Search

Solid organic wastes create potential risks to environmental pollution and human health due to the uncontrolled discharge of huge quantities of hazardous wastes from numerous sources. Now-a-days, anaerobic digestion (AD) is considered as a verified and effective alternative compared to other techniques for treating solid organic waste. The paper reviewed the biological process and parameters involved in the AD along with the factors could enhance the AD process. Hydrolysis is considered as a rate-limiting phase in the complex AD process. The performance and stability of AD process is highly influenced by various operating parameters like temperature, pH, carbon and nitrogen ratio, retention time, and organic loading rate. Different pre-treatment (e.g. mechanical, chemical and biological) could enhance the AD process and the biogas yield. Co-digestion can also be used to provide suitable nutrient balance inside the digester. Challenges of the anaerobic digestion for biogas production are also discussed.

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) are the major polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) contaminating global water environment. This study investigated the efficiency of granular activated carbon (GAC), ultrafiltration (UF) and nanofiltration (NF) treatment for removing PFOS and PFOA contaminants from lake water. NF gave greater removal of all contaminant types (in terms of organic matter, PFOS and PFOA) than GAC treatment which in turn was greater than UF treatment. The lower removal by UF was due to larger pore size of the membrane compared to the size of the target contaminants. For all treatment processes, lower pH (4) in the feedwater showed greater rejection of the organics and selected PFASs. This was likely due to increase in the electrostatic repulsion between solute and sorbent. It could be observed that on increasing the concentration of organics in the feed solution, the rejection of PFOA/PFOS decreased which was due to competition between organics and PFOS/PFOA for binding sites on the membrane/activated carbon surface. It was also noted that protein content led to greater influence for lower rejection of the PFOA/PFOS than carbohydrate or DOC content. This study demonstrated the potential use of membrane processes for removing emerging persistent organic pollutant removal from lake water. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The effects of ozonation, anion exchange resin (AER) and UV/H2O2were investigated as a pre-treatment to control organic fouling (OF) of ultrafiltration membrane in the treatment of drinking water. It was found that high molecular weight (MW) organics such as protein and polysaccharide substances were majorly responsible for reversible fouling which contributed to 90% of total fouling. The decline rate increased with successive filtration cycles due to deposition of protein content over time. All pre-treatment could reduce the foulants of a Ultrafiltration membrane which contributed to the improvement in flux, and there was a greater improvement of flux by UV/H2O2(61%) than ozonation (43%) which in turn was greater than AER (23%) treatment. This was likely due to the effective removal/breakdown of high MW organic content. AER gave greater removal of biofouling potential components (such as biodegradable dissolved organic carbon and assimilable organic carbon contents) compared to UV/H2O2and ozonation treatment. Overall, this study demonstrated the potential of pre-treatments for reducing OF of ultrafiltration for the treatment of drinking water. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The impact of biological activated carbon (BAC), sand filtration (SF) and biological aerated filter (BAF) for removal of the selected organic micropollutants and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) from secondary effluent was studied. BAC led to greater removal of dissolved organic carbon (43%) than BAF (30%) which in turn was greater than SF (24%). All biological filtration systems could effectively remove most of the selected organic micropollutants, and there was a greater removal of these micropollutants by BAC (76–98%) than BAF (70–92%) or SF (68–90%). It was found that all treatment was effective for removal of the hydrophobic (logD > 3.2) and readily biodegradable organic micropollutants. The major mechanism for the removal of these molecules was biodegradation by the micro-organism and sorption by the biofilm. Compared to organic micropollutants removal, there was a lower removal of PFASs by all treatments, and BAF and SF had a considerably lower removal than BAC treatment. The better removal for all molecule types by BAC was due to additional adsorption capacity by the activated carbon. This study demonstrated that the BAC process was most effective in removing organic micropollutants present in the secondary effluent. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Effects of biological activated carbon (BAC), biological aerated filter (BAF), alum coagulation and Moringa oleifera coagulation were investigated to remove iron and arsenic contaminants from drinking water. At an initial dose of 5 mg/L, the removal efficiency for arsenic and iron was 63% and 58% respectively using alum, and 47% and 41% respectively using Moringa oleifera. The removal of both contaminants increased with the increase in coagulant dose and decrease in pH. Biological processes were more effective in removing these contaminants than coagulation. Compared to BAF, BAC gave greater removal of both arsenic and iron, removing 85% and 74%, respectively. Longer contact time for both processes could reduce the greater concentration of arsenic and iron contaminants. The addition of coagulation (at 5 mg/L dosage) and a biological process (with 15 or 60 min contact time) could significantly increase removal efficiency, and the maximum removal was observed for the combination of alum and BAC treatment (60 min contact time), with 100% and 98.56% for arsenic and iron respectively. The reduction efficiency of arsenic and iron reduced with the increase in the concentration of dissolved organics in the feedwater due to the adsorption competition between organic molecules and heavy metals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]