4.8 Article

Biological Cr(VI) removal coupled with biomass growth, biomass decay, and multiple substrate limitation

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 45, 期 10, 页码 3034-3046

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.03.011

关键词

Cr(VI) reduction; Chromium toxicity; Kinetic parameter; Activated sludge; Nitrogen to carbon ratio; Mathematical modeling

资金

  1. Universidad Nacional de La Plata (UNLP)
  2. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas (CONICET)
  3. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica Argentina (ANPCyT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this work, a mathematical model for the biological reduction of Cr(VI), carbon and nitrogen sources consumption, and biomass growth under fully aerobic conditions was developed. The model comprises three types of aerobic heterotrophic cells (non-growing cells, growing cells with chromate reductase activity, and growing cells that have lost the chromate reductase activity), and five soluble compounds (organic substrate, ammonia nitrogen, non-metabolizable soluble products, dissolved oxygen, and hexavalent chromium). Two processes are considered responsible for the reduction of Cr(VI). The first one is the reduction of Cr(VI) coupled with growth, the second process is coupled with the endogenous decay of the biomass. The model was calibrated using the results obtained in batch cultures in the absence of carbon and nitrogen sources, using different initial Cr(VI) concentrations (0-100 mgCr L-1), two carbon sources (cheese whey and lactose), and different initial nitrogen to carbon ratio (0-50 mgN gCOD(-1)). The calibrated model was used to calculate steady-state values of TSS, soluble COD, TAN and Cr(VI) in continuous systems, obtaining a good agreement with the experimental data. The model also accurately predicted the transient concentration of Cr(VI) as a function of time in response to step changes of the inlet Cr(VI) concentration in continuous systems. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据