A Comparison of Different Support Materials in Anaerobic Fluidized Bed Reactors for the Treatment of Vinasse

Three identical anaerobic fluidized bed reactors containing different biomass support media were fed a distillery wastewater at various hydraulic retention times and COD loadings. The support media used were sepiolite, pumice stone and sand; particle diameter was around 0.5 mm in all cases. Start-up...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEnvironmental technology Vol. 18; no. 5; pp. 539 - 544
Main Authors Balaguer, M. D., Vicent, M. T., Parfs, J. M.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London Taylor & Francis Group 01.05.1997
Selper
Subjects
alkalimetric determination
Anaerobic digestion
Biological and medical sciences
Biological treatment of waters
Biotechnology
Environment and pollution
fluidized bed reactor
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Industrial applications and implications. Economical aspects
support material
vinasse
Performance evaluation
Fluidized bed reactor
Bioreactor
Support
Industrial waste water
Distillery
Materials
Waste water purification
Microbial biomass
Anaerobic digestion
Comparative study
Biological purification
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Three identical anaerobic fluidized bed reactors containing different biomass support media were fed a distillery wastewater at various hydraulic retention times and COD loadings. The support media used were sepiolite, pumice stone and sand; particle diameter was around 0.5 mm in all cases. Start-up of the reactors was achieved within 63 days using a regime that included stepped increases in influent COD concentration and substitution of methanol for part of the wastewater COD. No significant differences in performance between reactors were observed during this period. Six different steady states at hydraulic retention times between 0.5 and 2.48 days were studied. Results obtained at these steady states showed similar performances in all three reactors except at HRT of 0.5 days, when the reactors containing sepiolite and pumice stone achieved better COD removal efficiencies and higher methane yields than the sand-containing reactor. It was concluded that sepiolite and pumice stone would be excellent solid supports in biological fluidized bed processes and have a lower energy consumption than the one demanded when using a sand support.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0959-3330
1479-487X
DOI:10.1080/09593331808616570