2010
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2010.068
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cellular biopolymers and molecular structure of a secondary pulp and paper mill sludge verified by spectroscopy and chemical extraction techniques

Abstract: For proper treatment, recycling, or disposal of the pulp and paper mill secondary sludge qualitative and quantitative determination of its characteristics are necessary. Chemical extraction, quantitative characterization, and spectroscopic experiments have been performed to determine the molecular composition and chemical functionality of a pulp and paper mill secondary sludge. In order to extract the low-molecular-weight substances, soxhlet extraction with polar and non-polar solvents was performed where most… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This heavy water consumption results in high generation of wastewater [4]; in general terms, a typical paper mill generates an effluent volume ranging between 1.5 and 60 m 3 per each tonne of paper produced [6][7][8][9]. As a consequence of the treatment of these effluents, a large amount of sludge is produced, with values between 40 and 50 kg of dry sludge per each tonne of paper produced [4,10,11], 70% of which is primary sludge, and 30% biological sludge [12]. Primary sludge usually originates from sedimentation and coagulation-flocculation procedures, while secondary sludge originates from biological treatment [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This heavy water consumption results in high generation of wastewater [4]; in general terms, a typical paper mill generates an effluent volume ranging between 1.5 and 60 m 3 per each tonne of paper produced [6][7][8][9]. As a consequence of the treatment of these effluents, a large amount of sludge is produced, with values between 40 and 50 kg of dry sludge per each tonne of paper produced [4,10,11], 70% of which is primary sludge, and 30% biological sludge [12]. Primary sludge usually originates from sedimentation and coagulation-flocculation procedures, while secondary sludge originates from biological treatment [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A large amount of solid wastes is also simultaneously generated, and these include the causticizing wastes (in the form of lime sludge), ash from boilers, sludge from wastewater treatment processes, and unused raw materials (such as bamboo dust) (Amini et al 2012). On an average, a typical paper mill produces 45 kg of waste sludge per ton of paper produced (Edalatmanesh et al 2010) and effluent generation ranges from 1.5 to 60 m 3 (Thompson et al 2001;Szolosi 2003), based on technology and nature of raw materials. Indiscriminate and unplanned waste disposal has been an unwelcome common practice with the pulp and paper mills, particularly in the developing and the underdeveloped countries, which is a matter of concern (Whitehead and Geary 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further reviewed of existing literature was focused on these biomass components. (Edalatmanesh et al, 2010;Huang et al, 2010;Jimenez et al, 2013;Sluiter et al, 2010;Sun et al, 2004b). Hydrophobic extractives in sludge originated from a mixture of hydrophobic materials presence in the wastewater, phospholipids and cholesterols in cell membranes, metabolites of microorganisms, and by-products from cell lysis (Siddiquee and Rohani, 2011).…”
Section: Categorisation and Quantificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mid-infrared region (MIR) from 4000 cm -1 to 600 cm -1 was applied (Ena Smidt et al, 2011;Smith, 1998). Spectra were analyzed according to absorbance bands identified and recorded in library databases and previous publications (Edalatmanesh et al, 2010;Reveille et al, 2003;Sluiter et al, 2010;Ena Smidt et al, 2011;E. Smidt and Meissl, 2007;Smith, 1998).…”
Section: Functional Group Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation