Elsevier

Chemosphere

Volume 186, November 2017, Pages 322-330
Chemosphere

A comparative study on denitrifying sludge granulation with different electron donors: Sulfide, thiosulfate and organics

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.07.106Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Denitrifying granular sludge (DGS) was cultivated with different electron donors.

  • Longer time was required for sulfide-DGS cultivation.

  • Characteristics among sulfide-, thiosulfate- and organics-DGS were compared.

  • S2O32-driven denitrifying sludge granulation is the most compact technology for BNR.

Abstract

A comparative study on denitrifying sludge granulation with different electron donors (sulfide, thiosulfate and organics) was carried out. Longer time was spent on sulfide-denitrifying granular sludge (DGS) cultivation (88 days) than thiosulfate- and organics-DGS cultivations (57 days). All the three DGS were characterized in terms of particle size distribution, sludge settling ability (indicated by sludge volume index and settling velocity), permeability (indicated by fractal dimension) and extracellular polymeric substances (EPS, including polysaccharide and protein) secretion. Sludge productions in the three DGS-reactors were also monitored. The key functional microorganisms in three granular reactors were revealed via high through-put pyrosequencing analysis. Batch tests were performed to measure the denitrification activities of each DGS, including both denitratation (NO3 → NO2) and denitritation (NO2 → N2). We found that thiosulfate-driven denitrifying sludge granulation (TDDSG) should be the most efficient and compact technology for effective BNR in municipal wastewater treatment. The findings of this study suggests the TDDSG could further increase the nitrogen removal potential in an enhanced sulfur cycle-driven bioprocess for co-treatment of wet flue gas desulfurization wastes with fresh sewage depending on three short-cut biological reactions, including: 1) short-cut biological sulfur reduction (SO42−/SO32− → S2O32−); 2) thiosulfate-driven denitritation (S2O32− + NO2 → SO42− + N2↑); and 3) nitritation (NH4+ + O2 → NO2).

Introduction

Biological nitrogen removal (BNR) process has been widely applied to remove nutrients (e.g. nitrogen) from wastewater in view of its effectiveness, environmental friendliness and energy conservation (Tchobanoglous et al., 2003). In BNR process, chemolithotrophic denitrification plays an essential role in the reduction of nitrate to nitrogen gas. With respect to denitrification, both heterotrophic denitrification (HD) and autotrophic denitrification (AD) have been reported extensively with each advantage. For example, higher nitrogen removal rate was demonstrated in HD reactor while lower sludge (bio-wastes) production was observed in AD reactor (Qian et al., 2015a, Oh et al., 2000). However, the floatation of the flocculent sludge and its washout from the conventional both HD and AD reactors are common problems during denitrification reactors' operation, which seriously deteriorates the nitrogen removal performance (Eiroa et al., 2005). Therefore, effective biomass retention in the denitrification reactor should be improved to maintain the stability of the sludge. And sludge granulation is one of the most promising technologies for the biomass retention (Val del Río et al., 2015).

Sludge granulation is an advanced environmental biotechnology in wastewater treatment based on the principle of biomass self-immobilization (Liu et al., 2003). Granular sludge (GS) appeared in the form of aggregates, is the collective of numerous cells. Various functional microorganisms stick to each other in the aggregates, which have the tightly compact structure and where diversified microbial communities are spatially distributed (Adav et al., 2008a, Adav et al., 2008b). The characteristics of GS include abundant microbial biodiversity, high retainable biomass concentration, large specific density, low sludge yield, excellent sludge settling ability, and robust ability to withstand high pollutant loading rates (Liu et al., 2009). Therefore, granulation technology attracts tremendous academic interests in both industrial and domestic wastewater treatments. Despite the fact that denitrifying granular sludge (DGS) has been successfully cultivated in the lab-scale study (Val del Río et al., 2015), most of the these works focused on the effects of ratio of electron donors (e.g. organics and sulfide) to nitrogen (Yi et al., 2016), nitrogen loading rate (Li et al., 2013), nature of carbon sources (Lew et al., 2012), feeding strategy (Franco et al., 2006), hydraulic shear force (Xue et al., 2016), calcium/magnesium (Chen et al., 2015, Liu and Sun, 2011) on the DGS cultivation and stability. The comparison between the sludge granulations in HD and AD is missing in the literature.

As for AD, sulfide is the most commonly used electron donor and sulfide-based AD has been applied for simultaneous bio-desulfurization and denitrification (Guo et al., 2016). Alternative to sulfide, thiosulfate is a potential electron donor for AD, characterized as high bioavailability (Cardoso et al., 2006). Recently, we proposed a sulfur cycle-based bioprocess for co-treatment of wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastes with freshwater sewage. In this process, organics in the sewage are removed through biological sulfate/sulfite (via alkaline absorption of SO2 from the fossil power plant) reduction. After the biological sulfate/sulfite reduction, three major compounds, i.e. sulfide, thiosulfate and organics residuals co-existed in the effluent. These compounds act as three types of electron donors in the subsequent denitrification reactor for BNR (Qian et al., 2015b) (the schematics of the co-treatment process of wet FGD wastes with freshwater sewage could be referred to Fig. S1). However, to the best of our knowledge, no detailed comparative studies on the denitrifying sludge granulation with these three electron donors, i.e. sulfide, thiosulfate and organics have been carried out so far.

In this study, three sequential batch reactors (SBR) were set up and operated in parallel with sulfide, thiosulfate and organics (i.e. acetate) as the electron donor for denitrification. The specific focuses are placed on: 1) the rate of sludge granulation fed with sulfide-, thiosulfate- and organics, respectively; 2) the nitrogen removal performance in the three DGS-SBR reactors and denitrification activities of the three DGS in the batch reactors 3) the physiochemical and biological characteristics of the three DGS.

Section snippets

Experimental set-ups and DGS-SBR reactors' operation

Three lab-scale identical DGS-SBR reactors with effective volume of 2.2 L (height: 50 cm; diameter: 7.5 cm) were fabricated and set up, as shown in Fig. S2. The raw sludge was taken from a heterotrophic denitrification reactor of the modified A2O process in a municipal sewage treatment plant in Xi'an, China. About 1 L of raw sludge was seeded in each reactor, resulted in the initial biomass concentration of 1600 mg MLVSS/L (MLVSS: mixed liquor volatile suspended solids). 120 mg N/L sodium

Nitrogen removal performance in SBR reactors with different electron donors

In the first week after SBR reactors' start-up, nitrate removal efficiencies ([Influent NO3 concentration – Effluent NO3 concentration]/Influent NO3 concentration × 100%) in both sulfide- and thiosulfate-SBR reactors were less than 50% (Fig. 1a and b). Also NO2 accumulations in the effluent of both reactors were found. The low nitrogen removal capacities in these two reactors should be attributed to non-acclimation of the biomass to the new condition and biomass washout from the reactors,

Conclusions

DGS was cultivated with different electron donors in three parallel SBR reactors in this study. The denitrifying sludge granulation fed with sulfide, thiosulfate and organics were compared. The main findings are summarized as follows,

  • (1)

    The DGS could improve the nitrogen removal capacity (in terms of kg N/kg MLVSS/d) and denitrification activities (including both denitratation and denitritation) to a large extent compared with flocculent sludge.

  • (2)

    Longer time was required for sulfide-DGS cultivation

Acknowledgements

This work was financially supported by Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51608444), the Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities (No. 3102017zy002) and Natural Science Foundation of Shenzhen (No. JCYJ20170306153655840). Dr. Jin Qian gratefully acknowledges the financial supports from the Open Fund of State Key Laboratory of Geohazard Prevention and Geoenvironment Protection (No. SKLGP2017K026), and the Open Fund of State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and Mountain River

References (57)

  • Q. Guo et al.

    Towards simultaneously removing nitrogen and sulfur by a novel process: anammox and autotrophic desulfurization–denitrification (AADD)

    Chem. Eng. J.

    (2016)
  • T. Hao et al.

    Physicochemical and biological characterization of long-term operated sulfate reducing granular sludge in the SANI® process

    Water Res.

    (2015)
  • A. Koenig et al.

    Microbial community and biochemistry process in autosulfurotrophic denitrifying biofilm

    Chemosphere

    (2005)
  • B. Lew et al.

    Characterization of denitrifying granular sludge with and without the addition of external carbon source

    Bioresour. Technol.

    (2012)
  • X.Y. Li et al.

    Settling velocities and permeabilities of microbial aggregates

    Water Res.

    (2002)
  • W. Li et al.

    Physical characteristics and formation mechanism of denitrifying granular sludge in high-load reactor

    Bioresour. Technol.

    (2013)
  • H. Liu et al.

    Extraction of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) of sludge

    J. Biotechnol.

    (2002)
  • X.W. Liu et al.

    Physicochemical characteristics of microbial granules

    Biotechnol. Adv.

    (2009)
  • Y. Liu et al.

    Mechanisms and models for anaerobic granulation in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor

    Water Res.

    (2003)
  • Y. Liu et al.

    State of the art of biogranulation technology for the wastewater treatment

    Biotechnol. Adv.

    (2004)
  • Y.J. Liu et al.

    Calcium augmentation for enhanced denitrifying granulation in sequencing batch reactors

    Process Biochem.

    (2011)
  • Y.Q. Liu et al.

    The effects of extracellular polymeric substances on the formation and stability of biogranules

    Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.

    (2004)
  • J. Luo et al.

    Impact of influent COD/N ratio on disintegration of aerobic granular sludge

    Water Res.

    (2014)
  • J.W. Morgan et al.

    Comparative study of the nature biopolymers extracted from anaerobic and activated sludges

    Water Res.

    (1990)
  • Y. Mu et al.

    Rheological and fractal characteristics of granular sludge in an upflow anaerobic reactor

    Water Res.

    (2006)
  • S.Q. Ni et al.

    Distribution of extracellular polymeric substances in anammox granules and their important roles during anammox granulation

    Biochem. Eng. J.

    (2015)
  • S. Park et al.

    Operation of suspended-growth shortcut biological nitrogen removal (SSBNR) based on the minimum/maximum substrate concentration

    Water Res.

    (2010)
  • J. Qian et al.

    Beneficial co-treatment of simple wet flue gas desulphurization wastes with freshwater sewage through development of mixed denitrification–SANI process

    Chem. Eng. J.

    (2015)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text