Soluble‐Sulfide precipitation for heavy metals removal from wastewaters. Engineering details of a treatment plant scheduled to be operational in September, 1981

Whang, James S.; Young, Daniel; Pressman, Maurice

doi:10.1002/ep.670010212

Cited by 31 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Metal sulphides are generally less soluble than their corresponding metal hydroxides; allowing quantitative metal precipitation [15,16]. Metal sulphides are also more compact, have faster settling velocities and exhibit better thickening and dewatering characteristics than the corresponding hydroxide sludge [17]. Metal sulphide volume is 6-10 times lower than metal hydroxide/gypsum sludge from conventional neutralization [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization, morphology and composition of biofilm and precipitates from a sulphate-reducing fixed-bed reactor

Remoundaki

Kousi

Joulian

et al. 2008

Journal of Hazardous Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization, morphology and composition of biofilm and precipitates from a sulphate-reducing fixed-bed reactor

Remoundaki

Kousi

Joulian

et al. 2008

Journal of Hazardous Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of hydraulic retention time and sulfide toxicity on ethanol and acetate oxidation in sulfate‐reducing metal‐precipitating fluidized‐bed reactor

Kaksonen

Franzmann

Puhakka

2004

Biotech & Bioengineering

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of hydraulic retention time (HRT) and sulfide toxicity on ethanol and acetate utilization were studied in a sulfate-reducing fluidized-bed reactor (FBR) treating acidic metal-containing wastewater. The effects of HRT were determined with continuous flow FBR experiments. The percentage of ethanol oxidation was 99.9% even at a HRT of 6.5 h (loading of 2.6 g ethanol L(-1) d(-1)), while acetate accumulated in the FBR with HRTs below 12 h (loading of 1.4 g ethanol L(-1) d(-1)). Partial acetate utilization was accompanied by decreased concentrations of dissolved sulfide (DS) and alkalinity in the effluent, and eventually resulted in process failure when HRT was decreased to 6.1 h (loading of 2.7 g ethanol L(-1) d(-1)). Zinc and iron precipitation rates increased to over 600 mg L(-1) d(-1) and 300 mg L(-1) d(-1), respectively, with decreasing HRT. At HRT of 6.5 h, percent metal precipitation was over 99.9%, and effluent metal concentrations remained below 0.08 mg L(-1). Under these conditions, the alkalinity produced by substrate utilization increased the wastewater pH from 3 to 7.9-8.0. The percentage of electron flow from ethanol to sulfate reduction averaged 76 +/- 10% and was not affected by the HRT. The lowest HRT did not result in significant biomass washout from the FBR. The effect of sulfide toxicity on the sulfate-reducing culture was studied with batch kinetic experiments in the FBR. Noncompetitive inhibition model described well the sulfide inhibition of the sulfate-reducing culture. (DS) inhibition constants (K(i)) for ethanol and acetate oxidation were 248 mg S L(-1) and 356 mg S L(-1), respectively, and the corresponding K(i) values for H(2)S were 84 mg S L(-1) and 124 mg S L(-1). In conclusion, ethanol oxidation was more inhibited by sulfide toxicity than the acetate oxidation.

show abstract

Sulfate Reduction Based Bioprocesses for the Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage and the Recovery of Metals

Kaksonen

Puhakka

2007

Engineering in Life Sciences

315

177

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological sulfate reduction is increasingly replacing chemical unit processes in mining biotechnology. Sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB) can be used for treating ground‐ and surface waters contaminated with acid mine drainage (AMD), and for recovering metals from wastewater and process streams. Biologically produced H2S precipitates metals as metal sulfides, while biogenic bicarbonate alkalinity neutralizes acidic waters. This paper reviews various passive and active SRB‐based alternatives as well as some process design aspects, such as reactor types, process configurations, and choices of substrates for sulfate reduction. The latest developments of using various low‐cost substrates together with new bioprocess designs are increasing the uses and applications of SRB‐based bioreactors in AMD control and selective metal recovery.

show abstract

Soluble‐Sulfide precipitation for heavy metals removal from wastewaters. Engineering details of a treatment plant scheduled to be operational in September, 1981

Cited by 31 publications

References 1 publication

Characterization, morphology and composition of biofilm and precipitates from a sulphate-reducing fixed-bed reactor

Characterization, morphology and composition of biofilm and precipitates from a sulphate-reducing fixed-bed reactor

Effects of hydraulic retention time and sulfide toxicity on ethanol and acetate oxidation in sulfate‐reducing metal‐precipitating fluidized‐bed reactor

Sulfate Reduction Based Bioprocesses for the Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage and the Recovery of Metals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About