page 655 |
Previous | 1 of 10 | Next |
|
|
Loading content ...
INFLUENCE OF VARYING TEMPERATURE, FLOWRATE AND SUBSTRATE CONCENTRATION ON THE ANAEROBIC ATTACHED-FILM EXPANDED-BED PROCESS William J. Jewell, Professor James W. Morris, Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Engineering Cornell University Ithaca, New York 14853 A new anaerobic biological treatment process called the anaerobic attached-film ex- panded-bed (AAFEB) has been shown to be effective with dilute as well as concentrated waste streams, and efficient at temperatures as low as 10 C [1]. This process is of particular interest since the low microbial yield in anaerobic processes applied to domestic wastewater treatment has met the long sought goal of discharge standards without production of secondary sludge. Since energy costs and secondary sludge management problems associated with conventional aerobic processes comprise 20% or more of the total annual operations and maintenance budgets for municipalities [2], such a process could eliminate a large fraction of these costs. There are three areas that need attention prior to widespread adoption of this technology —the response of the microorganism to toxic materials, the interaction of particulates or suspended solids with the films, and the response under "real world" variable conditions. This study examined the response of the process to variable environmental conditions of flow, temperature and biodegradable substrate concentration. Studies by Parkin et al. [3] on the influence of toxic organics on anaerobic microbial films and acclimation of anaerobic bacteria to complex and toxic organics by McCarty et al. [4] indicate that anaerobic systems are capable of resisting influences of and recovery from exposure to highly toxic conditions, perhaps as well as other biological systems. The reaction of these sensitive microbes to variation in food supply, temperature, or hydraulics is an immediate practical concern when these processes are considered as secondary treatment systems. The anaerobic methane fermentation process has almost always been used under elevated and constant temperature conditions, and has been traditionally studied under these constraints. Many who have studied the anaerobic digestion process have had the misfortune of destroying an experiment due to temperature loss or due to some undefined effect such as exposure to small quantities of oxygen. For example, an accidental temperature decrease from 35 C to 20 C in a day and then return to 35 C may cause cessation of methane production for several days in a sludge digester. This level of sensitivity would be unacceptable for an on-line wastewater treatment process, since it is continuously exposed to a wide range of variables. Over the past eight years of research on the AAFEB process it was observed that the process was exceptionally robust and resistant to the most harsh conditions. McCarty and Young's work with the static film anaerobic filters [ 5 ] showed an exceptional ability of the biological system to start-up quickly after being shut down for a year or more. The experimental columns built by Young in 1964 are used annually in a course taught by Professor Perry L. McCarty for wastewater treatability studies. Laboratory accidents in the author's work such as pumping air through the unit and the loss of media into a collecting sump have resulted in no significant effects on the reaction rates. During Switzen- 655
Object Description
Purdue Identification Number | ETRIWC198168 |
Title | Influence of varying temperature, flowrate and substrate concentration on the anaerobic attached-film expanded-bed process |
Author |
Jewell, William J. Morris, James W. |
Date of Original | 1981 |
Conference Title | Proceedings of the 36th Industrial Waste Conference |
Conference Front Matter (copy and paste) | http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/u?/engext,32118 |
Extent of Original | p. 655-664 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital object copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Date Digitized | 2009-07-07 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Description
Title | page 655 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Transcript | INFLUENCE OF VARYING TEMPERATURE, FLOWRATE AND SUBSTRATE CONCENTRATION ON THE ANAEROBIC ATTACHED-FILM EXPANDED-BED PROCESS William J. Jewell, Professor James W. Morris, Research Assistant Department of Agricultural Engineering Cornell University Ithaca, New York 14853 A new anaerobic biological treatment process called the anaerobic attached-film ex- panded-bed (AAFEB) has been shown to be effective with dilute as well as concentrated waste streams, and efficient at temperatures as low as 10 C [1]. This process is of particular interest since the low microbial yield in anaerobic processes applied to domestic wastewater treatment has met the long sought goal of discharge standards without production of secondary sludge. Since energy costs and secondary sludge management problems associated with conventional aerobic processes comprise 20% or more of the total annual operations and maintenance budgets for municipalities [2], such a process could eliminate a large fraction of these costs. There are three areas that need attention prior to widespread adoption of this technology —the response of the microorganism to toxic materials, the interaction of particulates or suspended solids with the films, and the response under "real world" variable conditions. This study examined the response of the process to variable environmental conditions of flow, temperature and biodegradable substrate concentration. Studies by Parkin et al. [3] on the influence of toxic organics on anaerobic microbial films and acclimation of anaerobic bacteria to complex and toxic organics by McCarty et al. [4] indicate that anaerobic systems are capable of resisting influences of and recovery from exposure to highly toxic conditions, perhaps as well as other biological systems. The reaction of these sensitive microbes to variation in food supply, temperature, or hydraulics is an immediate practical concern when these processes are considered as secondary treatment systems. The anaerobic methane fermentation process has almost always been used under elevated and constant temperature conditions, and has been traditionally studied under these constraints. Many who have studied the anaerobic digestion process have had the misfortune of destroying an experiment due to temperature loss or due to some undefined effect such as exposure to small quantities of oxygen. For example, an accidental temperature decrease from 35 C to 20 C in a day and then return to 35 C may cause cessation of methane production for several days in a sludge digester. This level of sensitivity would be unacceptable for an on-line wastewater treatment process, since it is continuously exposed to a wide range of variables. Over the past eight years of research on the AAFEB process it was observed that the process was exceptionally robust and resistant to the most harsh conditions. McCarty and Young's work with the static film anaerobic filters [ 5 ] showed an exceptional ability of the biological system to start-up quickly after being shut down for a year or more. The experimental columns built by Young in 1964 are used annually in a course taught by Professor Perry L. McCarty for wastewater treatability studies. Laboratory accidents in the author's work such as pumping air through the unit and the loss of media into a collecting sump have resulted in no significant effects on the reaction rates. During Switzen- 655 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for page 655