Food-Processing Wastes

FOOD-PROCESSING WASTES Review by: Mark E. Grismer, Charles C. Ross, G. Edward Valentine Jr., Brandon M.
Smith and James L. Walsh Jr. Water Environment Research, Vol. 73, No. 5 (January 2001), pp. 1-29 Published by: Water Environment Federation Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29763116 . Accessed: 03/11/2013 16:59
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Water Environment Federation is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Water Environment Research.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 196.200.142.112 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 16:59:58 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
FOOD-PROCESSING WASTES
Mark E. Grismer, Charles C. Ross, G. Edward Valentine,
L. Walsh, Jr.
Jr.,Brandon M. Smith, James
Food-processing
waste management
continues
to be an area of great research
interest.
The challenge of meeting theworld's
increasing food demands while minimizing the innovative methods ofwaste largely focused on expanding and to
effect on the environment has required new and management. Research over the past year has waste for
optimizing existing technologies alternative uses ofwaste sectors.
treatment,while novel approaches
products continues to be a focus of many food industry to combine the
This year the Literature Review Committee has chosen
sections of FERMENTATION and FOOD-PROCESSING WASTES under the title of the

latter. This decision was made these two sections and was sections to be together. due to the common references and interests under determined to be more beneficial to the public for these
FERMENTATIONAND BEVERAGES
Though winery and micro-brewery for their products, research industries continue to grow due to increased demand
interest in the United States with respect to treatment of has fallen behind that conducted inEurope,
winery, brewery and distillerywastewater Australia and elsewhere. fermentation wastewaters problems associated wastewater industry and to some degree
However, as with many food processing wastewaters, are characterized by very high organic loads with additional Fermentation
with suspended
solids and phenolic compounds.
treatment concerns are often addressed inengineering and science
in industrytrade journals As in the past,
research publications.
the research work and experience
wastewater infermentation industry
treatment has
focused on the analysis of aerobic bioreactor and anaerobic systems and associated by-products.
sludge blanket treatment
Researchers
have found that brewery wastewater
is generally amenable
to biological
l
Water Environment Federation. Water Copyright? 2001 by the Environment Research, Volume 73, Number 5 Literature Review 2001.
reactor treatment methods
using different suspension
or filter media.
Nguyen et al.
(2000) used an aerobic fixed-filmsequencing control system based
batch reactor (SBR) with a feedback in the mixed liquor for
on dissolved oxygen (D.O.) concentration
treatment of brewery wastewater.
The system was operated at 25 ?C and 35 ?C and oxygen demand (TBOD) 120
under growth-rate limiting conditions. Total biochemical removal efficiency ranged from83% and 438 mg BOD/L, with suspended
to 92% after 1.5 to 3 h and resulted inbetween
solids contributing between 63% and 71% of the installed or if the suspended
load. As with most biological treatment systems, treatment effectiveness would have been were an efficient secondary clarifierwas improved if removed from the brewery wastewater solids before treatment. Using an airlift the influence of pH, temperature and degradation of brewery wastewater
bioreactor, Zhang et al. (2000) considered
nitrogen (N) source on the kinetics of simultaneous and cultivation of Candida tropicalis.
Use of upflow anaerobic
sludge blanket (UASB)
reactors inbrewery wastewater and Yspeert (1999) reactor systems that are
treatment research has continued over the past year. Driessen described a new generation of more advanced characterized by biogas separation anaerobic
in two stages within the reactor and gas-driven IC system allows for large upflow liquid and gas
internaleffluent circulation (IC). The
velocities, treatment of low strength effluents at short hydraulic retention times (HRTs), and treatment of high strength effluents at very high volumetric loading rates. Using UASB and expanded granular sludge bed (EGSB) reactors, Jeison and Chamy (1999)
treated 500 and 10 000 mg chemical oxygen demand COD/L diluted beer. They obtained similar overall COD reactors (~ 80% fora sludge [VSS>d),
(COD)/L ethanol and 3 000 mg removal forethanol from both solids
loading rate of 800 mg COD/g volatile suspended reactor performed better than the UASB considered for
but found that the EGSB
treatment of the diluted beer. Similarly, Ince et al. (2000a) production wastewater measured ina crossflow ultrafiltration membrane anaerobic
inert COD
reactor treating brewery
having practically no inertsoluble COD.
Soluble microbial products of 2.2% of the influent COD.
in terms of COD were found to be an average
These microbial products were not removed from the effluent even with extended
2
operation times. At a maximum organic COD
loading rate (OLR) of 28.5 kg COD/m3Dday, in the anaerobic reactor and 99% in the
removal efficiencies of no less than 97% permeate were achieved
membrane
during steady-state operation.
Research
into winery wastewater
treatment has
largely focused on the extension of to treatment of brewery via anaerobic
those anaerobic wastewater. processes
and aerobic methods
successfully applied
Research has
considering treatment ofwinery wastewater
included the application of UASB and fluidized-bed type reactors as well film technology (MFT). Kalyuzhnyi et al. (2000) investigated the (1 000 to 17 removals
as newer mobilized
performance of two laboratory UASB
reactors treatingwinery wastewater Total COD
000 mg COD/L) with and without recycling of treated water. achieved under OLRs
15.9, 6.5, 12.5 and 7.2 kg COD/m3*d and HRTs of less than one and 60% for the run at (45% to 67%
day were greater than 85% for the runs at the firstthree OLRs the lastOLR.
There was also substantial decolorization of thewastewater
reduction of polyphenol content). Using an inverse turbulent bed consisting of a granular floating solid expanded at an OLR of 15 kg COD/m3?d. 000 m2/m3) and Remaining by an upflow current of gas foranaerobic digestion, to 85% carbon removal froma winery wastewater (20
Buffiere et al. (2000) obtained 75 %
The carrier particles had high specific surface area
low energy requirements for fluidization (gas velocity of 1.5 mm/s). at the end of the tests was approximately 0.2 g attached volatile control of a fluidized bed on biological treatment of liquid
biomass
solids (VS)/g solids. anaerobic
Harmand et al. (2000) described
digester to stabilize production of biogas based The researchers
winery wastewater.
used a linearmodel of gas outflow rate and
inputflowrate inconjunction with the disturbance modeling principle to design a disturbance-accommodating full-scale application of MFT (2000). This case controller fora pilot-scale plant. A case technology was history of the first
presented by Cummings and Morris
history presented
the results obtained during the startup period as including reductions inelectrical,
well as benefits realized during system operation, chemical, and sludge disposal basins
costs and the ability to convert pre-existing aerobic basins.
intoadditional equalization
3
Building on previous work (Benitez et al., 1999a and 1999b) with ozonation and aerobic treatment ofwinery wastewater, Benitez et al. (2000) studied decomposition inbatch reactors. The wastewater was of the treated in In the
organic content in winery wastewater series by an ozonation ozonation process,
process, an aerobic degradation, and another ozonation.
the effects of temperature, pH and presence
of hydrogen peroxide
(H2O2) and ultraviolet (UV) radiation on removal of organic compounds were determined. Similarly, Beitran et al. (2000a) examined the effect of ozonation as a was It found that
pretreatment step prior to conventional aerobic biological treatment. preozonation enhanced COD and total organic carbon (TOC)
removal as well as N
removal and sludge settling properties. Kinetic studies revealed that preozonation enhances organic degradation by increasing the maximum microbial growth rate (Dmax)
and decreasing
the effects of inhibition.
Anaerobic
digester-style reactors have also been used to treat distillerywastewater. intoa high-rate anaerobic reactor
Nam et al. (1999) converted a conventional digester and obtained COD COD/m3?d. removal efficiencies of 72%
to 84% at OLRs
of 5.45 to 11.5 kg removed the of Up to
The process
produced biogas at rates of 0.57 to 0.69 m3/kg COD to 68%.
with methane
(CH4) contents of 59%
Akkuna and Clark (2000) described
performance of a granular-bed anaerobic baffled reactor and UASB 80% COD and 90% BOD
baffled reactor combining the advantages
systems for treatment ofwhiskey distillerywastewater. removal were obtained at an organic loading of 4.75 kg
COD/m3?d and very high solids retention times (SRTs), with effluent total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations of about 80 mg/L forall organic and hydraulic conditions studied. was It also found that acidogens were mostly non-granular while methanogens inan anaerobic were granular. Using rigid polyurethane foam as a packing material contact series filterto treat distillerywastewater, Vijayaraghavan (2000) evaluated the effect of HRT and toxic parameters
and Ramanujam
such as sulfate, total sulfide digestion on treatment acheieved when treating an
and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) generated during wastewater efficiency. At a 4 day HRT, 73% to 98% COD
removal was
influent withCOD concentrations of 1 500 mg COD/L to 19 000 mg COD/L.
4
Alternative distillerywastewater
treatment techniques considered
this past year include Lalov et al.
use of chitosan and fungi to remove high concentrations of organic material. (2000) determined that the amount of the anion-exchange contact time needed for successful wastewater
biopolymer chitosan and
treatmentwere a chitosan concentration concentrations of 2 800
wastewater with COD of 10 g/L and a contact time of 30 min for mg COD/L. Inaddition, the possibility was of adsorbed demonstrated
of subsequent by a direct
biomethanization
organic acid anions on the ionexchanger
addition of chitosan to the bioreactor. Gonzalez (Trametes spp.) to treat distillerywastewater. chromatography/mass wastewater
et al. (2000) used white-rot fungi They also used pyrolysis/gas the composition of a distillery
spectrometry to characterize
as well as tomonitor the changes which occurred after fungal treatment fungi. Maximum effluent decolorization values and COD reduction
with Basidiomycete
attained after 7 days of fungal treatmentwere 73.3% 20% (v/v)of distillerywastewater was added
and 61.7%,
respectively, when
to the culture medium.
Finally, Upendrakumar
and Bachman
(2000) presented a case
history of a wastewater featured an EGSB results of
pretreatment process at a beverage reactor followed by an aerobic SBR
bottling facility. The process
for polishing. The authors presented
initialsystem performance as well as modifications made

performance.
later to the system to improve
DAIRY
Several processes studies were conducted by researchers investigating the use of fixed-film the attachment, inan upflow
for treating dairy waste.
Ince et al. (2000b) evaluated
strength, and performance of a fixed filmon sintered glass media anaerobic filter. Biomass
distribution through the tower and reduction in media in the filter, which attained an average COD
compressive
strength was measured
removal of 80% at an OLR of 21 kg COD/m3*d and an HRT of 0.5 days. Alves et al. (2000) studied the effect of staged operation of an upflow anaerobic the effective HRT from2 d to 10 h by feeding synthetic dairy waste filter, decreasing at various points in
5
the reactor. No advantage observed was
inperformance or change
in microbial characteristics was
incomparison with a conventional
filter.A differentbiofilm support system and Abbasi, 2000), who
investigated by other researchers
(Ramasamy
incorporated nylon mesh
intoan anaerobic
continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR). CH4 yield, which improvement in microorganism-substrate contact and characterized as
This modification resulted ingreater than 20% according to the authors was due to enhanced
reduced washout.
Chen, et al. (2000a)
reviewed the use ofwhat was
a "deep bed" filtertechnology invarious dairy. This process media
industries throughout theworld, including a as well as the filter
used sand as the support formicroorganisms
for solids retention.
Other researchers
investigated biological and analytical topics related to dairy waste forBOD calculation was developed by Gough et al.
treatment. A prediction equation
(2000) using the effluent from an SBR at a fluidmilk processing which incorporated BOD, COD, total solids (TS), TSS,
plant. The equation, can
and pH in itsdevelopment,
be used for this particular wastewater with 95% confidence, according Vidal et al. (2000) studied the anaerobic wastewaters,
to the authors.
biodegradability of two synthetic dairy
one with a relatively high fat content and one with a relatively low fat found that optimum conditions forbiodegradability and CH4 in the range of 3 000 to 5 000 mg COD/L, requiring more time due to fat hydrolysis. for reducing whey COD
content. The researchers
production were obtained with wastewaters with treatment of the high-fatwastewater Mixed yeast cultures were used (Cristiana-Urbina et al., 2000).
inanother study as a means Treatment ofwhey
inan airliftbioreactor with a mixed yield (0.75 g
culture of Torulos cremoris and Candida biomass/g lactose) and high COD
utilis produced a high biomass
removal efficiency (95.8%).
Physical-chemical
processes
also generated
some
research
interest. Researchers
investigated the use of magnesium-enriched industrial wastewaters, to be an effective and economic An overview of membrane
liquid bittern in the treatment of a variety of The liquid bitternwas found lime.
including dairy (Ayoub et al., 2000). coagulant when used
inconjunction with slaked conducted
processes
was in the dairy industry
by Kuemmel,
6
et al. (2000). discussed, were
Membrane
process
use
indairy production and whey processing was
and the results of a pilot study using an innovative combination of processes batch tests that suggested
reviewed. Koyuncu et al. (2000) conducted
nanofiltrationwould be effective inproducing reusable water from the effluent of a dairy processing wastewater osmosis treatment plant. Additional testing of a two-pass reverse produced high COD removals and high (RO) process on raw dairy wastewater
quality effluent.
MEAT AND POULTRY

Ross et al. (2000) provided an overview of recent innovations indissolved air flotation pretreatment. Included in the overview was a study of a poultry rendering plant where a full-scale DAF was
wastewater (DAF) design for industrial case
installed to provide
pretreatment of a high-strength wastewater following pilot-scale provide TSS
(43 706 mg TSS/L and 113 864 mg COD/L) reported to
treatability testing. The full-scale DAF system was removals of 99.4% and 91.7%,
and COD
respectively, at high solids
loading rates (196 kg/m2?h) and systems at meat processing (2000).
lowair-to-solids ratios (0.0006 kg air/kg solids).
Alternatives for handling both the floatable and the settleable products fromDAF plants were discussed by Chittenden and Westerhold were
Ina full-scale application,
two-stage and three-stage centrifuge processes
used to separate
and recover the floatmaterial while settled solids were processed
through a plate settler. The recovered materials were used as animal feed ingredients, resulting ina cost-effective manner for handling these wastewater Two pilot-scale aerobic SBRs were operated on-site to evaluate treating poultry processing wastewater potential (ORP) Pavlostathis, and to examine residuals.
theirefficiency in
the use of oxidation-reduction (Pierson and to
in the reactors as a process Soluble COD (SCOD)
control parameter
2000).
removal efficiencies ranged from89%
98% and ammonia-nitrogen
(NH3-N) removal was 25%
to 41% while operating with an
HRT of 12 h. ORP monitoring provided distinctive trend lineswith identifiable inflection points related to carbon oxidation, ammonification and nitrification. A submerged
7
biotower consisting of a flooded upflow reactor with random-packed media was the tertiarynitrificationof poultry processing wastewater process (Dale, 2000).
used for
Details of
startup were given and results from 12 months of operations were given along Bickers and van Oostrom (2000) investigated the
with comparative operating costs.
ability of diluted blood and three meat processing waste paunch
streams
(rendering stickwater,
liquor,and slaughter floor effluent) to supply organic carbon fordenitrification.
Anoxic batch tests were used to determine the maximum specific denitrification rates and anoxic half-saturation constants foreach waste paunch liquor contained stream. Rendering stickwater and COD. Slaughter floor
large amounts of readily biodegradable
and diluted blood contained COD. Grabas (2000)
or no significant amounts of readily biodegradable little
reported on laboratory testing of moving bed biofilm reactors With a total HRT of 4 to 13 to 75% total COD removal
(MBBRs)
for the treatment of meat processing wastewater. reported to provide 64%
hours, a series of twoMBBRs were froma presettled wastewater.
Treatability of poultry processing wastewater reactor was
using fixed-filmanaerobic
reactors was
investigated by del Pozo et al. (2000) with two laboratory-scale reactors operated at 35 ?C. One an upflow configuration and the other was tubes as support media. downflow, both COD removal
equipped with vertical corrugated PVC efficiencies ranged from85% while the highest organic 55% to 75%.
to 95% at an organic
loading rate of 8 kg COD/m3?day, resulted inefficiencies of and
loading rate of 35 kg COD/m3?day
Batstone et al. (2000a and 2000b) to describe
reported on the development
validation of a model wastewater.
the high-rate anaerobic
digestion of a complex reactor treating hog
A full-scale, two-stage hybrid upflow anaerobic
processing wastewater was assessed close to CSTR
for system validation. Reactor hydraulics were
hydraulics, and the model performed well on independent data sets with process for the treatment of evaluated in
and without recycle. The performance of a UASB slaughterhouse bench-scale
wastewater with and without DAF as pretreatment was
studies at 30 ?C by Manjunath et al. (2000).
The biochemical methane
potential (BMP) of the rawwastewater,
the DAF floatmaterial, and DAF subnatant was Results revealed higher biodegradability
determined by using a serum bottle technique.
8
of the fractions as compared
to the rawwastewater.
SEAFOOD
An avoided cost economic potential wastewater analysis was performed by Cardoch et al. (2000) for two (1) conventional, on-site costs forDAF treatment
treatment options fora shrimp processor:
treatmentwith DAF and (2) artificialwetland treatmentwere approximately $208,000/year and a capitalized
treatment. Annualized for25 years.
Estimated wetland
costs were approximately 25% of the DAF treatment costs, with an annual cost of $63,000/year capacities and bead cost savings of over $1.5 million. The adsorption (Cu[ll]) and a commercial reactive dye on flake was It shown
and rates of divalent copper
types of chitosans were compared at 30 ?C (Wu et al., 2000).
that all equilibrium isotherms could be fitted to a Langmuir equation. capacity of Cu(ll) on flake and bead chitosans appeared adsorption capacity of the dye on bead typewas much
The adsorption but the
to be comparable,
larger than that on flake type by indicated
a factor of 2.0 to 3.8. The rates of dye adsorption on both types of chitosans differentcontrolling mechanisms.
SUGAR AND CONFECTIONERY

Ellis et al. (2000) of organic reported on a dynamic simulation used to examine the potential effect
loading fluctuations on the biological treatment process
at a corn processing
facility. Data collected during an intensive twoweek No significant effect on the soluble components noted during shock biomass may cause loadings. However, upsets was it
full-scale operation were used to
calibrate a dynamic model of the extended aeration activated sludge treatment process. of the treatment system effluentwas noted that the observed rapid growth of a temporary
in the clarification process.
Also, as expected,
reduction in the D.O. concentration was
observed, which could result infilamentous the identificationof nutrient
bulking problems. A key result of the simulation work was deficiencies as a potential operating problem associated
sugar streams.
with the release of refined
Water Environment Federation. Water Copyright? 2001 by the
Environment
Research,
Volume
73, Number 5 Literature Review 2001.
A pilot-scale
research program was
undertaken by Vossoughi
et al. (2000) to to generate several
investigate the capability of an upflow anaerobic wastewater CH4 from weeks were was
fixed bed (UAFB) process
from a beet sugar plant. After inoculation with biomass,
required for the population to adapt to the molasses wastewater
feedstock. The UAFB
able to treat the molasses
successfully at the OLR of 10 kg beet sugar molasses in the manner results of
COD/m3?day.
The results indicated that processing
is technically feasible and could be economically attractive. The experimental semi-continuous wastewater, tests of anaerobic
upflow filtertreatment of confectionery industry loads, were presented by di
carried out at various HRTs and organic COD
Berardino et al. (2000).
removal efficiencies greater than 80% were obtained demonstrated the ability to adapt
under the range of conditions tested, and the biomass
itselfto new a carbon source and deal successfully with organic
load fluctuations.
Three configurations fora dual-digestion examined was
system based
on an anaerobic
CSTR were
by Lafitte-Trouque and Forster (2000). A first-stage thermophilic digester mesophilic digesters. digesters operated at an HRT of 4 h while the mesophilic In terms of VS
used to provide the feed to each of the two second-stage
The thermophilic stage was
were operated at an HRT of 8, 12, and 15 d.
reduction, the three reactor used
configurations were similar, but all were more effective than a single-stage maintained a more stable pH, regardless of the quality of the feed sludge.
as the control. The configuration with the 12 d HRT was most effective and also
FRUITAND VEGETABLES
A DAF system was UASB implemented by a cranberry processor to polish the effluent from (le Roux et al., 2000). and flocculation,
reactor inorder to reduce TSS-related
sewer surcharges
The DAF system, using alum and a cationic polymer forcoagulation reduced the TSS COD reduction.
from the UASB effluent from691 mg/L to 53 mg/L and provided a 63%
10
Villaverde et al. (2000) presented operational and performance data on the modification of an aerobic SBR process to optimize N removal from the effluent of a UASB providing
treatment of a potato starch production wastewater. phase
By using a short-cycled aeration
to optimize oxygen uptake for nitrificationand organic carbon fordenitrification, reported to provide 79% (with concentrations total nitrogen (TN) removal from the high up to 700 mg total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)/L
the process was
strength wastewater
and 2 000 mg COD/L). process
Frijters et al. (2000) reported on the use of an aerobic/anoxic pretreatment system fora capable of biofilm in the system was
for providing treatment of effluent from an anaerobic The carrier-based
potato processing wastewater.
removing 5 kg COD/m3?day overall. NH3-N removal in the aerated NH3-N/m3?day was attained, as was TN removals of up to 90% the anoxic section.
section of up to 1 kg
through denitrification in
Inan attempt to reduce the occurrence was employed prior to the second
of bulking sludge problems, a selector system
stage of a two-stage activated sludge plant providing (Nikolavcic and Svardal, 2000). The system
treatment of a potato starch wastewater was reported to have stage and
improved the sludge volume
index (SVI) to below 150 mL/g in the In for
second
improved the overall performance of the treatment system. that has been attributed to the occurrence
another study, Contreras et al. (2000) established Sphaerotilus natans, a species
the kinetic growth characteristics of bulking
sludge problems
wastewater.
inactivated sludge processes
providing treatment of potato processing
Dinsdale
et al. (1999) conducted
laboratory-scale testing of a two-stage anaerobic activated sludge and a fruit
digestion process
for the stabilization of a mixture ofwaste
and vegetable mixture, with 25% of the feed VS contribution from fruit and vegetable wastes. The anaerobic system consisted of an acidogenic CSTR and methanogenic
inclined tubular reactor which provided 40% VS degradation and a CH4 yield of 0.25 m3/kgVS added, at an overall system Bagley loading rate of 5.7 kg VS/m3?day. Lalman and
(2000) determined the degradability and oils, inan anaerobic
effects of linoleic acid, inhibitory system. The authors recommended
commonly found invegetable
11
using two separate
stages
in the anaerobic
treatment of vegetable
oil wastewater
to
minimize the inhibition of acetoclastic 30 mg/L or greater.
methanogens
by linoleic acid at concentrations of
Inan effort to reduce the phenols conducted
inolive mill effluent (OME), Al-Malah et al. (2000) through an adsorption process using
treatment tests by passing OME
activated clay after pretreatment by settling, centrifugation, and filtration. Ina batch process, maximum adsorption capacity was reached in less than 4 h with the maximum
removal for phenols and organic matter of 81 % and 71%, respectively. Beltran-Heredia et al. (2000a, 2000b, and 2000c) reported on the treatment ofwashing waters from
black table olive production using ozonation
pretreatment followed by aerobic biological configured to degrade Data on the aqueous biologically
treatment. The ozonation pretreatment step was inhibitory phenolic compounds removals of organic material specific phenolic compounds
found in thewastewater in the aerobic stage.
and resulted in improved ozonation of were
commonly found infood processing wastewaters
presented by Beitran et al. (2000b). et al. (2000) were able to
By isolating three polyphenolic fractions fromOME, Sayadi determine the aerobic and anaerobic that lowmolecular-weight anaerobically.
treatabilityof each fraction. The study concluded aerobically and
phenolics were more degradable
Garcia et al. (2000) also tested a number of fungi inan effort to reduce The study concluded thatPhanerochaete chrysosporium isolated
the phenol content of OME. was most capable
of phenol degradation.
Similarly, Robles
et al. (2000)
several different strains of Penicillium spp. fromexisting OME tested them for the removal of phenols fromOME. strains were capable subsequently of significant removals of COD
treatment ponds and
The tests indicated that these and phenol from the OME and
reduction of inhibitory effects of OME treatment forCOD
on other microbial strains. Others reduction in OME (Erguder et al.,
investigated the use of anaerobic 2000).
After acclimation periods of 15-25 days, batch anaerobic of 85.4% to 93.4% COD removal efficiencies.
reactors were shown to
be capable
12
BAKERY
The performance of a full-scale tricklingfilterproviding pretreatment of a snack food processing wastewater was speeds (Linden et al., 2000). evaluated under various loading rates and flow distributor
Under optimum operating conditions, soluble BOD was varied considerably (400 to 1 300 rates and
reduced from 1 000 mg/L to 200 mg/L. Effluent TSS mg/L) due to biomass sloughing, which was
affected by hydraulic application
rotarydistributor speeds. reported on the performance of a grease aerobic treatment process
Keenan
and Sabelnikov
(2000)
trap system
converted
intoa biologically-augmented
to improve the The system was trap and
removal of fats, oils, and greases comprised of a two-cell grease the second acclimated cell converted
(FOG) froma bakery wastewater.
which the firstcell remained a grease trap in
intoan aerated
reactor augmented with bacterial strains
to a high-FOG food source.
During field tests of the system, effluent FOG
concentrations were
reduced from 1 512 mg/L to 320 mg/L. Effluent quality was installed to provide
media structure was improved to 28 mg FOG/L when a fixed-film biomass support.
SOLID WASTES
The conversion of rice straw, rice hulls, sugar bagasse, and pecan shells intogranular by
activated carbons using both physical and chemical activation was Ahmedna et al. (2000a). The carbons were evaluated
evaluated
for hardness, bulk density, ash,
conductivity, pH, total surface area, and adsorption properties, and the results were compared to two commercial reference carbons. Ina companion study, Ahmedna et al.
(2000b) produced granular activated carbons from pecan hulls and sugarcane combined with corn syrup or coal tar binders. This study examined parameters described sugar. in the previous citation fora process the same
bagasse
fordecolorization of raw to study the effects of
Daud et al. (2000)
reported on a series of experiments
carbonization
temperature on pore development
in the production of activated carbon
13
from palm shells. The char was bed reactor.
activated at 500 ?C, 800 ?C, and 900 ?C ina fluidized
Raw and pelletized peanut hulls were exchange
tested as a replacement forcommercial ions fromwastewater
ion The
resin for the removal of metal
(Brown et al., 2000).
study evaluated
the removal of Cu, cadmium
(Cd), zinc (Zn), and
lead (Pb) under both the use of
steady-state and transient-rate conditions. Gupta and AN (2000) evaluated bagasse wastewater. combustion flyash for removal of Cu and Zn from including pH, adsorbent dose, initial metal
The study ion
optimized various parameters concentrations,
temperature, and particle size.
Abu-EI-ShaY
et al. (2000)
reported on a process
for removal methyl blue and methyl and pyrolyzed oil shale. The Olive oil
orange dyes using solid residue from olive mill waste study compared wastes
thewaste materials with a commercial coconut shell carbon.
impregnated with phosphoric acid (H3PO4) and thermally treated at 500 ?C to The carbon
700 ?C were used tomanufacture activated carbon (Khalil et al., 2000). produced proved to be a multi-purpose, high-capacity adsorbent remediation.
wastewater useful in
An evaluation was bagasse
conducted on the economic
and environmental
impact of using
and eucalyptus as a fuel inelectric power production at sugar mills (van den The study concluded that the materials could compete with
Broek et al., 2000). conventional
fuel oil as a fuel source.
The energy characteristics of the exhaust foot reported by Masghouni and Hassairi compared to
were cake from the olive oil extraction industry (2000).
The combustion of the solid material for brick manufacturing was
fuel oil containing 4% sulfur (S) and found to significantly reduce the emissions
oxides.
of sulfur
Islam and Ani (2000) conducted processes
a technical and economic
analysis of pyrolytic
for the conversion of rice husk waste
to pyrolytic oil and solid char. The
study evaluated
fluidized bed pyrolysis with and without catalytic treatment. A simple
14
method for the production of pure silica xerogels Kalapathy et al. (2000). The process was based
from rice hull ash was
described
by
on an alkaline extraction followed by
acid precipitation. Jimenez et al. (2000)
investigated cooking conditions (time,
wheat temperature, and formaldehyde concentration) for the production of pulp from straw with formaldehyde water mixtures. The pulp properties analyzed cellulose, and ethanol-benzene lignin, also determined. extractables included yield,
content. The pH of thewastewater
produced was rice husk ash slabs made

commercial
The manufacture ofwhite Portland cement fromwaste described by Ajiwe et al. (2000). Concrete to
ina pilot plant process was
using the rice husk ash concrete were determined to be comparable

concrete.
Bioconversion
of cassava
and sugar cane bagasse Vandenberghe
and their products were et al. (2000)
reviewed by using a yielded a
Pandey et al. (2000a and 2000b)
reported on the synthesis bagasse
of citric acid from sugar cane bagasse,
coffee husk, and cassava
culture of Aspergillus niger. The solid-state fermentation of cassava maximum of 88 g of citric acid per kg of drymatter. (PAH), a bioplastic, was
bagasse
Polyhydroxyalkanoates malt and soy wastes al., 2000).
produced
through the bioconversion
of
mixed with a culture of activated sludge microorganisms
(Wong et
The physical and chemical properties were described and found to be Navarro et al. generated (2000) described a bioconversion
different formalt and soy feedstocks. process for the treatment of vinasse
by the production of ethanol from sugar The process required no that requires a using
cane molasses
by fermentation and distillation processes.
external energy inputand could replace the current incineration process significant amount of external energy. A solid-state fermentation process Lentinus edodes and apple, cranberry, and strawberry pomace was evaluated
as substrates for the The study
production of polygalacturonase concluded
by Zheng and Shetty (2000).
that strawberry pomace was
the best substrate, followed by apple pomace, substrate.
while cranberry pomace was
not an acceptable
An anaerobic
plug-flow reactor was
used to treat a mixture of semi-solid waste
from
15
wholesale
fruit and vegetable markets mixed with sewage
sludge
(Sharma et al., 2000).
The primary objective of the study was produced from the anaerobic process.
to determine the quality and quantity of biogas Edelmann et al. (2000) conducted a similar sludge inan
which fruit and vegetable waste was study in anaerobic process process. A two-step process was heat ina plant processing
co-digested with sewage
used to generate both electricity and A thermal hydrolysis process investigated by for
1 m3/d ofwaste.
the pretreatment of hard-to-digest waste Scheider et al. (2000).
such as food scraps was
The pretreatment process was
shown to significantly improve the effect of
the anaerobic
digestion of thewaste materials.
Kim et al. (2000) evaluated
particle size and sodium waste.
ion concentration on thermophilic anaerobic that particle size isone of the most
digestion of food
The study concluded process.
importantparameters
in the anaerobic
Huang et al. (2000) developed vegetable waste. waste
an empirical model for thermophilic composting of
The model can be used to predict the ratio of the pre-dried vegetable as an alternative to conventional composting
to rice hulls, aeration rate, and reaction temperature and time. A slurry-phase indecomposing At a 5 day HRT, roughly 82% of the carbonaceous degraded with comparable (PO4-P). removals of nitrate-nitrogen
bioreactor was evaluated food wastes materials
(Yun et al., 2000). in the feed stock was
(NO3-N) and phosphate-phosphorus
MISCELLANEOUS
Cantor et al. (2000) compared before and after conversion the performance of an aerobic activated sludge process biological reactor (MBR) process The external membrane allowed that filtration
to a membrane
provided treatment of a food ingredientswastewater. system used to clarify biomass roughly five times the COD (98.6% and 85.4%, from thewastewater
the plant to operate at COD and TN removals
loading while providing comparable
respectively) and effluent quality. A process
forcontrolling the
addition of N and P in the aerobic wastewater was described
treatment of nutrient-deficient food processing (2000). The addition of these
by Prendl and Nikolavcic
16
nutrientswas Rajeshwari anaerobic processing
controlled by monitoring the NH3-N and the PO4-P concentrations. for
et al. (2000) reviewed the suitability and status of development treatment of a variety of industrial wastewaters facilities.
including those from food
The use of cellulose-based
fibrous materials and polyelectrolytes for the recovery of froma food processing wastewater was and cellulose
proteins and other biological compounds reported by Chen et al. (2000b).
The use of carboxymethyl cellulose
triacetate fibers to form flocculated sludges quality effluentwith 90% BOD removals.
suitable foranimal feed also resulted inhigh the results of used for
Brinck et al. (2000) presented
studies on the influence of fattyacids on the fouling of ultrafiltration membranes the treatment of food processing wastewaters. membrane was
wastewater.
The flux through a polyethersulfone
severely reduced under acidic conditions with a high fattyacid
In response
to regulations limiting salt loading in land application systems, Smith and that total dissolved solids (TDS) and indicators for systems providing treatment of some food the use of fixed dissolved TDS solids as a
Crites (2000) presented data suggesting conductivity were not adequate processing wastewaters. better indicator because
The authors advocated
food processing wastewater
has a higher organic fraction
which will break down biologically soils. Data were presented production facilities.
in the soil system without affecting groundwater or from tomato, canning, and cheese
wastewater for
Mathematical
models were developed
to predict the effect of effluent recirculation on the reactors treatingmunicipal and soybean The study concluded that therewas a
performance of upflow fixed-filmanaerobic processing wastewaters maximum (Yu et al., 2000).
threshold of recirculation rates beyond which system performance would be processing wastewater made
adversely affected and that the complexity of the soybean the effect difficultto predict through a model.
17
Mark E. Grismeris
a Professorin
theDepts. Of LAWR-Hydrology and Biological & Charles C. Ross and G.
Agricultural Engineering Edward
at the University of California, Davis.
Valentine, Jr., are principals and Brandon M. Smith is a project engineer with Inc., inAtlanta, Georgia. Tech Research James L. Walsh, Jr., is a
Environmental Treatment Systems, Senior Research Correspondence Systems,
Engineer at the Georgia should be addressed
Institute inAtlanta.
to Charles C. Ross, Environmental Treatment
Inc., P.O. Box 94005, Atlanta, GA 30377.
REFERENCES
S.; and Mahmoud, S. (2000) Removal of Solid Residues of Dyes from fromOlive-Mill
Abu-EI-ShaY, W.; Gharaibeh, Aqueous Wastes
Solutions Using Low-Cost Sorbents Made (JETF) and Solid Residues
Refined from Jordanian Oil Shale. Environ. Geol.,
39, 1090.
Ahmedna, M.; Marshall, W.; Carbons
and Rao, R. (2000a)
Production of Granular Activated
fromSelect Agricultural By-Products and Evaluation of theirEffects on Raw Bioresour. Techno!., 71, 103.
Sugar Decolorization.
Ahmedna, M.; Marshall, W.; Carbons Chemical,
and Rao, R. (2000b) Production of Granular Activated
fromSelect Agricultural By-Products and Evaluation of theirPhysical, and Adsorption Properties. Bioresour. Techno!., 71, 113.
Ajiwe, V.; Okeke, C; Cement
and Akigwe, F.
(2000) A Preliminary Study of the Manufacturer of Techno!., 73, 37.
fromRice Husk Ash.
Bioresour.
Akunna, J.C., and Clark, M. Reactor 257.
(2000) Performance of a Granular-Bed Anaerobic Bioresour.
Baffled
Wastewater. (GRABBR) Treating Whisky Distillery
Techno!., 74,
Al-Malah, K.; Azzam, M.O.J.; and Abu-Lail, N.H.
(2000) Olive Mills Effluent (OME)
18
Wastewater
Post-Treatment Using Activated Clay.
Sep. Purif. Techno!., 20, 225.
Alves, M.; Ferreira, E.C.; Amaral, A.L.; Pereira, A.; Novais, J.M.; and Mota, M. Staged and Non-staged Anaerobic Filters: Performance inRelation
(2000)
to Physical and 75,
Biological Characteristics 601.
of Microbial Aggregates.
J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol.
Ayoub, G.M.; Merhebi, F.; Acra, A.; El-Fadel, M.; and Koopman, Bittern for the Treatment of Alkalized
B.
(2000)
Seawater
Industrial Effluents. Water Res.,
34, 640.
Batstone, D.J.; Keller, J.; Newell, R.B.; and Newland, M. Degradation 1. of Complex Wastewater.
(2000a) Modelling Anaerobic Bioresour. Technol., 75,
I: Model Development.
Batstone, D.J.; Keller, J.; Newell, R.B.; and Newland, M. Degradation of Complex Wastewater. Effluent. Bioresour.
(2000b) Modelling Anaerobic
II:Parameter Estimation and Validation Using Technol., 75, 75.
Slaughterhouse
Beitran, F.J; Garcia-Araya, Integrated Chemical
J.F.; and Alvarez, P.M. (2000a) Continuous Flow -Activated (Ozone) Sludge System Treating Combined Environ. Prog., 19, 28.
Agroindustrial-Domestic Wastewater.
Beltran, F.J; Garcia-Araya, Ozone Remediation
J.F.; Rivas, J.; Alvarez, P.M.; and Rodriguez, Phenol Compounds Present
E.
(2000b)
of Some
inFood Processing Subst. Environ. Eng., 35,
Wastewater. 681.
J. Environ. Sei. Health, Part A: Toxic/Hazard.
Beltran-Heredia,
J.; Torregrosa,
J.; Dominguez,
J.R.; and Garcia,
J. (2000a) Aerobic Effect of an Ozonation
Biological Treatment of Black Table Olive Washing Wastewaters: Stage. Process Biochem., 35, 1183.
19
Beltran-Heredia,
J.; Torregrosa,
J.; Dominguez,
J.R.; and Garcia,
J. (2000b) Ozonation
of Black-Table-Olive Pretreatment.
Industrial Wastewaters:
Effect of an Aerobic Biological
J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol., 75, 561.
Beltran-Heredia,
J.; Torregrosa,
J.; Dominguez,
J.R.; and Garcia,
J. (2000c) Treatment Water
of Black-Olive Wastewaters Res., 34, 3515.
by Ozonation
and Aerobic Biological Degradation.
Benitez, F.J.; Beltran-Heredia,
J.; Peres,
J.A.; and Dominguez, and Ozonation
J.R. (2000) Kinetics of J.
p-Hydroxybenzoic Acid Photodecomposition Hazard. Mater, 73, 2, 161.
ina Batch Reactor.
Benitez, F.J.; Beltran-Heredia, Kinetics of Winery Wastes Anaerobic Digestion.
J.; Real, F.J.; and Acero, J.L. (1999a)
Purification Plus
by Ozonation, Anaerobic
Digestion and Ozonation
Subst. Environ.
Eng., 34, 2023.
Benitez, F.J.; Beltran-Heredia, the Ozonation Eng., 21, 459. of Wine
J.; Real, F.J.; and Acero, J.L. (1999b) Enhancement
of
Wastewaters Distillery
by an Aerobic Pretreatment. Bioprocess
Bickers, P.O. and van Oostrom, A.J. Carbon in Meat-Processing
(2000) Availability forDenitrification of Organic Bioresour. Technol., 73, 53.
Wastestreams.
Brinck, J.; Jonsson, A.-S.;
Jonsson, B.; and Lindau, J. (2000) by Fatty Acid.
Influence of pH on the J.Membr. Sei., 164, 1,
Membranes Adsorptive Fouling of Ultrafiltration 187.
Brown, P.; Jefcoat, I.;Parrish, D.; Gill, S.; and Graham, E. (2000) Evaluation of the Adsorptive Capacity of Peanut Hull Pellets forHeavy Metals
Res., 4, 1, 19.
inSolution. Adv. Env.
20
Water Environment Federation. Water Copyright? 2001 by the
Environment
Research,
Volume
73, Number 5 Literature Review 2001.
Buffiere, P.; Bergeon, J.-P.; and Moletta, R.
(2000) The 34, 673.
Inverse Turbulent Bed: A Novel
Bioreactor for Anaerobic Treatment. Water Res.,
Cantor, J.; Sutton, P.M.; Steinheber, R.; and Novachis,
L. (2000)
Industrial
Biotreatment Plant Capacity Expansion and Upgrading throughApplication of Membrane Biomass - Effluent Separation. Proc. Water Environ. Fed. 73rdAnnu. Conf. Exposition [CD-ROM], Anaheim, CA.
Cardoch, L; Day, J.W., Jr.; Rybczyk, J.M.; and Kemp, G.P. Analysis of Using Wetlands Study inDulac,
(2000) An Economic -A Case forTreatment of Shrimp Processing Wastewater 33, 1, 93.
LA. Ecol. Econ.}
Chen, J.J.; McCarty, D.; Slack, D.; and Rundle, H. a Simplified Aerated Technol., 41, 4, 1. Filter (BAF) forOrganics
(2000a)
Full Scale
Case
Studies of
and Nitrogen Removal.
Water Sei.
Chen, L.I.; Carboneil, R.G.; and Serad, G.A. Biological Compounds
(2000) Recovery of Proteins and Other Using Fibrous Materials and
from Food Processing Wastewaters 34, 510.
Polyelectrolytes. Water Res.,
Chittenden, J.A. and Westerhold, Systems Wastes in the Food
D.M.
(2000) Processing
By-Products fromDAF Univ. Ind.
Industry. Proc. 2000 Water Environ. Fed./Purdue
Tech. Conf. [CD-ROM], St. Louis, MO.
Contreras, E.M.; Giannuzzi, Filamentous Microorganism Wastewater. Water Res.,
L.; and Zaritzky, N.E. Sphaerotilus natans
(2000) Growth Kinetics of the ina Model System of a Food Industry
34, 4455.
Cristiani-Urbina, E.; Netzahuatl-Munoz, C; Ruiz-Ordaz, N.; and Galindez-Mayer,
A.R.; Manriquez-Rojas, J. (2000) Cultures.
F.J.; Juarez-Ramirez,
Batch and Fed-batch Cultures for Process Biochem., 35, 649.
the Treatment of Whey with Mixed-yeast
21
Cummings, R.J., and Morris, J.W. (2000) Mobilized of a High StrengthWastewater. [CD-ROM], Anaheim, CA.
Film Technology
(MFT) Treatment
Proc. Water Environ. Fed. 73rdAnnu. Conf. Exposition
Dale, C. J. (2000) Submerged Abattoir Wastewater.
Biotower Technology
forTertiary Nitrificationof Poultry 14, 1, 35.
J. Inst.Water Environ. Manage.,
Daud, W.; Ali,W.; Pore Development
and Sulaiman, M. (2000) Effects of Carbonization inPalm-Shell-Based
Temperature
on
Activated Carbon. Carbon, 38, 1925.
de Berardino, S.; Costa, S.; and Converti, A. Digestion of a Food 71, 261. Wastewater Industry
(2000) Semi-Continuous
Anaerobic Techno!.,
inan Anaerobic
Filter. Bioresour.
del Pozo, R.; Diez, V.; and Beitran, S. Slaughterhouse Wastewater
(2000) Anaerobic
Pre-Treatment of Bioresour. Techno!., 71, 143.
Using Fixed-Film Reactors.
Dinsdale, Anaerobic
R.M.; Premier, G.C.; Co-Digestion
Hawkes,
F.R.; and Hawkes, D.L.
(2000) Two-Stage Using
of Waste
Activated Sludge
and FruitA/egetable Waste
Inclined Tubular Digesters.
Bioresour.
Techno!., 72, 159.
Driessen, W., and Yspeert, P.
(1999) Anaerobic Treatment of Low, Medium, and High
Strength Effluent in theAgro-Industry. Water Sei. Techno!., 40, 8, 221.
Edelmann, W.; Waste
Engeli, H.; and Gradenecker, fromSewage
M.
(2000) Co-Digestion
of Organic Solid
and Sludge
Treatment. Water Sei. Techno!., 41, 3, 213.
Ellis, D.; Gardner, D.; and Jervis, E.
(2000) Dynamic Simulation of Shock-Loading Manufacturing Wastewater. Proc. 2000
Effects on the Treatment of Corn-Sweetener Water Environ. Fed./Purdue Univ. Ind.Wastes
22
Erguder, T.H.; Guven, E.; and Demirer, G.N. Wastes inBatch Reactors. Process Biochem.,
(2000) Anaerobic 36, 243.
Treatment of Olive Mill
Frijters, C.T.M.J.; Vellinga, S.; Jorna, T.; and Mulder, R. Removal
(2000) Extensive Nitrogen
ina New Type of Airlift Reactor. Water Sei. Techno!., 41, 4, 469.
Garcia,
I.G.; Pena,
P.R.J.;
Venceslada,
J.L.B.;
Martin,
A.M.;
Santos,
M.A.M.;
and
Gomez,
E.R.
(2000) Removal
of Phenol Compounds
fromOlive MillWastewater
Using
Phanerochaete candidum.
chrysosporium, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus Biochem., 35, 751.
terreus, and Geotrichum
Process
Gonzalez,
T.; Terron, M.C.; Yague,
S.; Zapico,
E.; Galletti, G.C.;
and Gonzalez,
A.E.
(2000) Pyrolysis/Gas Chromatography/Mass Biotreated Distillery Wastewater Commun. Mass Spectrom.,
Spectrometry Monitoring of Fungal sp. I-62 (CECT 20197). Rapid
Using Trametes
14, 1417.
Gough, R.H.; Samkutty, P.J.; McGrew, P.; Arauz, J.; and Adkinson, R.W. Prediction of Effluent Biochemical Oxygen Demand System.
(2000)
ina Dairy Plant SBR Wastewater Subst. Environ. Eng., 35, 169.
Grabas,
M.
(2000) Organic Matter Removal
fromMeat Processing Wastewater
Using
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactors.
Environ. Prot. Eng., 26, 1, 55.
Gupta, V., and Ali, I. (2000) Utilization of Bagasse the Removal of Copper and Zinc from Wastewater.
Fly Ash
(A Sugar
Industry Waste) 12, 131.
for
Sep. Purif. Techno!.,
Harmand, J.; Manh, A.G.; and Steyer, J.P. Accommodating 177.
(2000)
Identificationand Disturbance Digester. Bioproeess Eng., 23,
Control of a Fluidized Bed Anaerobic
23
Huang J.; Wang, C;
and Jih,C. (2000) Empirical Model and Kinetic Behavior of of Vegetable Waste. J. Environ. Eng., 126, 1019.
Thermophilic Composting
Ince, B.K;
Ince, 0.; Sallis, P.J.; and Anderson, G.K.
(2000a)
Inert COD
Production 34, 3943.
ina
Membrane Anaerobic
Reactor Treating Brewery Wastewater.
Water Res.,
Ince, O.;
Ince, B.K;
and Donnelly, T.
(2000b) Attachment, Strength and Performance Filter Treating DairyWastewater. Water Sei.
of a Porous Media Technol.; 41, 4, 261.
inan Upflow Anaerobic
Islam, M., and Ani, F. (2000) Techno-Economics with Catalytic Treatment to Produce
of Rice Husk Pyrolysis, Conversion Techno!., 73, 67.
Liquid Fuel. Bioresour.
Jeison, D., and Chamy, R.
(1999) Comparison
of the Behaviour of Expanded
Granular
Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) Reactors in Dilute Sludge Bed (EGSB) and Upflow
and Concentrated Wastewater Treatment. Water Sei. Techno!., 40, 91.
Jimenez, L.; Perez, L.; de laTorre, M.; Lopez, F.; and Ariza, J. (2000) Use of Formaldehyde forMaking Wheat Straw Cellulose Pulp. Bioresour. Techno!., 72, 283.
Kalapathy, U.; Proctor, A.; and Shultz, J. (2000) A Simple Method forProduction of Pure Silica fromRice Hull Ash. Bioresour. Techno!., 73, 257.
Kalyuzhnyi, S.V.; Gladchenko, S.S.
M.A.; Sklyar, V.l.; Kurakova, O.V.; and Shcherbakov, under Submesophilic and
(2000) The UASB Treatment of Winery Wastewater Environ. Techno!., 21, 919.
Psychrophilic Conditions.
Keenan,
D. and Sabelnikov, A.
(2000) Biological Augmentation 72, 141.
Eliminates Grease
and
Oil inBakery Wastewater.
Water Environ. Res.,
Khalil, L.; Girgis, B.; and Tawfik, T. (2000) Porosity Characteristics
of Activated Carbons
24
Derived fromOlive Oil Wastes 373.
Impregnated with H3PO4. Adsorpt. Sei. Technol.,
18, 4,
Kim, I.;Kim, D.; and Hyun, S. Concentration 41, 3, 67. on Anaerobic
(2000) Effect of Particle Size and Sodium
Ion
Thermophilic Food Waste
Digestion. Water Sei. Technol.,
Koyuncu,
I.;Turan, M.; Topacik, D.; and Ates, A.
(2000) Application of Low Pressure of Dairy IndustryEffluents.
Nanofiltration Membranes
for the Recovery and Reuse
Water Sei. Technol., 41, 1, 213.
Kuemmel, R.; Robert, J.; Loewen, A.
(2000)
Waste Water Treatment, Improvement of
Water Recycling, and Efficiency in the Dairy Industryby Combined Membrane Processes. Proc. Water Environ. Fed. 73rdAnnu. Conf. Exposition [CD-ROM],
Anaheim, CA.
Lafitte-Trouque, S. and Forster, C.F. Sludge and Confectionery Waste.
(2000) Dual Anaerobic
Co-Digestion
of Sewage
Bioresour.
Technol., 71, 77.
Lalman, J.A. and Bagley, D.M. Linoleic Acid. Water Res.,
(2000) Anaerobic
Degradation
and
Effects of Inhibitory
34, 4220.
Lalov,
I.G.; Guerginov,
1.1.; Krysteva, M.A.; and Fartsov, K. Water Res., 34, 1503.
Waste (2000) Treatment of
Waterfrom
Distilleries with Chitosan.
leRoux, L.D.; Bowers, B.V.; and Lanting, J. (2000) Cost Effective Secondary Clarification of UASB Reactor Effluentwith the Biothane Dissolved Air Flotation Process at a Juice Manufacturing Plant. Proc. Water Environ. Fed. [CD-ROM], Anaheim, CA. 73rdAnnu. Conf. Exposition
Linden, K.G.; Krupa, K.M.; and Harden, CA.
(2000) Optimization and Performance of a
25
Trickling Filter forTreatment of a Snack Water Environ. Fed.
Food Processing
Plant Wastewater.
Proc.
73rdAnnu. Conf. Exposition
[CD-ROM], Anaheim, CA.
Manjunath, N.T.; Mehotra, Slaughterhouse
I.; and Mathur, R.P.
Wastewater (2000) Treatment of 34, 1930.
from
by DAF-UASB
System. Water Res.,
Masghouni, products:
M., and Hassairi, M. (2000) Energy Applications I.The Exhaust Foot Cake. Biomass
of Olive-Oil 18, 3. 257.
IndustryBy?
and Bioenergy,
Nam, K.-D.; Chung, Wastewater Scale.
I.;Young,
J.C.; and Park,W.
(1999) Treatment of Distillery Reactor in Industrial
Using a Thermophilic High-Rate Hybrid Anaerobic
J.Microbiol. Biotechnol., 9, 737.
Navarro, A.; del C.-Sepulveda,
S.; and Rubino, M. (2000)
Bio-Conversion Waste Manage.,
of Vinasse 20, 581.
from theAlcoholic Fermentation of Sugar Cane Molasses.
Nguyen, A-L; Duff, S.J.B.; and Sheppard, Based on Dissolved Oxygen
J.D.
(2000) Application of Feedback Batch Reactor
Control
to a Fixed-Film Sequencing 72, 75.
forTreatment
of Brewery Wastewater.
Nikolavcic, B. and Svardal, K. (2000) Biological Treatment of Potato-Starch Wastewater Design and Application of an Aerobic Selector. Water Sei. Techno!., 41, 9, 251.
Pandey, A.; Soccol, C; Agro-Industrial Residues.
Nigam, P.; and Soccol, V. I:Sugarcane Bagasse.
(2000a) Bioresour.
Biotechnological
Potential of
Techno!., 74, 69.
Pandey, A.; Soccol, C; (2000b) Biotechnological Bioresour.
Nigam, P.; Soccol, V.; Vandenberghe, Potential of Agro-Industrial Residues.
L; and Mohan, R. II:Cassava Bagasse.
Techno!., 74, 81.
26
Pierson, J.A. and Pavlostathis, Sequencing Wastewater. Batch Reactors
S.G.
(2000) Real-Time Monitoring and Control of Treatment of a Poultry Processing
forSecondary 72, 585.
Wastewater Prendl, L. and Nikolavcic, B. (2000) Aerobic Treatment of Industrial Experiences 241. with the Dosage of Nitrogen and Phosphorous.
Water Sei. Technol., 41, 9,
Rajeshwari,
K.V.; Balakrishnan, M.; Kansal, A.; Lata, K.; and Kishore, V.V.N. Digestion Technology for Industrial Wastewater
(2000)
State-of-the-Art of Anaerobic Treatment. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev., 4, 2, 135.
Ramasamy,
E.V., andAbbasi,
S.A.
(2000)
Energy Recovery
fromDairy Waste-waters: Appl. Energy, 65, 1,
Impacts of Biofilm Support Systems on Anaerobic

91.
CST Reactors.
Robles, A.; Lucas, R.; de Cienfuegos, and Detoxification of Wastewaters Isolated from Wastewater Disposal
G.A.; and Galvez, A.
(2000) Biomass
Production
from the Olive Oil Industryby Strains of Penicillium Ponds. Bioresour. Technol., 74, 217.
Ross, C.C.;
Smith, B.M.; and Valentine, G.E.,
Jr. (2000) Rethinking Dissolved Air
Flotation (DAF) Design Fed./Purdue
for Industrial Pretreatment. Proc. 2000 Water Environ. Tech. Conf. [CD-ROM], St. Louis, MO.
Univ. Ind.Wastes
Sayadi, S.; Allouche, N.; Jaoua, M.; and Aloui, F. Molecular-Mass Biochem., Polyphenols
(2000) Detrimental Effects of High Biotreatment. Process
on Olive MillWastewater
35, 725.
Scheider, D.; Schneider, R.; and Biscof, F.
(2000)
Thermal Hydrolysis (TDH) as a Water Sei. Technol., 41, 3,
Pretreatment Method for the Digestion of Organic Waste. 181.
27
Sharma, V.; Testa, C;
Lastella, G.; Cornacchia, for Anaerobic
G.; and Comparato, M.
(2000) Appl. Energy,
Inclined-Plug-Flow Reactor 65, 1, 173.
Digestion of Semi-Solid Waste.
Smith, J.W., and Crites, R.W. Wastewater Land Application.
(2000)
Impacts of Salt Content of Food Processing 73rdAnnu. Conf. Exposition
Proc. Water Environ. Fed.
[CD-ROM], Anaheim, CA.
Upendrakumar, K.C., and Bachman, T.C. UASB/EGSB
(2000) Reduction
inEffluent SS
from 73rd
Reactors Treating Beverage Wastewater. [CD-ROM], Anaheim, CA.
Proc. Water Environ. Fed.
Annu. Conf. Exposition
Vandenberghe,
L.P.S.;
Soccol,
C.R.; Pandey, A.; and Lebeault, J.-M. (2000) Solid
State Fermentation for the Synthesis of Citric Acid by Aspergillus niger. Bioresour. Techno!., 74, 175.
van den Broek, R.; van den Burg, T.; van Wijk, A.; and Turkenburg, W. Electricity Generation from Eucalyptus and Bagasse
(2000) A
by Sugar Mills inNicaragua:
Comparison with Fuel Oil Electricity Generation Impacts and Environmental Emissions. Biomass
on the Basis of Costs, Macro-Economic and Bioenergy, 19, 5, 311.
Vidal, G.; Carvalho, A.; Mendez,
R.; and Lema, J.M. (2000)
Influence of the Contents Bioresour.
in
Fats and Proteins on theAnaerobic Techno!., 74, 231.
Biodegradability of DairyWastewaters.
Vijayaraghavan, Filter inSeries
K., and Ramanujam,
T. K.
(2000) Performance of Anaerobic Bioprocess Eng., 22, 109.
Contact
forTreating Distillery Spentwash.
Villaverde, S.; Garcia Encina, P.A.; Lacalle, M.L.; and Fdz-Polanco, Operational Strategy forTotal Nitrogen Removal
F.
(2000) New Highly
from Industrial Wastewaters
28
Loaded with Nitrogen. Water Sei. Techno!., 41, 12, 85.
Vossoughi, and
M.; Alemzadeh,
I.;Borghei, M.; Farhadian, M.; Kashefeeolas, fromOrganic Industrial Waste
M.; Miller, D.; Using a
Iranpour, R.
(2000) Producing Methane Reactor.
Fixed Bed Anaerobic Wastes
Proc. 2000 Water Environ. Fed./Purdue
Univ. Ind.
Wong, A.; Chua, H.; Lo,W.; Wastes Industry
and Yu, P. (2000)
Synthesis of Bioplastics
from Food
with Activated Sludge Biomass.
Water Sei. Techno!., 41, 12, 55.
Wu,
F.-C; Tseng, R.-L;
and Juang, R.-S. of Chitosans
(2000) Comparative Adsorption of Metal and Prepared from FisheryWastes. J. Hazard.
Dye on Flake- and Bead-Types Mater, 73, 1, 63.
Yu, H.; Wilson,
F.; and Tay, J.-H. (2000) Prediction of the Effect of Recirculation on the Filters by Empirical Models. Water Environ. Res., 72, 217.
Effluent Quality of Anaerobic Yun, Y.-S.;
Park, J.I.; Suh, M.S.;
and Park, J.M. (2000) Treatment of Food Wastes Bioresour. Technol., 73, 21.
Using Slurry-Phase
Decomposition.
Zhang, Y.; Yu, J.; and Wang, and Simultaneously Kexue, 21, 3, 97.
Wastewater J. (2000) Treatment of
fromGrains Washing
Cultivating Candida
tropicalis as a Single Cell Protein. Huanjing
Zheng, Z., and Shetty, K. (2000) Solid State Production of Polygalacturonase Lentinus edodes Using Fruit Processing Wastes. Process Biochem., 35, 825.
by
29

Food-Processing Wastes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Food-Processing Wastes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FOOD-PROCESSING WASTES Review by: Mark E. Grismer, Charles C. Ross, G. Edward Valentine Jr., Brandon M.

Jr.,Brandon M. Smith, James

to be an area of great research

The challenge of meeting theworld's

optimizing existing technologies alternative uses ofwaste sectors.

treatment,while novel approaches

products continues to be a focus of many food industry to combine the

This year the Literature Review Committee has chosen

sections of FERMENTATION and FOOD-PROCESSING WASTES under the title of the

solids and phenolic compounds.

treatment concerns are often addressed inengineering and science

in industrytrade journals As in the past,

the research work and experience

wastewater infermentation industry

sludge blanket treatment

have found that brewery wastewater

reactor treatment methods

using different suspension

(2000) used an aerobic fixed-filmsequencing control system based

batch reactor (SBR) with a feedback in the mixed liquor for

on dissolved oxygen (D.O.) concentration

treatment of brewery wastewater.

to 92% after 1.5 to 3 h and resulted inbetween

bioreactor, Zhang et al. (2000) considered

Use of upflow anaerobic

sludge blanket (UASB)

internaleffluent circulation (IC). The

(COD)/L ethanol and 3 000 mg removal forethanol from both solids

but found that the EGSB

reactor treating brewery

having practically no inertsoluble COD.

Soluble microbial products of 2.2% of the influent COD.

in terms of COD were found to be an average

operation times. At a maximum organic COD

removal efficiencies of no less than 97% permeate were achieved

during steady-state operation.

into winery wastewater

largely focused on the extension of to treatment of brewery via anaerobic

those anaerobic wastewater. processes

and aerobic methods

considering treatment ofwinery wastewater

performance of two laboratory UASB

reactors treatingwinery wastewater Total COD

There was also substantial decolorization of thewastewater

Buffiere et al. (2000) obtained 75 %

The carrier particles had high specific surface area

solids (VS)/g solids. anaerobic

Harmand et al. (2000) described

digester to stabilize production of biogas based The researchers

used a linearmodel of gas outflow rate and

presented by Cummings and Morris

costs and the ability to convert pre-existing aerobic basins.

organic content in winery wastewater series by an ozonation ozonation process,

process, an aerobic degradation, and another ozonation.

the effects of temperature, pH and presence

the effects of inhibition.

of 5.45 to 11.5 kg removed the of Up to

produced biogas at rates of 0.57 to 0.69 m3/kg COD to 68%.

(CH4) contents of 59%

Akkuna and Clark (2000) described

baffled reactor combining the advantages

such as sulfate, total sulfide digestion on treatment acheieved when treating an

influent withCOD concentrations of 1 500 mg COD/L to 19 000 mg COD/L.