Comparing heterotrophic and hydrogen-based autotrophic denitrification reactors for effluent water quality and post-treatment

• Published in: Water science & technology. Water supply Vol. 12; no. 2; pp. 227 - 233
• Main Authors: YOUNENG TANG, ZIV-EL, Michal, RITTMANN, Bruce E, MEYER, Kerry, CHEN ZHOU, JUNG HUN SHIN, CHANG HOON AHN, MCQUARRIE, James, CANDELARIA, Daniel, SWAIM, Paul, SCOTT, Rick
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London International Water Association 01.01.2012; IWA Publishing
• Subjects: Applied sciences; Biodegradability; Biodegradation; Biofilms; Bioreactors; Buildings. Public works; Denitrification; Dissolved organic carbon; Dissolved oxygen; Drinking water; Effluents; Exact sciences and technology; Groundwater; Groundwater pollution; Nitrates; Nitrogen dioxide; Ozone; Reactors; Turbidity; Water purification; Water quality; Water quality standards; Water supply. Pipings. Water treatment; Water treatment; heterotrophic denitrification; Heterotrophy; post treatment; Water quality; Denitrification; Autotrophy; Reactor; autotrophic denitrification; Comparative study
• ISSN: 1606-9749; 1607-0798
• DOI: 10.2166/ws.2012.138

This work compares a pilot-scale H2-based membrane biofilm reactor (MBfR) and a pilot-scale packed-bed heterotrophic reactor (PBHR) for denitrification of nitrate-contaminated groundwater. The comparison includes the effluent water quality of the denitrification reactors (NO3−, NO2−, dissolved oxygen, SO42−, (biodegradable) dissolved organic carbon, heterotrophic plate counts (HPC), turbidity, NH4+, and pH), and the impact of post-treatment on water quality. At the same nitrate carrier-surface loading, effluent water quality was generally better directly from the MBfR than from the PBHR. However, post treatment including an ozone-contact tank and a post-filter brought the finished-water quality for both systems to roughly the same level, which met all drinking water standards except for HPC.