Professional Documents
Culture Documents
, 1(3):
215-224,
Summer
2015
Global
J. Environ.
Sci. Manage.,
1(3): 215-224, Summer 2015
ISSN 2383 - 3572
INRA, UR0050, Laboratoire de Biotechnologie de lEnvironnement, Avenue des Etangs, Narbonne, F11100, France
2
ABSTRACT: This study investigated the effect, on reactor performance and biomass retention inside the bed, of the
material used to make the supports of anaerobic fixed-bed reactors. Three inert supports of similar shape but made of
three different materials polyvinyl chloride, polypropylene, high-density polyethylene were manufactured and used.
All three supports had the same specific surface area but different relative densities. Three identical 10 L lab-scale upflow anaerobic fixed-bed reactors were filled (80% of the working volume) each respectively with polyvinyl chloride,
polypropylene and polyethylene support, and fed with vinasse (44 g total COD/L) for 140 days at 35 C. The organic
loading rates were increased from 0.5 g/L.d. to the maximum acceptable by each reactor. Fairly similar maximum organic
loading rates were reached for each type of support, with values above 20 g of COD/L.d. and more than 80 % soluble
chemical oxygen demand removal efficiency. A very large amount of biomass was entrapped and attached in all the
supports and represented more than 95% of the total biomass inside the reactors. In terms of performance and biomass
accumulation, this study demonstrated quite similar behavior for anaerobic fixed-bed reactors with supports made of
different materials, which suggests that the nature of the material used to make the supports has no major influence. The
chemical nature of the support material clearly has negligible effect and thus the size, shape, and porosity of the support
must be more influential.
Keywords: Anaerobic fixed-bed reactors (AFBRs), Organic loading rates (OLR), Polyethylene (HDPE), Polypropylene
(PP), Polyvinyl chloride (PVC), Specific biomass activity, Vinasse
INTRODUCTION
High-rate anaerobic treatment of wastewater is a
commonly accepted practice in the industry due to
its low energy consumption, methane production
which can be used to produce energy and a lower
sludge production than aerobic processes (Di
Berardino et al., 1997; Weiland and Wulfert, 1986).
These systems are extremely efficient in the treatment
of industrial and highly polluted wastewaters with
*Corresponding Author Email: bisen0102@gmail.com
Tel.: +91-124-2334015; Fax: +91-124-233-7637
Note. This manuscript was submitted on March 10, 2015;
approved on May 1, 2015; published online on June 1, 2015.
Discussion period open until October 1, 2015; discussion can
be performed online on the Website Show article section
for this article. This paper is part of the Global Journal of
Environmental Science and Management (GJESM).
216
Support media
Three support media, each made of a different plastic
material (PVC, PP and HDPE), were used to fill the filter
beds. Each cylindrically shaped support had a
dimension of 30/35 cm x 29 cm and a specific surface
area of 320 m2/m3, as shown in Fig. 6A. The relative
densities were 1.35, 0.90, and 0.95 for PVC, PP and HDPE,
respectively.
Experimental design
A classical start-up strategy was followed and
the OLR was increased from a low value of 0.5 g/L.d.
(for avoiding reactor overloading during the first day
of start-up) to the maximum OLR acceptable by each
reactor, that is to say the maximum OLR with a minimum
COD removal efficiency of 80 %. The OLR was
increased 15-20% each week on condition that COD
removal efficiency was 80% or more. To increase the
OLR, the HRT was decreased by increasing the feed
flow-rate while maintaining the feed concentration
constant throughout the experiment.
217
Effect
of the
chemicalSci.
nature
of fixed-bed
reactor support
Global
J. Environ.
Manage.,
1(3): 215-224,
Summermaterials
2015
Fig. 1: Evolution over time of OLR, soluble COD and purification efficiency of the
anaerobic fixed-bed reactor filled with supports made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
Fig. 2: Evolution over time of OLR, soluble COD and purification efficiency of the
anaerobic fixed-bed reactor filled with supports made of polypropylene (PP)
218
Global
J. Environ.
Sci. Sci.
Manage.,
1(3):1(3):
215-224,
Summer
Global
J. Environ.
Manage.,
, Summer
20152015
Fig. 3: Evolution over time of OLR, soluble COD and purification efficiency
of the anaerobic fixed-bed reactor filled with supports made of highdensity polyethylene (HDPE)
219
Fig. 4: Acetate and propionate accumulation during anaerobic digestion of vinasse in fixed-bed reactors packed with
(A) PVC (B) PP and (C) HDPE.
Fig. 5: Changes in the volatile suspended solids concentration at the outlet of three reactors packed with (A) PVC (B)
PP and (C) HDPE.
220
Table 1: Overview of the biomass distribution inside the reactors and specific activity
Reactor with
PVC modules
Reactor with
PP modules
Reactor with
HDPE modules
Number of modules
229
213
219
8.58
4.83
5.0
406
387
368
198
192
184
48.7
49.7
50
1.81
1.92
1.75
7.1
7.3
6.9
12
12.4
10.4
7.5
8.4
6.9
24
23
22
86
80
86
1.17
0.92
1.15
Attached/entrapped biomass:
221
Effect
of the
chemicalSci.
nature
of fixed-bed
reactor support
Global
J. Environ.
Manage.,
1(3): 215-224,
Summermaterials
2015
Fig. 6: Photograph of support module (A) before biomass entrapment (B) PVC module
after biomass entrapment (C) PP module after biomass entrapment and (D)
HDPE module after biomass entrapment.
CONCLUSION
Three anaerobic fixed-bed reactors of 10 L, each
one filled with loose 3-cm supports, were followed
for 140 days to study the influence of the chemical
nature of the support on reactor performance and
biomass accumulation. The supports had the same
shape but each one was made with a different
material, PVC, PP or HDPE. The results did not show
significantly different behavior and after four months
of operation all three reactors were able to reach an
OLR above 20 g COD/L.d. with more than 80 %
removal efficiency. Quite a high quantity of biomass
was entrapped inside the reactors (between 370 and
410 g solids/reactor) and there was no major
222
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The work was funded through Project No. 7109
by the Indo-French Centre for the promotion of
advanced research (CEFIPRA, India).
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that there is no conflict of
interests regarding the publication of this manuscript.
REFERENCES
Ac harya, B .K.; Moh ana, S.; Mad amwa r, D., (2008 ).
Anaerobic treatment of distillery spent wash-A study on
upflow anaerobic fixed film bioreactor, Bioresource Tech.,
(99): 4621-4626 (6 pages).
APHA, (2005). Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 21 ed., Washington, D.C., USA:
American Public Health Association, American Water
Works Association, Water Environment Federation.
Banu, J.R.; Kaliappan, S.; Beck, D., (2006). High rate
anaerobic treatment of Sago wastewater using HUASB
with PUF as carrier, Processing, 3(1): 69-77 (9 pages).
Chen, Y.; Cheng, J.J.; Creamer, K.S., (2008). Inhibition of
anaerobic digestion process: A review, Bioresource Tech.,
(99): 4044-4064 (21 pages).
Choi, Y.S.; Shin, E.B.; Chang, H.N.; Chung, H.K., (1989).
Start-up and operation of anaerobic biofilters with packing
alternatives, Bioprocess Eng., (4): 275-281 (8 pages).
Connau ghton, S .; Collins, G. ; OFlah erty, V., (2006 ).
Development of mic robial commu nity structu re and
activity in a high-rate anaerobic bioreactor at 18 C, Water
Res., (40): 1009-1017 (18 pages).
Di Berardino, S.; Bersi, R.; Converti, A.; Rovatti, M., (1997).
Starting-up an anaerobic hybrid filter for the fermentation
of wastewater from food industry, Bioprocess Eng., (16):
65-70 (6 pages).
Fang, C.; O-Thong, S.; Boe, K.; Angelidaki, I., (2011).
Comparison of UASB and EGSB reactors performance,
for treatment of raw and deoiled palm oil mill effluent
(POME), J. Hazardous Mater., 189(1-2): 229-234 (6
pa ges ).
Frankin, R. J., (2001). Full-scale experiences with anaerobic
treatment of industrial wastewater, Water Sci. Tech.,
88(8): 1-6 (6 pages).
Ganesh, R.; Rajinikanth, R.; Thanikal, J. V.; Ramanujam, R.
A.; Torrijos, M., (2010). Anaerobic treatment of winery
wastewater in fixed bed reactors, Bioprocess Biosystems
Eng., 33(5): 619-28 (10 pages).
Hickey, R.F.; Wu, W.M.; Veiga, M.C.; Jones, R., (1991).
Start-up, operation, monitoring and control of high-rate
anaerobic treatment systems, Water Sci. Tech., (24): 207255 (49 pages).
Lee, S.; Lee, H.; Lee, S.; Chitapornpan, S.; Chiemchaisri,
C.; Polprasert, C.; Ahn, K., (2007). Media configuration
and recirculation of upflow anaerobic floating filter for
piggery wastewater treatment, Korean J. Chem. Eng.,
24(6): 980-988 (9 pages).
Liu, R.; Tian, Q.; Chen, J., (2010). The developments of
anaerobic baffled reactor for wastewater treatment: A
review, African J. Biotech., 9(11): 1535-1542 (8 pages).
223
224