Recent advances in membrane fouling control in wastewater treatment processes

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 173 - 179, 10.10.2019

Amar Cemanovic Neslihan Manav Abdullah Kızılet Özer Çınar

Öz

Membrane
bioreactors (MBRs) are systems performing biological wastewater treatment with
membranes utilized for solids separation. These systems have a wide range of
applications since they offer some important advantages over conventional
processes (e.g. high solids removal, low sludge production etc.). One of their
main drawbacks, however, is the occurrence of membrane fouling – the occlusion
of membrane pores by the various components found in the mixed liquor. Factors
contributing to this phenomenon are various and stem from all the aspects of
the treatment process, including membrane-, biomass- and wastewater
characteristics as well as operating conditions. Efficient fouling control
requires a thorough insight into reactor operation and the mechanisms leading
to membrane fouling in the first place. While there are some universal
remedies, proper tackling of this problem requires an individual approach
tailored to the system of concern, since best results originate from the
utilization of several methods together. This review outlines novel and
emerging methods having a potential to contribute to sustainable and economical
membrane fouling mitigation in the future.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Biological processes, wastewater treatment, membrane bioreactors, membrane fouling

Destekleyen Kurum

Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (Tübitak)

Proje Numarası

2215 Graduate Scholarship Programme

Teşekkür

Author Amar Ćemanović is supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (Tübitak) through the 2215 Graduate Scholarship Programme.

Kaynakça

• [1]. C.V. Smith, D.D. Gregorio and R.M. Talcott, “The use of ultrafiltraiton membranes for activated sludge separation”, 24th Annual Purdue Industrial Waste Conference, Lafayette, IN pp. 130-1310, 1969.
• [2]. S. Judd, “The status of membrane bioreactor technology“, Trends in Biotechnology, 26, 2, 109 – 116,. 2008.
• [3]. H.-D. Park, I.-S. Chang and K.-J. Lee, Principles of Membrane Bioreactors for Wastewater Treatment, Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, 2015.
• [4]. P. Le-Clech, V. Chen, T.A. Fane, “Fouling in membrane bioreactors used in wastewater treatment.” J. Membr. Sci. 284 (1), 17–53, 2006.
• [5]. M. Bagheri, S.A. Mirbagheri, “Critical review of fouling mitigation strategies in membrane bioreactors treating water and wastewater.” Bioresource Technology 258, 318–334, 2018.
• [6]. T.B. Rasmussen, M. Givskov, “Quorum sensing inhibitors: a bargain of effects.” Microbiology 152 (4), 895–904, 2006.
• [7]. D.M Roche, J.T. Byers, D.S. Smith, et al., “Communications blackout? Do N-acylhomoserine-lactone-degrading enzymes have any role in quorum sensing?” Microbiology 150 (7), 2023–2028, 2004.
• [8]. K.-M. Yeon, W.-S. Cheong, H.-S. Oh, et al., “Quorum sensing: a new biofouling control paradigm in a membrane bioreactor for advanced wastewater treatment.” Environ. Sci. Technol. 43 (2), 380–385, 2008.
• [9]. I.P. Molobela, “Protease and amylase enzymes for biofilm removal and degradation of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens bacteria.” Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. 4 (14), 1515–1524, 2010.
• [10]. M. Loiselle, K.W. Anderson, “The use of cellulase in inhibiting biofilm formation from organisms commonly found on medical implants.” Biofouling 19 (2), 77–85, 2003.
• [11]. S. Te Poele, J. Van der Graaf, “Enzymatic cleaning in ultrafiltration of wastewater treatment plant effluent.” Desalination 179 (1–3), 73–81, 2005.
• [12]. A. Branch, T. Trinh, G. Carvajal, et al., “Hazardous events in membrane bioreactors–Part 3: impacts on microorganism log removal efficiencies.” J. Membr. Sci. 497, 514–523, 2016.
• [13]. R.M. Chaudhry, K.L. Nelson, J.r.E. Drewes, “Mechanisms of pathogenic virus removal in a full-scale membrane bioreactor.” Environ. Sci. Technol. 49 (5), 2815–2822, 2015.
• [14]. S. Purnell, J. Ebdon, A. Buck, et al., “Bacteriophage removal in a full-scale membrane bioreactor (MBR)–implications for wastewater reuse.” Water Res. 73, 109–117, 2015.
• [15]. W. Den, C.-J. Wang, “Removal of silica from brackish water by electrocoagulation pretreatment to prevent fouling of reverse osmosis membranes.” Sep. Purif. Technol. 59 (3), 318–325, 2008.
• [16]. K. Bani-Melhem, M. Elektorowicz, “Development of a novel submerged membrane electro-bioreactor (SMEBR): performance for fouling reduction.” Environ. Sci. Technol. 44 (9), 3298–3304, 2010.
• [17]. L. Liu, J. Liu, B. Gao, B., et al., “Fouling reductions in a membrane bioreactor using an intermittent electric field and cathodic membrane modified by vapor phase polymerized pyrrole.” J. Membr. Sci. 394, 202–208, 2012.
• [18]. J.-P. Chen, C.-Z. Yang, J.-H. Zhou, et al., “Study of the influence of the electric field on membrane flux of a new type of membrane bioreactor.” Chem. Eng. J. 128 (2), 177–180, 2007.
• [19]. O. Kulesha, Z. Maletskyi, H. Ratnaweera, “State-of-the-art of membrane flux enhancement in membrane bioreactor”. Cogent Engineering, 5: 1489700, 2018.
• [20]. M.A.H. Johir, R. Aryal, S. Vigneswaran, et al., “Influence of supporting media in suspension on membrane fouling reduction in submerged membrane bioreactor (SMBR).” Journal of Membrane Science, 374(1–2), 121–128, 2011.
• [21]. M.A. Johir, S. Shanmuganathan, S. Vigneswaran, et al., (2013), “Performance of submerged membrane bioreactor (SMBR) with and without the addition of the different particle sizes of GAC as suspended medium.” Bioresource Technology, 141, 13–18, 2013.
• [22]. D.-Y. Zuo, H.-J. Li, H.-T. Liu, et al., “A study on submerged rotating MBR for wastewater treatment and membrane cleaning.” Korean J. Chem. Eng. 27 (3), 881–885, 2010.
• [23]. T. Jiang, H. Zhang, D. Gao, et al., “Fouling characteristics of a novel rotating tubular membrane bioreactor.” Chem. Eng. Process.: Process Intensif. 62, 39–46, 2012.
• [24]. T. Jiang, H. Zhang, H. Qiang, et al., “Start-up of the anammox process and membrane fouling analysis in a novel rotating membrane bioreactor.” Desalination 311, 46–53, 2013.
• [25]. L. M. Ruiz, J. I. Perez, A. Gómez et al., “Ultrasonic irradiation for ultrafiltration membrane cleaning in MBR systems: operational conditions and consequences.” Water Sci Technol, 75 (4): 802-812., 2016.
• [26]. C. Juntawang, C. Rongsayamanont, E. Khan, “Entrapped cells-based-anaerobic membrane bioreactor treating domestic wastewater: performances, fouling, and bacterial community structure.” Chemosphere 187, 147–155, 2017.
• [27]. L.H. Kim, Y. Jung, S.-J. Kim, et al., “Use of rhamnolipid biosurfactant for membrane biofouling prevention and cleaning.” Biofouling 31 (2), 211–220, 2015.
• [28]. L. Qin, G. Zhang, Q. Meng, et al., “Enhanced submerged membrane bioreactor combined with biosurfactant rhamnolipids: performance for frying oil degradation and membrane fouling reduction.” Bioresour. Technol. 126, 314–320, 2012.
• [29]. I. Kolodkin-Gal, D. Romero, S.G. Cao, et al., “D-Amino Acids Trigger Biofilm Disassembly.” Science 328 (5978), 2010.
• [30]. H.S. Kim, H.D. Park, “Ginger Extract Inhibits Biofilm Formation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa PA14.” PLoS One 8 (9), 2013.
• [31]. T. Bjarnsholt, P.O. Jensen, T.B. Rasmussen, et al. “Garlic blocks quorum sensing and promotes rapid clearing of pulmonary Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections.” Microbiol. Sgm 151, 2005.
• [32]. H. Wu, B. Lee, L. Yang, et al., “Effects of ginseng on Pseudomonas aeruginosa motility and biofilm formation. Fems Immunol.” Med. Microbiol. 62 (1), 2011.
• [33]. U.A. Pereira, L.C.A. Barbosa, C.R.A. Maltha, et al., “Gamma-Alkylidene-gamma-lactones and isobutylpyrrol- 2(5H)-ones analogues to rubrolides as inhibitors of biofilm formation by Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.” Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 24 (8), 1052, 2008-2008, 2014.
• [34]. F. Meng, S. Zhang, Y. Oh, et al., “Fouling in membrane bioreactors: An updated review.” Water Research 114: 151-180, 2017.