4.7 Article

Turf soil enhances treatment efficiency and performance of phenolic wastewater in an up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 204, 期 -, 页码 227-234

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.04.040

关键词

UASB; Phenolic wastewater; Turf soil; Sludge granulation; Microbial community

资金

  1. National Science and Technology Major Project of China [2016ZX05040-001]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21776307]
  3. US Office of Naval Research [N00014-09-1-0709, N00014-12-1-0496 284]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phenols are industrially generated intermediate chemicals found in wastewaters that are considered a class of environmental priority pollutants. Up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors are used for phenolic wastewater treatment and exhibit high volume loading capability, favorable granule settling, and tolerance to impact loads. Use of support materials can promote biological productivity and accelerate start-up period of UASB. In the present study, turf soil was used as a support material in a mesophilic UASB reactor for the removal of phenols in wastewater. During sludge acclimatization (45-96 days), COD and phenols in the treatments were both reduced by 97%, whereas these contents in the controls were decreased by 81% and 75%, respectively. The phenol load threshold for the turf soil UASB reactor was greater (1200 mg/L, the equivalent of COD 3000 mg/L) in comparison with the control UASB reactor (900 mg/L, the equivalent of COD 2250 mg/L) and the turf soil UASB reactor was also more resistant to shock loading. Improved sludge settling, shear resistance, and higher biological activity occurred with the turf soil UASB reactor due to the formation of large granular sludge (0.6 mm or larger) in higher relative percentages. Granular sludge size was further enhanced by the colonization of filamentous bacteria on the irregular surface of the turf soil. (C) 2018 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