Effect of an electro phosphorous removal process on phosphorous removal and membrane permeability in a pilot-scale MBR

Kim, Hyoung-Gun; Jang, Ha Nee; Kim, Hye-Min; Lee, Daesung; Chung, Tae‐Ho

doi:10.1016/j.desal.2009.09.038

Cited by 51 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Wei et al [59] integrated the electrocoagulation system with a membrane bioreactor and observed an increase in Ortho-P removal from 18.9% to 86.6% after direct current was applied to the bioreactor [60]. The PO 4 -P and total P removal efficiencies of the MBR system with the electrocoagulation unit were 77.2% and 79.9%, respectively, which were significantly higher than that of the MBR system without the coagulation process (PO 4 -P = 59.0% and total P = 41.0%) [61].…”

Section: Removal Of Conventional Pollutantsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Removal of Pharmaceuticals from Wastewater by Intermittent Electrocoagulation

Ensano

Borea

Naddeo

et al. 2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The continuous release of emerging contaminants (ECs) in the aquatic environment, as a result of the inadequate removal by conventional treatment methods, has prompted research to explore viable solutions to this rising global problem. One promising alternative is the use of electrochemical processes since they represent a simple and highly efficient technology with less footprint. In this paper, the feasibility of treating ECs (i.e., pharmaceuticals) using an intermittent electrocoagulation process, a known electrochemical technology, has been investigated. Diclofenac (DCF), carbamazepine (CBZ) and amoxicillin (AMX) were chosen as being representative of highly consumed drugs that are frequently detected in our water resources and were added in synthetic municipal wastewater. The removal efficiencies of both individual and combined pharmaceuticals were determined under different experimental conditions: hydraulic retention time (HRT) (6, 19 and 38 h), initial concentration (0.01, 4 and 10 mg/L) and intermittent application (5 min ON/20 min OFF) of current density (0.5, 1.15 and 1.8 mA/cm 2 ). Results have shown that these parameters have significant effects on pharmaceutical degradation. Maximum removals (DCF = 90%, CBZ = 70% and AMX = 77%) were obtained at a current density of 0.5 mA/cm 2 , an initial concentration of 10 mg/L and HRT of 38 h.

show abstract

Section: Removal Of Conventional Pollutantsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Removal of Pharmaceuticals from Wastewater by Intermittent Electrocoagulation

Ensano

Borea

Naddeo

et al. 2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among the numerous papers available in literature for eMBR, only few studies have been made comparing the different performances of membrane materials and these studies only focused on the effects of the membrane's pore size on fouling. Kim et al (2010) used two plate type membranes: PVDF (mean pore size: 0.08 µm) and polyethersulfone (PES) (mean pore size: 0.2 µm) in an EC-SMBR system and observed that although both membranes maintained a stable transmembrane pressure (TMP) for a period of 5 months without chemical cleaning, PVDF has better performance, as shown in its lower average TMP (PVDF = 10 kPa vs. PES = 16 kPa) which was attributed to its smaller pore size. Apparently, membranes with large pore sizes are more susceptible to fouling as more smaller particles can migrate, attach and accumulate into the interior surfaces of the pores resulting in pore narrowing and pore blocking and eventually to irreversible fouling (Kim et al, 2010).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kim et al (2010) used two plate type membranes: PVDF (mean pore size: 0.08 µm) and polyethersulfone (PES) (mean pore size: 0.2 µm) in an EC-SMBR system and observed that although both membranes maintained a stable transmembrane pressure (TMP) for a period of 5 months without chemical cleaning, PVDF has better performance, as shown in its lower average TMP (PVDF = 10 kPa vs. PES = 16 kPa) which was attributed to its smaller pore size. Apparently, membranes with large pore sizes are more susceptible to fouling as more smaller particles can migrate, attach and accumulate into the interior surfaces of the pores resulting in pore narrowing and pore blocking and eventually to irreversible fouling (Kim et al, 2010). The same conclusion was reached by Akamatsu et al (2010) when they used MF-1 (0.1 µm) and MF-2 membranes (0.22 µm) in eMBR, both membranes were made up of a mixture of cellulose acetate and cellulose nitrate.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…COD and TP concentrations in the effluent were lower at shorter SRT due to the decline in the MLSS concentration, while high TN removal was observed when SRT was increased from 5 to 20 days due to the provision of ample time for the growth of nitrifying bacteria responsible for the biological nitrification processes . The values of HRT in some studies range from 6 to 14 h (Wei et al, 2009;Kim et al, 2010;Elektorowicz et al, 2014;Hasan et al, 2014) while, regarding SRT, it can last up to 268 days (Bani-Melhem and (Tables 1, 2). Longer SRT is one of the many advantages of eMBR over CAS process.…”

Section: Operating Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…EC-SMBR was used by Kim et al (2010), Bani-Melhem and Smith (2012), and Keerthi et al (2013) to treat municipal wastewater, actual gray water, and tannery wastewater, respectively. Here, the influent is first treated via electrocoagulation process in a separate unit prior to biological degradation and membrane filtration in a conventional submerged membrane bioreactor (SMBR).…”

Section: Main Configurationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Combination of Electrochemical Processes with Membrane Bioreactors for Wastewater Treatment and Fouling Control: A Review

Ensano

Borea

Naddeo

et al. 2016

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a critical review about the integration of electrochemical processes into membrane bioreactors (MBR) in order to understand the influence of these processes on wastewater treatment performance and membrane fouling control. The integration can be realized either in an internal or an external configuration. Electrically enhanced membrane bioreactors or electro membrane bioreactors (eMBRs) combine biodegradation, electrochemical and membrane filtration processes into one system providing higher effluent quality as compared to conventional MBRs and activated sludge plants. Furthermore, electrochemical processes, such as electrocoagulation, electrophoresis, and electroosmosis, help to mitigate deposition of foulants into the membrane and enhance sludge dewaterability by controlling the morphological properties and mobility of the colloidal particles and bulk liquid. Intermittent application of minute electric field has proven to reduce energy consumption and operational cost as well as minimize the negative effect of direct current field on microbial activity which are some of the main concerns in eMBR technology. The present review discusses important design considerations of eMBR, its advantages as well as its applications to different types of wastewater. It also presents several challenges that need to be addressed for future development of this hybrid technology which include treatment of high strength industrial wastewater and removal of emerging contaminants, optimization study, cost benefit analysis and the possible combination with microbial electrolysis cell for biohydrogen production.

show abstract

Heavy Metal Removal by Electrocoagulation Integrated Membrane Bioreactor

Vijayakumar

Keerthi

Balasubramanian

2014

CLEAN Soil Air Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the performance of electrocoagulation integrated membrane bioreactor (EMBR) in treating synthetic wastewater enriched with heavy metals (Cu, Cr, and Zn). This hybrid system was compared with a conventional membrane bioreactor (MBR). The results suggest that it is superior to conventional MBR in terms to chemical oxygen demand removal, flux improvement, fouling reduction, and metal removal. The metal removal efficiencies in both MBR and EMBR followed the sequence Cr > Cu > Zn. The average removal efficiencies in MBR were 60.90, 53.24, and 48.22% for Cr, Cu, and Zn, respectively, while for the EMBR 98.60, 97.53, and 93.52% could be achieved, respectively. The mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) concentration was also found to affect the metal removal potential of the MBR. In MBR, metal removal and MLSS concentration showed significant relationship, while in EMBR, this correlation was found to be less. The specific energy consumption for removing each metal by EMBR was calculated and found to be 6.62, 6.94, and 6.69 kWh/kg removed for Cr, Zn, and Cu, respectively.

show abstract

Effect of an electro phosphorous removal process on phosphorous removal and membrane permeability in a pilot-scale MBR

Cited by 51 publications

References 22 publications

Removal of Pharmaceuticals from Wastewater by Intermittent Electrocoagulation

Removal of Pharmaceuticals from Wastewater by Intermittent Electrocoagulation

Combination of Electrochemical Processes with Membrane Bioreactors for Wastewater Treatment and Fouling Control: A Review

Heavy Metal Removal by Electrocoagulation Integrated Membrane Bioreactor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About