4.7 Article

A novel simultaneous partial nitrification Anammox and denitrification (SNAD) with intermittent aeration for cost-effective nitrogen removal from mature landfill leachate

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 313, 期 -, 页码 619-628

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2016.12.105

关键词

Mature landfill leachate; Intermittent aeration; SNAD; Anammox; EEM; QPCR

资金

  1. Project Natural Science Foundation of China [51478013]
  2. Funding Projects of Beijing Municipal Commission of Education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mature landfill leachate is difficult to be treated due to its complex composition, high concentration of ammonia, and low carbon/nitrogen ratio (C/N). Simultaneous partial nitrification, Anammox and denitrification (SNAD) with intermittent aeration was developed to achieve nitrogen removal from mature landfill leachate. An ammonia conversion efficiency of 99.3 +/- 0.3% and total nitrogen (TN) removal efficiency of 99 +/- 0.1% were obtained under the influent NH4+ -N, SCOD and TN of 1950 +/- 250 mg/L 1900 +/- 200 mg/L and 2300 +/- 75 mg/L, respectively. Full utilization of carbon source and high efficient Anammox were two significant factors in SNAD process. Based on the nitrogen balance, the nitrogen removal contribution was 77.1% for Anammox, and 15.6% for dehitrification. Three dimensional excitation-emission matrix (EEM) fluorescence spectroscopy was used to detect dissolved organic matter (DOM) in a typical operation cycle for the first time, demonstrating that DOM increased during the anoxic phase and facilitated the reduction of excess NO3--N by denitrification. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (QPCR) analysis revealed dominant bacterial groups, aerobic ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and anaerobic ammonia oxidizing bacteria (AnAOB), which accounted for 12.99% and 8.32% of total bacteria respectively. As a whole, in the SNAD process, nitrogen and COD are removed from the wastewater simultaneously. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. 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