4.8 Article

Slow sand filtration for biofouling reduction in seawater desalination by reverse osmosis

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 155, 期 -, 页码 474-486

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2019.02.033

关键词

Slow sand filtration; Seawater; Reverse osmosis; Microbial growth potential; Biofouling control

资金

  1. Center for Marine Biology CEBI-MAR of the University of Sao Paulo
  2. CAPES
  3. FINEP [01.04.1132.00, 01.07.0524.00]
  4. FAPESP [2013/50435-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Control of the organic substrate pool that determines the microbial growth potential (MGP) of feedwater in seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) is a challenge unresolved in conventional or advanced membrane pretreatment. Slow sand filtration (SSF) combines filtration with biodegradation, but its capability of reducing MGP, proteins and carbohydrates on seawater feeds is not known. Two SSF, one constructed with new media (newSSF) and one from a previous filtration run (oldSSF), reduced MGP as measured in a growth assay with the marine organism Pseudoalteromonas songiae by one order of magnitude after maturation periods of 76 and 61 days, respectively. The reduction of the amount of biopolymers deposited on the surfaces of SWRO membranes in laminar fluid flow cells was significant with filtrates from biologically non-acclimated SSF (proteins: -60% (oldSSF) and -66% (new SSF), carbohydrates: 75% (oldSSF) and -70% (newSSF)) and an even greater reduction was observed after filter maturation (proteins: 81% (oldSSF) and -76% (new SSF), carbohydrates: 88% (oldSSF) and -88% (newSSF). Turbidity was less than 0.3 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) and silt density index (SDI) <4 immediately after startup and during the 181 days operating period regardless of the oscillations of the raw sea water quality. Filtration and biological activity were restricted to the top 30 cm of the media column, with no significant further contribution of the deeper media layers to filtrate quality. (C) 2019 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