4.8 Article

Potentials of anaerobic treatment for catalytically oxidized olive mill wastewater (OMW)

期刊

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
卷 100, 期 7, 页码 2147-2154

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2008.10.051

关键词

Olive mill wastewater; Catalytically oxidized pretreated effluent; Hybrid UASB; COD; Oil and grease

资金

  1. EU [ICA3-CT2002-10034]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The catalytically oxidized olive mill wastewater (OMW) was subjected to continuous anaerobic treatment using two treatment schemes. The 1st step in both schemes was an up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor (2 01). The 2nd step was either a hybrid UASB reactor or a classical one (101, each). The 1st stage was operated at constant hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 24 h. The organic loading rate (OLR) varied from 3.4 to 4.8 kgCOD/m(3) d depending on the quality of the pretreated wastewater. The results obtained indicated that, the 1st step UASB reactor achieved a COD percentage removal value of 53.9%. Corresponding total BOD5 and TSS removal were 51.5% and 68.3%, respectively. The results obtained indicated that the hybrid UASB reactor as a 2nd step produced better quality effluent as compared to the classical one. This could be attributed to the presence of the packing curtain sponge with active biomass in the sedimentation part of hybrid UASB reactor which minimizes suspended solids washout, consequently enhancement of the efficiency of the reactor. Available data showed that a two stage system consisting of a classical and a hybrid UASB reactor operated at a total HRT of 48 h and OLR of 2.0 kgCOD/m(3) d provided promising results. Removal values of CODtotal, BOD5 (total), TOC, VFA, oil and grease were 83%, 84%, 81%, 93% and 81%, respectively. Based on the available data, the use of a two stage anaerobic system consisting of a classical UASB reactor followed by a hybrid UASB as a post-treatment step for catalytically oxidized OMW is recommended. (C) 2008 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

4.8
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