Removal of ibuprofen from wastewater: comparing biodegradation in conventional, membrane bioreactor, and biological nutrient removal treatment systems

2008 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
T.M. Smook ◽  
H. Zho ◽  
R.G. Zytner
Keyword(s):  
Nutrient Removal ◽  
Rate Constants ◽  
Membrane Bioreactor ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
Aerobic Biodegradation ◽  
Biological Nutrient Removal ◽  
Aeration Tank ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Pharmaceutical Removal

Pharmaceuticals are continually being introduced into the influent of municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). Developing a better understanding of pharmaceutical removal mechanisms within the different treatment processes is vital in preventing downstream contamination of our water resources. In this study, ibuprofen, a popular over-the-counter pain reliever, was monitored by taking wastewater samples throughout the City of Guelph municipal WWTP. Greater than 95% of ibuprofen was found to be removed in the aeration tank, with aerobic biodegradation being the dominant mechanism. For comparison, first-order kinetics were used to quantify ibuprofen biodegradation in a conventional WWTP aeration tank and in a membrane bioreactor (MBR) pilot plant. The rate constants, kbiol, for the conventional tank and the MBR were determined to be (−6.8±3.3) L/g SS*d and (−8.4±4.0) L/g SS*d, respectively. These two rate constants were found to be statistically similar. Preliminary study of a biological nutrient removal pilot system also suggests that ibuprofen can be anaerobically degraded.

Pilot Scale Study on Biological Nutrient Removal and Membrane Fouling Alleviation in Combined Membrane Bioreactor for Municipal Wastewater Treatment

2011 ◽  
Vol 365 ◽  
pp. 354-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuo Liu ◽  
Ji Fu Wang ◽  
Bao Zhen Wang ◽  
Bing Wang ◽  
Wei Wan
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Nutrient Removal ◽  
Membrane Fouling ◽  
Membrane Bioreactor ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Removal Rate ◽  
Oxygen Demand ◽  
Biological Nutrient Removal ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Nutrient Removal Rate

To solve the problem of eutrophication in receiving water, a novel Membrane Bioreactor (MBR) with combined configuration was designed for municipal wastewater treatment and reclamation. By dividing bioreactor into three zones, the combined MBR operated under anoxic, anaerobic and aerobic conditions. It provided optimum conditions for nitrification, denitrifying and phosphate accumulating bacterial growth which resulted in high biological nutrient removal rate directly. The operational performance of combined MBR pilot plant showed that it exhibited high nutrient removal rate on Chemical oxygen demand (CODcr), total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP). The mean value of effluent CODcr, TN and TP removal rate was 90.63%, 63.05% and 60.51% respectively during 180 days of operation. In order to obtain stable membrane flux, the combined MBR packed with fibrous bio-film carrier and added diatomite. Furthermore, it could alleviate membrane fouling effectively. As a result, the combined MBR improved effluent water quality significantly and alleviated membrane fouling remarkably.

Expenditure on the operation of municipal wastewater treatment plants for nutrient removal

2000 ◽  
Vol 41 (9) ◽  
pp. 281-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Nowak
Keyword(s):  
Nutrient Removal ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
General Scheme ◽  
Operating Costs ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Wastewater Purification ◽  
Labour Costs ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
P Removal

Operating costs of Austrian municipal treatment plants are evaluated for 1989/90 and for 1997, respectively. The results indicate that presently the expenses which can be directly connected to wastewater purification, i.e. energy and chemicals for P removal, comprise only about 20% of the total operating costs. Today, in Austria like in other EU countries, the predominating factor is “labour costs”, even at nutrient removal plants. A general scheme for estimating operating costs is presented that can be applied to WWTPs in other parts of the world. In this scheme the important factors relevant to the operating costs are integrated.

Benchmarks for the energy demand of nutrient removal plants

2003 ◽  
Vol 47 (12) ◽  
pp. 125-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Nowak
Keyword(s):  
Nutrient Removal ◽  
Energy Demand ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
Electrical Energy ◽  
Anaerobic Sludge ◽  
Operational Experience ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Sludge Digestion ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants

The energy demand of municipal wastewater treatment plants for nutrient removal equipped with primary clarifiers, activated sludge system, anaerobic sludge digestion, and CHP is evaluated theoretically, on the basis of COD balances. Operational experience from energy-efficient Austrian treatment plants confirms that the demand on external electrical energy can be kept as low as 5 to 10 kWh/(pe.a) depending on the N:COD ratio in the raw wastewater. A low N:COD ratio helps to keep not only the effluent nitrogen load low, but also the energy demand. Measures to minimise the energy demand at treatment plants and to reduce the nitrogen load are discussed.

Nitrogen removal by recycle water nitritation as an attractive alternative for retrofit technologies in municipal wastewater treatment plants

2004 ◽  
Vol 49 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 39-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.-I. Gil ◽  
E. Choi
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Nitrogen Removal ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
Biological Nutrient Removal ◽  
Recycle Water ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Effluent Quality ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
Final Effluent

The recycle water from sludge processing in municipal wastewater treatment plants causes many serious problems in the efficiency and stability of the mainstream process. Thus, the design approach for recycle water is an important part of any biological nutrient removal system design when a retrofit technology is required for upgrading an existing plant. Moreover, the application of nitrogen removal from recycle water using the nitritation process has recently increased due to economic reasons associated with an effective carbon allocation as well as the minimization of aeration costs. However, for the actual application of recycle water nitritation, it has not been fully examined whether or not additional volume would be required in an existing plant. In this paper, the addition of recycle water nitritation to an existing plant was evaluated based on a volume analysis and estimation of final effluent quality. It was expected that using the reserve volume of the aeration tank in existing plants, recycle water nitritation could be applied to a plant without any enlargement. With the addition of recycle water nitritation, it was estimated that the final effluent quality would be improved and stabilized, especially in the winter season.

Retrofitting conventional primary clarifiers to activated primary clarifiers to enhance nutrient removal and energy conservation in WWTPs in Beijing, China

2011 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 1446-1452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia-wei Wang ◽  
Tian-zhu Zhang ◽  
Ji-ning Chen ◽  
Zhi-rong Hu
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Source ◽  
Energy Conservation ◽  
Nutrient Removal ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
Test System ◽  
Biological Nutrient Removal ◽  
Aeration Tank ◽  
Secondary Effluent ◽  
Nitrogen And Phosphorus ◽  
Primary Sludge

Biological nutrient removal requires sufficient carbon source. Meanwhile, the removal of organic matter in wastewater requires energy consumption in the aeration tank. Carbon source for nutrient removal in most wastewater treatment plants with conventional primary clarifier (CPC) is generally insufficient in China. In order to increase carbon source and to save energy, a part of the CPC may be retrofitted as an activated primary clarifier (APC). In this paper, a pilot scale experiment was conducted to examine the performance of primary sludge fermentation and its effect on nitrogen and phosphorus removal. Results show that the primary sludge fermentation in APC has produced a similar VFA/TP ratio but a higher BOD5/TN ratio compared with those in the CPC effluent, and the TN concentrations in the secondary effluent are at 8.0, 10.8, and 17.4 mg/L, while TP is at 0.45, 1.10, and 2.28 mg/L when the pilot test system was fed with (1) the APC effluent, (2) 50% from the APC effluent and 50% from the CPC effluent, and (3) the CPC effluent, respectively. Results also indicate that the BOD5/TN ratio is a more sensitive factor than the VFA/TP ratio for nutrient removal and energy conservation for the APC fermentation.

scholarly journals LCA of a Membrane Bioreactor Compared to Activated Sludge System for Municipal Wastewater Treatment

Membranes ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 421
Author(s):  
Dimitra C. Banti ◽  
Michail Tsangas ◽  
Petros Samaras ◽  
Antonis Zorpas
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Activated Sludge ◽  
Membrane Bioreactor ◽  
Municipal Wastewater ◽  
Wastewater Treatment Plants ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Real Data ◽  
Municipal Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Conventional Activated Sludge

Membrane bioreactor (MBR) systems are connected to several advantages compared to the conventional activated sludge (CAS) units. This work aims to the examination of the life cycle environmental impact of an MBR against a CAS unit when treating municipal wastewater with similar influent loading (BOD = 400 mg/L) and giving similar high-quality effluent (BOD < 5 mg/L). The MBR unit contained a denitrification, an aeration and a membrane tank, whereas the CAS unit included an equalization, a denitrification, a nitrification, a sedimentation, a mixing, a flocculation tank and a drum filter. Several impact categories factors were calculated by implementing the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology, including acidification potential, eutrophication potential, global warming potential (GWP), ozone depletion potential and photochemical ozone creation potential of the plants throughout their life cycle. Real data from two wastewater treatment plants were used. The research focused on two parameters which constitute the main differences between the two treatment plants: The excess sludge removal life cycle contribution—where GWPMBR = 0.50 kg CO2-eq*FU−1 and GWPCAS = 2.67 kg CO2-eq*FU−1 without sludge removal—and the wastewater treatment plant life cycle contribution—where GWPMBR = 0.002 kg CO2-eq*FU−1 and GWPCAS = 0.14 kg CO2-eq*FU−1 without land area contribution. Finally, in all the examined cases the environmental superiority of the MBR process was found.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document