Cargando…
A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study
BACKGROUND: Phthalic acid esters, including diethyl phthalate (DEP), which are considered as top-priority and hazardous pollutants, have received significant attention over the last decades. It is vital for industries to select the best treatment technology, especially when the DEP concentration in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5452402/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28580013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13068-017-0826-9 |
_version_ | 1783240413196320768 |
---|---|
author | Yousefzadeh, Samira Ahmadi, Ehsan Gholami, Mitra Ghaffari, Hamid Reza Azari, Ali Ansari, Mohsen Miri, Mohammad Sharafi, Kiomars Rezaei, Soheila |
author_facet | Yousefzadeh, Samira Ahmadi, Ehsan Gholami, Mitra Ghaffari, Hamid Reza Azari, Ali Ansari, Mohsen Miri, Mohammad Sharafi, Kiomars Rezaei, Soheila |
author_sort | Yousefzadeh, Samira |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Phthalic acid esters, including diethyl phthalate (DEP), which are considered as top-priority and hazardous pollutants, have received significant attention over the last decades. It is vital for industries to select the best treatment technology, especially when the DEP concentration in wastewater is high. Meanwhile, anaerobic biofilm-based reactors are considered as a promising option. Therefore, in the present study, for the biological removal of DEP from synthetic wastewater, two different anaerobic biofilm-based reactors, including anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor (AnFFBR) and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor (UAnFFFBR), were compared from kinetic and performance standpoints. As in the previous studies, only the kinetic coefficients have been calculated and the relationship between kinetic coefficients and their interpretation has not been evaluated, the other aim of the present study was to fill this research gap. RESULTS: In optimum conditions, 90.31 and 86.91% of COD as well as 91.11 and 88.72% of DEP removal were achieved for the AnFFBR and UAnFFFBR, respectively. According to kinetic coefficients (except biomass yield), the AnFFBR had better performance as it provided a more favorable condition for microbial growth. The Grau model was selected as the best mathematical model for designing and predicting the bioreactors’ performance due to its high coefficients of determination (0.97 < R (2)). With regard to the insignificant variations of the calculated Grau kinetic coefficients (K (G)) when the organic loading rate (with constant HRT) increased, it can be concluded that both of the bioreactors can tolerate high organic loading rate and their performance is not affected by the applied DEP concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Both the bioreactors were capable of treating low-to-high strength DEP wastewater; however, according to the experimental results and obtained kinetic coefficients, the AnFFBR indicated higher performance. Although the AnFFBR can be considered as a safer treatment option than the UAnFFFBR due to its lower DEP concentrations in sludge, the UAnFFFBR had lower VSS/TSS ratio and sludge yield, which could make it more practical for digestion. Finally, both the bioreactors showed considerable methane yield; however, compared to the UAnFFFBR, the AnFFBR had more potential for bioenergy production. Although both the selected bioreactors achieved nearly 90% of DEP removal, they can only be considered as pre-treatment methods according to the standard regulations and should be coupled with further technology. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13068-017-0826-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5452402 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54524022017-06-02 A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study Yousefzadeh, Samira Ahmadi, Ehsan Gholami, Mitra Ghaffari, Hamid Reza Azari, Ali Ansari, Mohsen Miri, Mohammad Sharafi, Kiomars Rezaei, Soheila Biotechnol Biofuels Research BACKGROUND: Phthalic acid esters, including diethyl phthalate (DEP), which are considered as top-priority and hazardous pollutants, have received significant attention over the last decades. It is vital for industries to select the best treatment technology, especially when the DEP concentration in wastewater is high. Meanwhile, anaerobic biofilm-based reactors are considered as a promising option. Therefore, in the present study, for the biological removal of DEP from synthetic wastewater, two different anaerobic biofilm-based reactors, including anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor (AnFFBR) and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor (UAnFFFBR), were compared from kinetic and performance standpoints. As in the previous studies, only the kinetic coefficients have been calculated and the relationship between kinetic coefficients and their interpretation has not been evaluated, the other aim of the present study was to fill this research gap. RESULTS: In optimum conditions, 90.31 and 86.91% of COD as well as 91.11 and 88.72% of DEP removal were achieved for the AnFFBR and UAnFFFBR, respectively. According to kinetic coefficients (except biomass yield), the AnFFBR had better performance as it provided a more favorable condition for microbial growth. The Grau model was selected as the best mathematical model for designing and predicting the bioreactors’ performance due to its high coefficients of determination (0.97 < R (2)). With regard to the insignificant variations of the calculated Grau kinetic coefficients (K (G)) when the organic loading rate (with constant HRT) increased, it can be concluded that both of the bioreactors can tolerate high organic loading rate and their performance is not affected by the applied DEP concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Both the bioreactors were capable of treating low-to-high strength DEP wastewater; however, according to the experimental results and obtained kinetic coefficients, the AnFFBR indicated higher performance. Although the AnFFBR can be considered as a safer treatment option than the UAnFFFBR due to its lower DEP concentrations in sludge, the UAnFFFBR had lower VSS/TSS ratio and sludge yield, which could make it more practical for digestion. Finally, both the bioreactors showed considerable methane yield; however, compared to the UAnFFFBR, the AnFFBR had more potential for bioenergy production. Although both the selected bioreactors achieved nearly 90% of DEP removal, they can only be considered as pre-treatment methods according to the standard regulations and should be coupled with further technology. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13068-017-0826-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC5452402/ /pubmed/28580013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13068-017-0826-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Yousefzadeh, Samira Ahmadi, Ehsan Gholami, Mitra Ghaffari, Hamid Reza Azari, Ali Ansari, Mohsen Miri, Mohammad Sharafi, Kiomars Rezaei, Soheila A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study |
title | A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study |
title_full | A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study |
title_fullStr | A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study |
title_short | A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study |
title_sort | comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5452402/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28580013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13068-017-0826-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yousefzadehsamira acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT ahmadiehsan acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT gholamimitra acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT ghaffarihamidreza acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT azariali acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT ansarimohsen acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT mirimohammad acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT sharafikiomars acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT rezaeisoheila acomparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT yousefzadehsamira comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT ahmadiehsan comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT gholamimitra comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT ghaffarihamidreza comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT azariali comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT ansarimohsen comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT mirimohammad comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT sharafikiomars comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy AT rezaeisoheila comparativestudyofanaerobicfixedfilmbaffledreactorandupflowanaerobicfixedfilmfixedbedreactorforbiologicalremovalofdiethylphthalatefromwastewateraperformancekineticbiogasandmetabolicpathwaystudy |