A Comparison of Membrane Bioreactor and Conventional‐Activated‐Sludge Mixed Liquor and Biosolids Characteristics

Characteristics and behavior of raw and digested mixed liquor derived from a membrane bioreactor (MBR) and a full‐scale activated‐sludge (FSAS) facility were compared. The accumulation of nondegradable chemical oxygen demand in the MBR appears to play an important role in increasing the observed biological yield coefficient (Yobs), reducing average floc size, decreasing total suspended solids/total solids and volatile suspended solids/volatile solids (VS) ratios, and reducing specific‐oxygen‐uptake rates of the mixed liquor relative to FSAS‐derived biological solids. Membrane bioreactor sludges exhibited lower VS destruction following 30 days mesophilic‐anaerobic and aerobic digestion when compared to FSAS sludges. Significant deterioration in dewatering behavior was observed for the FSAS biosolids after anaerobic digestion and, to a lesser extent, following aerobic digestion. In comparison, digestion had a small affect on dewatering efficiency and conditioner requirements for MBR biosolids. Full‐scale facilities using membrane separation may need to tailor digestion and dewatering processes to the specific characteristics of MBR sludges.

[1]  T. Stephenson,et al.  Effect of influent organic content on digested sludge extracellular polymer content and dewaterability. , 2002, Water research.

[2]  H. Schröder.  Mass spectrometric monitoring of the degradation and elimination efficiency for hardly eliminable and hardly biodegradable polar compounds by membrane bioreactors. , 2002, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[3]  A. Andreadakis,et al.  The effect of reactor configuration and operational mode on Microthrix parvicella bulking and foaming in nutrient removal activated sludge systems. , 2002, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[4]  D. G. Allen,et al.  Effect of solids retention time on floc structure. , 2002, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[5]  Chung‐Hak Lee,et al.  Comparison of the filtration characteristics between attached and suspended growth microorganisms in submerged membrane bioreactor. , 2001, Water research.

[6]  I. Chang,et al.  Effect of pump shear on the performance of a crossflow membrane bioreactor. , 2001, Water research.

[7]  H. Walker,et al.  Stability of particle flocs upon addition of natural organic matter under quiescent conditions. , 2001, Water research.

[8]  John T. Novak,et al.  Optimizing Dewatering of Biosolids from Autothermal Thermophilic Aerobic Digesters (ATAD) Using Inorganic Conditioners , 2000 .

[9]  Karl-Heinz Rosenwinkel,et al.  Sludge production in membrane bioreactors under different conditions , 2000 .

[10]  J. Novak,et al.  Factors Affecting Floc Properties During Aerobic Digestion: Implications for Dewatering , 1999 .

[11]  B. Wilén,et al.  The effect of dissolved oxygen concentration on the structure, size and size distribution of activated sludge flocs , 1999 .

[12]  A. Grasmick,et al.  Floc size distribution in a membrane bioreactor and consequences for membrane fouling , 1998 .

[13]  Nazim Cicek,et al.  Effectiveness of the membrane bioreactor in the biodegradation of high molecular weight compounds , 1998 .

[14]  Krzysztof Barbusiński,et al.  Activated sludge floc structure during aerobic digestion , 1997 .

[15]  L. Spinosa,et al.  The rheology of sewage sludge at different steps of treatment , 1997 .

[16]  Pierre Côté,et al.  Immersed membrane activated sludge for the reuse of municipal wastewater , 1997 .

[17]  Rao Y. Surampalli,et al.  Effects of different biosolids treatment systems on pathogen and pathogen indicator reduction , 1997 .

[18]  J. Ganczarczyk,et al.  Factors affecting dispersion of activated sludge flocs , 1993 .

[19]  A. R. Bowers,et al.  Soluble Microbial Product Formation in Biological Systems , 1991 .

[20]  G. Daigger,et al.  Effect of Alum Addition on the Performance of Submerged Membranes for Wastewater Treatment , 2004, Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation.

[21]  M. Kraume,et al.  Microbiological aspects of a bioreactor with submerged membranes for aerobic treatment of municipal wastewater. , 2002, Water research.

[22]  M. Kraume,et al.  Performance of a bioreactor with submerged membranes for aerobic treatment of municipal waste water. , 2002, Water research.

[23]  B. Rittmann,et al.  Interpreting the Response to Loading Changes in a Mixed‐Culture Completely Stirred Tank Reactor , 2000 .

[24]  Awwa,et al.  Standard Methods for the examination of water and wastewater , 1999 .

[25]  Nazim Cicek,et al.  Characterization and Comparison of a Membrane Bioreactor and a Conventional Activated‐Sludge System in the Treatment of Wastewater Containing High‐Molecular‐Weight Compounds , 1999 .

[26]  K. Krauth,et al.  Replacement of secondary clarification by membrane separation — Results with plate and hollow fibre modules , 1998 .

[27]  P. Cote,et al.  The use of immersed membranes for upgrading wastewater treatment plants , 1998 .

[28]  Kazuo Yamamoto,et al.  Floc size distribution and bacterial activities in membrane separation activated sludge processes for small-scale wastewater treatment/reclamation , 1997 .

[29]  T. M. Keinath,et al.  Influence of particle size on sludge dewaterability , 1978 .