Environmental Engineering Research

  • 제20권1호
  • /
  • Pages.65-72
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 1226-1025(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-968X(eISSN)
대한환경공학회 (Korean Society of Environmental Engineers)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative study on response of thiocyanate shock load on continuous and fed batch anaerobic-anoxic-aerobic sequential moving bed reactors

  • Sahariah, B.P. (Centre for the Environment, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati) ;
  • Chakraborty, S. (Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati)
  • 투고 : 2014.08.07
  • 심사 : 2015.01.26
  • 발행 : 2015.03.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

A comparative study on response of a toxic compound thiocyanate ($SCN^-$) was carried out in continuous and fed batch moving bed reactor systems. Both systems had three sequential anaerobic, anoxic and aerobic reactors and operated at same hydraulic retention time. Feed $SCN^-$ was first increased from 600 mg/L to 1,000 mg/L for 3 days (shock 1) and then from 600 to 1,200 mg/L for 3 days (shock 2). In anaerobic continuous reactor, increase of effluent COD (chemical oxygen demand) due to shock load was only 2%, whereas in fed batch reactor it was 14%. In anoxic fed batch reactor recovery was partial in terms of $SCN^-$, phenol, COD and $NO{_3}{^-}$-N and $NO{_2}{^-}$-N removals and in continuous reactor complete recovery was possible. In both systems, inhibition was more significant on aerobic reactors than anaerobic and anoxic reactors. In aerobic reactors ammonia removal efficiency deteriorated and damage was irreversible. Present study showed that fed batch reactors showed higher substrate removal efficiency than continuous reactors during regular operation, but are more susceptible to toxic feed shock load and in nitrifying reactor damage was irreversible.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Veeresh GS, Kumar P, Mehrotra I. Treatment of phenol and cresols in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) process: a review. Water Res. 2005;39:154-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.07.028
  2. Odegaard H. Innovations in wastewater treatment: the moving bed bioreactor. Water Sci. Technol. 2006;53:17-33.
  3. Li YM, Gu GW, Zhao JF, Yu HQ, Qiu YL, Peng YG. Treatment of coke- plant wastewater by biofilm systems for removal of organic compounds and nitrogen. Chemosphere 2003;52:997-1005. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(03)00287-X
  4. Vazquez I, Rodriguez J, Maranon E, Castrillon L, Fernandez Y. Study of the aerobic biodegradation of coke wastewater in a two and three-step activated sludge process. J. Hazard. Mater. 2006;137:1681-1688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.05.007
  5. Hung CH, Pavlostathis SG. Fate and transformation of thiocyanate and cyanate under methanogenic conditions. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 1998;49:112-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002530051146
  6. Zhao W, Huang X, Lee D. Enhanced treatment of coke plant wastewater using an anaerobic-anoxic-oxic membrane bioreactor system. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2009;66:279-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2008.12.028
  7. Chakraborty S, Veeramani H. Effect of HRT and recycle ratio on removal of cyanide, phenol, thiocyanate and ammonia in an anaerobic-anoxic-aerobic continuous system. Process Biochem. 2006;41:96-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2005.03.067
  8. Sahariah BP, Chakraborty S. Kinetic analysis of phenol, thiocyanate and ammonia-nitrogen removals in an anaerobic-anoxic- aerobic moving bed bioreactor system. J. Hazard. Mater. 2011;190:260-267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.03.038
  9. Sahariah BP, Chakraborty S. Effect of cycle and fill time on performance of sequential anaerobic-anoxic-aerobic fed batch moving bed reactor. Environ. Technol. 2013;34:245-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2012.692712
  10. APHA, AWWA, WPCF. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 20th ed. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association; 1998.
  11. Kim YM, Cho HU, Lee DS, Park C, Park D, Park JM. Response of nitrifying bacterial communities to the increased thiocyanate concentration in pre-denitrification process. Bioresour. Technol. 2011;102:913-922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.09.032
  12. Li H, Han H, Du M, Wang W. Inhibition and recovery of nitrification in treating real coal gasification wastewater with moving bed biofilm reactor. J. Environ. Sci. 2011;23:568-574. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(10)60449-4
  13. Kim YM, Park D, Lee DS, Park JM. Inhibitory effects of toxic compounds on nitrification process for cokes wastewater treatment. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008;152:915-921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.07.065
  14. Kaballo HP, Zhao Y, Wilderer PA. Elimination of p-chlorophenol in biofilm reactors- a comparative study of continuous flow and sequenced operation. Water Sci. Technol. 1995;31: 51-60.
  15. Wilderer PA, Roske I, Ueberschar A, David L. Continuous flow and sequenced batch operation of biofilm reactors: A comparative study of shock loading responses. Biofouling 1993;6: 295-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927019309386232
  16. Mendoza-Espinosa LG, Tom S. Organic and hydraulic shock loadings on a biological aerated filter. Environ. Technol. 2001;22:321-330. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593332208618281
  17. Woolard CR. The advantages of periodically operated biofilm reactors for the treatment of highly variable wastewater. Water Sci. Technol. 1997;35:199-206.

피인용 문헌

  1. Stability of continuous and fed batch sequential anaerobic–anoxic–aerobic moving bed bioreactor systems at phenol shock load application pp.1479-487X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2017.1343388