Treatment investigation of the Erzurum City municipal wastewaters with anaerobic membrane bioreactors

Application of Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor to the Treatment of Low-Strength Municipal Wastewater

“…It indicates that COD removal was significantly influenced by the temperature in the AnMBR. Similar COD removal efficiency by AnMBR was also reported by other researchers [7,8].…”

“…Recently, the application of this technology has been also shifted to the treatment of lowstrength wastewater like domestic or municipal wastewater. Kocadagistan and Topcu [7] reported that COD, phosphorus and suspended solids (SS) removal efficiencies were achieved as 98.1%, 81% and 99%, respectively, at 80-450 L/ (m 2 h) permeate flux in an anaerobic bioreactor coupled with an external mcirofiltration membrane for municipal wastewater treatment. Other similar applications were also reported recently for the treatment of low-strength wastewater [8][9][10].…”

Long-term operation of a pilot scale anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) for the treatment of municipal wastewater under psychrophilic conditions

“…Hence, membrane technology combined with anaerobic biological processes, known as the anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR), seems in theory to offer very attractive possibilities for the treatment of municipal wastewater at psychrophilic temperature (Ozgun et al, 2013a;Smith et al, 2013). Nevertheless, there are still critical technical-economic limitations that hinder the widespread implementation of AnMBRs, such as low operational fluxes, rapid membrane fouling and their high capital and operational costs (Kocadagistan and Topcu, 2007;Ozgun et al, 2013a). Fortunately, membrane acquisition and/or replacement costs have decreased significantly over the past decade due to a decline in membrane module costs (Santos et al, 2011).…”

Development and Applications of Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor in Japan

“…AnMBR performance was not as good, however, when tested against actual wastewater. Lin et al (2011) found a COD removal of only 90% at an OLR of 1.0 kg-COD·m -3 ·d -1 at 30 o C. Kocadagistan and Topcu (2007) reported a COD removal efficiency of 88% at 37 o C and at an OLR of 0.2-2.0 kg-COD·m -3 ·d -1 . Yoo et al (2012) reported that COD removal was 84% at 25 o C with OLR of 3.9-4.7 kg-COD·m -3 ·d -1 .…”

“…Membranes may also be classified, according to their size and shape, into three types: flat-sheet, tubular and hollow fiber. Flat-sheet membranes are often used in laboratory studies for their stability and ease of cleaning and replacement (Kim et al 2007;Kocadagistan and Topcu 2007;Lin et al 2011;Kanai et al 2010). Some also used tubular membranes, which are less vulnerable to fouling (Ho et al 2007;An et al 2009;Calderón et al 2011;Herrera-Robledo et al 2011;Salazar-Pelaez et al 2011).…”