Advances in wastewater nitrogen removal by biological processes: state of the art review

Capodaglio, Andrea G.; Hlavínek, Petr; Raboni, Massimo

doi:10.4136/ambi-agua.1772

Cited by 60 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 33 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Use of membrane systems in decentralized treatment of household (domestic) wastewater was described by several researchers [38,39]. When properly operated, MBRs have also shown the capability to effectively remove nutrients [40,41] and-to some degree-micropollutants [42]. Depending on the pore size of the adopted membrane, MBRs may effectively remove pathogens, directly meeting water recycling standards without further disinfection.…”

Section: Membrane Biological Reactors (And Related Technologies)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated, Decentralized Wastewater Management for Resource Recovery in Rural and Peri-Urban Areas

Capodaglio

2017

Resources

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collection and treatment of wastewater have a huge impact on the environment and economy, both at the local and global levels. Eco-innovation may play a paramount role in the reduction of the environmental impact of such systems, and in their greater sustainability in economic, environmental, and social terms. Decentralization appears as a logical solution to tackle sustainability problems of wastewater management systems, as it focuses on the on-site treatment of wastewater and on local recycling and reuse of resources contained in domestic wastewater (in primus, water itself). This paper analyses the needs, technological options and contribution to water management of decentralized systems. Decentralized solutions in general will tend to be compatible with local water use and reuse requirements, where locally treated water could support agricultural productivity or (in more urban areas) be used as a substitute for drinking-quality supply water for compatible uses. In analyzing sustainability of technology, different dimensions should be taken into account (in particular, local issues). There is no fixed or universal solution to the technological issue; to the contrary, all relevant studies demonstrated there are varying degrees of sustainability in the way a technology is selected and operated, to avoid exporting problems over time or space.

show abstract

Section: Membrane Biological Reactors (And Related Technologies)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated, Decentralized Wastewater Management for Resource Recovery in Rural and Peri-Urban Areas

Capodaglio

2017

Resources

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In conventional ASP nitrification-denitrification, process energy consumption is 2.3 kWh/kg N removed [60]. A new, casually discovered, mechanism of autotrophic N-removal (Anammox) in which ammonium is oxidised under anaerobic conditions has recently been introduced in wastewater treatment practice, with energy requirements of just 0.9 kWh/kg N removed [61][62][63]. It was also shown that autotrophic N-removal determines lower sludge production by up to one order of magnitude [64], reducing disposal costs for residues.…”

Section: Towards More Energy-efficient Wwtpsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Issues in Sustainable Urban Wastewater Management: Use, Demand Reduction and Recovery in the Urban Water Cycle

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban water systems and, in particular, wastewater treatment facilities are among the major energy consumers at municipal level worldwide. Estimates indicate that on average these facilities alone may require about 1% to 3% of the total electric energy output of a country, representing a significant fraction of municipal energy bills. Specific power consumption of state-of-the-art facilities should range between 20 and 45 kWh per population-equivalent served, per year, even though older plants may have even higher demands. This figure does not include wastewater conveyance (pumping) and residues post-processing. On the other hand, wastewater and its byproducts contain energy in different forms: chemical, thermal and potential. Until very recently, the only form of energy recovery from most facilities consisted of anaerobic post-digestion of process residuals (waste sludge), by which chemical energy methane is obtained as biogas, in amounts generally sufficient to cover about half of plant requirements. Implementation of new technologies may allow more efficient strategies of energy savings and recovery from sewage treatment. Besides wastewater valorization by exploitation of its chemical and thermal energy contents, closure of the wastewater cycle by recovery of the energy content of process residuals could allow significant additional energy recovery and increased greenhouse emissions abatement.

show abstract

“…Although the conventional one‐stage BAFs present partial advantages in terms of energy saving and removal efficiency, their pollutants removal rates are not optimal (De Feo, ). In addition, conventional one‐stage BAFs are not convenient to control anaerobic and aerobic alternative systems for denitrification (Capodaglio, Hlavínek, & Raboni, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined UMBAF‐MBAF process treating detergent wastewater

Zhou

Zhou³

et al. 2019

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A combined process of the upflow multimedium biological aerated filter (UMBAF) and the multimedia biological aerated filter (MBAF) treating detergent wastewater was investigated in this study. Results showed that the optimal filtration rate of the combined system was 1.4 m/hr while the optimized performance was observed at air to water ratio of 2:1. The average removal rate of chemical oxygen demand (COD), linear alkyl benzene sulfonate sodium (LAS), and total phosphate (TP) was up to 91.4%, 88.5%, and 40%, respectively, while the average effluent concentrations of COD, LAS, and TP under stable operation states were 35.0 mg/L, 7.0 mg/L, and 4.4 mg/L, respectively. UMBAF played a major role in TP removal; the removal of COD in the combined UMBAF and MBAF process was consistent with the general formula C = C0e ‐(ah + b), while the kinetic model of LAS removal in the combined UMBAF and MBAF process could be expressed by L = L0e−(mh + n). The combined UMBAF‐MBAF process provides a promising technology for the treatment of detergent wastewater. The kinetic model of LAS removal in the UMBAF and MBAF units is helpful for the prediction of the treatment efficiency of organic pollutants. Practitioner points A novel UMBAF‐MBAF process was developed treating detergent wastewater. The average removal rate of COD, LAS, and TP by the combined process was up to 91.4%, 88.5%, and 40%, respectively. Kinetic models for the UMBAF‐MBAF process were investigated.

show abstract

Advances in wastewater nitrogen removal by biological processes: state of the art review

Cited by 60 publications

References 33 publications

Integrated, Decentralized Wastewater Management for Resource Recovery in Rural and Peri-Urban Areas

Integrated, Decentralized Wastewater Management for Resource Recovery in Rural and Peri-Urban Areas

Energy Issues in Sustainable Urban Wastewater Management: Use, Demand Reduction and Recovery in the Urban Water Cycle

Combined UMBAF‐MBAF process treating detergent wastewater

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About