4.7 Article

Performance and fate of organics in a pilot MBR-NF for treating antibiotic production wastewater with recycling NF concentrate

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 121, 期 -, 页码 92-100

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.11.034

关键词

Antibiotic production wastewater; Membrane bioreactor; Nanofiltration; Water yield; Organics fate; Microbial community

资金

  1. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2009AA063901]
  2. National Major Science & Technology Projects for Water Pollution Control and Management [2012ZX07203-002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A double membrane system comprising a membrane bioreactor (MBR) combined with a nanofiltration (NF) membrane was investigated on a pilot scale for the treatment of antibiotic production wastewater over a three-month period at a pharmaceutical company in Wuxi, China. By recycling the NF concentrate, the combined MBR-NF process was shown to be effective for the treatment of antibiotic production wastewater, resulting in excellent water quality and a high water yield of 92 +/- 5.6%. The water quality of the pilot-scale MBR-NF process was excellent; e.g., the concentrations of TOC, NH4+-N, TP were stable at 5.52, 0.68, 0.34 mg L-1, respectively, and the values of turbidity and conductivity of the NF permeate were 0.15 NTU and 2.5 mS cm(-1), respectively; these values meet China's water quality standard requirements for industrial use (GB21903-2008). Not only were the antibiotic removal rates of spiramycin (SPM) and new spiramycin (NSPM) over 95%, the acute toxicity was also drastically reduced by the MBR-NF pilot system. The main organics in the MBR effluent were proteins, polysaccharides, and humic-like substances; they were almost completely retained by the NF membrane and further biodegraded in the MBR because the NF concentrate was recycled. The microbial community of the MBR did not significantly change with the recycling of the NF concentrate. (C) 2014 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