4.7 Article

Assessment of energy-saving strategies and operational costs in full-scale membrane bioreactors

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 134, 期 -, 页码 8-14

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.12.023

关键词

Energy efficiency; Membrane bioreactor; Wastewater; OPEX

资金

  1. Catalan Water Agency (ACA)
  2. Ministry of Science and Innovation [CTM2012-38314-C02-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The energy-saving strategies and operational costs of stand-alone, hybrid, and dual stream full-scale membrane bioreactors (MBRs) with capacities ranging from 1100 to 35,000 m(3) day(-1) have been assessed for seven municipal facilities located in Northeast Spain. Although hydraulic load was found to be the main determinant factor for the energy consumption rates, several optimisation strategies have shown to be effective in terms of energy reduction as well as fouling phenomenon minimization or preservation. Specifically, modifications of the biological process (installation of control systems for biological aeration) and of the filtration process (reduction of the flux or mixed liquor suspended solids concentration and installation of control systems for membrane air scouring) were applied in two stand-alone MBRs. After implementing these strategies, the yearly specific energy demand (SED) in flat-sheet (FS) and hollow-fibre (HF) stand-alone MBRs was reduced from 1.12 to 0.71 and from 1.54 to 1.12 kW h(-1) m(-3), respectively, regardless of their similar yearly averaged hydraulic loads. The strategies applied in the hybrid MBR, namely, buffering the influent flow and optimisation of both biological aeration and membrane air-scouring, reduced the SED values by 14%. These results illustrate that it is possible to apply energy-saving strategies to significantly reduce MBR operational costs, highlighting the need to optimise MBR facilities to reconsider them as an energy-competitive option. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据