nach oben

Erschienen in:

2010 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

18. Membrane BioReactors: A Cost-Effective Solution to Enhance the Removal of Xenobiotics from Urban Wastewaters?

verfasst von : Francesco Fatone

Erschienen in: Xenobiotics in the Urban Water Cycle

Verlag: Springer Netherlands

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Membrane bioreactor is no longer just a promising technology. Full scale applications in urban wastewater treatment plants are rapidly growing in number and in terms of treatment capacity. This modification of the conventional activated sludge process may enhance the removal of xenobiotics for two main reasons: (1) the effluent (permeate) is virtually free from suspended solids and associated pollutants; (2) there is a major flexibility for the operation of the biological process, which is distinguished from the sedimentation properties of the activated sludge. This chapter deals with the removal of xenobiotics from real urban wastewater showing and discussing a 10-year activity carried out in Italy on pilot, demonstration and full scale membrane bioreactors. Target xenobiotics were metals (As, Cd, Cr, Hg, Ni, Pb), industrial organic chemicals and products, such as PAHs, BTEXs, PCBs, PCDDs/PCDFs, etc. As far as metals are concerned, besides Cd and Hg, which were almost completely removed both in conventional and membrane systems, generally the enhanced biosorption and/or retention capability allowed the membrane bioreactor to be more effective than the conventional activated sludge systems in removal of Cr, Cu and Ni. High sludge age seemed to enhance the bioconversion of hydrophobic and partially recalcitrant substances such as dioxins, hexachlorobenzene and poly-chlorinated bi-phenyls. As for the power requirements of the membrane bioreactors, which still represent a bottleneck for the widespread urban application of the technology, full scale data demonstrated were close to sustainable values, especially when membrane filtration is coupled to energy-saving biological processes such as the intermittent and automatically controlled aeration. Moreover, although a significant decrease is being observed for investment costs, land cost still represents a real major driver for membrane bioreactors urban implementation.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Xenobiotics Removal by Membrane Technology: An Overview

Nächstes Kapitel Removal of Xenobiotics from Wastewater in Sequencing Batch Reactors: Conventional and Two-Phase Configurations

Battistoni, P., & Chemitec. (1999). Metodo e dispositivo di controllo di un processo di trattamento biologico, a cicli alternati, di acque reflue. Italian Patent N° RM99A0000182.6.99.

Battistoni, P., De Angelis, A., Boccadoro, R., & Bolzonella, D. (2003). An automatically controlled alternate oxic-anoxic process for small municipal wastewater treatment plants. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 42(3), 509-515.CrossRef

Battistoni, P., Fatone, F., Bolzonella, D., & Pavan, P. (2006). Full scale application of the coupled alternate cycles-membrane bioreactor (ACMBR) process for wastewater reclamation and reuse. Water Practice and Technology, 1(4) on-line journal doi: 10.2166/WPT.2006077.

Battistoni, P., Fatone, F., Passacantando, D., & Bolzonella, D. (2007). Application of food waste disposers and alternate cycles process in small-decentralized towns: A case study. Water Research, 41, 893-903.CrossRef

Battistoni, E. M., Fatone, F., Pavan, P., Beltritti, R., & Raviola, M. (2008). Process control automation and remote on-line supervision: The strategy for wastewater treatment in an Italian piedmont. Water Science and Technology, 57(10), 1571-1577.CrossRef

Battistoni, P., Fava, G., & Ruello, M. L. (1993). Heavy metal shock load in activated sludge uptake and toxic effects. Water Research, 27, 821-827.CrossRef

Brown, M. J., & Lester, J. N. (1979). Metal removal in activated sludge: The role of bacterial extracellular polymers. Water Research, 13, 817-837.CrossRef

Brown, M. J., & Lester, J. N. (1982). Role of bacterial extracellular polymers in metal uptake in pure bacterial culture and activated sludge. I. Effects of metal concentration. Water Research, 16(11), 1539-1548.CrossRef

Byrns, G. (2001). The fate of xenobiotic organic compounds in wastewater treatment plants. Water Research, 35(10), 2523-2533.CrossRef

Carrer, S., & Leardi, R. (2006). Characterizing the pollution produced by an industrial area: Chemometric methods applied to the Lagoon of Venice. Science of the Total Environment, 370(1), 99-116.

Cattaneo, S., Marciano, F., Masotti, L., Vecchiato, G., Verlicchi, P., & Zaffaroni, C. (2008). Improvement in the removal of micropollutants at Porto Marghera industrial wastewaters treatment plant by MBR technology. Water Science and Technology, 58(9), 1789-1796.CrossRef

Cecchi, F., Innocenti, L., Bolzonella, D., & Pavan, P. (2003). Membrane bioreactor processes: A must for the wastewater treatment plants of the lagoon of Venice. Annali di Chimica, 93, 381-388.

Chang, I. S., & Judd, S. J. (2003). Domestic wastewater treatment by a submerged MBR (membrane bio-reactor) with enhanced air sparging. Water Science and Technology, 47(12), 149-154.

Chapman, S., Leslie, G., & Law, I. (2003). Membrane Bioreactors (MBR) for municipal wastewater treatment - An Australian perspective. Paper presented at the Australian Water Association Annual Conference, Perth, Australia.

Charpentier, J., Florenz, M., & David, G. (1987). Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) regulation: A way to optimize pollution removal and energy savings in low load activated sludge process. Water Science and Technology, 19, 645-655.

Cicek, N., Macomer, J., Davel, J., Suidan, M. T., Audic, J., & Genestet, P. (2001). Effect of solids retention time on the performances and biological characteristics of a membrane bioreactor. Water Science and Technology, 43(11), 43-50.

Cirja, M., Ivashechkin, P., Schaffer, A., & Corvini, P. F. X. (2008). Factors affecting the removal of organic micropollutants from wastewater in conventional treatment plants (CTP) and membrane bioreactors (MBR). Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology, 7, 61-78.

Clara, M., Kreuzinger, N., Strenn, B., Gans, O., & Kroiss, H. (2005). The solids retention time - A suitable design parameter to evaluate the capacity of wastewater treatment plants to remove micropollutants. Water Research, 39, 97-106.CrossRef

Comte, S., Guibaud, G., & Baudu, M. (2006). Biosorption properties of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) resulting from activated sludge according to their type: Soluble or bound. Process Biochemistry, 41, 815-823.CrossRef

Cotè, P., Masini, M., & Mourato, D. (2004). Comparison of membrane options for water reuse and reclamation. Desalination, 167, 1-11.CrossRef

Daigger, G. T., Crawford, G. V., & Lozier, J. C. (2004). Membrane bioreactor practices and applications in North America. Paper presented at WEFTEC 04 Workshop 108, New Orleans, LA.

Engelhardt, N., & Linder, W. (2006). Experiences with the world’s largest municipal waste water treatment plant using membrane technology. Paper presented at the 5th IWA World Water Congress, Beijing, China, September 10-14, 2006.

Evenblij, H. (2006). Filtration characteristics in membrane bioreactors. Ph.D. Thesis, Delft Technical Univesity, Delft, The Netherlands.

Fatone, F. (2007). Advanced wastewater treatment by membrane bioreactors operating the alternate cycles process. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.

Fatone, F., Battistoni, P., Bolzonella, D., Pavan, P., & Cecchi, F. (2008a). Long-term experience with an automatic process control for nitrogen removal in membrane bioreactors. Desalination, 227(1-3), 72-84.

Fatone, F., Battistoni, P., Pavan, P., & Cecchi, F. (2006). Application of a membrane bioreactor for the treatment of low loaded wastewater for water re-use. Water Science and Technology, 53(9), 111-121.CrossRef

Fatone, F., Battistoni, P., Pavan, P., & Cecchi, F. (2007). Operation and maintenance of full-scale municipal membrane biological reactors: A detailed overview on a case study. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 46, 6688-6695.CrossRef

Fatone, F., Bolzonella, D., Battistoni, P., & Cecchi, F. (2005). Removal of nutrients and micropollutants treating low loaded wastewaters in a membrane bioreactor operating the automatic alternate-cycles process. Desalination, 183, 395-405.

Fatone, F., Eusebi, A. L., Pavan, P., & Battistoni, P. (2008b). Exploring the potential of membrane bioreactors to enhance metals removal from wastewater: Pilot experiences. Water Science and Technology, 57(4), 505-511.

Frechen, F. B., Schier, W., & Linden, C. (2007, May). Pre-treatment of municipal MBR applications. Paper presented at the 4th IWA Specialized Conference on Water and Membranes, Harrogate, UK.

Germain, E., Nelles, F., Drews, A., Pearce, P., Kraume, M., Reid, E., et al. (2007). Biomass effects on oxygen transfer in membrane bioreactors. Water Research, 41(5), 1038-1044.

Gnirss, R., Carsten Luedicke, C., Vocks, M., & Lesjean, B. (2008). Design criteria for semi-central sanitation with low pressure network and membrane bioreactor-the ENREM project. Water Science and Technology, 57(3), 403-410.CrossRef

Holakoo, L., Nakhla, G., Yanful, E. K., & Bassi, A. S. (2006). Chelating properties and molecular weight distribution of soluble microbial products from an aerobic membrane bioreactor. Water Research, 40(8), 1531-1538.CrossRef

Innocenti, L., Bolzonella, D., Pavan, P., & Cecchi, F. (2002). Effect of sludge age on the performance of a membrane bioreactor: Influence on nutrients and metals removal. Desalination, 146, 467-474.CrossRef

Joss, A., Keller, E., Alder, A. C., Göbel, A., McArdell, C. S., Ternes, T., et al. (2005). Removal of pharmaceuticals and fragrances in biological wastewater treatment. Water Research, 39(14), 3139-3152.

Joss, A., Siegrist, H., & Ternes, T. A. (2008). Are we about to upgrade wastewater treatment for removing organic micropollutants? Water Science and Technology, 57(2), 251-255.CrossRef

Judd, S. (2006). The MBR book: Principle and applications of membrane bioreactors in water and wastewater treatment. Oxford: Elsevier.

Lau, S. L., & Stenstrom, M. K. (2005). Metals and PAHs adsorbed to street particles. Water Research, 39(17), 4083-4092.CrossRef

Le-Clech, P., Chen, V., & Fane, T. A. G. (2006). Fouling in membrane bioreactors used in wastewater treatment. Journal of Membrane Science, 284(1-2), 17-53.

Le-Clech, P., Fane, A., Leslie, G., & Childress, A. (2005). MBR focus: The operators’ perspective. Filtration & Separation, 42(5), 20-23.CrossRef

Liang, S., Liu, C. & Song, L. (2007). Soluble microbial products in membrance bioreactor operation: behaviours, characteristics, and fouling potential. Water Research, 41, 95-101.

Metcalf and Eddy Inc. (2003). Wastewater engineering: Treatment and reuse (4th international ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRef

Montagnoli, T. (2006, November). L’esperienza di Brescia. Depurazione e riutilizzo: Analisi dei costi e benefici (in Italian). Presented at giornata di studio “Acqua: Risorsa strategica per l’agricoltura”, Genova, Italy.

Pirbazari, M., Ravindran, V. M., Badriyha, B., & Kim, S. H. (1996). Hybrid membrane filtration process for leachate treatment. Water Research, 30(11), 2691-2706.CrossRef

Schwarzenbach, R. P., Escher, B. I., Fenner, K., Hofstetter, T. B., Johnson, C. A., von Gunten, U., et al. (2006). The challenge of micropollutants in aquatic systems. Science, 313, 1072.

Vegliò, F., & Beolchini, F. (1997). Removal of metals by biosorption: A review. Hydrometallurgy, 44, 301-316.CrossRef

Villar, P., Callejon, M., Alonso, E., Jiménez, J. C., & Guiraùm, A. (2006). Temporal evolution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in sludge from wastewater treatment plants: Comparison between PAHs and heavy metals. Chemosphere, 64(4), 535-541.CrossRef

Titel: Membrane BioReactors: A Cost-Effective Solution to Enhance the Removal of Xenobiotics from Urban Wastewaters?
verfasst von: Francesco Fatone
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Buch: Xenobiotics in the Urban Water Cycle
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-3508-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-90-481-3509-7

Copyright-Jahr: 2010
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3509-7_18