Membrane filtration of the liquid fraction from a solid–liquid separator for swine manure using a cationic polymer as flocculating agent

The liquid fraction from a solid–liquid separator for swine manure, which used a cationic polymer to promote particle flocculation, was processed by one nanofiltration and two reverse osmosis spiral-wound membranes. Eight different liquid fraction batches (750 to 1750 L) were concentrated at volumetric concentration ratios (VCRs, initial to final volumes) ranging from 2.3 to 4.2. Membrane fouling intensity was highly variable, as water flux recovery after concentration cycles ranged from 13% to 88%. The most severe fouling was caused by a liquid fraction that had relatively low suspended solids (SS) (774 mg/L) and was concentrated at a low VCR of 2.6. Raw manure collected the same day also contained low SS, suggesting that fewer sites were available for polymer adsorption and thus more polymer remained in the liquid. However, because of the high opacity of the samples, residual polymer could not be detected in any feed or concentrate samples. Fouling was not totally irreversible as over 97% of membrane flux could be recovered by cleaning with acidic and alkaline solutions. Further tests with spiked liquid fractions indicated that fouling due to residual polymer in solution started to occur at a polymer concentration of 3 and 11 mg/L in initial and concentrated effluents, respectively. If a cationic polymer is used to pretreat manure, the amount of added polymer would have to be closely related to SS content as opposed to manure volume, in order to leave very little residual polymer in solution.

[1]  A. E. Greenberg,et al.  Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater seventh edition , 2013 .

[2]  M. Gamal El-Din,et al.  Evaluation of membrane fouling for in-line filtration of oil sands process-affected water: the effects of pretreatment conditions. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[3]  J. M. Benito,et al.  Ultrafiltration of activated sludge: Flocculation and membrane fouling , 2011 .

[4]  M. R. M. Abed,et al.  Progress in the production and modification of PVDF membranes , 2011 .

[5]  S. G. Sommer,et al.  Solid—liquid separation of animal slurry in theory and practice. A review , 2011, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[6]  Morten Lykkegaard Christensen,et al.  Solid-Liquid Separation of Animal Slurry in Theory and Practice , 2011 .

[7]  Simon Judd,et al.  Chemical cleaning of potable water membranes: A review , 2010 .

[8]  Daniel I. Massé,et al.  Osmotic pressure and substrate resistance during the concentration of manure nutrients by reverse osmosis membranes , 2010 .

[9]  B. Lesjean,et al.  Fouling mitigation through flocculants and adsorbents addition in membrane bioreactors: Comparing lab and pilot studies , 2009 .

[10]  D. Massé,et al.  The effect of pH on the separation of manure nutrients with reverse osmosis membranes , 2008 .

[11]  Valentina Lazarova,et al.  Problems of operation and main reasons for failure of membranes in tertiary treatment systems. , 2008, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[12]  Patrick G Hunt,et al.  Development of environmentally superior treatment system to replace anaerobic swine lagoons in the USA. , 2007, Bioresource technology.

[13]  Xia Huang,et al.  Changes in biofilm architecture with addition of membrane fouling reducer in a membrane bioreactor , 2007 .

[14]  In-Soung Chang,et al.  Effect of membrane fouling reducer on cake structure and membrane permeability in membrane bioreactor , 2007 .

[15]  Sang-June Choi,et al.  Effect of coagulant types on textile wastewater reclamation in a combined coagulation/ultrafiltration system , 2007 .

[16]  Chuyang Y. Tang,et al.  Probing the nano- and micro-scales of reverse osmosis membranes—A comprehensive characterization of physiochemical properties of uncoated and coated membranes by XPS, TEM, ATR-FTIR, and streaming potential measurements , 2007 .

[17]  C. Sørensen,et al.  Nutrient recovery by solid-liquid separation and methane productivity of solids. , 2007 .

[18]  Kerry J. Howe,et al.  Effect of coagulation pretreatment on membrane filtration performance , 2006 .

[19]  S. Katayon,et al.  Influence of cationic polyelectrolyte coagulant on microfiltration performance for treatment of oxidation pond effluent , 2005 .

[20]  S. Tsai,et al.  Effects of flux enhancing polymer on the characteristics of sludge in membrane bioreactor process. , 2005, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[21]  K. Farahbakhsh,et al.  A review of the impact of chemical pretreatment on low-pressure water treatment membranes , 2004 .

[22]  B. Han,et al.  Arsenic removal from drinking water by flocculation and microfiltration , 2002 .

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

[24]  K. Geckeler,et al.  Removal of Hazardous Substances from Water Using Ultrafiltration in Conjunction with Soluble Polymers , 1996 .

[25]  E. Espedal,et al.  Membrane Separation of Raw and Anaerobically Digested Pig Manure , 1992 .