4.5 Article

Outdoor flat-panel membrane photobioreactor to treat the effluent of an anaerobic membrane bioreactor. Influence of operating, design, and environmental conditions

Journal

WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 78, Issue 1, Pages 195-206

Publisher

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2018.259

Keywords

flat-panel; membrane photobioreactor; microalgae; outdoor; pilot plant; wastewater treatment

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) [CTM2011-28595-C02-01, CTM2011-28595-C02-02]
  2. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
  3. Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport [FPU14/05082]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As microalgae have the ability to simultaneously remove nutrients from wastewater streams while producing valuable biomass, microalgae-based wastewater treatment is a win-win strategy. Although recent advances have been made in this field in lab conditions, the transition to outdoor conditions on an industrial scale must be further investigated. In this work an outdoor pilot-scale membrane photobioreactor plant was operated for tertiary sewage treatment. The effects of different parameters on microalgae performance were studied including: temperature, light irradiance (solar and artificial irradiance), hydraulic retention time (HRT), biomass retention time (BRT), air sparging system and influent nutrient concentration. In addition the competition between microalgae and ammonium oxidising bacteria for ammonium was also evaluated. Maximum nitrogen and phosphorus removal rates of 12.5 +/- 4.2 mgN.L-1.d(-1) and 1.5 +/- 0.4 mgP.L-1.d(-1), respectively, were achieved at a BRT of 4.5 days and HRT of 2.5 days, while a maximum biomass productivity of 78 +/- 13 mgVSS.L-1.d(-1 )(VSS: volatile suspended solids) was reached. While the results obtained so far are promising, they need to be improved to make the transition to industrial scale operations feasible.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available