4.4 Article

Enhanced efficiencies of sludge dewatering and domestic wastewater treatment by using the bioflocculant from rice stover

期刊

WATER AND ENVIRONMENT JOURNAL
卷 31, 期 1, 页码 120-126

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/wej.12221

关键词

bioflocculant; domestic wastewater treatment; rice stover; sludge dewatering

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51508043]
  2. Basic Project of Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Provincial [2016JY0015]
  3. Program of Education Department of Sichuan Province [15ZB0178]
  4. Program of Chengdu Science and Technology Board [2015-HM01-00149-SF]
  5. Scientific Research Foundation of Chengdu University of Information Technology (CUIT) [J201515, CRF201509, KYTZ201405]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Potential of a bioflocculant from rice stover was studied in sludge dewatering and domestic wastewater treatment. Production of this bioflocculant showed good correspondence to cell growth, after fermentation for 60 h, the fermentation liquor was obtained, from 1.0 L of which a value of 2.37 g bioflocculant can be extracted, and the main backbone of this bioflocculant was polysaccharides. Without adjusting the sludge's initial pH value of 6.5, when incubated with 18 mg/L of this bioflocculant, dry solids (DS) and specific resistance to filtration (SRF) of the typical wastewater activated sludge reached 18.5% and 4.7 x 10(12) m/kg, respectively, which was better than the ones achieved by Al-2(SO4)(3) and FeCl3 flocculants. For domestic wastewater treatment, after treated by 12 mg/L of this bioflocculant at pH value of 7.5, removal efficiencies of chemical oxygen demand (COD) and turbidity can reach 91.8 and 89.7%, respectively, which were better than the ones achieved by the traditional flocculants such as Al-2(SO4)(3), FeCl3, and polyaluminum chloride (PAC). This study suggested that the bioflocculant from rice stover has great potentials as an alternative flocculant to conventional flocculants in sludge dewatering and domestic wastewater treatment.

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

4.4
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