4.7 Article

Enhancement of the denitrification performance of an activated sludge using an electromagnetic field in batch mode

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 262, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127698

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study showed that electromagnetic fields can both stimulate and inhibit bacterial denitrification, with potential for improving the efficiency of the process. Multiple exposure cycles to magnetic fields resulted in a significant improvement in denitrification performance, with the enhancement persisting even after the magnetic field was removed.
The influence of electromagnetic fields on bacterial denitrification has been tested on synthetic media with sludges from wastewater treatment stations, in batch mode. The effects of the intensity of the magnetic induction ratio B (mT), reaction volume and initial biomass concentration on the kinetics of the denitrification process were studied. Magnetic field had both an optimal stimulating effect on the activity of the denitrifying flora for B (mT)/mgx values of the order of 0.212, and an inhibitory effect for the values beyond the latter.Sludges underwent multiple exposure cycles to magnetic fields. It was shown that, after three exposure cycles, denitrification kinetics went from 6.5 to 12.7 mg N-NO3-L-1.h(-1) which corresponds to a 2.7 fold improvement. The improved performance persists even after the cessation of the magnetic field. Observation of the sludge by the environmental-electron microscope shows that the microbial population forming the starting sludge; changed following exposure to the magnetic field. The action of the; electromagnetic field on the microbial populations in denitrification resulted in the modification of the diversity of the flora that is initially present, favoring the development of Proteo bacteria, particularly the Betaproteo bacteria subclass, which results in improved denitrification. (C) 2020 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

4.7
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