4.7 Review

Chemolithotrophic denitrification in biofilm reactors

Journal

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
Volume 280, Issue -, Pages 643-657

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2015.05.131

Keywords

Biofilm; Biofilm electrode reactor; Chemolithotrophic denitrification; Fluidized bed reactor; Membrane biofilm reactor; Packed bed reactor

Funding

  1. European Commission [2010-0009]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chemolithotrophic denitrification is an inexpensive and advantageous process for nitrate removal and represents a promising alternative to classical denitrification with organics. Chemolithotrophic denitrifiers are microorganisms able to reduce nitrate and nitrite using inorganic compounds as source of energy. Ferrous iron, sulfur-reduced compounds (e.g. hydrogen sulfide, elemental sulfur and thiosulfate), hydrogen gas, pyrite and arsenite have been used as inorganic electron donors resulting in diverse outcomes. In the last 40 years, a large number of engineered systems have been used to maintain chemolithotrophic denitrification and improve rate and efficiency of the process. Among them, biofilm reactors proved to be robust and high-performing technologies. Packed bed reactors are particularly suitable for the removal of low nitrate concentrations, since high retention times are required to complete denitrification. Fluidized bed and membrane biofilm reactors result in the highest denitrification rates (>20 kg N-NO3-/m(3) d) when hydrogen gas and sulfur reduced compounds are used as electron donors. Hydrogen gas pressure and current intensity rule the performance of membrane biofilm and biofilm electrode reactors, respectively. Biofouling is the most common and detrimental issue in biofilm reactors. Bed fluidization and hydrogen supply limitation are convenient and effective solutions to mitigate biofouling. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available