Real-time optimization of the key filtration parameters in an AnMBR: Urban wastewater mono-digestion vs. co-digestion with domestic food waste

Robles, Ángel; Capson-Tojo, Gabriel; Ruano, M.V.; Seco, A.; Ferrer, J.

doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2018.09.031

Cited by 18 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In wastewater treatment especially, these processes result in increased energy intensities. Robles et al., for instance, reported that gas sparging to clean an AnMBR made up 79.7% of the AnMBR energy demand, while Harclerode et al found that pumping and gas sparging comprise 35–76% of an AnMBR’s energy consumption …”

Section: Fouling Impacts On Operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For AnMBR treatment of municipal wastewater, some claim that cleaning comprises 2–7% of OPEX . Lin and Chen et al found that the cost of chemicals to clean the AnMBR represented approximately 32.5% of OPEX, , while a different AnMBR study found the costs of cleaning chemicals to be 17% of OPEX, although it should be noted that both of these studies only evaluated costs of the AnMBR unit operation, not of an entire wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). Membrane cleaning disrupts operations and decreases efficiency and performance. , In the case of RO processes, Patil et al state that RO membrane cleaning comprised ∼33% of OPEX, while a different analysis suggests that cleaning chemical costs normally contribute about 10% to OPEX .…”

Section: Fouling Impacts On Operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Careful cleaning and flux management can extend membrane lifetimes via the reduction of fouling, but ultimately, membranes will require replacement. Some estimate that AnMBR membrane replacement costs comprise 3–22% of OPEX depending on the system design and various operating factors, while others found that 23.4% of OPEX was from AnMBR membrane replacement requirements . The membranes themselves can also be significant contributors to capital costs of WWTPs and desalination plants.…”

Section: Fouling Impacts On Operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessing Advances in Anti-fouling Membranes to Improve Process Economics and Sustainability of Water Treatment

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Membrane fouling in desalination and wastewater treatment increases operating costs and energy consumption. Accordingly, research efforts have focused on developing new membrane materials and surface treatments that can resist fouling. Due to the case-specific nature of fouling, there is limited quantification of the impacts these novel anti-fouling membranes can have on water treatment systems. To address this gap, we report results of high-level analyses that evaluated savings in cost, energy consumption, and life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions when membranes with improved fouling resistance are used in brackish water desalination with reverse osmosis and wastewater treatment with anaerobic membrane bioreactors. To carry out these analyses, we used models Water-TAP 3 and GPS-X for desalination and wastewater treatment, respectively. We considered the influence of the membrane replacement rate and clean-in-place frequency in both scenarios. In the case of desalination, we also considered the influence of fouling factor and antiscalant dosage. In both scenarios, we determined that increasing membrane lifetime was the most influential factor in reducing operating expenses. Less influential factors included energy associated with increased pumping pressure to maintain a constant flux in the face of fouling and the frequency of clean-in-place events. Overall, desalination energy consumption was insensitive to the parameters we evaluated. Reducing energy associated with sparging in anaerobic membrane bioreactors offered the best opportunity to reduce AnMBR energy consumption in the wastewater treatment plant configuration we modeled. Greenhouse gas emissions were largely unaffected by the adoption of fouling-resistant membranes. Membranes made with new anti-fouling materials could be more expensive than current membranes. For the case studies we evaluate, depending on key variables such as membrane lifetime, the cost of desalination membranes could increase by 1.2−2.9 times, and the cost of anaerobic membrane bioreactor membranes could increase by up to 43% without operating costs increasing above our calculated baseline. This analysis highlights the promise of fouling-resistant membrane materials to reduce costs and energy consumption in water treatment systems. It also underscores a significant need for improved empirical data and multi-scale modeling to improve estimates of these savings.

show abstract

Section: Fouling Impacts On Operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fouling Impacts On Operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fouling Impacts On Operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Advances in Anti-fouling Membranes to Improve Process Economics and Sustainability of Water Treatment

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They found that it was sufficient to install two membrane modules for a medium-size operation, in a two-phase extraction mill, in order to optimize the capital costs and minimize operation and maintenance expenses. Robles, Capson-Tojo, Capson-Tojo, Ruano, Seco, and Ferrer (2018) showed that AnMBRs could be successfully applied to domestic wastewater treatment based on a quantitative economic and environmental assessment protocol they developed. Based on their analyses, the authors also noted that the AnMBR modeling may need more attention.…”

Section: Membrane Treatment Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Robles, Capson‐Tojo, Capson‐Tojo, Ruano, Seco, and Ferrer (2018) showed that AnMBRs could be successfully applied to domestic wastewater treatment based on a quantitative economic and environmental assessment protocol they developed. Based on their analyses, the authors also noted that the AnMBR modeling may need more attention.…”

Section: Membrane Treatment Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Food‐processing wastes

Frenkel

Cummings

Maillacheruvu

et al. 2020

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Literature published in 2018 and literature published in 2019 related to food-processing wastes treatment for industrial applications are reviewed. This review is a subsection of the Treatment Systems section of the annual Water Environment Federation literature review and covers the following food-processing industries and applications: general, meat and poultry, fruits and vegetables, dairy and beverage, and miscellaneous treatment of food wastes.

show abstract

Food waste valorization via anaerobic processes: a review

Capson-Tojo

Rouez

Crest

et al. 2016

Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol

218

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need for sustainable development is driving a major focus shift in the biowaste treatment sector. While traditional practices such as landfilling are progressively being banned/penalised due to their obvious environmental impacts and prevention policies are being implemented, the potential of food waste (FW) as a resource is being increasingly recognised. The immense amounts of food waste produced worldwide -and its overall characteristics -make it a promising candidate for resource recovery if collected separately, a practice that is gaining popularity. This chapter aims at giving a general overview of the different processes that are being developed/implemented for resource recovery from FW, including energy, carbon, and 2 nutrients (i.e. N and P). The main options are critically assessed and compared. In addition, a special focus is given to potential state-of-the-art research/technological developments that could be applied in the future. Key challenges to be faced are also discussed, including legislative, social and technological aspects. KeywordsSolid waste; valorisation; biogas; biohydrogen; biomolecules; single-cell 14.1. Food waste production and characteristics How much food waste is produced worldwide?FW can be precisely defined as the "mass of food lost or wasted in the part of food supply chains leading to edible products for human consumption" (Gustavsson et al., 2011). It is important to note that the FW definition shown above does not include the source-separated residues from industrial activities related to food production (e.g. dairy effluents, sugar-refining residues, brewery wastes or agricultural residues). As each of these industrial effluents has different characteristics and treatment/valorisation options, discussing them separately falls out of the scope of this chapter, which focuses on general, non-specific FW.

show abstract

Real-time optimization of the key filtration parameters in an AnMBR: Urban wastewater mono-digestion vs. co-digestion with domestic food waste

Cited by 18 publications

References 47 publications

Assessing Advances in Anti-fouling Membranes to Improve Process Economics and Sustainability of Water Treatment

Assessing Advances in Anti-fouling Membranes to Improve Process Economics and Sustainability of Water Treatment

Food‐processing wastes

Food waste valorization via anaerobic processes: a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About