TY - JOUR
T1 - Anaerobic-aerobic sequencing bioreactors improve energy efficiency for treatment of personal care product industry wastes
AU - Ahammad, S. Z.
AU - Bereslawski, J. L.
AU - Dolfing, J.
AU - Mota, C.
AU - Graham, D. W.
N1 - Funding Information:
Authors acknowledge the funding support from the European Commission, Marie Curie Action project ENERMIN (Project No. 218305). The authors also thank L’Oreal – Paris for cooperation and assistance on the project.
Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2013/7
Y1 - 2013/7
N2 - Personal care product (PCP) industry liquid wastes contain shampoo residues, which are usually treated by aerobic activated sludge (AS). Unfortunately, AS is expensive for PCP wastes because of high aeration and energy demands, whereas potentially energy-positive anaerobic designs cannot meet effluent targets. Therefore, combined anaerobic-aerobic systems may be the best solution. Seven treatment systems were assessed in terms of energy and treatment performance for shampoo wastes, including one aerobic, three anaerobic (HUASB, AHR and AnCSTR) and three anaerobic-aerobic reactor designs. COD removals were highest in the HUASB-aerobic (87.9. ±. 0.4%) and AHR-aerobic (86.8. ±. 0.5%) systems, which used 69.2% and 62.5% less energy than aerobic AS. However, actual methane production rates were low relative to theoretical in the UASB and AHR units (~10% methane/COD removed) compared with the AnCSTR unit (~70%). Anaerobic-aerobic sequence reactors show promise for treating shampoo wastes, but optimal designs depend upon whether methane production or COD removal is most important to operations.
AB - Personal care product (PCP) industry liquid wastes contain shampoo residues, which are usually treated by aerobic activated sludge (AS). Unfortunately, AS is expensive for PCP wastes because of high aeration and energy demands, whereas potentially energy-positive anaerobic designs cannot meet effluent targets. Therefore, combined anaerobic-aerobic systems may be the best solution. Seven treatment systems were assessed in terms of energy and treatment performance for shampoo wastes, including one aerobic, three anaerobic (HUASB, AHR and AnCSTR) and three anaerobic-aerobic reactor designs. COD removals were highest in the HUASB-aerobic (87.9. ±. 0.4%) and AHR-aerobic (86.8. ±. 0.5%) systems, which used 69.2% and 62.5% less energy than aerobic AS. However, actual methane production rates were low relative to theoretical in the UASB and AHR units (~10% methane/COD removed) compared with the AnCSTR unit (~70%). Anaerobic-aerobic sequence reactors show promise for treating shampoo wastes, but optimal designs depend upon whether methane production or COD removal is most important to operations.
KW - Energy economy
KW - High-rate anaerobic treatment
KW - Personal care products (PCP)
KW - Sequencing reactors
KW - Shampoo wastewater
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84877638814&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.biortech.2013.03.185
DO - 10.1016/j.biortech.2013.03.185
M3 - Article
C2 - 23639409
AN - SCOPUS:84877638814
SN - 0960-8524
VL - 139
SP - 73
EP - 79
JO - Bioresource Technology
JF - Bioresource Technology
ER -
