4.6 Article

Comparison of different pilot scale bioreactors for the treatment of a real wastewater from the textile industry

Journal

INTERNATIONAL BIODETERIORATION & BIODEGRADATION
Volume 65, Issue 3, Pages 396-403

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2011.01.002

Keywords

Wastewater treatment; Reactor configuration; Fluid dynamics; Microbial characterization

Funding

  1. Progetto Lagrange, Fondazione CRT - Fondazione ISI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wastewater from textile industry usually undergoes activated sludge biotreatment ahead of refining treatments, final discharge or reuse. To identify the most effective bioreactor typology for the secondary treatment of a wastewater resulting from a textile industry of the Biella district (Italy), four pilot units characterized by a different configuration and fluid dynamics (i.e., Bioflotation (R), Fixed Bed Biofilm Reactor (FBBR), flow-jet aeration and standard aerobic sludge reactors) were operated in parallel, inoculated with the same microbial consortium and fed with identical streams of wastewater discharged from wet textile processes of the industy. COD, TC and non-ionic surfactants were monitored in effluents of the compared bioreactors working under continuous mode and the cultivable heterotrophic microorganisms prevailing in each of them were isolated and characterized as the end of the study. The results demonstrated that the air supply system greatly influenced the treatment efficiency which reached the highest value in the case of Bioflotation (R) and FBBR technology. A highly specialized bacterial biomass mostly composed by strains of the Pseudomonas, Stenotrophomonas and Ochrobactrum genera was isolated in such reactors, thus suggesting that a direct correlation between reactor configuration, decontamination performances and microbial biomass composition exist. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available