Comparative study of MBR and activated sludge in the treatment of paper mill wastewater

Water Science and Technology

Volumn 55, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 23-29

  Lerner, M ^a   Stahl, Nathan ^b   Galil, N I ^a  

^a TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

^b American Israeli Paper Mills (AIPM)   (Israel)

Author keywords

Activated sludge; Anaerobic pre treatment; Membrane bioreactor; Paper mill

Indexed keywords

ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS; AMMONIA; ANAEROBIC DIGESTION; BIOREACTORS; CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND; FILTRATION; PAPER AND PULP MILLS; PHOSPHORUS;

MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR; PAPER MILL WASTEWATER;

WASTEWATER TREATMENT;

AMMONIA; CALCIUM CARBONATE; NITROGEN; ORGANIC MATTER; PHOSPHORUS;

ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS; AMMONIA; ANAEROBIC DIGESTION; BIOREACTORS; CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND; FILTRATION; PAPER AND PULP MILLS; PHOSPHORUS; WASTEWATER TREATMENT;

ACTIVATED SLUDGE; BIOFOULING; BIOREACTOR; MEMBRANE; WASTEWATER;

ACTIVATED SLUDGE; ANAEROBIC CAPACITY; BIOFOULING; BIOREACTOR; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED STUDY; EFFLUENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; PAPER INDUSTRY; POLLUTION MONITORING; QUALITY CONTROL; SUSPENDED PARTICULATE MATTER; WASTE WATER MANAGEMENT;

ANAEROBIOSIS; BACTERIA, ANAEROBIC; BIOREACTORS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; FACILITY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION; INDUSTRIAL WASTE; ISRAEL; MEMBRANES, ARTIFICIAL; PAPER; SEWAGE; WASTE DISPOSAL, FLUID; WATER PURIFICATION;

ACTIVATED SLUDGE; AMMONIA; ANAEROBIC PROCESS; BOD; CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND; EFFLUENT TREATMENT; FILTRATION; PAPER MILLS; PHOSPHORUS; REACTORS;

BACTERIA (MICROORGANISMS);

EID: 34247492034     PISSN: 02731223     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2007.208     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Cicek, N. (2003). A review of membrane bioreactors and their potential application in the treatment of agricultural wastewater. Canadian Biosystems Engineering, 45, 6.37-6.49.
2. Cicek, N., Franco, J.P., Suidan, M.T. and Urbain, V. (1998). Using a membrane bioreactor to reclaim wastewater. Journal American Water Works Association, 90(11), 105-113.
3. Cicek, N., Dionysiou, D., Suidan, M.T., Ginestet, P. and Audic, J.M. (1999). Performance deterioration and structural changes of a ceramic membrane bioreactor due to inorganic abrasion. Journal of Membrane Science, 163(1), 19-28.
4. Dufresne, R., Lavallee, H.C., Lebrun, R.E. and Lo, S.N. (1998). Comparison of performance between membrane bioreactor and activated sludge system for the treatment of pulping process wastewaters. TAPPI Journal, 81(4), 131-135.
5. Galil, N., Sheindorf, C., Stahl, N., Tenenbaum, A. and Levinsky, Y. (2003). Membrane bioreactors for final treatment of wastewater. Wat. Sci. Tech., 48(8), 103-110.
6. Lerner, M., Stahl, N. and Galil, N. (accepted for publication, 2006). Aerobic vs. Anaerobic-Aerobic Biotreatment-Paper Mill Wastewater. Environmental Engineering Science.
7. Metcalf and Eddy (1991). Wastewater Engineering, Treatment, Disposal and Reuse, Third edn., McGraw-Hill Inc.
8. Sarlin, T., Halttunen, S., Vuoriranta, P. and Puhakka, J. (1999). Effects of chemical spills on activated sludge treatment performance in pulp and paper mills. Wat. Sci. Tech., 40(11-12), 319-325.
9. Stahl, N., Tenenbaum, A. and Habets, L. (2004). Finding a better way. PPI, 11, 29-32.
10. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (1997). APHA/AWWA/WEF, Washington, DC, USA.
11. Webb, L. (2001). Effluent treatment heats up at mills. http://www.paperloop.com/db_area/archive/ppi_mag/2001/0104/sludge.htm.
12. Webb, L. (2003). Water and Waste Trends. PPI, 4, 33-36.