Treatment of biologically treated landfill leachate with forward osmosis: Investigating membrane performance and cleaning protocols

Ibrar, Ibrar; Yadav, Sudesh; Altaee, Ali; Samal, Akshaya K.; Zhou, John L.; Nguyễn, Tiến Vinh; Ganbat, Namuun

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140901

Cited by 33 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The water contact angle of the PFTE membrane decreased by 28% after landfill treatment. Although H 2 O 2 cleaning is an effective method for organic and inorganic foulant removal [ 44 ], it was insufficient to restore the water flux at high recovery. After 30 h of AGMD process with leachate feed, membrane fouling becomes denser, and fouling layers are probably stacked over each other at high recoveries.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fouling and Performance Investigation of Membrane Distillation at Elevated Recoveries for Seawater Desalination and Wastewater Reclamation

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

: This study reports on the impact of elevated recovery (i.e., 80%, 85%, and 90%) on the fouling and performance of air gap membrane distillation (AGMD) with real seawater and landfill leachate wastewater samples using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) polymer membranes. Increasing the feed temperature from 55 °C to 65 °C improved the water flux of seawater and wastewater and shortened the operating time by 42.8% for all recoveries. The average water flux in the 80%, 85%, and 90% recovery experiments at the 65 °C feed temperature was 32%, 37.32%, and 36.7% higher than the case of 55 °C for the same recoveries. The water flux decline was more severe at a higher temperature and recovery. The highest flux decline was observed with a 90% recovery at 65 °C feed temperature, followed by an 85% recovery at 65 °C. Close examination of the foulants layer revealed that seawater formed a cake fouling layer made predominantly of metal oxides. In contrast, the landfill leachate fouling was a combination of pore blocking and cake formation, consisting mainly of carbonous and nitrogenous compounds. Physical cleaning with deionized (DI) water at 55 °C and 65 °C and chemical cleaning with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) were investigated for their efficiency in removing membrane foulants. Analytical results revealed that seawater fouling caused membrane pore blockage while wastewater fouling formed a porous layer on the membrane surface. The results showed that membrane cleaning with hydrogen peroxide restored >97% of the water flux. Interestingly, the fouling factor in seawater tests was 10%, while it was 16% for the wastewater tests.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fouling and Performance Investigation of Membrane Distillation at Elevated Recoveries for Seawater Desalination and Wastewater Reclamation

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At this point, the drop in the water flux under the AL-DS mode was quicker, which might be explained due to the combination of dilution and more intense membrane fouling. This observation could be due to the active and SL structure, leading to more severe concentration polarization in the FO mode, which has been investigated in previous works(Ibrar et al, 2020;Vu et al, 2018).Exp3 and Exp4 studied the effect of the flow rate of DI water in the cleaning cycle on the FO process in AL-DS & AL-FS modes. The 40 o C DI water flow rate in the cleaning process was increased to 3 LPM in Exp3 and Exp4.…”

mentioning

confidence: 86%

“…As shown in Fig.2a, water flux in Exp1 (AL-DS) was 33.6 LMH in cycle 1 but decreased 32%, reaching 22.7 LMH after 180 min.The performance of the FO system was studied after cleaning the fouled membrane with DI water at 40 o C and 2 LPM flow rate. The reason for using DI water at 40 o C for membrane cleaning is its ability to dissolve and remove the fouling materials(Ibrar et al, 2020).Comparing to the initial water flux in cycle 1, it decreased to 29.5 LMH in cycle 2. The initial water flux at the beginning of cycles 3 and 4 was 28.6 and 27.0 LMH, respectively.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Brine reject dilution with treated wastewater for indirect desalination

Khanafer

Ibrahim

Yadav

et al. 2021

Journal of Cleaner Production

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The forward osmosis (FO) process was suggested as a pretreatment to a multi-stage flashing (MSF) plant to reduce the environmental impact of brine discharge and the chemicals used.Yet, there is no study investigating the performance of the FO process pretreatment to the MSF plant using tertiary sewage effluent (TSE) as a feed solution. Combining MSF brine with the TSE generates a considerable permeation flux, reducing the membrane area and capital cost. This study evaluated the performance of the FO process for indirect desalination of the MSF brine, considering membrane fouling, cleaning, required membrane area and the specific power consumption. The FO process used a thin-film composite (TFC) membrane to dilute the brine reject from the MSF plant by the TSE and hence converting waste solutions into a feasible water resource. A considerable high water flux (±35 L/m²h) was generated and slightly decreased throughout each experiment's 4 cycles. An enhancement in the water permeability was observed in the FO tests with a prefiltration of the brine reject and the wastewater with 20µm and an osmotic backwash cleaning of the used membrane. The prefiltration of the draw and feed solutions was effective in minimizing the impact of fouling.Maximum power consumption of 0.007 kWh/m³ was consumed in the forward osmosis process without prefiltration and decreased to 0.006 kWh/m³ in the FO process. The proposed FO system successfully diluted the brine reject' divalent ions, reducing their concentration to 43% in some cases. Depending on the FO membrane orientation, the TSE feed solution resulted in a 276% to 473% reduction in the number of FO elements required in the FO process compared to the seawater feed solution.

show abstract

“…8. 155 The FO system could be integrated with an adsorptionbased pre-treatment system to selectively remove organic foulant precursors from the FS. Biochar (10 g L −1 ) and powdered activated carbon (0.3 g L −1 ) could effectively reduce the membrane fouling, leading to 95% flux recovery and a 57% increase in filtered volume without chemical cleaning of the FO membrane.…”

Section: Application Of Forward Osmosis In Oil-water Separationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Engineered osmosis – sustainable technology for water recovery, product concentration and energy generation

Kaleekkal

Nambikkattu

Satheesh

et al. 2022

Environ. Sci.: Water Res. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Treatment of biologically treated landfill leachate with forward osmosis: Investigating membrane performance and cleaning protocols

Cited by 33 publications

References 50 publications

Fouling and Performance Investigation of Membrane Distillation at Elevated Recoveries for Seawater Desalination and Wastewater Reclamation

Fouling and Performance Investigation of Membrane Distillation at Elevated Recoveries for Seawater Desalination and Wastewater Reclamation

Brine reject dilution with treated wastewater for indirect desalination

Engineered osmosis – sustainable technology for water recovery, product concentration and energy generation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About