Much of Nepal lacks access to clean drinking water, and many water sources are contaminated with arsenic at concentrations above both World Health Organization and local Nepalese guidelines. While many water treatment technologies exist, it is necessary to identify those that are easily implementable in developing areas. One simple treatment that has gained popularity is biochar—a porous, carbon-based substance produced through pyrolysis of biomass in an oxygen-free environment. Arizona State University’s Engineering Projects in Community Service (EPICS) has partnered with communities in Nepal in an attempt to increase biochar production in the area, as it has several valuable applications including water treatment. Biochar’s arsenic adsorption capability will be investigated in this project with the goal of using the biochar that Nepalese communities produce to remove water contaminants. It has been found in scientific literature that biochar is effective in removing heavy metal contaminants from water with the addition of iron through surface activation. Thus, the specific goal of this research was to compare the arsenic adsorption disparity between raw biochar and iron-impregnated biochar. It was hypothesized that after numerous bed volumes pass through a water treatment column, iron from the source water will accumulate on the surface of raw biochar, mimicking the intentionally iron-impregnated biochar and further increasing contaminant uptake. It is thus an additional goal of this project to compare biochar loaded with iron through an iron-spiked water column and biochar impregnated with iron through surface oxidation. For this investigation, the biochar was crushed and sieved to a size between 90 and 100 micrometers. Two samples were prepared: raw biochar and oxidized biochar. The oxidized biochar was impregnated with iron through surface oxidation with potassium permanganate and iron loading. Then, X-ray fluorescence was used to compare the composition of the oxidized biochar with its raw counterpart, indicating approximately 0.5% iron in the raw and 1% iron in the oxidized biochar. The biochar samples were then added to batches of arsenic-spiked water at iron to arsenic concentration ratios of 20 mg/L:1 mg/L and 50 mg/L:1 mg/L to determine adsorption efficiency. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) analysis indicated an 86% removal of arsenic using a 50:1 ratio of iron to arsenic (1.25 g biochar required in 40 mL solution), and 75% removal with a 20:1 ratio (0.5 g biochar required in 40 mL solution). Additional samples were then inserted into a column process apparatus for further adsorption analysis. Again, ICP-MS analysis was performed and the results showed that while both raw and treated biochars were capable of adsorbing arsenic, they were exhausted after less than 70 bed volumes (234 mL), with raw biochar lasting 60 bed volumes (201 mL) and oxidized about 70 bed volumes (234 mL). Further research should be conducted to investigate more affordable and less laboratory-intensive processes to prepare biochar for water treatment.
The COVID-19 pandemic places significant strain on the U.S. healthcare system due to the high number of coronavirus cases. During the pandemic, there was much unknown about the virus, its course of the disease, COVID-19 diagnosis, treatments, or other imperative information needed to contain the virus. Resources within the healthcare system, such as PPE and healthcare workers, were in short supply and exacerbated the difficulty of managing the viral outbreak. Peer-reviewed articles suggest that telehealth, the application of electronic information and telecommunication technologies in healthcare, proved useful in public health and clinical care during the 2020 public health emergency due to a novel virus. The scoping review broadly assessed themes of telehealth’s strengths and weaknesses during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings could suggest how virtual medicine may be a helpful tool to improve access in addition to the quality of care in the future of medicine. Assessments of case studies suggest that telehealth helped provide care to large patient volumes by aiding with communication, data collection, triage, remote patient monitoring, and critical care. Limitations of expanding telehealth subsequent to the pandemic include, but not limited to, a lack of national standards for practice and restrictions of utility for certain populations. Populations may include those with low socioeconomic status, specific cultural practices, and beliefs, or physical and cognitive ability barriers. Outlining the benefits and limitations of telehealth may suggest how virtual medicine can provide valuable in day-to-day medical practices and other pathogenic outbreaks.