Biofiltration vs conventional activated sludge plants: what about priority and emerging pollutants removal?

被引:0
|
作者
R. Mailler
J. Gasperi
V. Rocher
S. Gilbert-Pawlik
D. Geara-Matta
R. Moilleron
G. Chebbo
机构
[1] LEESU (UMR MA 102,
[2] Université Paris-Est,undefined
[3] AgroParisTech),undefined
[4] LEESU (UMR MA 102,undefined
[5] Université Paris-Est,undefined
[6] AgroParisTech),undefined
[7] SIAAP,undefined
[8] Direction du Développement et de la Prospective,undefined
关键词
Priority pollutants; Emerging pollutants; Biofiltration; Conventional activated sludge; Physicochemical lamellar settling; Wastewater treatment plant; Nitrification;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This paper compares the removal performances of two complete wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) for all priority substances listed in the Water Framework Directive and additional compounds of interest including flame retardants, surfactants, pesticides, and personal care products (PCPs) (n = 104). First, primary treatments such as physicochemical lamellar settling (PCLS) and primary settling (PS) are compared. Similarly, biofiltration (BF) and conventional activated sludge (CAS) are then examined. Finally, the removal efficiency per unit of nitrogen removed of both WWTPs for micropollutants is discussed, as nitrogenous pollution treatment results in a special design of processes and operational conditions. For primary treatments, hydrophobic pollutants (log Kow > 4) are well removed (>70 %) for both systems despite high variations of removal. PCLS allows an obvious gain of about 20 % regarding pollutant removals, as a result of better suspended solids elimination and possible coagulant impact on soluble compounds. For biological treatments, variations of removal are much weaker, and the majority of pollutants are comparably removed within both systems. Hydrophobic and volatile compounds are well (>60 %) or very well removed (>80 %) by sorption and volatilization. Some readily biodegradable molecules are better removed by CAS, indicating a better biodegradation. A better sorption of pollutants on activated sludge could be also expected considering the differences of characteristics between a biofilm and flocs. Finally, comparison of global processes efficiency using removals of micropollutants load normalized to nitrogen shows that PCLS + BF is as efficient as PS + CAS despite a higher compactness and a shorter hydraulic retention time (HRT). Only some groups of pollutants seem better removed by PS + CAS like alkylphenols, flame retardants, or di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP), thanks to better biodegradation and sorption resulting from HRT and biomass characteristics. For both processes, and out of the 68 molecules found in raw water, only half of them are still detected in the water discharged, most of the time close to their detection limit. However, some of them are detected at higher concentrations (>1 μg/L and/or lower than environmental quality standards), which is problematic as they represent a threat for aquatic environment.
引用
收藏
页码:5379 / 5390
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Biofiltration vs conventional activated sludge plants: what about priority and emerging pollutants removal?
    Mailler, R.
    Gasperi, J.
    Rocher, V.
    Gilbert-Pawlik, S.
    Geara-Matta, D.
    Moilleron, R.
    Chebbo, G.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2014, 21 (08) : 5379 - 5390
  • [2] Assessment of toxicity and biodegradability on activated sludge of priority and emerging pollutants
    Tobajas, Montserrat
    Verdugo, Veronica
    Polo, Alicia M.
    Rodriguez, Juan J.
    Mohedano, Angel F.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, 2016, 37 (06) : 713 - 721
  • [3] Occurrence and removal of priority pollutants by lamella clarification and biofiltration
    Gasperi, Johnny
    Rocher, Vincent
    Gilbert, Solene
    Azimi, Sam
    Chebbo, Ghassan
    [J]. WATER RESEARCH, 2010, 44 (10) : 3065 - 3076
  • [4] REMOVAL OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS IN INTEGRATED ACTIVATED SLUDGE-ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT SYSTEMS
    WEBER, WJ
    CORFIS, NH
    JONES, BE
    [J]. JOURNAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FEDERATION, 1983, 55 (04): : 369 - 376
  • [5] REMOVAL OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS WITH A COMBINED POWDERED ACTIVATED CARBON-ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS
    HUTTON, DG
    [J]. ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 1980, 179 (MAR): : 77 - ENVR
  • [6] Priority and emerging pollutants in sewage sludge and fate during sludge treatment
    Mailler, R.
    Gasperi, J.
    Chebbo, G.
    Rocher, V.
    [J]. WASTE MANAGEMENT, 2014, 34 (07) : 1217 - 1226
  • [7] Comparison of the removal of phthalates and other organic pollutants from industrial wastewaters in membrane bioreactor and conventional activated sludge treatment plants
    Llop, A.
    Borrull, F.
    Pocurull, E.
    [J]. WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2009, 60 (09) : 2425 - 2437
  • [8] Electrooxidation treatment for removal of emerging pollutants in wastewater sludge
    Barrios, J. A.
    Becerril, E.
    De Leon, C.
    Barrera-Diaz, C.
    Jimenez, B.
    [J]. FUEL, 2015, 149 : 26 - 33
  • [9] EFFECTIVENESS OF ORGANIC SUBSTANCE REMOVAL IN HOUSEHOLD CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGE AND HYBRID TREATMENT PLANTS
    Krzanowski, Stanislaw
    Walega, Andrzej
    [J]. ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION ENGINEERING, 2008, 34 (03): : 5 - 12
  • [10] Effectiveness of organic substance removal in household conventional activated sludge and hybrid treatment plants
    Department of Sanitary Engineering and Water Management, Agriculture University of Cracow, al. Mickiewicza 24/28, 30-059 Cracow, Poland
    [J]. Environ. Prot. Eng., 2008, 3 (5-12):