Journal of Environmental Sciences 19(2007) 513–522

Supercritical water oxidation for the destruction of toxic organic

wastewaters: A review
VERIANSYAH Bambang, KIM Jae-Duck ∗
Supercritical Fluid Research Laboratory, Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST)–Department of Green Process and System Engineering,
University of Science and Technology (UST), 39-1 Hawolgok-dong, Seoungbuk-gu, Seoul 136-791, Korea. E-mail: jdkim@kist.re.kr

Received 16 June 2006; revised 28 September 2006; accepted 11 October 2006

Abstract
The destruction of toxic organic wastewaters from munitions demilitarization and complex industrial chemical clearly becomes an
overwhelming problem if left to conventional treatment processes. Two options, incineration and supercritical water oxidation (SCWO),
exist for the complete destruction of toxic organic wastewaters. Incinerator has associated problems such as very high cost and public
resentment; on the other hand, SCWO has proved to be a very promising method for the treatment of many different wastewaters
with extremely efficient organic waste destruction 99.99% with none of the emissions associated with incineration. In this review, the
concepts of SCWO, result and present perspectives of application, and industrial status of SCWO are critically examined and discussed.

Key words: supercritical water oxidation; toxic wastewater treatment; SCWO industrial status

Introduction land-based alternatives as land filling, deep-well injection,

The world is facing a waste crisis from organic and toxic
wastes today. Every year the amount of those wastes gen-
erated by industrial and domestic sources increase rapidly.
The treatment of organic and toxic waste is becoming more
difficult and costly because of more stringent treatment
standards and discharge limitations. Public health concerns
are the driving force for the continued legislation aimed at
providing a cleaner and safer environment. Furthermore,
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) goals suggest
destruction levels up to 99.9999% of some compounds and
use of totally enclosed treatment facilities. The increased
environmental constrains and unfavorable public opinion
have challenged the continuing application of conventional
waste management techniques (Li et al., 1991).
Conventional technologies currently used to treat all
types of organic and toxic wastes include adsorption,
biological oxidation, chemical oxidation, land-based, and
incineration. Each of these treatment methods has short-
comings and therefore may not be the best option for
treating organic and toxic wastes. Supercritical water oxi-
dation (SCWO) has been proposed as a technology capable
of destroying a very wide range of organic hazardous
waste. It has been drawing much attention due to effec-
tively destroy a large variety of high-risk wastes resulting
from munitions demilitarization and complex industrial
chemical.
The primary advantage of the SCWO process over such
Project supported by the Korea Institute of Science and Technology
(KIST). *Corresponding author. E-mail: jdkim@kist.re.kr.
and lagooning is the destruction method. Land-based dis-
posal does not address the ultimate destruction of toxic
components of the waste and can result in the possible
contamination of surrounding soil and groundwater. Deep-
well injection systems are subject to plugging or fouling
if organic concentration of 1% or higher are allowed.
Landfills and lagoons can contribute to contamination
of the air by volatile organics. The increasing of public
concern and regulatory action will restrict or prohibit land-
based disposal of many organic wastes in the future.
Destruction methods based on oxidation of organic con-
tent for aqueous wastes include activated carbon treatment,
biological treatment, incineration, wet air oxidation, and
supercritical oxidation. For very dilute aqueous waste
whose organic contents are less than 1%, activated carbon
treatment or biological treatment is often an effective de-
struction method. In activated carbon treatment, organics
are first adsorbed onto carbon and then oxidized during
regeneration of carbon. Partially oxidized materials are
perfectly destroyed by after-burner treatment. Main cost
is proportional to the organic content. So this method is
not economically useful for waste containing more than
1% organic. Biological treatment systems often become
poisoned and cannot be sustained for many wastes with
organic concentrations of 1% or more.
Incineration, on the other hand, is restricted for eco-
nomic reasons to waste streams relatively high organic
concentrations. To attain high destruction efficiency for
hazardous and toxic wastes, incineration must be operated
at very high temperature as 900–1100°C and often with
excess air of 100%–200%. With aqueous wastes, the
514 VERIANSYAH Bambang et al.
energy required to bring the water component of the waste
to this temperature is substantial. For the aqueous wastes
with organic content more than 25%, the heat required
for high temperature can be generated from wastes. With
decreasing organic content, the supplemental fuel required
to satisfy the energy balance becomes a major cost. Thus,
controlled incineration of aqueous waste with less than
20% organics is the only consideration in extenuating
circumstances (Thomason and Modell, 1984). Incineration
is also being regulated to restrict stack gas emissions
to the atmosphere. Extensive equipment must now be
used downstream of the reaction system to remove NO x ,
acid gasses, and particulates from the stack gases before
discharge. The cost of this equipment often exceeds that of
the incinerator itself.
In the range of concentration of 1% to 20% organic, wet
air oxidation or SCWO is far less costly than incineration
or active carbon treatment. Wet air oxidation (WAO) has
been offered as a method to treat wastewater, industrial
wastes, and sludge. From a public perception standpoint,
WAO is more favorable than incineration, land application,
deep well injection, and ocean dumping because the waste
products can be completely converted to inert materials
and the process can be conducted as a closed system which
does not produce any hazardous byproducts. Capital costs
are often higher than incineration; however, operating costs
are lower. It is possible to recover energy and inorganic
in WAO. Wet air oxidation, commonly associated with
sludge conditioning and some organic destruction, is a low-
temperature process (Boock, 1996).
The Zimpro-Passavant’s WAO process is typically oper-
ated in a temperature range of 150°C to 350°C and pressure
range of 2–20 MPa. The operating pressure is maintained
well above the saturation pressure corresponding to the
operating temperature so that the reaction is carried out
in the liquid phase. Residence times may range from 15–
120 min, and the chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal
may typically be approximately 75%–90%. Volatile acids
constitute a substantial portion of remaining COD. The
formation of volatile acids, particularly acetic acid, is
a limitation for WAO. Furthermore, the effluent from
incomplete (partial) wet oxidation of some wastewaters
Fig. 1 Block flow diagram of typical SCWO process.
Vol. 19
may be intensely colored and toxic (Li et al., 1991).
The above examples illustrate the utility of WAO as an
alternative to incineration for the treatment of dilute aque-
ous wastes. However, a number of compounds, including
m-xylene and acetic acid are refractory towards oxida-
tion at these conditions. Additionally, WAO often cannot
achieve the 99.9% destruction efficiencies that many newer
regulations require. This motivated a look at oxidation
under more severe conditions, such as higher temperatures
and pressures, which bring the reaction mixture above its
critical point. Thus, the supercritical oxidation process was
born. Supercritical water oxidation, on the other hand, is
known to attain nearly complete destruction of various
organics such as PCBs, and dioxins in very short time
(Boock, 1996).
1 Supercritical water oxidation
Supercritical water oxidation defined as oxidation pro-
cess which occurs in water above its critical point
(T c =374°C and Pc =22.1 MPa). It uses supercritical water
as a reaction medium and exploits the unique solvat-
ing properties to provide enhanced solubility of organic
reactants and permanent gases (like oxygen and carbon
dioxide), a single-phase environment free of inter-phase
mass transfer limitations, faster reaction kinetics, and
an increased selectivity to complete oxidation products
(Tester et al., 1993; Savage et al., 1995; Schimeider and
Abeln, 1999).
SCWO provides a potential alternative for process-
ing hazardous military wastes without the concomitant
production of noxious byproducts as might be experi-
enced with combustion-based technologies (Downey et
al., 1995). The process usually operates in a temperature
range of 450–600°C and pressure range of 24–28 MPa.
It consists of the general steps shown in the block flow
diagram in Fig.1. The aqueous waste stream containing the
organic is pressurized and preheated to reactor conditions.
The oxidant stream, which can be an aqueous solution
of hydrogen peroxide, pure oxygen, or air, is pressurized
and mixed with the organic stream. The one-phase mixture
of water, organic and oxidant enters the reaction zone,
No. 5 Supercritical water oxidation for the destruction of toxic organic wastewaters: A review
where both organic compounds and oxygen are completely
soluble, and the temperature is high enough that free
radical oxidation reactions proceed rapidly. The organic
oxidizes rapidly and completely (destruction efficiency
>99.99% with residence times less than one minute) to
CO2 and H2 O (Tester et al., 1993; Savage et al., 1995;
Schmieder and Abeln, 1999; Modell, 1989).
If any nitrogen is present, either introduced with the
waste or if air is used as the source of O2 , the resulting
product is N2 or N2 O (Killilea and Swallow, 1992). NO x
and SO x gases, typical undesired by-products of combus-
tion processes, are not formed because the temperature
is too low for these oxidation pathways to be favored.
Any N2 O found can be catalytically converted to N2 .
Heteroatoms (e.g., chlorine, phosphorous, sulfur) react to
form their corresponding mineral acids. With the addition
of a suitable base, acids are neutralized and form their
corresponding salts which precipitate out of the reacting
mixture allowing for their removal. It has already been
proved that SCWO is an environment friendly waste
treatment technology that produces disposable clean liquid
(pure water), clean solid (metal oxides) and clean gases
(CO2 and N2 ) (Bianchetta et al., 1999; Brunner, 1994;
Fang et al., 2000, 2005; Goto et al., 1999; Kritzer and
Dinjus, 2001; Kronholm et al., 2003; Lee et al., 2004; Rice
and Steeper, 1998; Sullivan and Tester, 2004; Veriansyah et
al., 2005a, 2005b, 2005c).
2 Toxic organic wastes treated with supercrit-
ical water oxidation
The SCWO process as a hazardous waste treatment
technology has been proven to be a viable and effective
technique by both academia and industrial researchers.
These researchers showed that SCWO indiscriminately
and rapidly destroys a broad spectrum of organic wastes.
SCWO has been shown effective in the treatment of toxic
chlorinated chemicals such as polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) (Anitescu and Tavlarides, 2000, 2002, 2005; An-
itescu et al., 2004, 2005; Fang et al., 2004, 2005; Hatakeda
et al., 1997a, 1997b, 1999; Kubatova et al., 2003; O’Brien
et al., 2005; Rahuman et al., 2000; Sako et al., 1999;
Staszak et al., 1987; Weber et al., 2002) and the pesticide
DDT (Modell, 1990), bacteria and dioxins (Thomason et
al., 1990), chlorophenol and chlorobenzene (Lin et al.,
1998, 1999; Lin and Wang, 1999a, 1999b, 2000a, 2000b,
2001; Muthukumaran and Gupta, 2000; Namasivayam and
Kavitha, 2003; Svishchev and Plugatyr, 2006) process
waste waters (Li et al., 1993; Sawicki and Casas, 1993;
Park et al., 2003; Portela et al., 2001a; Veriansyah et al.,
2005b), and pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical waste
(Aki and Abraham, 1999; Johnston et al., 1988; Qi et
al., 2002). Compounds which are problematic to recycle
or dispose due to the formation of hazardous by-products
and residues such as the polymer polyvinylchloride
(PVC), the flame retardant tetrabromobisphenol A, and the
chlorocarbon γ-hexachlorocyclohexane and hexachloro-
cyclohexane, are completely oxidized without hazardous
by-product formation (Hirth et al., 1998). SCWO has
515
also been shown effective in the treatment of a highly
contaminated activated sludge (Patterson et al., 2001;
Griffith and Raymond, 2002; Stendahl and Jafverstrom,
2003), municipal sludges (Shanableh and Gloyna, 1991;
Tongdharmachart and Gloyna, 1991; Goto et al., 1997;
Mizuno et al., 2000), sludges from the pulp and paper
industry (Modell, 1990; Modell et al., 1992, 1995), de-
inking sludge from the recycle paper industry (Gidner and
Stenmark, 2002), and a combination of sludge from a pri-
mary clarifier mixed with effluent from a bleach plant and a
decant of pond sludge (Cooper et al., 1997). Additionally,
wastes which are typically treated by a bioremediation
process, such as urea (Timberlake et al., 1982), human
wastes (Hong et al., 1987, 1988), and waste from manned
space missions (Takahashi et al., 1988) are all destroyed
by SCWO.
SCWO process has been identified as a promising
alternative technology to incineration for the destruction
of the chemical weapons stockpile (NRC, 1993). In the
US, approximately 25000 t of chemical weapons are
slated for destruction by 2006. Originally in 1982, these
weapons were to be incinerated at each of the eight storage
sites in the continental USA (Umatilla Depot Activity,
Oregon; Tooele Army Depot, Utah; Pueblo Depot Activity,
Colorado; Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas; Newport Army
Ammunition Plant, Indiana; Lexington Blue Grass Depot
Activity, Kentucky; Anniston Army Depot, Alabama; and
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland) and on Johnston Is-
land in the Pacific (Harigel, 2000; Hogendoorn, 1997). Due
to operational problems at the Johnston Island incinerator,
the increasingly poor public perception of incineration and
the unanticipated local public opposition to building new
incinerators at the remaining storage locations, the Army
was forced to consider alternative methods for destroying
these weapons in the early 1990’s (U.S. Congress, 1992).
In that report, SCWO was selected as one of four possible
alternative technologies.
SCWO has been shown effective for destroying the
stockpiled chemical warfare agents (Bianchetta et al.,
1999; Downey et al., 1995; Lachance et al., 1999; Snow
et al., 1996; Sullivan and Tester, 2004; Veriansyah et al.,
2005a, 2005c, 2006), propellants and energetics (Buelow,
1990, 1992; Harradine et al., 1993), and military smokes
and dyes (Robinson, 1992; Rice et al., 1994). Because of
the ability of SCWO to destroy broad classes of organic
wastes and its ability to destroy chemical warfare agents,
the three branches of USA military are building SCWO
units for their purposes. The USA Navy is developing com-
pact SCWO units for the on-board treatment of hazardous
wastes (Kirts, 1995; Cohen et al., 1998). The USA Army
commissioned Foster Wheeler Development Corporation
in conjunction with Sandia National Laboratories and
Gencorp Aerojet to build a SCWO facility at the Pine
Bluff Arsenal in Arkansas for destroying smokes, dyes,
and pyrotechnics (Haroldsen et al., 1996a, 1996b). The
Army is also undergoing testing the SCWO facility built by
General Atomics in Toole, Utah for treating VX and GB.
The USA Air Force awarded a contract to General Atomics
to design a plant for destroying solid rocket propellant
516 VERIANSYAH Bambang et al. Vol. 19

(Hurley, 1996). 3.2.2 Floating type reactor (SUWOX)

SUWOX was designed to prevent corrosion problem,
3 Supercritical water oxidation reactor sys- which was solved by dividing the construction into two
tem vessels, the pressure-resistant vessel and the inner vessel
(Casal and Schmidt, 1998). Fig.3 shows the design of the
3.1 Batch system reactor. The SCWO reaction occurs in the inner nonporous
vessel. Between those two vessels, there is a gap for small
Various batch reactors suitable for conducting SCWO
stream of water.
of organic waste are described in the literature (Calvo and
Vallejo, 2002; Goto et al., 1999; Mizuno et al., 2000;
Portela et al., 2001b; Jin et al., 2001; Lachance et al., 1999;
Thornton and Savage, 1992). This reactor usually has two
temperature zones, the upper part, to keep the reactor above
critical temperature, and the lower part, to dissolve the salt
precipitant at subcritical temperature (Kupferer, 2002).
3.2 Continuous-flow system
Organic waste treated by SCWO mostly conduct in
continuous-flow system. This is due to its flexibility for
expansion to plant or industrial scale. The type of reactor is
developed from basic tubular type to the current transpiring
wall reactor (Crooker et al., 2000; Fauvel et al.,2003, 2005;
Lee et al.,2005; Marrone et al., 2004, 2005; Wellig et al.,
2005).
3.2.1 Transpiring wall reactor (TWR)
The concept behind the TWR design includes a dual
shell consisting of an outer pressure-resistant vessel and
an inner porous vessel (Daman, 1996; Kritzer and Dinjus,
2001). Through the porous wall, supercritical water will
get through to form a thin, protecting water film. Through
this complex perspiration system, the porous liner is said
to protect the reactor against corrosion and salt deposition. Fig. 3 SUWOX reactor (Baur et al., 2005).
Fig.2 shows a simple schematic diagram of TWR. Some
group have developed a hydrothermal flame as internal Extensive study for this type of reactor was conducted
heat source in TWR (Wellig et al., 2005) and another group in Germany (Baur et al., 2005). They explore four types
have studied its application on halogenated hydrocarbons of SUWOX-base reactor for biocides treatment in SCWO.
(2,4-dichlorophenol) with 98.7% conversion at residence The destruction of organic with conversion 99.9% could be
time of 32 s., temperature of 713 K and pressure of 25 achieved, even at low oxygen supply and the shortest resi-
MPa (Lee et al., 2005). Current study and review related to dence time (1.37 min). Salt content in the effluent remained
this type of reactor is described in literature (Fauvel et al., dissolve, with concentration >200 g/L (NaCl). Another
2003, 2005; Marrone et al., 2004, 2005). group, successfully decomposed 2,4-dichlorophenol with
99.9% conversion at residence time of 34 s, temperature
of 693 K and pressure of 25 MPa (Lee et al., 2005). This
result was higher, compare to when they employed TWR
at the similar conditions.

Fig. 2 Transpiring wall reactor (Daman, 1996).
4 Industrial status
Several reviews have summarized the current general
state of SCWO technology, as well as pilot work re-
cently performed or in progress in support of a number
of applications (Kritzer and Dinjus, 2001; NRC, 1998;
Schmieder and Abeln, 1999; Shaw and Dahmen, 2000;
Tester and Cline, 1999; Yoo et al., 2004). The promotion
of SCWO for treating industrial wastes has also met
with limited success. The main drawbacks are the high
operating pressure, possible of the reactor plugging due
to salt formation, corrosive behavior under certain T-P-
No. 5 Supercritical water oxidation for the destruction of toxic organic wastewaters: A review 517

xi conditions, and pre-commercial higher processing costs.
With active research underway to understand and resolve
the problems of plugging from salts and corrosion, the
development of novel reactor designs to alleviate these
problems and the disappearance of landfills, SCWO may
yet become a viable waste treatment option for industrial
wastes and find a nice market (Hodes et al., 2004; Kritzer
et al., 1999; Kritzer and Dinjus, 2001; Kritzer, 2004).
An even more serious problem facing SCWO having
nothing to do with the process itself is the unwillingness of
industries to invest in novel, and potentially superior, waste
treatment technologies. This barrier will likely prove more
difficult than the technical problem facing SCWO. Regula-
tory pressure does not suffer from these constraints, and
changes in industrial effluent discharge regulations may
be needed. The success of SCWO in treating the military
waste will be important for its industrial acceptance.
Table 1 contains a list of full-scale facilities and li-
censees of the SCWO processes developed by several
companies, along with recent feed material that have been
processed. MODAR, Inc., the first company to attempt to
exploit the technology commercially, performed extensive
studies of destruction efficiencies for organic compound
in the 1980’s and early 1990’s in an attempt to validate
the SCWO process and develop large-scale reactor system
for treating industrial wastes. MODAR, Inc., was acquired
by General Atomics (GA) in 1996, but GA is currently
only using the technology for treating military wastes.
A full-scale SCWO facility based on MODAR process
(i.e., reverse flow, tank reactor) was constructed by Organo
Co. by Japan in 1998 (Oe et al., 1998). In addition to
having a licence to the MODAR process, organo is a li-
censee of the MODEC process (designed a SCWO reactor
system capable of avoiding the salt plugging problems
and eliminating corrosion issues for many wastes). Two
other Japanese companies, Hitachi Plant Engineering and
Construction Co. and NGK Insulator Ltd., and a Canadian
firm, NORAM Engineering and Constructors, Ltd., are
also MODEC licensee. Hitachi and NGK are interested in
developing the MODEC process further for sewage sludge
treatment (Japan Chemical Week, 1998).
Both GA and Foster Wheeler have been very active in
recent years with several projects being conducted for three
branches of the U.S. Armed Forces. GA has demonstrated
successful treatment of chemical agent (HD, GB and VX)
hydrolysate and energetics hydrolysate/secondary wastes
for the U.S. Army’s Assembled Chemical Weapons As-
sessment (ACWA) program (U.S. DOD ACWA, 1999),
SCWO is part of GA’s Total Solution proposed to ACWA
for demilitarization of the complete munition (projectiles,
mortars, rockets) and associated storage and process-
ing materials. The energetics hydrolysate/secondary waste
feeds consisted of slurry of hydrolyzed energetics (tetry-
tol, Composition B, and/or M28 propellant) along with
shredded wood, plastics, and activated carbon. GA recently
completed further pilot testing for ACWA in support of a
full-scale design for demilitarization of chemical weapons
stored in Pueblo, CO, and Lexington, KY (U.S. DOD
ACWA, 2002). GA also designed and tested a compact
SCWO system for the U.S. Navy in 1999 for destruction
of shipboard wastes (Elliott et al., 2000). GA conducted
hydrolysis and SCWO testing of rocket motor propellant
for the USA Air Force in 1995 using a 1 gpm (3.8 L/min)
pilot-scale system (Defense, 1995). The Japanese compa-
nies Komatsu, Ltd., and Kurita Water Industries, Ltd., have
a licensing agreement with GA in commercializing SCWO
technology in Asia (Schmieder and Abeln, 1999).
Foster Wheeler constructed a full-scale SCWO system
based on their transpiring wall reactor design for the U.S.
Army’s Pine Bluff Arsenal in Arkansas in 1998 (Crooker
et al., 2000). The system was designed to treat obsolete
smoke and dye munitions at a rate of 80 lb/h (36 kg/h)
of munitions. It is being operated by Sandia National
Laboratories and has been undergoing extensive system-
ization with surrogate feed materials since construction
completion. Foster Wheeler has also conducted pilot-scale

Table 1 Commercially designed SCWO facilities currently in existence

Company Licenses Large-scale plants Application

MODAR Organo Nittetsu Semiconductor, Semiconductor manufacture wastes

Japan (constructed by Organo)
MODEC Organo, Hitachi, None Pharmaceutical wastes, pulp, and paper mill wastes,
NGK sewage sludge
General Atomics Komatsu, Kurita U.S. Army Newport Chemical Bulk VX nerve agent hydrolysate; other feed processed
Waste Industries Depot, Newport, IN in smaller-scale system; chemical agent, explosives, and
dunnage (U.S. Army), shipboard wastes (U.S. Navy),
rocket, propellant (U.S. Army Force)
Foster-Wheeler U.S. Army Pine Bluff Arsenal, Smokes and dyes; other feeds processed in smaller-
Pine Bluff, AR (operate by scale systems: chemical agent and explosives
Sandia National Laboratory) (U.S. Army), shipboard wastes (U.S. Navy)
EcoWaste Chematur Huntsman Chemical, Austin, TX Oxygenated and nitrogen-containing hydrocarbon
Technologies (EWT) (e.g., alcohols, glycols, amines)
Chematur Shinko Pantec Johnson Matthey, Brimsdown, UK Spent catalyst (recover platinum group metals and
destroy organic contaminants)
Japan (constructed by Shinko Pantec) Municipal sludge
SRI International Mitsubishi Heavy Japan PCBs, chlorinated wastes
Industries
Hydro-Processing Harlingen Wastewater Treatment Mixed municipal and industrial wastewater sludge
Plant No.2, Harlingen, TX
Hanwha Chemical Namhae Chemical Corp, Korea Wastewater from DNT/MNT Plant and Melamine Plant
518 VERIANSYAH Bambang et al.
testing of a transpiring wall SCWO system for the USA
Navy and Army ACWA program similar to that described
for GA. Testing for the Navy was performed in 1999
with halogenated solvents and photographic solution feeds
at 80–209 lbs/h (36–95 kg/h) (Crooker et al.,2000). The
same system was used for ACWA testing in 2000, in
which mixtures of agent (HD, GB, VX) and energetic
(tetrytol, Composition B, M28 propellant) hydrolysates
were processed with minimal corrosion and salt buildup
in the reactor (U.S. DOD ACWA, 2001). Foster Wheeler is
part of a team who’s proposed Total Solution to ACWA for
munition demilitarization includes co-processing of agent
and energetic hydrolysates via SCWO as demonstrated.
The hydrolysate feed recipes were chosen to represent
compositions expected from processing actual munitions.
Foster Wheeler recently completed further pilot testing
for ACWA in 2002 in support of a full-scale design for
demilitarization of chemical weapons stored in Lexington,
KY.
EcoWaste Technologies (EWT) designed and built the
first operating commercial SCWO plant in the USA. The
plant was constructed for the Huntsman Co. (formerly
Texaco Chemical Co.) in Austin, TX, for destruction
of non-halogenated organic wastes produced on-site at
their Austin Research Laboratories. The tubular reactor
system began operation in 1994. The waste feed consisted
primarily of a blend of alcohols, glycols, and amines with
an overall organic loading of 10 wt%, and was fed at a rate
of 2425 lb/h (1100 kg/h) (McBrayer et al., 1996).
Chematur Engineering (1999) acquired a licensing
agreement for the EWT SCWO process in Europe in 1995,
and acquired the exclusive world-wide rights for EWT
SCWO in 1999. SCWO is marketed by Chematur under
the trade name Aqua Critoxr . Chematur built a 550 lb/h
(250 kg/h) pilot-scale SCWO system in 1998 that has since
been tested with several mostly nitrogen-containing wastes
(amine production wastes, non-halogenated spent cutting
fluid, de-inking sludge, and sewage sludge) (Stenmark,
2001; Gidner and Stenmark, 2002). Chematur has also
constructed its first full-scale SCWO facility for Johnson
Matthey in the UK (Chematur, 2001). Chematur has li-
censed the EWT SCWO process to the Shinko Pantec
Co. of Japan. Under this license agreement, Shinko Pantec
has constructed an 2425 lb/h(1100 kg/h) SCWO plant for
treating municipal sludge, which was commissioned in
2000.
SRI International granted its first licensing agreement of
the AHO process (i.e., carbonate-filled reactor for catalytic
oxidation and salt product adsorption) to Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries (MHI) in 1999 (Waste Treatment Technology
News, 1999). MHI has been working with SRI on com-
mercializing the AHO process since 1995, and plans to
use it to destroy polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) wastes
at commercial facilities. Since 1998, MHI has conducted
tests with PCBs in a pilot-scale system in Japan, demon-
strating greater than 99.9999% destruction at 380°C and
270 atm. MHI also owns a patent on the AHO process
as applied to PCB decomposition (Tateishi et al., 2000).
MHI is currently designing the first full-scale commercial
Vol. 19
AHO system in Japan for PCB destruction, with plans to
build several more plants for both government and private
clients.
HydroProcessing, LLC, has focused on the application
of SCWO for treating municipal wastewater sludge. Their
patented process (Griffith et al., 1999), referred to as the
HydroSolidsr process, is intended to replace tradition-
al sludge digestion and dewatering units in a standard
wastewater treatment plant. They have operated a 0.4 gpm
(1.5 L/min) tubular reactor pilot system with this feed since
1996, and have built a full-scale system for the Harlingen
Wastewater Treatment Plant in Harlingen, TX. The system
is intended to process both municipal wastewater sludge
and industrial wastewater sludge from an adjacent factory
(Wofford and Griffith, 2001). HydroProcessing states that
operating costs are about 180 USD/t (dry) on (not includ-
ing any projected benefits from energy or CO2 recovery),
compared to a cost of 275 USD/t for sludge disposal by
landfill or land application (Parkinson, 2001). Because of
the inherently greater amount of solids contained in the
sludge feed (as compared to liquid wastes), the process
incorporates a hydrocyclone after the reactor for solids
removal, and a separate patented downstream system for
handling pressure letdown of the solids-containing effluent
stream.
There are other companies trying to commercialize
SCWO technology, as well. For example, Hanwha Chem-
ical has constructed 2000 kg/h SCWO plant for treating
DNT/MNT Plant wastewater and 35000 kg/h SCWO
plant for treating Melamine Plant wastewater, which
were commissioned in 2000 (Hanwha Chemical, 2000).
ProChemTech International, Inc. designed and built a
small tubular SCWO system of 0.1 gpm (0.4 L/min) capac-
ity in 1993 for treating organic-laden wastewater from a
semi-conductor manufacturer (ProChemTech, 2004). No-
ram Engineering and Constructors, Ltd., has recently been
issued a patent (Boyd et al., 2001) on a process for
utilizing SCWO for oxidation of redwater (a waste from
the manufacture of nitroaromatic explosive compounds).
Daimler Chrysler of Germany has also been interested in
the application of SCWO for the treatment of electronic
scrap (e.g., circuit boards) and, in collaboration with the
Fraunhofer Institute ITC, has built a mobile plant (20
L/h) containing a tubular reactor for treating this waste
(Schmieder and Abeln, 1999).
5 Conclusions
SCWO provides a potential alternative for processing
hazardous and toxic organic wastes without the con-
comitant production of noxious byproduct, as might be
experienced with combustion based technologies. The
primary challenges that are inhibiting the rapid commer-
cialization of SCWO are the high operating pressure,
possible plugging of the reactor due to salt formation,
corrosive behavior, and pre-commercial higher processing
costs. With active research underway to understand and
resolve the problems of plugging from salts and corrosion,
the development of novel reactor designs to alleviate these
No. 5 Supercritical water oxidation for the destruction of toxic organic wastewaters: A review
problems and the disappearance of landfills, SCWO may
yet become a viable waste treatment option for industrial
wastes and find a nice market. Given the resolution of relia-
bility and other engineering issues, SCWO technology has
the potential to stake a claim in toxic waste management
industry and to return a sufficient profit.
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported by the Korea Institute of
Science and Technology (KIST) program for supercritical
fluid research. The authors would like to thank to the Korea
Institute of Science and Technology, Korea.
References
Aki S N V K, Abraham M A, 1999. Catalytic supercritical
water oxidation of pyridine: kinetic and mass transfer[J].
Chemical Engineering Science, 54: 3533–3542.
Anitescu G, Tavlarides L L, 2000. Oxidation of aroclor 1248 in
supercritical water: a global kinetic study[J]. Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research, 39: 583–591.
Anitescu G, Tavlarides L L, 2002. Methanol as a cosol-
vent and rate-enhancer for the oxidation kinetics of
3,30 ,4,40 -tetrachlorobiphenyl decomposition in supercritical
water[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 41:
9–21.
Anitescu G, Tavlarides L L, Munteanu V, 2004. Decomposition
of monochlorobiphenyl isomers in supercritical water in the
presence of methanol[J]. American Institute of Chemical
Engineers Journal, 50: 1536–1544.
Anitescu G, Tavlarides L L, 2005. Oxidation of biphenyl in su-
percritical water: reaction kinetics, key pathways, and main
products[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,
44: 1226–1232.
Anitescu G, Munteanu V, Tavlarides L L, 2005. Co-oxidation
effects of methanol and benzene on the decomposition
of 4-chlorobiphenyl in supercritical water[J]. Journal of
Supercritical Fluids, 33: 139–147.
Baur S, Schmidt H, Krämer A et al., 2005. The destruction of
industrial aqueous waste containing biocides in supercrit-
ical water–development of the SUWOX process for the
technical application [J]. Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 33:
149–157.
Bianchetta S, Li L, Gloyna E F, 1999. Supercritical water oxida-
tion of methylphosphonic acid[J]. Industrial & Engineering
Chemistry Research, 38: 2902–2910.
Boock L T, 1996. A quantitative analysis of reactions in
supercritical water: experimental kinetics and mechanis-
tic modeling[D]. Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of
Delaware.
Boyd D A, Gairns S A, Guenkel A A, 2001. Integrated effluent
treatment process for nitroaromatic manufacture[P]. USA
Patent 6 288 289.
Brunner G D, 1994. Extraction and destruction of waste with
supercritical water[M]. In: Supercritical fluids (Kiran E.,
Sengers J. M. H. L., ed.). The Netherlands: Kluwer Aca-
demic Publisher. 697–705.
Buelow S J, 1990. Destruction of propellant components in super-
critical water[Z]. LA-UR-90-1338, Los Alamos National
Laboratory.
Buelow S J, 1992. Chemical reactions of nitrogen containing
compounds in supercritical water[C]. In: Proceedings of
Workshop on Federal Programs Involving Supercritical
519
Water Oxidation, Gaithersburg, MD. 7.
Calvo L, Vallejo D, 2002. Formation of organic acids during
the hydrolysis and oxidation of several wastes in sub- and
supercritical water[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
Research, 41: 6503–6509.
Casal V, Schmidt H, 1998. SUWOX–a facility for the destruction
of chlorinated hydrocarbons[J]. Journal of Supercritical
Fluids, 13: 269–276.
Chematur A B, 1999. Company web page[EB]. http://www.
chematur.se, news release dated February 18, 1999.
Chematur A B, 2001. Company web page[EB]. http://www.
chematur.se, news release dated November 26, 2001.
Cohen L S, Jensen D, Lee G et al., 1998. Hydrothermal oxidation
of navy excess hazardous materials[J]. Waste Management,
18: 539–546.
Cooper S P, Folster H G, Gairns S A et al., 1997. Treatment of
lagoon sludge, primary clarifier sludge, and bleach plant
effluent by supercritical water oxidation[J]. Pulp & Paper-
Canada, 98(10): 37–41.
Crooker P J, Ahluwalia K S, Fan Z, 2000. Operating results
from supercritical water oxidation plants[J]. Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research, 39: 4865–4870.
Daman E L, 1996. Process and apparatus for supercritical water
oxidation[P]. USA Patent 5 571 423.
Defense Daily, 1995. General Atomics successfully destroys
rocket motor propellant (Use of hydrothermal oxidation for
disposal of solid rocket motor propellant and hazardous
materials)[N]. Defense Daily, 188(27): 210.
Downey K W, Snow R H, Hazlebeck D A et al., 1995. Corrosion
and chemical agent destruction: research on supercriti-
cal water oxidation of hazardous military wastes[M]. In:
Innovation in supercritical fluids science and technology
(Hutchenson K. W., Foster N. R., ed.). Washington DC:
American Chemical Society. ACS Symposium Series #608,
Chapter 21.
Elliott J P, Hazlebeck D A, Ordway D W et al., 2000. Update
on hydrothermal oxidation developments on DARPA/ONR
and air force projects at General Atomic[C]. In: Proceed-
ings of the International Conference on Incineration and
Thermal Treatment Technologies, Portland, OR. 25.
Fang Z, Xu S K, Kozinski J A, 2000. Behavior of metals during
combustion of industrial organic wastes in supercritical
water[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 39:
4536–4542.
Fang Z, Xu S K, Butler I S et al., 2004. Destruction of
decachlorobiphenl using supercritical water oxidation[J].
Energy & Fuels, 18: 1257–1265.
Fang Z, Xu S K, Smith Jr R L et al., 2005. Destruction of
deca-chlorobiphenyl in supercritical water under oxidizing
conditions with and without Na2 CO3 [J]. Journal of Super-
critical Fluids, 33: 247–258.
Fauvel E, Joussot-Dubien C, Pomier E et al., 2003. Modeling of
a porous reactor for supercritical water oxidation by a res-
idence time distribution study[J]. Industrial & Engineering
Chemistry Research, 42: 2122–2130.
Fauvel E, Joussot-Dubien C, Tanneur V et al., 2005. A porous re-
actor for supercritical water oxidation: experimental results
on salty compounds and corrosive solvents oxidation[J].
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 44: 8968–
8971.
Gidner A, Stenmark L, 2002. Oxidation of de-inking sludge
in supercritical water[R]. In: Workshop of managing
pulp and paper process residues, Barcelona, Spain (Re-
port is also available on the chematur company website:
520 VERIANSYAH Bambang et al.
http://www.chematur.se ).
Goto M, Nada T, Kawajiri S et al., 1997. Decomposition of mu-
nicipal sludge by supercritical water oxidation[J]. Journal
of Chemical Engineering of Japan, 30(5): 813–818.
Goto M, Nada T, Kodama A et al., 1999. Kinetic analysis
for destruction of municipal sewage sludge and alcohol
distillery wastewater by supercritical water oxidation[J].
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 38: 1863–
1865.
Griffith J W, Wofford W T, Griffith J R, 1999. Apparatus for
oxidizing undigested wastewater sludges[P]. USA Patent 5
888 389.
Griffith J W, Raymond D H, 2002. The first commercial super-
critical water oxidation sludge processing plant[J]. Waste
Management, 22: 453–459.
Hanwha Chemical[EB], 2000. http://hcc.hanwha.co.kr/English/
Product/newbusiness clean05. html, company webpage.
Harigel G G, 2000. The concept of weapons of mass destruction:
Chemical and biological weapons, use in warfare, impact
on society and environment[C]. In: Proceeding of Seventh
ISODARCO-Beijing Seminar on Arms Control, Xi’an, Chi-
na.
Haroldsen B L, Ariizumi D Y, Mills B E et al., 1996a. Transpiring
wall supercritical water oxidation reactor salt deposition
studies[R]. Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA
SAND96-8213 UC-702.
Haroldsen B L, Ariizumi D Y, Mills B E et al., 1996b. Transpir-
ing wall supercritical water oxidation test reactor design
report[R]. Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA,
SAND96-8213 UC-402.
Harradine D M, Buelow S J, Dell’Orco P C et al., 1993.
Oxidation chemistry of energetic materials in supercritical
water[J]. Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials, 10(2):
233–246.
Hatakeda K, Ikushima Y, Ito S et al., 1997a. Supercritical water
oxidation of a PCB of 3-chlorobiphenyl using hydrogen
peroxide[J]. Chemistry Letters, 3: 245–246.
Hatakeda K, Ikushima Y, Ito S et al., 1997b. Supercritical water
oxidation (SCWO) of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
using hydrogen peroxide[C]. In: Proceeding of 4th Inter-
national Symposium on Supercritical Fluids, Sendai, Japan.
Hatakeda K, Ikushima Y, Sato O et al., 1999. Supercritical
water oxidation of polychlorinated biphenyls using hydro-
gen peroxide[J]. Chemical Engineering Science, 54(15/16):
3079–3084.
Hirth T, Heck L, Jahnke S et al., 1998. Supercritical water
oxidation–waste destruction and synthesis[C]. In: Koat-
suryoku no Kagaku to Gijutsu 7 (Proceedings of Inter-
national Conference-AIRAPT-16 and HPCJ-38-on High
Pressure Science and Technology, 1997). 1375.
Hodes M, Marrone P A, Hong G T et al., 2004. Salt precipitation
and scale control in supercritical water oxidation: Part
A. Fundamental and research[J]. Journal of Supercritical
Fluids, 29: 265–288.
Hogendoorn E J, 1997. A chemical weapons atlas[J]. Bulletin of
the Atomic Scientists, 53(5): 35–39.
Hong G T, Fowler P K, Killilea W R et al., 1987. Supercritical
water oxidation: treatment of human waste and system
configuration tradeoff study[C]. In: Proceeding of 17th In-
tersociety Conference on Environmental Systems, Seattle,
WA.
Hong G T, Killilea W R, Thomason T B, 1988. Supercritical
water oxidation: space application[C]. In: Proceedings of
ASCE Space, Albuquerque, NM.
Vol. 19
Hurley J A, 1996. Development of hydrothermal oxidation re-
actor technology for the destruction of hazard class 1.1.
propellant[C]. Presented at the Third International Confer-
ence on Advanced Oxidation Technologies for Water and
Air Remediation, Cincinnati, OH.
Japan Chemical Week, 1998. Supercritical water oxidation pro-
cess inducted from U.S[Z]. Hitachi Plant Engineering and
Construction and NGK Insulators licenses supercritical
water oxidation technology from Modec Corp. 7.
Jin F M, Kishita A, Moriya T et al., 2001. Kinetics of oxidation
of food wastes with H2 O2 in supercritical water[J]. Journal
of Supercritical Fluids, 19: 251–262.
Johnston J B, Hannah R E, Cunningham V L et al., 1988. De-
struction of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical waste by
MODAR supercritical water oxidation process[J]. Biotech-
nology, 6: 1423–1427.
Killilea W R, Swallow K C, 1992. The fate of nitrogen in
supercritical-water oxidation[J]. Journal of Supercritical
Fluids, 5: 72–78.
Kirts R E, 1995. Destruction of Navy hazardous wastes by
supercritical water oxidation[C]. In: Proceedings of Annual
Meeting–Air Waste Management Association. 9.
Kritzer P, Boukis N, Dinjus E, 1999. Factors controlling corrosion
in high-temperature aqueous solutions: a contribution to
the dissociation and solubility data influencing corrosion
processes[J]. Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 15: 205–227.
Kritzer P, Dinjus E, 2001. An assessment of supercritical water
oxidation (SCWO) existing problems, possible solutions
and new reactor concepts[J]. Chemical Engineering Jour-
nal, 83: 207–214.
Kritzer P, 2004. Corrosion in high-temperature and supercritical
water and aqueous solutions: a review[J]. Journal of Super-
critical Fluids, 29: 1–29.
Kronholm J, Kuosmanen T, Hortonen K et al., 2003. Destruction
of PAHs from soil by using pressurized hot water extraction
coupled with supercritical water oxidation[J]. Waste Man-
agement, 23: 253–260.
Kubátová A, Herman J, Steckler T S et al., 2003. Subcritical
(hot/liquid) water dechlorination of PCBs (Aroclor 1254)
with metal additives and in waste paint[J]. Environ Sci
Technol, 37: 5757–5762.
Kupferer D N, 2002. An evaluation of supercritical water oxida-
tion technology[D]. Master Thesis. Massachussets Institute
of Technology.
Lachance R, Paschkewitz J, DiNaro J et al., 1999. Thiodiglycol
hydrolysis and oxidation in sub- and supercritical water[J].
Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 16: 133–147.
Lee H C, In J H, Hwang K Y et al., 2004. Decomposition
of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid by supercritical water
oxidation[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,
43: 3223–3227.
Lee H C, In J H, Lee S Y et al., 2005. An anti-corrosive reactor
for the decomposition of halogenated hydrocarbons with
supercritical water oxidation[J]. Journal of Supercritical
Fluids, 36: 59–69.
Li L, Chen P, Gloyna E F, 1991. Generalized kinetic model for
wet oxidation of organic compounds[J]. American Institute
of Chemical Engineers Journal, 37(11): 1687–1697.
Li L, Gloyna E F, Sawicki J E, 1993. Treatability of DNT pro-
cess wastewater by supercritical water oxidation[J]. Water
Environment Research, 62: 250–257.
Lin K S, Wang H P, Li M C, 1998. Oxidation of 2,4-
dichlorophenol in supercritical water[J]. Chemosphere,
36(9): 2075–2083.
No. 5 Supercritical water oxidation for the destruction of toxic organic wastewaters: A review
Lin K S, Wang H P, 1999a. Rate enhancement by cations in
supercritical water oxidation of 2-chlorophenol[J]. Environ-
mental Science and Technology, 33(18): 3278–3280.
Lin K S, Wang H P, 1999b. Shape selectivity of trace by-products
for supercritical water oxidation of 2-chlorophenol effected
by CuO/ZSM-48[J]. Applied Catalysis B: Environmental,
22: 261–267.
Lin K S, Wang H P, Yang Y W, 1999. Supercritical water oxida-
tion of 2-chlorophenol effected by Li+ and CuO/zeolites[J].
Chemosphere, 39(9): l385–1396.
Lin K S, Wang H P, 2000a. Byproduct shape selectivity in
supercritical water oxidation of 2-chlorophenol effected by
CuO/ZSM-5[J]. Langmuir, 16: 2627–2631.
Lin K S, Wang H P, 2000b. Supercritical water oxidation of 2-
chlorophenol catalyzed by Cu2+ cations and copper oxide
clusters[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 34: 4849–4854.
Lin K S, Wang H P, 2001. Catalytic oxidation of 2-chlorophenol
in confined channels of ZSM-48[J]. Journal Physical Chem-
istry B, 105: 4956–4960.
Marrone P A, Hodes M, Smith K A et al., 2004. Salt precipitation
and scale control in supercritical water oxidation–part B:
commercial/full-scale applications[J]. Journal of Supercrit-
ical Fluids, 29: 289–312.
Marrone P A, Cantwell S D, Dalton D W, 2005. SCWO sys-
tem designs for waste treatment: application to chemical
weapons destruction[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chem-
istry Research, 44: 9030–9039.
McBrayer R N, Griffith J W, Gidner A, 1996. Operation of
the first commercial supercritical water oxidation industrial
waste facility[C]. In: Proceedings of International Confer-
ence on Oxidation Technologies for Water and Wastewater
Treatment.
Mizuno T, Goto M, Kodama A et al., 2000. Supercritical water
oxidation of municipal solid waste[J]. Industrial & Engi-
neering Chemistry Research, 39: 2807–2810.
Modell M, 1989. Supercitical water oxidation[M]. In: Standard
handbook of hazardous waste treatment and disposal (Free-
man H.M., ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Modell M, 1990. Treatment of pulp mill sludges by supercritical
water oxidation[R]. Final Report, DOE Contract No. FG05-
90CE40914.
Modell M, Larson J, Sobczynski S F, 1992. Supercritical water
oxidation of pulp mill sludges[J]. Tappi Journal, 75: 195-
202.
Modell M, Mayr S, Kemna A, 1995. Supercritical water oxidation
of aqueous wastes[C]. In: Proceedings of 56th Annual
International Water Conference, Pittsburgh, PA. 478.
Muthukumaran P, Gupta R B, 2000. Sodium-carbonate-assisted
supercritical water oxidation of chlorinated waste[J]. Indus-
trial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 39: 4555–4563.
Namasivayam C, Kavitha D, 2003. Adsorptive removal of 2-
chlorophenol by low-cost coir pith carbon[J]. Journal of
Hazardous Materials, 98: 257–274.
NRC (National Research Council), 1993. Alternative technology
for the destruction of chemical agents and munitions[M].
Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.
NRC (National Research Council), 1998. Using supercritical
water oxidation to treat hydrolysate from VX neutraliza-
tion[M]. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.
O’Brien C P, Thies M C, Bruce D A, 2005. Supercritical
water oxidation of the PCB congener 2-chlorobiphenyl in
methanol solutions: a kinetic analysis[J]. Environ Sci and
Technol, 39: 6839–6844.
Oe T, Suzuki A, Suzugaki H et al., 1998. Commercialization of
521
the first supercritical water oxidation facility for semicon-
ductor manufacturing wastes[C]. In: Proceedings of 1998
Semiconductor Pure Water and Chemicals Conference. 399.
Park T J, Lim J S, Lee Y W et al., 2003. Catalytic supercritical
water oxidation of wastewater from terephthalic acid man-
ufacturing process[J]. Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 26:
201–213.
Parkinson G, 2001. Supercritical water oxidation takes on a city’s
sludge output[Z]. News-Chementator: Chemical Engineer-
ing,
Patterson D A, Stenmark L, Hogan F, 2001. Pilot-scale supercrit-
ical water oxidation of sewage sludge[C]. Presented at the
6th European Biosolids and Organic Residuals Conference,
United Kingdom.
Portela J R, Lopez J, Nebot E et al., 2001a. Elimination of cutting
oil wastes by promoted hydrothermal oxidation[J]. Journal
of Hazardous Material, 88: 95–106.
Portela J R, Nebot E, Ossa E M, 2001b. Kinetic comparison
between subcritical and supercritical water oxidation of
phenol[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 81: 287-299.
ProChemTech International Inc.[EB], 2004. Company web
page, http://www.prochemtech.com/Products/Equipment/
equipment.html.
Qi X H, Zhuang Y Y, Yuan Y C et al., 2002. Decomposition
of aniline in supercritical water[J]. Journal of Hazardous
Material, 90: 51–62.
Rahuman M S M M, Pistone L, Trifirò F et al., 2000. Destruction
technologies for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)[C]. In:
Proceedings of Expert Group Meetings on POPs and Pes-
ticides Contamination: Remediation Technologies and on
Clean Technologies for the Reduction and Elimination of
POPs, Trieste, Italy.
Rice S F, LaJeunesse C A, Hanush R G et al., 1994. Supercritical
water oxidation of colored smoke, dye, and pyrotechnic
composition[Z]. SAND94-8209, Sandia National Labora-
tory.
Rice S F, Steeper R R, 1998. Oxidation rates of common organic
compounds in supercritical water[J]. Journal of Hazardous
Material, 59: 261–278.
Robinson C, 1992. Demilitarization R&D technology for con-
ventional munitions via SCWO of colored smokes, dyes,
and pyrotechnics[C]. In: Proceedings of Workshop on
Federal Programs Involving Supercritical Water Oxidation,
Gaithersburg, MD.
Sako T, Sugeta T, Otake K et al., 1999. Dechlorination of PCBs
with supercritical water hydrolysis[J]. Journal of Chemical
Engineering of Japan, 32(6): 830–832.
Savage P E, Gopalan S, Mizan T I et al., 1995. Reactions at
supercritical conditions: application and fundamentals[J].
American Institute of Chemical Engineers Journal, 41(7):
1723–1778.
Sawicki J E, Casas B, 1993. Wet oxidation systems–process
concept to design[J]. Environmental Progress, 12: 275–283.
Schmieder H, Abeln J, 1999. Supercritical water oxidation: state
of art[J]. Chemical Engineering and Technology, 22(11):
903–908.
Shanableh A, Gloyna E F, 1991. Supercritical water oxidation–
wastewater and sludges[J]. Water Science Technology, 23:
389–398.
Shaw R W, Dahmen N, 2000. Destruction of toxic organic
materials using supercritical water oxidation: current state
of the technology[M]. In: Supercritical fluids-fundamentals
and application (Kiran E., Debenedetti P. G., Peters C. J.,
ed.). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 425–
522 VERIANSYAH Bambang et al.
437.
Snow R H, Sabato W, Taylor K et al., 1996. Demilitarization
of chemical agents by hydrolysis and supercritical water
oxidation[C]. In: Proceedings of ERDEC Scientific Confer-
ence on Chemical and Biological Defense Research. 359.
Staszak C N, Malinowski K C, Killilea W R, 1987. The pilot-
scale demonstration of the MODAR oxidation process for
the destruction of hazardous waste materials[J]. Environ-
mental Progress, 6(1): 39–43.
Stendahl K, Jafverstrom S, 2003. Phosphate recovery from
sewage sludge in combination with supercritical water
oxidation[J]. Water Science Technology, 48(1): 185–190.
Stenmark L, 2001. Aqua Critoxr , the Chematur Engineering
concept for SCWO[M]. In: Supercritical water oxidation-
archievements and challenges in commercial applications
(Nazeri A., Shaw R. W., Marrone P. A., ed.). Arlington, VA:
Stategic Analysis, Inc.
Sullivan P A, Tester J W, 2004. Methylphosphonic acid oxidation
kinetics in supercritical water[J]. American Institute of
Chemical Engineers Journal, 50(3): 673–683.
Svishchev I M, Plugatyr A, 2006. Supercritical water oxidation
of o-dichlorobenzene: degradation studies and simulation
insights[J]. Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 37: 94–101.
Takahashi Y T, Wydeven T, Koo C, 1988. Subcritical and
supercritical water oxidation of CELSS model wastes[J].
Advances in Space Research, 9: 99–110.
Tateishi M, Tsuchiyama Y, Yamauchi Y et al., 2000. PCB
decompositon process[P]. USA Patent 6 162 958.
Tester J W, Holgate H R, Armellini F J et al., 1993. Super-
critical water oxidation technology: a review of Process
Development and Fundamental Research[M]. In: Emerging
technologies in hazardous waste management III (Ted-
der D.W., Pohland F.G., ed.). Washington, DC: American
Chemical Society. Chapter 3.
Tester J W, Cline J A, 1999. Hydrolysis and oxidation in sub- and
supercritical water: connection process engineering science
to molecular interactions[J]. Corrosion, 55(11): 1088–1100.
Thomason T B, Modell M, 1984. Supercritical water destruction
of aqueous wastes[J]. Hazardous Waste, 1(4): 453–467.
Thomason T B, Hong G T, Swallow K C et al., 1990. The
MODAR supercritical water oxidation process[M]. In:
Innovative hazardous waste treatment technology series
(Freeman H.M., ed.). Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing.
Volume I: Thermal Processes.
Thornton T D, Savage P E, 1992. Phenol oxidation pathways in
supercritical water[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
Research, 31: 2451–2456.
Timberlake S H, Hong G T, Simson M et al., 1982. Supercritical
water oxidation for wastewater treatment: preliminary study
of urea destruction[C]. In: Proceedings of 12th Intersociety
Conference on Environmental Systems, San Diego, CA.
Tongdhamachart C, Gloyna E F, 1991. Supercritical water oxida-
tion of anaerobically digested municipal sludge[R]. CRWR
Vol. 19
Technical Report 229, University of Texas at Austin, Austin,
TX.
U.S. Congress, 1992. O.T.A. Disposal of Chemical Weapons:
Alternative Technologies-Background Paper[Z]. OTA-BP-
O-95, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), 1999. Assembled chemical
weapons assessment (ACWA) program[R]. Supplemental
report to Congress, Report is also available on the ACWA
website: http://www.pmacwa.army.mil/ip/archive.htm .
U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), 2001. Assembled chemical
weapons assessment (ACWA) program[R]. Supplemental
report to Congress, Report is also available on the ACWA
website: http://www.pmacwa.army.mil/ip/archive.htm .
U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), 2002. Assembled chemical
weapons assessment (ACWA) program[R]. Supplemental
report to Congress, Report is also available on the ACWA
website: http://www.pmacwa.army.mil/ip/index r.htm .
Veriansyah B, Kim J D, Lee J C et al., 2005a. OPA oxidation rates
in supercritical water[J]. Journal of Hazardous Material,
124: 119–124.
Veriansyah B, Park T J, Lim J S et al., 2005b. Supercritical water
oxidation of wastewater from LCD manufacturing process:
kinetic and formation of chromium oxide nanoparticles[J].
Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 34: 51–61.
Veriansyah B, Kim J D, Lee J C, 2005c. Supercritical wa-
ter oxidation of thiodiglycol[J]. Industrial & Engineering
Chemistry Research, 44: 9014–9019.
Veriansyah B, Kim J D, Lee Y W, 2006. Decomposition kinetics
of dimethyl methylphospate (chemical agent simulant) by
supercritical water oxidation[J]. Journal of Environmental
Sciences, 18(1): 13–16.
Yoo K P, Lim J S, Kim S Y et al., August 2004. Recent
commercial applications of SFE, SFD, SCWO, SCORR
and Nano-Materials in Korea[C]. In: Proceedings of 11th
International Symposium and Exhibit on Supercritical Fluid
Chromatography, Extraction and Processing, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, U.S.
Waste Treatment Technology News, 1999. Supercritical treat-
ment technology licensed, 14(5).
Weber R, Yoshida S, Miwa K, 2002. PCB destruction in subcriti-
cal and supercritical water s evaluation of PCDF formation
and initial steps of degradation mechanisms[J]. Environ Sci
Technol, 36: 1839–1844.
Wellig B, Lieball K, von Rohr P R, 2005. Operating char-
acteristics of a transpiring-wall SCWO reactor with a
hydrothermal flame as internal heat source[J]. Journal of
Supercritical Fluids, 34: 35–50.
Wofford W T, Griffith J W, 2001. Commercial application of
SCWO to the treatment of municipal sludge[M]. In: Su-
percritical water oxidation-archievements and challenges in
commercial applications (Nazeri A., Shaw R.W., Marrone
P. A., ed.). Arlington, VA.: Stategic Analysis, Inc.