Occurrence and removal of priority pollutants by lamella clarification and biofiltration

Gaspéri, Johnny; Rocher, Vincent; Gilbert, Solène; Azimi, Sam; Chebbo, Ghassan

doi:10.1016/j.watres.2010.02.035

Cited by 33 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, final effluents undergo a significant dilution effect when discharge in the receiving waters. Removal and concentrations for DEHP measured during those different campaigns were in adequacy with the values reported by Gasperi et al [14] on the same WWTP (between 50 to 80% for the physicochemical lamellar clarification and between 20 and 50% for the biofiltration) and more generally by Martin-Ruel et al [27] and Dargnat et al [20] for several French WWTP (from 78.1% for DEHP to 93.4% for DEP). However, alkylphenol concentrations measured during our three campaigns were significantly higher than those reported by Gilbert et al [23] could be explained by the strong variability of concentrations existing in urban wastewaters.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Phthalate and alkylphenol removal within wastewater treatment plants using physicochemical lamellar clarification and biofiltration

Bergé

Gaspéri

Rocher³

et al. 2012

Water Pollution XI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) have been found in surface waters worldwide. They are known for exerting adverse effects on animals of many species, including humans. EDCs comprise compounds of anthropogenic origin. They can enter waterways via either discharges from wastewater treatment plant (WWTPs), combined sewer overflows (CSO) or atmospheric deposition. In this work, the fate and removal of four phthalates and two alkylphenols: Diethyl phthalate (DEP), Di-n-Butyl phthalate (DnBP), Butyl Benzyl phthalate (BBP), Di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), nonylphenol (NP) and octylphenol (OP) were investigated within a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) using lamellar clarification and biofiltration. This plant receives about 240,000 m 3 d −1 of wastewater. The whole treatment process comprises: screening, grit removal, primary sedimentation using coagulant and flocculant, followed by biofiltration units. Phthalates and alkylphenols were monitored at three locations, including raw sewage, before primary treatment, decanted effluents, before biological treatment, and final effluents, just before discharge to receiving waters. Nine campaigns were performed in 2011 during different seasons.In 2.95 µg.l -1 ), followed by DEHP (0.95 to 6.43, median 2.30 µg.l -1 ) and NP (0.31 to 1.36, median 0.63 µg.l -1 ). Contaminant removal depends on the physicochemical characteristics of the compounds. For example, for lamellar clarification, removal efficiency was found to be strongly dependent to log Kow and, hence, to be highly correlated with their sorption coefficient (Kd). As a consequence, compounds with high log Kow (>3) were removed to a significant extent. DEHP was highly removed by lamellar clarification (68.8%), followed by BBP (61.5%) and NP (51.0%). Besides, DEP (log Kow < 3) was slightly removed (13.8%). During biofiltration, both hydrophilic and hydrophobic compounds were equally eliminated. Therefore, DEP (87.3%), OP (88.0%) and DEHP (81.9%) were mostly removed during biological treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…This study complete a previous work dealing with the removal of WFD priority substances [14,15]. The main advantages of this WWTP compared to conventional activated sludge WWTP lies in their compactness and their high biomass content and its volumetric reaction rates [16,17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Phthalate and alkylphenol removal within wastewater treatment plants using physicochemical lamellar clarification and biofiltration

Bergé

Gaspéri

Rocher³

et al. 2012

Water Pollution XI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For all of the treatments, dialysis bags were filled with 100 ml of Mississippi River water and 100 ml of primary sewage effluent from a local wastewater treatment plant (City of Davenport Water Pollution Control Plant; GPS coordinates 41°29=31.83ЉN and 90°37=41.71ЉW). A 1:1 ratio was selected to mimic sewage spills such as CSO events, where estimated loads from sanitary sewage can be greater than 50% and pollutants such as fecal indicator organisms are reported to be up to 10 times higher than in treated sewage discharges (35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40), and is consistent with earlier decay studies (23-25, 34, 41, 42). Both river water and primary sewage effluent were collected in the morning on the same day that the mesocosm was deployed.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 56%

Biotic Interactions and Sunlight Affect Persistence of Fecal Indicator Bacteria and Microbial Source Tracking Genetic Markers in the Upper Mississippi River

Korajkic

McMinn

Shanks

et al. 2014

Appl Environ Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sanitary quality of recreational waters that may be impacted by sewage is assessed by enumerating fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) (Escherichia coli and enterococci); these organisms are found in the gastrointestinal tracts of humans and many other animals, and hence their presence provides no information about the pollution source. Microbial source tracking (MST) methods can discriminate between different pollution sources, providing critical information to water quality managers, but relatively little is known about factors influencing the decay of FIB and MST genetic markers following release into aquatic environments. An in situ mesocosm was deployed at a temperate recreational beach in the Mississippi River to evaluate the effects of ambient sunlight and biotic interactions (predation, competition, and viral lysis) on the decay of culture-based FIB, as well as molecularly based FIB (Entero1a and GenBac3) and human-associated MST genetic markers (HF183 and HumM2) measured by quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). In general, culturable FIB decayed the fastest, while molecularly based FIB and human-associated genetic markers decayed more slowly. There was a strong correlation between the decay of molecularly based FIB and that of humanassociated genetic markers (r 2 , 0.96 to 0.98; P < 0.0001) but not between culturable FIB and any qPCR measurement. Overall, exposure to ambient sunlight may be an important factor in the early-stage decay dynamics but generally was not after continued exposure (i.e., after 120 h), when biotic interactions tended to be the only/major influential determinant of persistence.

show abstract

“…All concentrations are given on dry weight basis. 3 Recommended levels set by the Swedish Forest Agency for forest application of ashes, 4 analyzed at ALS Scandinavia, see Section 2.2.1 for details, 5 analyzed both by ALS Scandinavia and the authors, values given with respect to mixed data, 6 when P 2 O 5 is < 5 wt.% the phosphorus limit value is 3 mg per kg dry matter, 7 for Cr (VI) the limit value is 2 mg per kg dry matter while in this table the total Cr concentrations are given, 8 the phosphor concentration should be higher than 7 g/kg ash for the ash to be eligible for forest application, na-not analyzed, the following letters a-g denote the number of replicates for each sample: a = 2, b = 3, c = 4, d = 5, e = 6, f = 7, g = 9. The concentrations of some selected heavy metals and phosphorus are given for the bottom ash samples from the lab experiments in Table 3.…”

Section: Laboratory-scale Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-Combustion of Municipal Sewage Sludge and Biomass in a Grate Fired Boiler for Phosphorus Recovery in Bottom Ash

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phosphorus has been identified as a critical element by the European Union and recycling efforts are increasingly common. An important phosphorus-containing waste stream for recycling is municipal sewage sludge (MSS), which is used directly as fertilizer to farmland. However, it contains pollutants such as heavy metals, pharmaceutical residues, polychlorinated bi-phenyls (PCBs) and nano-plastics. The interest in combustion of MSS is continuously growing, as it both reduces the volume as well as destroys the organic materials and could separate certain heavy metals from the produced ashes. This results in ashes with a potential for either direct use as fertilizer or as a suitable feedstock for upgrading processes. The aim of this study was to investigate co-combustion of MSS and biomass to create a phosphorus-rich bottom ash with a low heavy metal content. A laboratory-scale fixed-bed reactor in addition to an 8 MWth grate-boiler was used for the experimental work. The concentration of phosphorus and selected heavy metals in the bottom ashes were compared to European Union regulation on fertilizers, ash application to Swedish forests and Swedish regulations on sewage sludge application to farmland. Element concentrations were determined by ICP-AES complemented by analysis of spatial distribution with SEM-EDS and XRD analysis to determine crystalline compounds. The results show that most of the phosphorus was retained in the bottom ash, corresponding to 9-16 wt.% P 2 O 5 , while the concentration of cadmium, mercury, lead and zinc was below the limits of the regulations. However, copper, chromium and nickel concentrations exceeded these standards.

show abstract

Occurrence and removal of priority pollutants by lamella clarification and biofiltration

Cited by 33 publications

References 31 publications

Phthalate and alkylphenol removal within wastewater treatment plants using physicochemical lamellar clarification and biofiltration

Phthalate and alkylphenol removal within wastewater treatment plants using physicochemical lamellar clarification and biofiltration

Biotic Interactions and Sunlight Affect Persistence of Fecal Indicator Bacteria and Microbial Source Tracking Genetic Markers in the Upper Mississippi River

Co-Combustion of Municipal Sewage Sludge and Biomass in a Grate Fired Boiler for Phosphorus Recovery in Bottom Ash

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About