Ten persistent myths and the realities of membrane bioreactor technology for municipal applications

Lesjean, B.; Tazi‐Pain, A.; Thauré, David; Moeslang, H.; Buisson, H.

doi:10.2166/wst.2011.005

Cited by 42 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(15 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering that NoV GI is more often associated with water-or food-borne transmission than NoV GII (29), it is important to select wastewater treatment technology that is capable of removing all NoV genotypes to equal extents. MBR, which uses size exclusion sieving rather than settling for particle removal (26), removes both genotypes with similar efficacies and thus should be the preferred technology for NoV removal. Another group argued that AdV removal by MBR is predictive of that of NoV (23,44).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, MBR plants filter activated sludge through microporous membranes, eliminating the sedimentation step necessary for conventional wastewater treatment (17,26). MBR plants are significantly more compact, require less frequent monitoring, and are more customizable (due to the modular design of membrane filters) than conventional treatment systems.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Caliciviruses have been detected previously in wastewater treatment plant effluent (5,15,19,21,28,47). Although the removal of pathogenic bacteria by MBR plants is well documented (26), the removal of viruses, caliciviruses in particular, is far from being understood. Thus far, studies of bacteriophage MS-2 (43) and Qb (20) have shown that these particles are removed to a greater extent by MBR than by conventional plants.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Calicivirus Removal in a Membrane Bioreactor Wastewater Treatment Plant

Sima

Schaeffer

Saux

et al. 2011

Appl Environ Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To evaluate membrane bioreactor wastewater treatment virus removal, a study was conducted in southwest France. Samples collected from plant influent, an aeration basin, membrane effluent, solid sludge, and effluent biweekly from October 2009 to June 2010 were analyzed for calicivirus (norovirus and sapovirus) by real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) using extraction controls to perform quantification. Adenovirus and Escherichia coli also were analyzed to compare removal efficiencies. In the influent, sapovirus was always present, while the norovirus concentration varied temporally, with the highest concentration being detected from February to May. All three human norovirus genogroups (GI, GII, and GIV) were detected in effluent, but GIV was never detected in effluent; GI and GII were detected in 50% of the samples but at low concentrations. In the effluent, sapovirus was identified only once. An adenovirus titer showing temporal variation in influent samples was identified only twice in effluent. E. coli was always below the limit of detection in the effluent. Overall, the removal of calicivirus varied from 3.3 to greater than 6.8 log units, with no difference between the two main genogroups. Our results also demonstrated that the viruses are blocked by the membrane in the treatment plant and are removed from the plant as solid sludge.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Calicivirus Removal in a Membrane Bioreactor Wastewater Treatment Plant

Sima

Schaeffer

Saux

et al. 2011

Appl Environ Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The submerged MBR systems use membrane interception to separate activated sludge from treated water, thereby controlling and increasing the solid retention time independently from the hydraulic retention time within the bioreactor (Lesjean et al 2011;Lin et al 2011;Sarp et al 2011;Yu et al 2011;Zaw et al 2011). Under these conditions, nitrifiers, which are naturally slow growers, are intercepted by the membrane and prevented from being washed out of the reactor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecophysiology of nitrifying communities in membrane bioreactors

Awolusi

Kumari

Bux

2014

Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Membrane bioreactors (MBRs) are rapidly becoming the technology of choice over conventional activated sludge treatment systems due to their smaller footprint, reduced sludge production, rapid start-up of biological processes, complete removal of suspended solids and better effluent quality. The retention of sufficient amount of slow-growing nitrifiers makes it feasible for the MBRs to achieve strong tolerance against the shock loads with stable and highly efficient nitrogen removal. Various studies have focused on the ecophysiology of nitrifiers in MBRs as well as their distinctive operational parameters as well as their impact on the selection and activity of nitrifying community. Several techniques have been employed over the years to understand the nitrifying community and their interaction within the MBR system, which led to its modification from the initial design. This review focuses on the identification of optimal operational and environmental conditions for efficient nitrification in MBRs. The advantages and limitations of different techniques employed for investigating the nitrifying communities in MBRs are also emphasized.

show abstract

“…MBR generally combines membrane separation and the activated sludge process (ASP) [1]. Membrane separation contributes to disinfection and removal of turbidity while ASP significantly impacts the biological treatment [2]. Both membrane separation and ASP are influenced by aeration especially in submerged MBR.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%