The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

High rate domestic wastewater treatment at 15 °C using anaerobic reactors inoculated with cold-adapted sediments/soils-shaping robust methanogenic communities

High rate domestic wastewater treatment at 15 °C using anaerobic reactors inoculated with cold-adapted sediments/soils-shaping robust methanogenic communities
High rate domestic wastewater treatment at 15 °C using anaerobic reactors inoculated with cold-adapted sediments/soils-shaping robust methanogenic communities

To choose the reactor format in which to employ a low temperature adapted seed for wastewater treatment, we compared a UASB and an AnMBRUASB (UF) reactor at low HRT and temperature (15 °C). The reactors were inoculated with biomass from reactors seeded with soils and sediments from low temperature environments, and fed real municipal wastewater. Both systems met the UWWT Directive (91/271/EEC) COD effluent standard (<125.0 mg L−1) with the AnMBR COD removal efficiency being slightly higher (86.2 ± 1.5%) than that of the UASB (79.3 ± 2.0%). Methane production rates were also higher for the AnMBR than for the UASB, resulting in a COD : CH4 of 26.1 ± 3.0 and 18.2 ± 2.1%, respectively. Higher methanogenic cell abundance was observed in the AnMBR (3בUASB'). The low conversion of COD to methane was attributed to (i) the presence of SO4 in the influent (120.4 ± 17.4 mg L−1), which scavenged up to 50% of the COD, and (ii) accumulation of un-hydrolysed lipids in the mixed liquor especially in the case of the AnMBR. The UASB was energy positive (0.041 ± 0.013 kW h m−3) whilst the AnMBR was energy negative (−0.221 ± 0.016 kW h m−3). The reactor design appeared to have a profound effect on the numbers and diversity of the methanogens: the hydrogenotrophic activity being favoured in the UASB. But both reactors had comparatively high cell specific rates of methanogenesis. We concluded that the slightly better performance of the AnMBR was not sufficient to offset its higher running cost and the complexity of its design.

2053-1400
70-82
Petropoulos, Evangelos
d87aa587-8935-4ad4-adaa-dc53c89d981d
Yu, Yongjie
72be160d-42be-4b32-ba66-41b542592a95
Tabraiz, Shamas
1aadf9c7-38fb-4112-ae42-d568853cee68
Yakubu, Aminu
85f6ae13-a382-47ce-951e-956509035232
Curtis, Thomas P.
cb92fa5d-b9e5-4d69-b6ef-a12652cb86bb
Dolfing, Jan
754a1560-4b0b-4f56-901a-5f9db424b95d
Petropoulos, Evangelos
d87aa587-8935-4ad4-adaa-dc53c89d981d
Yu, Yongjie
72be160d-42be-4b32-ba66-41b542592a95
Tabraiz, Shamas
1aadf9c7-38fb-4112-ae42-d568853cee68
Yakubu, Aminu
85f6ae13-a382-47ce-951e-956509035232
Curtis, Thomas P.
cb92fa5d-b9e5-4d69-b6ef-a12652cb86bb
Dolfing, Jan
754a1560-4b0b-4f56-901a-5f9db424b95d

Petropoulos, Evangelos, Yu, Yongjie, Tabraiz, Shamas, Yakubu, Aminu, Curtis, Thomas P. and Dolfing, Jan (2019) High rate domestic wastewater treatment at 15 °C using anaerobic reactors inoculated with cold-adapted sediments/soils-shaping robust methanogenic communities. Environmental Science: Water Research and Technology, 5 (1), 70-82. (doi:10.1039/c8ew00410b).

Record type: Article

Abstract

To choose the reactor format in which to employ a low temperature adapted seed for wastewater treatment, we compared a UASB and an AnMBRUASB (UF) reactor at low HRT and temperature (15 °C). The reactors were inoculated with biomass from reactors seeded with soils and sediments from low temperature environments, and fed real municipal wastewater. Both systems met the UWWT Directive (91/271/EEC) COD effluent standard (<125.0 mg L−1) with the AnMBR COD removal efficiency being slightly higher (86.2 ± 1.5%) than that of the UASB (79.3 ± 2.0%). Methane production rates were also higher for the AnMBR than for the UASB, resulting in a COD : CH4 of 26.1 ± 3.0 and 18.2 ± 2.1%, respectively. Higher methanogenic cell abundance was observed in the AnMBR (3בUASB'). The low conversion of COD to methane was attributed to (i) the presence of SO4 in the influent (120.4 ± 17.4 mg L−1), which scavenged up to 50% of the COD, and (ii) accumulation of un-hydrolysed lipids in the mixed liquor especially in the case of the AnMBR. The UASB was energy positive (0.041 ± 0.013 kW h m−3) whilst the AnMBR was energy negative (−0.221 ± 0.016 kW h m−3). The reactor design appeared to have a profound effect on the numbers and diversity of the methanogens: the hydrogenotrophic activity being favoured in the UASB. But both reactors had comparatively high cell specific rates of methanogenesis. We concluded that the slightly better performance of the AnMBR was not sufficient to offset its higher running cost and the complexity of its design.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 30 October 2018
e-pub ahead of print date: 31 October 2018
Published date: 1 January 2019

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 427135
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/427135
ISSN: 2053-1400
PURE UUID: e4d3efbc-1bea-4552-9f14-4084733aaddd

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 03 Jan 2019 17:30
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 23:38

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Evangelos Petropoulos
Author: Yongjie Yu
Author: Shamas Tabraiz
Author: Aminu Yakubu
Author: Thomas P. Curtis
Author: Jan Dolfing

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×