinfectant to improve water quality and meet more stringent disinfection regulations. The objective of this study was to evaluate the response of a full-scale drinking water distribution system to a change in disinfectant from chlorine to chlorine dioxide, in terms of its impact on microbiological stability and disinfection by-product formation. Chlorine dioxide residuals were consistently present above detection limits throughout the distribution system (>0.20 mg/L). Over a study period of 3.5 months, no degradation of bacterial water quality occurred after implementing the new disinfectant. Chlorine dioxide maintained total bacteria (microscopic counts) and heterotrophic plate count levels below 2 x 105 cells/mL and 1000 CFU/mL, respectively. The change in disinfectant from chlorine to chlorine dioxide led to an 85% reduction in trihalomethanes (i.e., from 30 to 5 μμg/L) and a 60% reduction in haloacetic acids (i.e., from 20 to 8 μμg/L). Chlorine dioxide represents a valuable tool to produce high quality water and is a strong alternative to chlorine for certain distribution systems. Key words: distribution system, chlorine dioxide, drinking water quality, disinfection by-products.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".