Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Bertolino, Sueli Moura
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Silva, Larissa A. M., Aquino, Sergio Francisco de, Leão, Versiane Albis
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFOP
Texto Completo: http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/handle/123456789/5872
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104-6632.20150321s00003158
Resumo: Reactor hydrodynamics is important for sulfidogenesis because sulfate reduction bacteria (SRB) do not granulate easily. In this work, the sulfate reduction performance of two continuous anaerobic bioreactors was investigated: (i) an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor and (ii) a fluidized bed reactor (FBR). Organic loading, sulfate reduction, and COD removal were the main parameters monitored during lactate and glycerol degradation. The UASB reactor with biomass recirculation showed a specific sulfate reduction rate of 0.089±0.014 g.gSSV-1.d-1 (89% reduction), whereas values twice as high were achieved in the FBR treating either lactate (0.200±0.017 g.gSSV-1.d-1) or glycerol (0.178±0.010 g.gSSV-1.d-1). Sulfate reduction with pure glycerol produced a smaller residual COD (1700 mg.L-1) than that produced with lactate (2500 mg.L-1) at the same COD.sulfate-1 mass ratio. It was estimated that 50% of glycerol degradation was due to sulfate reduction and 50% to fermentation, which was supported by the presence of butyrate in the FBR effluent. The UASB reactor was unable to produce effluents with sulfate concentrations below 250 mg.L-1 due to poor mixing conditions, whereas the FBR consistently ensured residual sulfate concentrations below such a value.
id UFOP_4c5fc72641d397a80e10d1b7ba72cbf7
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:123456789/5872
network_acronym_str UFOP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UFOP
repository_id_str 3233
spelling Bertolino, Sueli MouraSilva, Larissa A. M.Aquino, Sergio Francisco deLeão, Versiane Albis2015-12-02T17:42:31Z2015-12-02T17:42:31Z2015BERTOLINO, S. M. et al. Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction. Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, v. 32, n. 1, p. 59-71, 2015. Disponível em: <http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjce/v32n1/0104-6632-bjce-32-1-0059.pdf>. Acesso em: 21 out. 2015.0104-6632http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/handle/123456789/5872http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104-6632.20150321s00003158Reactor hydrodynamics is important for sulfidogenesis because sulfate reduction bacteria (SRB) do not granulate easily. In this work, the sulfate reduction performance of two continuous anaerobic bioreactors was investigated: (i) an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor and (ii) a fluidized bed reactor (FBR). Organic loading, sulfate reduction, and COD removal were the main parameters monitored during lactate and glycerol degradation. The UASB reactor with biomass recirculation showed a specific sulfate reduction rate of 0.089±0.014 g.gSSV-1.d-1 (89% reduction), whereas values twice as high were achieved in the FBR treating either lactate (0.200±0.017 g.gSSV-1.d-1) or glycerol (0.178±0.010 g.gSSV-1.d-1). Sulfate reduction with pure glycerol produced a smaller residual COD (1700 mg.L-1) than that produced with lactate (2500 mg.L-1) at the same COD.sulfate-1 mass ratio. It was estimated that 50% of glycerol degradation was due to sulfate reduction and 50% to fermentation, which was supported by the presence of butyrate in the FBR effluent. The UASB reactor was unable to produce effluents with sulfate concentrations below 250 mg.L-1 due to poor mixing conditions, whereas the FBR consistently ensured residual sulfate concentrations below such a value.Sulfate reductionAnaerobic processesGlycerolUpflow anaerobic sludge blanketWastewater treatmentComparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleTodo o conteúdo do periódico Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, exceto onde identificado, está sob uma licença Creative Commons 4.0 que permite copiar, distribuir e transmitir o trabalho em qualquer suporte ou formato desde que sejam citados o autor e o licenciante. Não permite o uso para fins comerciais. Fonte: Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering <http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=0104-6632&lng=en&nrm=iso>. Acesso em: 20 ago. 2019.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessengreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFOPinstname:Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP)instacron:UFOPLICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-82636http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/bitstream/123456789/5872/2/license.txtc2ffdd99e58acf69202dff00d361f23aMD52ORIGINALARTIGO_ComparisonUasbFluidized.pdfARTIGO_ComparisonUasbFluidized.pdfapplication/pdf805254http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/bitstream/123456789/5872/1/ARTIGO_ComparisonUasbFluidized.pdfa2a5945187dde82490e682a9b0a29918MD51123456789/58722019-08-21 09:42:29.639oai:localhost: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Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.ufop.br/oai/requestrepositorio@ufop.edu.bropendoar:32332019-08-21T13:42:29Repositório Institucional da UFOP - Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP)false
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.
title Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.
spellingShingle Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.
Bertolino, Sueli Moura
Sulfate reduction
Anaerobic processes
Glycerol
Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket
Wastewater treatment
title_short Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.
title_full Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.
title_fullStr Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.
title_sort Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction.
author Bertolino, Sueli Moura
author_facet Bertolino, Sueli Moura
Silva, Larissa A. M.
Aquino, Sergio Francisco de
Leão, Versiane Albis
author_role author
author2 Silva, Larissa A. M.
Aquino, Sergio Francisco de
Leão, Versiane Albis
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Bertolino, Sueli Moura
Silva, Larissa A. M.
Aquino, Sergio Francisco de
Leão, Versiane Albis
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Sulfate reduction
Anaerobic processes
Glycerol
Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket
Wastewater treatment
topic Sulfate reduction
Anaerobic processes
Glycerol
Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket
Wastewater treatment
description Reactor hydrodynamics is important for sulfidogenesis because sulfate reduction bacteria (SRB) do not granulate easily. In this work, the sulfate reduction performance of two continuous anaerobic bioreactors was investigated: (i) an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor and (ii) a fluidized bed reactor (FBR). Organic loading, sulfate reduction, and COD removal were the main parameters monitored during lactate and glycerol degradation. The UASB reactor with biomass recirculation showed a specific sulfate reduction rate of 0.089±0.014 g.gSSV-1.d-1 (89% reduction), whereas values twice as high were achieved in the FBR treating either lactate (0.200±0.017 g.gSSV-1.d-1) or glycerol (0.178±0.010 g.gSSV-1.d-1). Sulfate reduction with pure glycerol produced a smaller residual COD (1700 mg.L-1) than that produced with lactate (2500 mg.L-1) at the same COD.sulfate-1 mass ratio. It was estimated that 50% of glycerol degradation was due to sulfate reduction and 50% to fermentation, which was supported by the presence of butyrate in the FBR effluent. The UASB reactor was unable to produce effluents with sulfate concentrations below 250 mg.L-1 due to poor mixing conditions, whereas the FBR consistently ensured residual sulfate concentrations below such a value.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2015-12-02T17:42:31Z
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv 2015-12-02T17:42:31Z
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2015
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv BERTOLINO, S. M. et al. Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction. Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, v. 32, n. 1, p. 59-71, 2015. Disponível em: <http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjce/v32n1/0104-6632-bjce-32-1-0059.pdf>. Acesso em: 21 out. 2015.
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/handle/123456789/5872
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv 0104-6632
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104-6632.20150321s00003158
identifier_str_mv BERTOLINO, S. M. et al. Comparison of UASB and fluidized-bed reactors for sulfate reduction. Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, v. 32, n. 1, p. 59-71, 2015. Disponível em: <http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjce/v32n1/0104-6632-bjce-32-1-0059.pdf>. Acesso em: 21 out. 2015.
0104-6632
url http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/handle/123456789/5872
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104-6632.20150321s00003158
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFOP
instname:Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP)
instacron:UFOP
instname_str Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP)
instacron_str UFOP
institution UFOP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UFOP
collection Repositório Institucional da UFOP
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/bitstream/123456789/5872/2/license.txt
http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/bitstream/123456789/5872/1/ARTIGO_ComparisonUasbFluidized.pdf
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv c2ffdd99e58acf69202dff00d361f23a
a2a5945187dde82490e682a9b0a29918
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UFOP - Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv repositorio@ufop.edu.br
_version_ 1801685791726895104