Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Understand
the Fundamentals of
Wastewater Treatment
Mukesh Doble
Venkatachalam Geetha
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Secondary
Tertiary
Activated-carbon adsorption
Membrane filtration
Membrane filtration
Reverse osmosis
Reverse osmosis
Chemical
Chemical precipitation
Chemical precipitation
Chemical coagulation
Disinfection
Disinfection
Dechlorination
Dechlorination
Activated-carbon adsorption
Ion exchange
Oxidation
Biological
Activated-sludge processes
Activated-sludge processes
Fixed-film reactors
36
Advantages
Reduces chlorine and
particulate matter
Improves taste and odor
Cost*
Disadvantages
Cannot physically remove small
particulates, such as Cryptosporidia,
Giardia, and other bacteria
$9/kgal
TC = 0.1612/m3
Reusable
90% efficiency for removal of
0.05-m (50-nm) particles
Reverse Osmosis
(See Table 3)
Filters 0.5-m
(500-nm) particles
$3.25/m3 (3)
94% efficiency
*Costs
are for operation and maintenance unless otherwise specified. The total cost (TC) associated with wastewater treatment includes capital
investment, operation (OC) and maintenance, land requirements, sludge handling and disposal, monitoring, and quality control.
All
costs are based on the Simultaneous Compliance Tool unless otherwise specified, available at: www.simultaneouscompliancetool.org/
SCToolSmall/jsp/modules/welcome/welcome.jsp.
37
Back to Basics
from 0.1 nm to 5,000 nm, making them effective at removing bacteria. Reverse osmosis cannot be used upstream of
other primary treatment methods because suspended solids
may foul and damage the membrane.
Another type of filter is the ceramic membrane, which
is made of such materials as aluminia, zirconia, titania
and silicon carbide. Ceramic membranes have a pore size
range of 0.0051 m and have higher fluxes than organic
membranes due to their higher porosity and larger hydrophilic surface area. These membranes are more resistant
to mechanical, chemical, and thermal stresses than polymeric membranes.
Ultrafiltration
Nanofiltration
Pore Size
0.110 m
0.0010.1 m
(1.0100 nm)
0.510 nm
Common Applications
0.15,000 nm
(Not driven by pore
size)
Polysulfone
Separation of oil-water
emulsions
Polyethersulfone
Polyvinylidine fluoride
Polyacrylonitrile
Polyvinylidene fluoride
Polyamide composites
Requires pretreatment
Water softening
High cost
Cellulose acetate
Cellulose triacetate
38
Membrane Materials
Potential viral
contamination because
viruses are smaller than
the pores of microfiltration
membranes
Disadvantages
Separation of oil-water
emulsions
Chlorine Dioxide
Advantages
Cost-effective
Approx. 50% efficiency for
removal of TSS with ClO2
concentration equal to COD of
sample
Ultraviolet Radiation
Cost*
Disadvantages
TC = $41/kgal (4)
Subject to regulations,
such as the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agencys Risk
Management Program
Not effective against
Cryptosporidium
Low doses may not inactivate
some viruses, spores, and cysts
$2.00/kgal
Oxidation by Ozone
Inactivates Cryptosporidium
and Giardia
Able to oxidize many inorganic
and organic compounds
$6.50/kgal
$3.00/kgal
*Costs
are for operation and maintenance unless otherwise specified. The total cost (TC) associated with wastewater treatment includes capital
investment, operation and maintenance, land requirements, sludge handling and disposal, monitoring, and quality control.
All
costs are based on the Simultaneous Compliance Tool unless otherwise specified, available at: www.simultaneouscompliancetool.org/
SCToolSmall/jsp/modules/welcome/welcome.jsp.
39
Back to Basics
Advantages
Disadvantages
High efficiency
High cost
Small footprint
Cost*
TC = $0.25/m3 (5)
$0.05$0.1/m3-d (6)
$0.08$0.15/m3-d (6)
Stabilization Ponds
TC = $0.03/m3 (6)
$0.10$0.16/m3-d (6)
$0.07$0.13/m3-d (6)
$0.03$0.09/m3-d (6)
are for operation and maintenance unless otherwise specified. The total cost (TC) associated with wastewater treatment includes capital
investment, operation and maintenance, land requirements, sludge handling and disposal, monitoring, and quality control.
All
costs are based on the Simultaneous Compliance Tool unless otherwise specified, available at: www.simultaneouscompliancetool.org/
SCToolSmall/jsp/modules/welcome/welcome.jsp.
40
Tertiary treatment
Tertiary treatment is carried out after secondary
treatment to remove significant amounts of nitrogen,
phosphorus, heavy metals, biodegradable organics,
bacteria, and viruses. The most commonly used tertiary
treatment methods are reverse osmosis, membrane filtration, chemical coagulation, flocculation and sedimentation,
activated carbon adsorption, ion exchange, and natural
treatment systems.
The physical tertiary treatment systems include lowpressure microfiltration and ultrafiltration. The membranes
used in this method act as physical barriers to prevent
contaminants from passing through.
Tertiary filtration is sometimes preceeded by adding
such chemicals as aluminum- or iron-based coagulants,
which together can reduce the phosphorus concentration to
0.01 mg/L.
Activated carbon removes two pollutants, namely
phosphorous and nitrogen, in tertiary treatment. When used
in tertiary treatment, activated carbon achieves a 90% efficiency of COD removal. Phosphorus can also be removed
through precipitation.
The main function of a tertiary-treatment stabilization (or maturation) pond is the removal of pathogens
and nutrients (e.g., nitrogen) through natural disinfection mechanisms. Because the intensity of the sunlight
and high temperatures are key factors in achieving high
Copyright 2011 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)
Future focus
Wastewater treatment and management methods must
change in response to urban development, population
growth, and diminishing natural resources. Three aspects
of wastewater management will become important in the
future, namely decentralized wastewater management,
wastewater reclamation and reuse, and wet-weather flow
(i.e., water from rain, floods, and snowmelt) management.
Addressing the challenges associated with these trends
will require a combination of traditional wastewater treatment technologies as discussed in this article and new and
innovative approaches. Some of the advances that might be
expected over the next decade or so include:
Photons and engineered nanostructures. A futuristic
disinfection method might combine photons (from UV or
visible light) and nanostructures (such as titanium dioxide).
UV light, for instance, is capable of activating photocatalytic
materials such as TiO2, which in turn can inactivate viruses.
TiO2 doped with nitrogen, or co-doped with nitrogen and a
metal such as palladium, can be activated with visible light
or with sunlight.
Development of this disinfection method will require
a better understanding of the mechanisms that control the
interaction of pathogens with excited photocatalyst surfaces
and active moieties, such as hydroxyl radicals and superoxides. In addition, the physicochemical characteristics of
such surfaces need to be optimized for maximum selective
affinity of target viruses.
Antiviral photocatalysts could be immobilized on fibers
and foams of various materials (8, 9) or incorporated into
membranes (10). Optical fibers could be used to transport
photons into compact configurations such as monolithic
reactors (11). Reactors incorporating visible-light photocatalysts could be designed using sunlight as the source of
photons (12, 13).
Improved membrane technologies. The major challenges
in seawater desalination are the quality and life of the reverse
osmosis membranes, membrane fouling, relatively low
recovery of freshwater from seawater (which results in large
volumes of concentrated brine), and inefficient removal of
low-molecular-weight contaminants (primarily boron).
Future membranes should ideally have high water flux,
complete rejection of dissolved solids, low fouling tendency, and tolerance to oxidants used for biofouling control.
Conventional polyamide membranes and low-fouling composite membranes have been shown to have stable flux and
rejection over long periods of time.
Membrane bioreactor (MBR) process. The MBR
process combines microporous membranes for solid-liquid
CEP October 2011 www.aiche.org/cep
41
Back to Basics
Final thoughts
The volume of wastewater produced, and thus the
demand for wastewater treatment, is expected to increase
dramatically due to rapid growth of the worlds population
and industrialization. The World Bank has estimated that
over the next decade, a total global outlay of $600$800
billion will be required to meet the demand for clean
water, including water for sanitation, irrigation, and power
generation. In the U.S., the wastewater treatment market
is expected to grow from $6.0 billion in 2010 to more than
CEP
$10 billion by 2015.
MukeSh Doble is a professor in the Dept. of Biotechnology at the Indian
Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras (Chennai-600036, India; Phone:
+91-044-2257-4107; Email: mukeshd@iitm.ac.in, mukesh.doble0@
gmail.com). He previously worked for 20 years at Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) and General Electric (GE) Technology Centre in
Bangalore, India. His areas of interest are bioremediation, bioreactors,
biomaterials, Six-Sigma, and statistical process control. He received a
BTech and an MTech in chemical engineering from IIT and a PhD from
the Univ. of Aston (Birmingham, U.K.), and did postdoctoral work at
the Univ. of Cambridge (U.K.) and Texas A&M Univ. Doble is a member
of the editorial board of Chemical Engineering magazine, a Fellow of
the Royal Society of Chemistry, and a member of AIChE and the Indian
Institute of Chemical Engineers (IIChE). He has authored or co-authored
165 technical papers and five books. He is a recipient of the IIChEs
Herdillia Award for Excellence in Basic Research.
VenkaTachalaM GeeTha is a postdoctoral fellow in the Drug Design and
Bioengineering Lab, Dept. of Biotechnology at the Indian Institute of
Technology Madras (Chennai-600036, India; Phone: +91-044-5122;
Email: geegha@gmail.com). She has more than five years of experience
in scaleup and production of enzymes, dye degradation, and bioactive
compounds derived from microbes, and has published two articles in
international journals. She holds a BS and an MS in microbiology from
the Periyar Univ., and a PhD from the Univ. of Madras.
42
www.aiche.org/cep
October 2011
CEP
Literature Cited
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Water Environment Federation, Natural Systems for Wastewater Treatment, Hampton Press, New York, NY (2005).
7.
8.
9.