4.4 Article

Water recovery by treatment of food industry wastewater using membrane processes

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY
卷 42, 期 5, 页码 775-788

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09593330.2019.1645739

关键词

Water recovery; water reuse; food wastewater; industrial effluents; membrane processes

资金

  1. National Council of Science and Technology ('CONACyT')

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study proposes the use of membrane processes to treat food industry wastewater for water recovery. After ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis treatment, the results showed high efficiency and high quality of the recovered water.
This work presents a proposal for the recovery of water through the treatment of food industry wastewater using membrane processes. Three wastewater streams from the different manufacturing steps were identified as possible sources of water recovery: (1) wastewater from the washing of ionic exchange resins and (2) wastewater from the concentration stage of animal proteins (type 1 and 2). The wastewater streams were treated as effluent mixtures; each one with different level of pollution. The principal characteristics of the effluent mixtures were identified as high conductivity and the presence of organic matter. Under these conditions, ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis were carried out for the treatment of wastewater. The ultrafiltration process was tested at an industrial-level plant and the reverse osmosis process was applied at a pilot-plant level. The results showed the feasibility of the proposed treatment for water recovery. The data demonstrates an efficiency greater than 95% in all the quality parameters and therefore, a high quality in the recovered water was obtained by membrane processes. According to the chemical composition of wastewater, the reversible fouling was linked to salts and protein retention, promoting the formation of a cake layer as reversible resistance; whereas, irreversible fouling was minimum during wastewater treatment. [GRAPHICS] .

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

4.4
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