Effect of External Carbon Source and Bed Turnover Rate on Denitrificaion

Jihee Song; Younghee Kim; Namjong Yoo

doi:10.4236/ce.2012.37B004

Home > Journals > Social Sciences & Humanities > CE

CE> Vol.3 No.7B, November 2012

Share This Article:

Effect of External Carbon Source and Bed Turnover Rate on Denitrificaion ()

Abstract Full-Text HTML

Download as PDF (Size:277KB) PP. 17-20

DOI: 10.4236/ce.2012.37B004 3,254 Downloads 4,344 Views Citations

Author(s) Leave a comment

Jihee Song, Younghee Kim, Namjong Yoo

Affiliation(s)

R&D Department Ilshin Environmental Engineering Co., Ltd..
R&D Department Ilshin Environmental Engineering Co., Ltd. Seoul, Korea.

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the effect of external carbon source and bed turnover rate on biological denitrification in the pilot-scale IPNR (Ilshin Phosphorus and Nitrate Removal) process. IPNR process is an up-flow reactor filled with Si-media which removes phosphorus physically and nitrate nitrogen biologically using secondary effluent from sewage treatment plant. Phosphorus (PO₄-P) was removed using HFO (Hydrous ferric oxide) by adsorption as well as nitrate nitrogen (NO₃-N) was transformed to nitrogen gas (N₂) by denitrifying bacteria using external carbon source in the same reactor. Methanol was used as an external carbon source for denitrification with various dosing concentration and Si-media bed turnover rate was varied from 6.4 ~ 7.75 day^-1. The concentrations of PO₄-P and NO₃-N in the secondary effluent were from 0.1 to 1.75 mg/L and from 1.1 to 31.9 mg/L, respectively. The results demonstrated that high amount of NO₃-N removed from 31.9 to 1.2 mg/L, at the same time PO₄-P removed from 1.75 to 0.41mg/L using secondary effluent. Denitrification was found more stable with 6.4 bed turnover/day and 130% over dosing of theoretical methanol dose for denitrification.

KEYWORDS

Denitrification; Carbon Source; Bed Turnover Rate; Phosphorus Removal

Cite this paper

Song, J. , Kim, Y. and Yoo, N. (2012) Effect of External Carbon Source and Bed Turnover Rate on Denitrificaion. Creative Education, 3, 17-20. doi: 10.4236/ce.2012.37B004.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	U.S. E.P.A, “Water quality criteria research of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency”, Proceings of an EPA sponsored symposium, EPA-600/3-76-079, 1976.

[2]	Forsberg, C. & S. O. Ryding, “Eutrophication paramters and trophic state indices in 30 Swedish waste-receiving lakes”, Arch. Hydrobiol., vol. 89, pp. 189~207, 1980.

[3]	Water Environment Federation, Nutrient Removal, Chapter 7. Chemical phosphorus removal, 2010.

[4]	WEF and ASCE, “Design of municipal wastewater treatment plants-WEF manual of practice 8 and ASCE manuals and reports on engineeing practice No. 76, 5th Ed. Water Environment Feferation and Americal Society of Civil Engineers Environment & Water Resources Institute, 2009

[5]	Francisco J. Cervantes, Spysros G. Pavlostathis and Adrianus C. van Haandel, Advanced biological treatment processes for industrial wastewaters, 2006.

[6]	Tchobanoglous, G., F.L. Burton, and H.D. Stensel, wastewater engineeing: Treatment and reuse, 2003.

[7]	Gilda Carvalho, Paulo c. Lemos, Adrian Oehmen, Maria A.M. Reis, “Denitrifying phosphorus removal: Linking the process performance with the microbial community structure”, Water Research, vol. 41, pp. 4383-4396, 2007.

[8]	H.S. Shin and J.W. Kwak, Nitrogen and phosphorus treatment technology, Environmental Management Research Center, Korea, 2002.

[9]	George T. Moore, “Nutrient control design manual”, U.S. E.P.A, Aug. 2010.