Issue

Vol. 26 No. 16 (2014): Vol 26 Issue 16

Copyright (c) 2014 AJC

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Effectiveness of Waste Activated Sludge Solubilization Treated by Sonication, Thermal and Acid-Alkali Adjustment

https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2014.16688
Xiaoxia Wang
State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Environmental Risk Assessment and Control on Chemical Process, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, P.R. China;College of Resource and Environmental Engineering, East China University of Science and Technology, No. 130, Mei Long Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200237, P.R. China
Shuguang Lu
State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Environmental Risk Assessment and Control on Chemical Process, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, P.R. China;College of Resource and Environmental Engineering, East China University of Science and Technology, No. 130, Mei Long Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200237, P.R. China
Zhaofu Qiu
State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Environmental Risk Assessment and Control on Chemical Process, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, P.R. China;College of Resource and Environmental Engineering, East China University of Science and Technology, No. 130, Mei Long Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200237, P.R. China
Weichi Ying
College of Resource and Environmental Engineering, East China University of Science and Technology, No. 130, Mei Long Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200237, P.R. China

Corresponding Author(s) : Shuguang Lu

lvshuguang@ecust.edu.cn

Asian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 26 No. 16 (2014): Vol 26 Issue 16

Abstract

Solubilization performance using sonication, thermal and acid-alkali adjustment in batch treatment of waste activated sludge (WAS) samples were evaluated. By sonication, the organics (measured as COD) and nutrient releases from waste activated sludge increased with treatment time (up to 60 min) and intensity (0.167, 0.330 and 0.500 W/mL); while, by thermal treatment, the releases increased with treatment time (up to 3 h) and temperature (50, 70 and 90 ºC). Organic-N of the supernatant accounted for most of the total nitrogen released from the waste activated sludge, followed by NH3-N and trace amounts of nitrate and nitrite; orthophosphorus. was the predominant form of the released total phosphorus. The molecular weight distribution of soluble organics, BOD5/COD and C/N data of the supernatant suggest that it can be returned to the biological aerobic unit for treatment without any negative effect. The sludge treatment by adjusting pH to 3-10 was unable to cause substantial release of organic and nutrient species; at a higher pH of 12 for 4 h, the releases were still too few to result in a significant reduction of the waste activated sludge volume. Among the three treatments, sonication shows an attractive process for waste activated sludge solubilization.

Keywords

Waste activated sludge (WAS) Sludge solubilization Sonication Thermal treatment Acid-alkali adjustment
Wang, X., Lu, S., Qiu, Z., & Ying, W. (2014). Effectiveness of Waste Activated Sludge Solubilization Treated by Sonication, Thermal and Acid-Alkali Adjustment. Asian Journal of Chemistry, 26(16), 5186–5194. https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2014.16688
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Y.X. Zhao, J. Yin, H.L. Yu, N. Han and F.J. Tian, Water Sci. Technol., 56, 167 (2007); doi:10.2166/wst.2007.710.
  2. J. Kopp, J. Müller, N. Dichtl and J. Schwedes, Water Sci. Technol., 36, 129 (1997); doi:10.1016/S0273-1223(97)00694-X.
  3. C.P. Chu, B. Chang, G.S. Liao, D.S. Jean and D.J. Lee, Water Res., 35, 1038 (2001); doi:10.1016/S0043-1354(00)00338-9.
  4. E. Gonze, S. Pillot, E. Valette, Y. Gonthier and A. Bernis, Chem. Eng. Process., 42, 965 (2003); doi:10.1016/S0255-2701(03)00003-5.
  5. C. Bougrier, H. Carrère and J.P. Delgenès, Chem. Eng. J., 106, 163 (2005); doi:10.1016/j.cej.2004.11.013.
  6. S. Vaxelaire, E. Gonze, G. Merlin and Y. Gonthier, Environ. Technol., 29, 1307 (2008); doi:10.1080/09593330802379649.
  7. W. Saktaywin, H. Tsuno, H. Nagare, T. Soyama and J. Weerapakkaroon, Water Res., 39, 902 (2005); doi:10.1016/j.watres.2004.11.035.
  8. Y. Suzuki, T. Kondo, K. Nakagawa, S. Tsuneda, A.A. Hirata, Y. Shimizu and Y. Inamori, Water Sci. Technol., 53, 107 (2006); doi:10.2166/wst.2006.179.
  9. M. Rocher, G. Roux and G. Goma, Water Sci. Technol., 44, 437 (2001).
  10. S. Saby, M. Djafer and G. Chen, Water Res., 36, 656 (2002); doi:10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00259-7.
  11. A.A. Atchley and L.A. Crum, in ed.: K. S. Suslick, Acoustic Cavitation and Bubble Dynamics, in Ultrasound-Its Chemical, Physical, and Biological Effects, VCH Publishers, Weinheim (1988).
  12. H. Monnier, A.M. Wilhelm and H. Delmas, Chem. Eng. Sci., 54, 2953 (1999); doi:10.1016/S0009-2509(98)00335-2.
  13. A. Tiehm, K. Nickel and U. Neis, Water Sci. Technol., 36, 121 (1997); doi:10.1016/S0273-1223(97)00676-8.
  14. Y.C. Chiu, C.N. Chang, W.S. Huang and A.C. Chao, J. Chin. Inst. Environ. Eng., 7, 25 (1997).
  15. F. Wang, S. Lu and M. Ji, Ultrason. Sonochem., 13, 334 (2006); doi:10.1016/j.ultsonch.2005.04.008.
  16. F. Wang, Y. Wang and M. Ji, J. Hazard. Mater., 123, 145 (2005); doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.03.033.
  17. K.Y. Show, T.H. Mao and D.J. Lee, Water Res., 41, 4741 (2007); doi:10.1016/j.watres.2007.07.017.
  18. T. Mao, S.Y. Hong, K.Y. Show, J.H. Tay and D.J. Lee, Water Sci. Technol., 50, 91 (2004).
  19. T. Xue and X. Huang, J. Environ. Sci. (China), 19, 1153 (2007); doi:10.1016/S1001-0742(07)60188-0.
  20. H.Y. Yuan, Y.G. Chen, H.X. Zhang, S. Jiang, Q. Zhou and G.W. Gu, Environ. Sci. Technol., 40, 2025 (2006); doi:10.1021/es052252b.
  21. M.L. Cai, J.X. Liu and Y.S. Wei, Environ. Sci. Technol., 38, 3195 (2004); doi:10.1021/es0349204.
  22. B. Xiao and J. Liu, Environ. Sci., 27, 319 (2006).
  23. P. Camacho, S. Deleris, V. Geaugey, P. Ginestet and E. Paul, Water Sci. Technol., 46, 79 (2002).
  24. E. Dulekgurgen, S. Doğruel, Ő. Karahan and D. Orhon, Water Res., 40, 273 (2006); doi:10.1016/j.watres.2005.10.032.
  25. C. Sophonsiri and E. Morgenroth, Chemosphere, 55, 691 (2004); doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2003.11.032.
  26. L. Clesceri, A. Greenberg and A. Eaton, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, APHA, Washington, DC, edn 20 (2001).
  27. T. Leiviskä, H. Nurmesniemi, R. Pöykiö, J. Rämö, T. Kuokkanen and J. Pellinen, Water Res., 42, 3952 (2008); doi:10.1016/j.watres.2008.06.016.
  28. C.P. Leslie Grady, G.T. Daigger and H.C. Lim, Biological Wastewater Treatment, Marcell Dekker, New York, USA, edn 2, Revised and Expanded (1999).
  29. G. Zhang, P. Zhang, J. Yang and Y. Chen, J. Hazard. Mater., 145, 515 (2007); doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.01.133.
  30. A. Kuroda, N. Takiguchi, T. Gotanda, K. Nomura, J. Kato, T. Ikeda and H. Ohtake, Biotechnol. Bioeng., 78, 333 (2002); doi:10.1002/bit.10205.
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0