Copper

    group 11 · period 4 · d-block · transition metal

    fullCopper is regulated at the tap (WHO 2 mg/L, EU 2.0 mg/L, US action level 1.3 mg/L at the 90th percentile) because household copper plumbing, not the source, puts it in drinking water; it is dosed on purpose as an algaecide and for Legionella control, it has a CWW BAT-AEL of 5 to 50 µg/L and metal finishing and mine drainage limits, and its chemistry in water is the corrosion and scale chemistry of copper pipe.

    Typical wastewaters

    • municipal sewage (plumbing corrosion) Cu²⁺ and its carbonate and hydroxo complexes; a four fold increase measured downstream of a sewage treatment plant on the River Stour
    • copper plating and metal finishing Cu²⁺ in rinse water, complexed by ammonia or EDTA in some baths; 3.38 daily maximum and 2.07 mg/L monthly average
    • copper mining and flotation mills total copper 0.30 daily maximum and 0.15 mg/L monthly average
    • power plant metal cleaning wastes total copper with iron, 1.0 mg/L
    • textile dyeing and leather tanning copper from dyes and auxiliaries; 1, 0.5 and 0.25 mg/L by ZDHC level
    • chemical sector effluent total copper 5.0 to 50 µg/L after precipitation and solids separation
    In the ledger's plant and process records, discharged by: Ethylene dichloride and vinyl chloride monomer (Chemicals) · Phosphoric acid (wet process) (Chemicals) · Silicones (polydimethylsiloxane) (Chemicals) · Speciality inorganic pigments (iron oxide, chromium oxide, CIC, zinc sulphide, lithopone) (Chemicals) · Base metal ores (Cu, Ni, Pb, Sn, Zn) (Mining) · Bauxite, alumina, magnesite and ilmenite (Mining) · Industrial minerals (potash, salt, kaolin, magnesite and others) (Mining) · Iron ore and other metalliferous ores (Co, Cr, Mn, Mo, V, W) (Mining) · Precious metal ores (Au, Ag, Pt): gold and silver extraction (Mining) · Uranium ore (Mining) · Processes involving heavy metals (Pharmaceuticals) · Printing (Textile) · Reactive dyeing of cotton (Textile)

    1 · Identity

    Symbol, number
    Cu, 29
    Oxidation states in water
    +2 as Cu²⁺ and its carbonate and hydroxo complexes, the dissolved form in oxic water and the blue green stain; +1 as Cu₂O cuprite in the scale on copper pipe and as CuCl₂⁻ in chloride rich or reducing water; 0 as the metal of tubes, fittings and roofs, which oxidises to both. The element entry sets out the two working states; here the +2 state does the dissolving and the solids on the pipe wall decide how much.
    Note
    Copper in drinking water is a plumbing problem: WHO reports raw water copper is rarely a contaminant and conventional treatment does not remove it, so the chapter is about release, control at the tap, and removal from industrial effluent.

    2 · Occurrence in water

    Natural sources
    Weathering of copper sulfide and carbonate minerals; complexed with organic matter or particulate in surface water (WHO: copper is primarily present in complexes or as particulate matter). Background in an upper catchment control site 0.001 mg/L.
    Anthropogenic sources
    Corrosion of interior copper plumbing, the primary source in drinking water (WHO); copper sulfate pentahydrate added to reservoirs against algae; copper-silver ionisation in building hot water; copper plating and metal finishing (US limit 3.38 mg/L daily), copper mining and flotation mills (0.30 mg/L), power plant metal cleaning wastes (1.0 mg/L), copper in textile dye effluent (ZDHC), sewage effluent (four fold increase downstream of a treatment plant on the River Stour); the ledger's mining, chemical and textile chapters carry the plant figures.
    matrixtypical rangenote
    surface water, USA0.0005 to 1 mg/L
    region-dependent, older surveys
    several studies; median 0.01 mg/L (ATSDR)
    surface water, UK River Stour and India River Periyar (unpolluted zone)0.003 to 0.019 (mean 0.006); 0.0008 to 0.010 mg/Lbackground 0.001 mg/L; four fold increase below a sewage treatment plant
    drinking water, general0.005 or less to above 30 mg/L
    plumbing and stagnation dependent
    primarily from corrosion of interior copper plumbing (fact sheet); flushed German tap water mean 182 µg/L (central supply) and 134 µg/L (single wells), maxima 4.8 and 2.8 mg/L
    drinking water, standing or first drawabove 1 in 53 percent of Nova Scotia homes; Sweden unflushed median 0.72, 10th percentile 0.17, 90th percentile 2.11; Berlin composite medians 0.32 and 0.45, maxima 3.5 and 4.2 mg/L
    stagnation dependent; first draw after at least 6 hours in the US rule
    US first draw 90th percentile exceedances 1991 to 1999: median slightly above 2 mg/L, 10 percent above 5 and 1 percent above 10 mg/L (7,307 samples)

    3 · Speciation

    Dissolved copper(II) in drinking water is mostly the neutral carbonate ion pair CuCO₃ and the hydroxo species, with free Cu²⁺ dominant only below about pH 6; natural organic matter binds copper strongly, which is why total and bioavailable copper differ and why the US freshwater criterion is a biotic ligand model rather than a number. Copper pipe corrodes to a scale of Cu₂O next to the metal with Cu(OH)₂, malachite Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ and tenorite CuO above it; the solubility of that outer scale sets the tap concentration, so copper is highest in new pipe, in acid water and in high carbonate alkaline water (WHO: release increases in systems with an acid pH or in high carbonate waters with an alkaline pH), and falls as the scale ages to malachite and tenorite. Copper(I) matters in chloride: CuCl₂⁻ carries copper in seawater and brines, and Cu₂O is the first corrosion product.

    conditiondominant speciesnote
    drinking water, pH 7 to 8.5, bicarbonate presentCuCO₃ (aq), Cu(OH)⁺, Cu(OH)₂ (aq), Cu²⁺; copper bound to natural organic matterthe dissolved copper measured at the tap
    acid water, pH below 6Cu²⁺ (hexaaqua) dominanthighest cuprosolvency; WHO: copper tubing may not be appropriate in highly acidic or aggressive water
    pipe wall scaleCu₂O (s) next to the metal; Cu(OH)₂ (s), Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ (s) malachite, CuO (s) tenorite outsideageing from hydroxide to malachite and tenorite lowers release over years
    chloride rich or reducing waterCuCl₂⁻ and other Cu(I) chloride complexes; Cu₂S and CuS in sulfidic sedimentsseawater and cooling water; sulfide sink
    alkaline treatment, pH 9 to 10Cu(OH)₂ (s), then CuO (s)hydroxide precipitation window for effluent
    Solubility
    Controlled by the scale: Cu(OH)₂ is the most soluble of the pipe wall solids, malachite and tenorite the least, so copper release depends on scale age as much as on water chemistry. Carbonate raises copper solubility through the CuCO₃ ion pair, which is why high alkalinity alkaline waters are cuprosolvent (WHO). No solubility products quoted; the sources read print none (Stumm and Morgan chapter 7 has them).
    Hydrolysis
    Cu²⁺ hydrolyses from about pH 6 to Cu(OH)⁺ and Cu(OH)₂; copper salts are acidic in solution.
    Complexation
    Carbonate (CuCO₃ ion pair) and natural organic matter dominate in fresh water; chloride for Cu(I); ammonia, EDTA and citrate in plating rinses hold copper against precipitation; orthophosphate forms low solubility copper phosphate films, the basis of corrosion control (US EPA 1995 cuprosolvency study cited by WHO).
    Precipitates
    Cu₂O cuprite, Cu(OH)₂, Cu₂(OH)₂CO₃ malachite, CuO tenorite (pipe scale and treatment sludge); CuS and Cu₂S (sulfide); copper phosphate films (corrosion control); Cu co-precipitated in Fe(OH)₃ and Al(OH)₃ flocs.
    2Cu(s)+OX2+4HX+2CuX2++2HX2O\ce{2 Cu (s) + O2 + 4 H+ -> 2 Cu^2+ + 2 H2O}
    oxygen corrosion of copper pipe, fastest at low pH and in new pipe; the overall cell reaction (Stumm and Morgan, from the chapter, not re-read)
    CuX2++COX3X2CuCOX3(aq)\ce{Cu^2+ + CO3^2- <=> CuCO3 (aq)}
    the dominant dissolved species in bicarbonate water above pH 7; raises cuprosolvency with alkalinity (Stumm and Morgan chapter 6, from the chapter, not re-read)
    CuX2++2OHXCu(OH)X2(s)\ce{Cu^2+ + 2 OH- -> Cu(OH)2 (s)}
    first scale solid on new pipe and the effluent precipitation reaction at pH 9 to 10; the CWW BREF lists hydroxide precipitation
    2CuX2++2OHX+COX3X2CuX2(OH)X2COX3(s)\ce{2 Cu^2+ + 2 OH- + CO3^2- -> Cu2(OH)2CO3 (s)}
    malachite, the aged scale in carbonate water; lower solubility than the hydroxide (Stumm and Morgan chapter 7, from the chapter, not re-read)
    Cu(OH)X2(s)CuO(s)+HX2O\ce{Cu(OH)2 (s) -> CuO (s) + H2O}
    ageing of the hydroxide to tenorite in warm or old pipe, lowering copper release
    CuSOX45HX2O(s)CuX2++SOX4X2+5HX2O\ce{CuSO4.5H2O (s) -> Cu^2+ + SO4^2- + 5 H2O}
    algaecide dosing to reservoirs; the copper ion is the biocide (WHO fact sheet names copper sulfate pentahydrate for algae control)
    2Cu(s)+HX2OCuX2O(s)+2HX++2eX\ce{2 Cu (s) + H2O -> Cu2O (s) + 2 H+ + 2 e-}
    the anodic half reaction at the pipe wall; cuprite is the first solid formed and sits next to the metal under the hydroxide, malachite and tenorite layers that control release
    OX2+2HX2O+4eX4OHX\ce{O2 + 2 H2O + 4 e- -> 4 OH-}
    the cathodic half reaction that pairs with it; dissolved oxygen is the driver of copper corrosion, which is why release is highest in new pipe and in standing water that has had time to consume it
    CuX++2ClXCuClX2X\ce{Cu^+ + 2 Cl^- <=> CuCl2^-}
    chloride stabilises copper(I) in seawater, brine and cooling water; the anionic chloro complex keeps copper dissolved where the hydroxide or carbonate would hold it as a solid
    CuX2++2eXCu(s)\ce{Cu^2+ + 2 e- -> Cu (s)}
    standard potential about +0.34 V, so copper is a noble metal in water: it does not corrode without an oxidant, and copper plates out of solution on any less noble metal or on a cathode, which is what electrowinning of a plating rinse does
    CuX2++Fe(s)Cu(s)+FeX2+\ce{Cu^2+ + Fe (s) -> Cu (s) + Fe^2+}
    cementation of copper on scrap iron in a plating rinse or a mine drainage stream; the potential difference between the two couples drives it, and it swaps a copper problem for an iron one

    4 · Role in treatment

    as a problem
    cuprosolvency and blue green staining
    copper released from plumbing, highest in standing water, acid water and high carbonate alkaline water
    WHO: staining of laundry and sanitary ware above 1 mg/L; bitter taste above 2.5 mg/L (taste threshold 2.4 to 2.6 mg/L as the sulfate or chloride); colour at higher levels
    CuX2(OH)X2COX3(s)+2HX+2CuX2++COX3X2+2HX2O\ce{Cu2(OH)2CO3 (s) + 2 H+ -> 2 Cu^2+ + CO3^2- + 2 H2O}
    dissolution of the aged malachite scale by acid or aggressive water; the same water at high alkalinity dissolves copper by the other route, as the CuCO3 ion pair, so both ends of the pH and alkalinity range are cuprosolvent
    acute gastrointestinal effects
    copper concentration in the water, more than the daily dose, drives nausea
    NOAEL 2 to 4 mg/L and LOAEL 4 to 6 mg/L for nausea in volunteer studies; vomiting from 6 mg/L (WHO background document); infants on formula made with standing tap water get the highest exposure
    not removed by conventional treatment
    dissolved and complexed copper passes coagulation and filtration
    WHO: copper is not removed by conventional treatment; but it is not normally a raw water contaminant
    copper as an interference
    copper ions catalyse chlorine and ozone decay and can interfere with residual and DPD measurements at mg/L levels
    no figure read; flagged as general practice
    sludge and biosolids
    copper from plumbing and industry ends in sewage sludge
    ZDHC sludge threshold 50 mg/kg dry weight (textile)
    as a reagent
    copper sulfate pentahydrate, algaecide
    Cu²⁺ toxic to algae and cyanobacteria in reservoirs and canals
    CuSOX45HX2O(s)CuX2++SOX4X2+5HX2O\ce{CuSO4.5H2O (s) -> Cu^2+ + SO4^2- + 5 H2O}
    dosed to surface water for the control of algae (WHO fact sheet); doses and the lysis of cyanobacterial cells are not in the sources read
    copper-silver ionisation for Legionella
    electrolytically released copper and silver ions in building hot water systems
    WHO silver fact sheet: silver with copper may be necessary to control Legionella in building distribution systems and the risk of legionellosis outweighs the risk from low µg/L silver; usually the hot water side only
    corrosion control (the treatment technique of the Lead and Copper Rule)
    pH and alkalinity adjustment and orthophosphate to make the pipe scale less soluble
    3CuX2++2POX4X3CuX3(POX4)X2(s)\ce{3 Cu^2+ + 2 PO4^3- -> Cu3(PO4)2 (s)}
    40 CFR 141.80: the copper action level is exceeded when the 90th percentile of tap samples is above 1.3 mg/L; US EPA 1995 studied pH, dissolved inorganic carbon, orthophosphate and sulfate effects on cuprosolvency (cited by WHO). The orthophosphate lever works by laying a low solubility copper phosphate film over the scale; typical corrosion control doses are 1.0 to 3.0 mg/L as PO4 (EPA OCCT, via the lead chapter of this book)

    5 · Removal and control

    corrosion control at the tap
    raise pH, manage alkalinity, dose orthophosphate; replace copper in aggressive water
    WHO: in highly acidic or aggressive waters copper tubing may not be appropriate; US action level 1.3 mg/L at the 90th percentile triggers optimal corrosion control
    Efficiency
    to below the 1.3 mg/L action level; scale ageing does the rest over years
    Interferences
    new pipe, stagnation, high carbonate alkaline water
    hydroxide precipitation, settling and filtration (industrial effluent)
    lime or caustic to pH 9 to 10 precipitates Cu(OH)₂, which ages to CuO; clarifier and filter
    CuX2++2OHXCu(OH)X2(s)\ce{Cu^2+ + 2 OH- -> Cu(OH)2 (s)}
    the CWW BREF technique; complexed copper (ammonia, EDTA) must be broken first
    Efficiency
    to the CWW BAT-AEL of 5 to 50 µg/L with good solids separation; US metal finishing 2.07 mg/L monthly with simpler plants
    Interferences
    complexing agents; fine floc carry-over
    sulfide precipitation
    CuS is far less soluble than the hydroxide and forms even from complexed copper
    CuX2++HSXCuS(s)+HX+\ce{Cu^2+ + HS^- -> CuS (s) + H+}
    sodium sulfide or organosulfide at pH 8 to 9; BREF chemical precipitation variant. Written with bisulfide, the sulfide species that dominates at pH 8 to 9; the reaction releases acid, so alkali is fed with the sulfide; the BREF names the reagent, the stoichiometry is the standard one of Metcalf and Eddy chapter 6
    Efficiency
    lower residuals than hydroxide; no figure printed in the sources read
    Interferences
    excess sulfide; colloidal CuS
    ion exchange and copper recovery from rinse water
    cation or chelating resin takes Cu²⁺; regenerant returned to the bath or electrowon
    2RNa+CuX2+RX2Cu+2NaX+\ce{2 RNa + Cu^2+ -> R2Cu + 2 Na^+}
    BREF lists ion exchange for metals; plating rinse recovery. R is the cation exchange site, shown in the sodium form; divalent copper is held well above sodium, and acid or brine regeneration returns a concentrated copper liquor to the bath or to electrowinning; the exchange is the standard cation exchange of MWH chapter 16
    Efficiency
    not quoted
    Interferences
    complexed copper, iron fouling
    conventional coagulation and filtration (surface water)
    removes only the particulate and floc bound fraction
    WHO: copper is not removed by conventional treatment processes
    Efficiency
    low; not quoted
    Interferences
    dissolved and organically complexed copper

    6 · Analytics

    methodstandarddetection limitnote
    ICP-MSEPA 200.8 (mass 63); ISO 17294-2; Standard Methods 31250.02 to 0.1 µg/L (WHO fact sheet); EPA 200.8 instrument detection limit 0.03 µg/L scanning, 0.004 µg/L selected ion monitoringlowest of the methods (WHO background document 0.02 µg/L)
    ICP-OESEPA 200.7; ISO 11885; Standard Methods 31200.3 µg/L (WHO fact sheet)
    flame and graphite furnace AASStandard Methods 3111; ISO 15586 (furnace)0.5 µg/L flame (fact sheet); AAS up to 20 µg/L is the highest of the methods (background document); US practical quantification limit 50 µg/L (1991)
    colorimetryStandard Methods 3500-Cu (bathocuproine)not readfield kits for cooling water and plating rinse
    Sampling pitfalls
    State the sampling protocol or the number means nothing: first draw after at least 6 hours of stagnation (the US rule) can be ten times the flushed value. Dissolved copper needs field filtration before acidification (WHO notes measurement of dissolved copper requires filtration); particulate copper from scale flakes is a total copper artefact. Copper adsorbs on unacidified container walls.

    7 · Regulatory limits

    Limits change, and many are set locally. Treat these as the published values to start from, not as your compliance target: check the standard in force at your site and the numbers written into your own permit.

    drinking water
    bodylimitnote
    WHO GDWQ 4th ed. with addenda (2022)2 mg/Lprotective against acute gastrointestinal effects with a margin for populations with normal copper homeostasis; permits 2 to 3 L/day plus diet and a supplement without exceeding the 10 mg/day tolerable upper intake; staining above 1 mg/L, taste above 2.5 mg/L; assessment 2003
    EU DWD 2020/21842.0 mg/LAnnex I Part B
    US EPA Lead and Copper Rule, 40 CFR 141.801.3 mg/Ltreatment technique with an action level: exceeded when the 90th percentile of tap samples is above 1.3 mg/L; MCLG 1.3 mg/L; health effects listed as short term gastrointestinal distress and long term liver or kidney damage; the 2024 revisions took effect 30 December 2024 with compliance by 1 November 2027
    US EPA1.0 mg/LNational Secondary Drinking Water Regulation, non enforceable; metallic taste, blue green staining
    discharge
    bodylimitnote
    EU CWW BREF BAT-AEL (Decision 2016/902), copper, direct discharge to a receiving water5.0 to 50 µg/Lyearly average; applies if the emission exceeds 5.0 kg/yr; lower end where few copper compounds are used or produced (footnote c); may not apply to inorganic effluents from production of inorganic heavy metal compounds (d), or where the main load is from copper-organic compounds or from vinyl chloride monomer and ethylene dichloride via oxychlorination (g)
    US EPA 40 CFR 433.14, metal finishing (BAT), copper (total)3.38 daily maximum; 2.07 monthly average mg/Lwith nickel 3.98 and 2.38, cadmium 0.69 and 0.26, silver 0.43 and 0.24 mg/L
    US EPA 40 CFR 440.103, copper, lead, zinc, gold, silver and molybdenum ore mines and mills (BAT)0.30 daily maximum; 0.15 30-day average mg/Ltaken from the book's lead water chapter; section not re-read this session
    US EPA 40 CFR 423.12(b)(5), steam electric metal cleaning wastes (BPT)1.0 mg/L total copperdaily maximum and 30-day average; taken from the book's iron water chapter, section not re-read
    Abu Dhabi ADS 23/2017, discharge to the marine environment (EAD)0.5 mg/L
    region-dependent; marine discharge only
    Table 1 maximum allowable concentration at the point of discharge
    Abu Dhabi DoE Trade Effluent Control Regulations 2022, discharge to sewer5 mg/L
    region-dependent; sewer discharge, not receiving water
    Table A₄ Metals
    industry thresholds
    sectorbodylimitnote
    textile and leatherZDHC Wastewater Guidelines v₂.1 (2022), Table 21 foundational; 0.5 progressive; 0.25 aspirational mg/Ltextile and leather alike; sludge total copper threshold 50 mg/kg dry weight, textile only (Table 4A)

    8 · Health and environmental effects

    Toxicity
    Essential nutrient and a contaminant. The guideline rests on acute gastrointestinal effects: nausea NOAEL 2 to 4 mg/L and LOAEL 4 to 6 mg/L in volunteer studies, vomiting from 6 mg/L, with the response driven by concentration rather than daily mass (WHO background document). Tolerable upper intake 10 mg/day; carriers of Wilson disease and other copper homeostasis disorders are the uncertain sensitive group. Infants fed formula reconstituted with standing tap water carry the highest exposure.
    Bioaccumulation
    Homeostatically regulated in mammals; not addressed as a bioaccumulation concern in the sources read.
    Ecotoxicity
    Among the most toxic common metals to algae and invertebrates, which is why it is an algaecide. US EPA aquatic life criteria: saltwater 4.8 µg/L acute and 3.1 µg/L chronic (2007); freshwater criteria are calculated site by site with the biotic ligand model because organic matter, pH and hardness change copper bioavailability.

    Flags

    • The corrosion, carbonate complex, malachite and tenorite equations and the scale ageing sequence are cited to Stumm and Morgan chapters 6 and 7 from memory of the text, not re-read this session; the Lead and Copper Rule corrosion control detail and the EPA 1995 cuprosolvency study were not read beyond the WHO citation.
    • The copper as oxidant interference item is general practice with no figure read.
    • Mine drainage and metal cleaning limits are reused from the book's lead and iron chapters; the CFR sections were not re-read.
    • No seawater copper concentration was read; the surveys quoted are 1990s and 2000s compilations by WHO.
    • EU law was read on legislation.gov.uk mirrors because eur-lex did not respond; eur-lex urls kept for consistency.
    • Abu Dhabi values cover two media (marine 0.5 mg/L, sewer 5 mg/L); other GCC states not read.
    • Standard Methods and ISO method numbers other than those in the sources read (EPA 200.8, ISO 17294-2 and the methods the WHO documents cite) are quoted from memory and were not confirmed this session.

    Gaps

    • No seawater, municipal wastewater or raw plating effluent copper concentration was read.
    • Copper sulfate algaecide doses, cyanotoxin release on lysis and the aquatic side effects are not in the sources read.
    • The EU textiles BAT conclusions (2022/2508) were not read for a copper BAT-AEL.
    • The 2024 Lead and Copper Rule Improvements were read only as the effective date line on the Cornell page.
    • EU law was read on legislation.gov.uk mirrors; other GCC discharge standards were not read.
    • No solubility products or stability constants are quoted: Stumm and Morgan chapters 6, 7 and 8 were used for the hydrolysis, carbonate, chloride and redox forms only, from the chapter, not re-read, and the corrosion half reactions are from MWH chapter 22 on the same basis.
    • The copper phosphate film of orthophosphate corrosion control is written as the simple phosphate solid; the real film composition and the dose response are in the US EPA 1995 cuprosolvency study, which was not read.

    Sources

    WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, 4th ed. incorporating the first and second addenda (2022), chapter 12 chemical fact sheet, Copper (pp. 369 to 370)
    WHO, Copper in Drinking-water, background document for development of WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, WHO/SDE/WSH/03.04/88 (2004), sections 1.3, 2, 3.2 and 8
    WHO GDWQ 4th ed. with addenda (2022), chapter 12 fact sheet, Silver (pp. 461 to 462), copper-silver for Legionella
    40 CFR 141.80, General requirements and action level (Lead and Copper Rule), copper action level 1.3 mg/L at the 90th percentile
    US EPA, Secondary Drinking Water Standards: Guidance for Nuisance Chemicals
    40 CFR 440.103, Effluent limitations (BAT), copper, lead, zinc, gold, silver and molybdenum ores subcategory
    40 CFR 423.12, Effluent limitations guidelines representing BPT, steam electric power generating point source category
    Directive (EU) 2020/2184 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (recast), Annex I Part B (read on the legislation.gov.uk mirror of the directive)
    Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/902 establishing BAT conclusions for common waste water and waste gas treatment/management systems in the chemical sector (CWW), BAT 12 Table 3 and footnotes c, d and g (read on the legislation.gov.uk mirror)
    Best Available Techniques Reference Document for Common Waste Water and Waste Gas Treatment/Management Systems in the Chemical Sector (CWW BREF 2016), chapter 3 (chemical precipitation with hydroxide and sulfide, ion exchange)
    40 CFR 433.14, Effluent limitations (BAT), metal finishing point source category
    Abu Dhabi Specification ADS 23/2017, Environmental Specifications for Land-Based Liquid Discharges to the Marine Environment (Environment Agency Abu Dhabi), Table 1
    Abu Dhabi Department of Energy, Trade Effluent Control Regulations 2022 (DoE/PD/R01/005, effective 1 January 2022), Appendix Table A4 Metals
    ZDHC Wastewater Guidelines Version 2.1 (November 2022), Table 2 heavy metals and Table 4A sludge
    US EPA Method 200.8, Revision 5.4 (1994), Determination of trace elements in waters and wastes by ICP-MS, sections 1.7 and 7.1, Table 1 (instrument detection limits)
    US EPA, National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, Aquatic Life Criteria Table
    Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (online edition), 3111 (flame AAS), 3120 (ICP-OES), 3125 (ICP-MS)
    Stumm, W. and Morgan, J. J., Aquatic Chemistry, 3rd ed. (Wiley, 1996), chapter 6 (metal ions in aqueous solution: hydrolysis and complexation) and chapter 7 (precipitation and dissolution)
    MWH, Water Treatment: Principles and Design, 3rd ed. (Wiley, 2012), chapter 22 (internal corrosion: anodic and cathodic half reactions, oxygen as cathodic reactant, corrosion control) and chapter 16 (ion exchange)

    Conventions

    Valence electrons are counted by the usual convention: the outer shell for s- and p-block elements, ns and (n-1)d for the d-block, ns, (n-1)d and (n-2)f for the f-block. Lanthanides and actinides are placed in the f-block with no group number. Electrical conductivity is the reciprocal of the printed resistivity. Ionic radii are Shannon effective radii, six-coordinate unless noted. Where a field reads “not in sources” the value was not found; it is a gap, not a zero. Regulatory limits are the published values and change often, so check the standard in force at your site and the numbers written into your own permit before you design to them.

    Data

    Element records, isotopes, radii and the descriptive text come from PubChem (NCBI), the Los Alamos National Laboratory periodic table, IUPAC CIAAW and the IAEA Atomic Mass Data Center. Appearance, thermal conductivity, electrical resistivity, crystal structure, discovery and the origin of each name come from Wikipedia and Periodic-Table-JSON, used under CC BY-SA 4.0. Hazard classifications come from the ECHA C&L inventory via PubChem. Ionic radii follow R. D. Shannon (1976). The water chapters cite their own sources at the foot of each entry, and are written to the level of Snoeyink and Jenkins, Stumm and Morgan, MWH's Water Treatment and Metcalf and Eddy.