A hybrid process for leachate wastewater treatment: Evaporation and reverse osmosis/sequencing batch reactor

Bouchareb, Raouf; Işık, Zelal; Özay, Yasin; Karagündüz, Ahmet; Keskinler, Bülent; Dizge, Nadir

doi:10.1002/wer.10717

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, "nanofiltration -reverse osmosis" offers advantages and flexibility in leachate treatment and is also more energyefficient. Bouchareb et al [28] proposed a leachate treatment process that involved evaporation and reverse osmosis membranes. This process was experimentally investigated for the treatment of actual waste leachate.…”

Section: Membrane Separation Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Research progress of leachate treatment in waste transfer station

Fu,

Su,

et al. 2024

E3S Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The garbage leachate generated by the waste transfer station has the characteristics of scattered water sources, relatively small water quantity, large fluctuations in water quality and quantity, and high concentrations of organic matter, ammonia nitrogen, suspended solids, and other pollutants. These characteristics make it prone to environmental hazards. This paper analyzes the characteristics and hazards of leachate from waste transfer stations and introduces the current research status of physico-chemical, biological, and combined treatment of leachate from waste transfer stations. Meanwhile, this paper introduces engineering practices for leachate treatment in waste transfer stations, offering a valuable reference for research and engineering practices in this field. Finally, this review discusses pretreatment, economic, low-carbon, and high-efficiency treatment methods and facilities, the recovery of valuable elements, energy recycling technologies, and the demand outlook for high-standard deep treatment processes.

show abstract

Section: Membrane Separation Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Research progress of leachate treatment in waste transfer station

Fu,

Su,

et al. 2024

E3S Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The evaluation of the biological technique operating circumstances is made possible by control relationship conditions such as the sludge retention time (SRT), food-microorganism ratio (F/M), and hydraulic retention time (HRT) and cell residence time (sludge age) [1]. Leachate transfer processes, such as co-treatment of leachate with wastewater [91], evaporation [11], and recycling of nutrients from wastewater, thus save energy consumption or produce biofuels [135]. The final waste of treatment (such as sludge and biomass) can be used as agricultural fertilizers [144].…”

Section: Combined Treatment Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Leachates may include high concentrations of organic matter (OM), ammonium nitrogen [7], heavy metals [8], and chlorinated inorganic and organic salts [9]. Organic pollutants in leachate are characterized using global parameters, namely total organic carbon (TOC) [10], 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD 5 ) [8], and chemical oxygen demand (COD) [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Extensive Analysis of Combined Processes for Landfill Leachate Treatment

Jamrah,

AL-Zghoul,

Al-Qodah

2024

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sanitary landfilling is the predominant process for solid urban waste disposal, but it generates leachate that poses environmental, economic, and social concerns. Landfill leachate (LL) contains complex and refractory pollutants and toxic compounds that can vary depending on landfill maturity, age, and biochemical reactions, making its treatment challenging. Due to its unique characteristics and occurrence in remote locations, LL requires separate treatment from wastewater. Various conventional treatment processes involving biological, chemical, and physical processes have been used for LL treatment, but a single treatment process is insufficient to meet environmental standards. This review demonstrates that combined treatment processes are more effective and efficient for LL treatment compared to single processes. Among the various combinations, chemical–chemical and chemical–biological treatments are the most commonly used. Specifically, the integration of Fenton with adsorption and a membrane bioreactor (MBR) with nanofiltration (NF) processes shows promising results. The combined processes of MBR with NF, Fenton with adsorption, and PF with biological treatment show maximum removal efficiencies for COD, reaching 99 ± 1%, 99%, 98%, and 97%, respectively. Additionally, the combined Fenton with adsorption process and EC with SPF process enhance biodegradability as indicated by increased BOD5/COD ratios, from 0.084 to 0.82 and 0.35 to 0.75, respectively. The findings emphasize the importance of developing and implementing enhanced combined treatment processes for LL, with the aim of achieving efficient and comprehensive pollutant mineralization. Such processes have the potential to address the environmental concerns associated with LL and contribute to sustainable waste management practices.

show abstract

“…In order to treat landfill leachate, a number of traditional chemical and physical processes have been suggested, such as adsorption with different adsorbent (Detho et al, 2021; Elgarahy et al, 2023; Kumara & Dayanthi, 2023; J. Liu et al, 2024; Salama et al, 2022), ion exchange with various resins (Aziz et al, 2020; Bashir et al, 2010; Scandelai et al, 2020), reverse osmosis (Bouchareb et al, 2022; Folino et al, 2024; García‐Pacheco et al, 2022), electrocoagulation (Guo et al, 2022; Hamid et al, 2021; R. Li et al, 2017; Ogedey & Oguz, 2024), electrochemical oxidation (Tang et al, 2022; Vocciante et al, 2021; Zhao & Zhao, 2021), fenton processes (Crispim et al, 2022; Feng et al, 2022; X. Li et al, 2018), advanced oxidation processes (Kanmani & Dileepan, 2023, Shuo Li et al, 2022, Y. Liu et al, 2022), dissolved air flotation (Adlan et al, 2011), and coagulation/flocculation (Lessoued et al, 2017; Reddy et al, 2022; Zakaria et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leachate treatment via electrocoagulation–coal‐based powdered activated carbon process: Efficiencies, mechanisms, kinetics, and costs

Ogedey,

Oguz

2024

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to improve COD, NH3‐N, and turbidity removal from Bingöl's leachate using a single‐reactor integrated electrocoagulation (EC)–coal‐based powdered activated carbon (CBPAC) process under various experimental conditions. In the EC‐CBPAC process, three stainless‐steel cathodes and three aluminum electrodes were connected to the negative and positive terminals of the power supply, respectively. The initial concentrations in the leachate were 1044 mg O2/L for COD, 204 mg/L for NH3‐N, and 57 NTU (or 71.25‐mg (NH2)2H2SO4/L) for turbidity, respectively. After a 40‐min EC‐CBPAC process, with a CBPAC dosage of 5 g/L and pH of 5 for COD and turbidity, and 9.5 for NH3‐N, the optimum removal efficiencies for COD, NH3‐N, and turbidity were achieved at 92%, 40%, and 91%, respectively. When the EC process was applied without CBPAC under the same experimental conditions, the removal efficiencies of COD, NH3‐N, and turbidity were 87%, 28%, and 54%, respectively. Before and after the EC‐CBPAC process, the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) surface area, pore volume, and mean pore diameter of the CBPAC were found to be (888 m2/g, 0.498 cm3/g, and 22.28 Å) and (173 m2/g, 0.18 cm3/g, and 42.8 Å), respectively. The optimum pseudo‐first‐order (PFO) rate constants for COD, turbidity, and NH3‐N were determined to be 3.15 × 10−2, 4.77 × 10−2, and 8.8 × 10−3 min−1, respectively. With the current density increasing from 15 to 25 mA/cm2, energy consumption, unit energy consumption, and total cost increased from 68.7 to 122.4 kWh/m3, 6.948 to 15.226 kWh/kg COD, and 0.85 to 1.838 $/kg COD, respectively.Practitioner points EC‐CBPAC process has greater COD, NH3‐N, and turbidity removal efficiency than EC process. COD and turbidity achieved their optimum disposal efficiencies at 92% and 91%, respectively, at pH 5 The most efficient disposal efficiency for NH3‐N was observed to be 40% at pH 9.5. EC‐CBPAC process increased removal efficiencies for COD, NH3‐N, and turbidity by 20%, 19%, and 38%, respectively, compared with EC alone. The turbidity, NH3‐N, and COD disposal fitted PSO model due to high correlation values (R2 0.94–0.99).

show abstract

A hybrid process for leachate wastewater treatment: Evaporation and reverse osmosis/sequencing batch reactor

Cited by 11 publications

References 34 publications

Research progress of leachate treatment in waste transfer station

Research progress of leachate treatment in waste transfer station

An Extensive Analysis of Combined Processes for Landfill Leachate Treatment

Leachate treatment via electrocoagulation–coal‐based powdered activated carbon process: Efficiencies, mechanisms, kinetics, and costs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About