Poultry slaughterhouses produce a large amount of wastewater, which is usually treated by conventional methods. The traditional techniques face some challenges, especially the incapability of recovering valuable nutrients and reusing the treated water. Therefore, membrane technology has been widely adopted by researchers due to its enormous advantages over conventional methods. Pressure-driven membranes, such as microfiltration (MF), ultrafiltration (UF), nanofiltration (NF), and reverse osmosis (RO), have been studied to purify poultry slaughterhouse wastewater (PSWW) as a standalone process or an integrated process with other procedures. Membrane technology showed excellent performance by providing high efficiency for pollutant removal and the recovery of water and valuable products. It may remove approximately all the pollutants from PSWW and purify the water to the required level for discharge to the environment and even reuse for industrial poultry processing purposes while being economically efficient. This article comprehensively reviews the treatment and reuse of PSWW with MF, UF, NF, and RO. Most valuable nutrients can be recovered by UF, and high-quality water for reuse in poultry processing can be produced by RO from PSWW. The incredible performance of membrane technology indicates that membrane technology is an alternative approach for treating PSWW.

To address some challenges of food security and sustainability of the poultry processing industry, a sequential membrane process of ultrafiltration (UF), forward osmosis (FO), and reverse osmosis (RO) is proposed to treat semi-processed poultry slaughterhouse wastewater (PSWW) and water recovery. The pretreatment of PSWW with UF removed 36.7% of chemical oxygen demand (COD), 38.9% of total phosphorous (TP), 24.7% of total solids (TS), 14.5% of total volatile solids (TVS), 27.3% of total fixed solids (TFS), and 12.1% of total nitrogen (TN). Then, the PSWW was treated with FO membrane in FO mode, pressure retarded osmosis (PRO) mode, and L-DOPA coated membrane in the PRO mode. The FO mode was optimal for PSWW treatment by achieving the highest average flux of 10.4 ± 0.2 L/m2-h and the highest pollutant removal efficiency; 100% of COD, 100% of TP, 90.5% of TS, 85.3% of TVS, 92.1% of TFS, and 37.2% of TN. The performance of the FO membrane was entirely restored by flushing the membrane with 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate solution. RO significantly removed COD, TS, TVS, TFS, and TP. However, TN was reduced by only 62% because of the high ammonia concentration present in the draw solution. Overall, the sequential membrane process (UF-FO-RO) showed excellent performance by providing high rejection efficiency for pollutant removal and water recovery.