Nanofiltration and adsorption on powdered adsorbent as process combination for the treatment of severely contaminated waste water

Meier, Johannes; Melin, Thomas; Eilers, L.

doi:10.1016/s0011-9164(02)00513-1

Cited by 34 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some investigations have indicated, that pressure membrane techniques (nanofiltration, reverse osmosis) and advanced oxidation processes are efficient to remove bisphenol A [11][12][13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Effectiveness of Bisphenol a Removal on Domestic and Foreign Activated Carbons

Bohdziewicz¹,

Liszczyk²

2013

Ecological Chemistry and Engineering S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wide use of bisphenol A (BPA) in production of polycarbonates and plastic food packaging cause increase of concentration of BPA in the environment. Both in surface water, underground water and seawater BPA was frequently detected in different concentrations. Emerging problem is adsorption of BPA on sewage, because it could be considered as an additional source of pollution, if it is used as a fertilizer in agricultural sectors. Absorbed BPA on sewage sludge stays persistent in the environment and generates adverse biological effects in endocrine system. Because of ecological safety, exploration of potential techniques to remove BPA to the level, which does not give adverse effect on natural environment is necessary. In this study the adsorption of BPA from simulated water onto commercial activated carbons was investigated. On the basis of experimental data the kinetics and type of sorption were determined.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Effectiveness of Bisphenol a Removal on Domestic and Foreign Activated Carbons

Bohdziewicz¹,

Liszczyk²

2013

Ecological Chemistry and Engineering S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to meet the more stringent disposal regulations, the processes for landfill leachate treatment currently used are the combination of biological and physical and/or chemical treatment technologies. Generally, a biological technique is firstly applied to removing ammonia, COD and BOD, followed by an additional physicochemical treatment to remove non-biodegradable organic components [15][16][17][18][19] . Recently, to MBRs more attention is paid in landfill leachates treatment owing to their efficiency and small foot-print [15,16,[19][20][21][22][23][24] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Landfill leachate treatment by MBR: Performance and molecular weight distribution of organic contaminant

Chen

Liu

2006

CHINESE SCI BULL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Theoretically, adding PAC to leachate before membrane filtration improves the permeate flux. This is because powdered adsorbent serves as a filter aid, and nonpolar carbon particles within a fouling layer makes it easily removable (Meier et al 2002). In series 3, 1 g/L of Norit SX2 was added to the leachate to remove as much as possible of the organic contaminants with a relatively low consumption of PAC.…”

Section: Efficiency Of Removal Of Organic Compounds With Norit Sx2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of stabilized landfill leachate in an integrated adsorption–fine-ultrafiltration system

Kulikowska

Zielińska

Konopka

2018

Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the feasibility of using an adsorption-fine-ultrafiltration system for removing organics from stabilized landfill leachate. For adsorption, Norit SX2 powdered activated carbon was used; the fine-ultrafiltration system was equipped with a ceramic membrane. Due to low organics removal efficiency in fine-ultrafiltration alone (series 1) (46.5% of chemical oxygen demand, 22.1% of dissolved organic carbon), two doses of activated carbon were used for adsorption before fine-ultrafiltration: 0.2 g/L (series 2) and 1 g/L (series 3). Although organics removal efficiency at both doses of Norit SX2 differed (12.9 and 34.5% of chemical oxygen demand, 12.2 and 54.7% of dissolved organic carbon, at 0.2 and 1 g/L, respectively), permeate quality did not differ substantially. Although the use of Norit SX2 improved permeate quality in comparison with fine-ultrafiltration alone (220 mg/L in series 2 and 209 mg/L in series 3 vs. 842 mg/L in series 1), its particles blocked the membrane and lowered the permeate flux even at the lower dose. In the series with adsorption, permeate flux was about 10 times lower than during fine-ultrafiltration alone. This indicates that, in fine-ultrafiltration preceded by adsorption on activated carbon, it is reasonable to use the lower dose of Norit SX2 because the efficiency of treatment is similar to that at the higher dose, but the reduction in permeate flux is somewhat less. These results indicate that the possibility of using adsorption-fine-ultrafiltration in the practice of leachate treatment is limited because of blocking membrane pores with particles of activated carbon.

show abstract

Nanofiltration and adsorption on powdered adsorbent as process combination for the treatment of severely contaminated waste water

Cited by 34 publications

References 1 publication

Evaluation of Effectiveness of Bisphenol a Removal on Domestic and Foreign Activated Carbons

Evaluation of Effectiveness of Bisphenol a Removal on Domestic and Foreign Activated Carbons

Landfill leachate treatment by MBR: Performance and molecular weight distribution of organic contaminant

Treatment of stabilized landfill leachate in an integrated adsorption–fine-ultrafiltration system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About