LWR_PHD_1053

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON DIFFERENT ANAMMOX SYSTEMS

Grzegorz Cema

October 2009

TRITA-LWR PhD Thesis 1053 ISSN 1650-8602 ISRN KTH/LWR/PHD 1053-SE ISBN 978-91-7415-501-3

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

ii

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Dedicated to my parents Małgorzata and Paweł

Harvard Law: Under the most rigorously controlled conditions of pressure, temperature, humidity, and other variables, the organism will do as it damn well pleases

iii

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

iv

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not be possible without my colleagues and the support of my friends and family.

I would like to thank to my supervisor Prof. Elżbieta Płaza for giving me the opportunity to join a special research team and to participate in the deammonification project. I appreciate your support, constructive advices and suggestions. Thank you for many ‘brain storm’ discussions.

I would like to express my gratitude to my second supervisor Prof. Joanna Surmacz-Górska, for guiding me through the process of becoming a researcher. I would like to thank for the right amount of freedom, supporting me in my work and for finding her office door always open for any questions I had. Thank you, for many fruitful and stimulating discussions.

I acknowledge Dr Józef Trela for the leadership of deammonification project and devoting lots of his time on discussion about the Anammox tests. I would like to sincerely thank to Prof.

Bengt Hultmant for his guidance and support. I respect your huge knowledge and never ending ideas.

Beata Szatkowska and Luiza Gut were two other Ph.D. students involved in the deammonification project and sharing with me experimental and analytical work. Beata, there is not enough space in this thesis to write down all the support and help I got from you in my time in Stockholm. However, most of all thank you for your friendship. Luiza, I am indebted to you for introducing me and explaining the research conducted in Stockholm. Thank you also for your friendship that developed during our Ph.D. studies. I also respect your professionalism. I would like to thank Ania Raszka for FISH analyses and the most important for her great friendship. I hope we can do a real good project together again and I hope for some mountains trips. Special thanks to Maja Długołęcka for many our helpful and stimulating discussions. Maja, you are also an excellent discussion partner over the everyday ‘cup of coffee’.

Thanks go also to master students Giampaolo Mele, Aleksandra Pietrala, Anna Chomiak and Arkadiusz Stachurski, for their help in experiments. Giampaolo, you wrote that there was no need to mention that the “something of me” was in your thesis. I could say the same, but there is “something of you all” in this thesis and without your help, it would be impossible to finish it.

You are also more friends than colleagues.

Special thanks have to be done to Jan Bosander, Expert Process Engineer at the Himmerfjäden WWTP for all his help, continuous availability. His competence and great professionalism have been one of the best tools in the practical things during my research. He and the staff of the WWTP created an unforgettable working environment.

Dr Ewa Zabłocka-Godlewska, I appreciate your support in microbiological analyses.

Monica Löwén, Marek Tarłowski and Katarzyna Radziszewska, thanks for their aid in laboratory works.

I am very grateful to Aira Saarelainen and Elżbieta Tarłowska for pleasant help with administrative matters.

Jerzy Buczak thank you for the help with computer problems and being so friendly.

Dr Lesław Płonka, thank you for your help with computer issues, but mainly for being a friend more than a colleague. Many people at the Environmental Biotechnology Department (EBD) deserve my gratitude. Hereby I would like to thank especially to: Ewa, Jarek, Dorota, Ola and Sebastian. Thank you for your friendship. Of course, I would like to thank you all the members of the EBD for friendliness.

Most of all, my family deserves the biggest appreciation. To my Mother, for all her support, encouragement and love. My brother Qba and his wife Ula for being always supportive. Qba, you are the best brother. To all my family for helping me every time I need it. Last but not least, my v

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

love Oleńka – thank you for your patience, support and understanding and just for being with me!

This thesis was realized as a joint PhD study at Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, and Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice.

In Poland: study was funded by Ministry of Science and Higher Education (Project reference number 1 T09D 030 30 - 0359/H03/2006/30).

In Sweden: Financial support was obtained from VA-FORSK, SYVAB, J. Gust Richert Foundation and Lars Eric Lundbergs Foundation. The pilot plant was build by PURAC AB and has been operated with co-operation of the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) and SYVAB. I wish to acknowledge all people, whom I might have not mentioned here and who have - either directly or indirectly – affected my professional life.

Thank you

Stockholm, October 2009.

vi

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

TABLE OF CONTENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................... V ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................... IX LIST OF PAPERS......................................................................................................................................... XI ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 I – INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 2 II – BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................................... 2 II-1. The Anammox process .................................................................................................................................. 2 Nitrogen cycle and the discovery of the Anammox process .............................................................................................................. 2 Brief process overview ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Application of the Anammox bacteria .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Summary....................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 II-2. Landfill leachate - characteristics and treatment methods for nitrogen elimination........................................ 9 Landfill leachate generation ......................................................................................................................................................... 10 Landfill leachate composition ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Landfill leachate treatment review – nitrogen removal .................................................................................................................. 11 Summary..................................................................................................................................................................................... 15 II-3. Reject water - characteristics and treatment method for nitrogen removal .................................................. 15 Chemical and physical methods .................................................................................................................................................... 16 Biological treatment ..................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Summary..................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 III – AIM OF THE THESIS ......................................................................................................................... 19 IV – MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................................................................................... 19 IV-1. Membrane assisted bioreactor (MBR) ......................................................................................................... 19 Reactor operation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Analytical procedure .................................................................................................................................................................... 20 Membrane cartridge ..................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Batch tests ................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 IV-2. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) – Two step process ........................................................................ 21 Reactor operation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Biofilm carrier material ............................................................................................................................................................... 22 Analytical procedure .................................................................................................................................................................... 23 Batch tests ................................................................................................................................................................................... 23 IV-3. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) – one step process.......................................................................... 24 Reactor operation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Determination of the dry weight of biomass developed on Kaldnes cerrier....................................................................................... 25 Batch tests ................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Oxygen uptake rates tests ............................................................................................................................................................ 25 IV-4. Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC) .......................................................................................................... 26 Reactor operation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Analytical procedure .................................................................................................................................................................... 28 FISH – Fluorescent in situ Hybridization.................................................................................................................................. 28 Denitrifying bacteria analysis ....................................................................................................................................................... 29

vii

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Batch tests ................................................................................................................................................................................... 29 V – RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................. 29 V-1. Membrane Assisted Bioreactor (MBR)......................................................................................................... 29 Process performance evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................... 29 Nitrogen conversion ..................................................................................................................................................................... 33 V-2. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor – two step process ......................................................................................... 34 Process performance evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................... 34 Assessment of bacterial activity in biofilm and activated sludge ..................................................................................................... 37 Estimation of kinetic parameters ................................................................................................................................................. 39 V-3. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor –from two-step towards one-step process ..................................................... 40 V-4. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor – one-step process ......................................................................................... 41 Process performance evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................... 41 Influence of conditions in the pilot-plant on nitrogen removal dynamics ......................................................................................... 44 Dissolved oxygen influence on the nitrogen removal rate ................................................................................................................ 44 Evaluation of kinetic parameters ................................................................................................................................................. 45 V-5. Rotating Biological Reactor – two step process............................................................................................ 46 Process performance evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................... 46 Kinetic evaluation of process ......................................................................................................................................................... 49 Looking for bacteria populations ................................................................................................................................................. 49 V-6. Rotating Biological Reactor – one-step process ........................................................................................... 51 Process performance evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................... 51 Nitrogen conversion ..................................................................................................................................................................... 52 Kinetic evaluation of process ......................................................................................................................................................... 52 Looking for bacteria populations ................................................................................................................................................. 53 VI – SYSTEMS COMPARISON ................................................................................................................... 54 VII – CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 58 Membrane assisted BioReactor (MBR) ....................................................................................................................................... 58 Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) – two-step process ............................................................................................................ 59 Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) – one-step process ............................................................................................................ 59 Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC) – two-step process .............................................................................................................. 60 Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC) – one-step process .............................................................................................................. 60 General ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 61 VIII – FUTURE RESEARCH ....................................................................................................................... 61 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................. 63

viii

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

A CRON YMS AND ABBREVIATIONS – disc surface area, [m2] – anaerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria – Anaerobic Ammonium Oxidation – aerobic Ammonium Oxidizing Bacteria – adsorbable organic halogen – Adenosine5’-triphosphate – allylthiourea – dry weight of biomass developed on carriers, [mg d.w.]

– Bio Augmentation Batch Enhanced – biochemical oxygen demand, [g O2 m-3] – Completely Autotrophic Nitrogen Removal Over Nitrite – chemical oxygen demand, [g O2 m-3] – mass of 50 kaldnes carriers after drying, [mg] – dry weight – DEnitrifying AMmonium OXidation – pH-controlled deammonification system, names only refers to the process in a SBR denammox – DENitrification-anAMMOX process DIB – Deammonification in Internal-aerated Biofilm system DO – Dissolved oxygen, [g O2 m-3] – diffusivity coefficient of electron acceptor in water Dwa – diffusivity coefficient of electron donor in water Dwd e – mass of 50 kaldnes carriers after washing, [mg] ET – actual evaporative losses from the bare-soil/evapotranspiration losses from a vegetated surface FISH – Fluorescent in situ Hybridization GFP – granular floating polystyrene H – heterotrophs HDPE – high density polyethylene HRT – hydraulic retention time K – proportionality coefficient – the saturation value constant, [g m-2d-1] KB – Haldane inhibition coefficient, [g m-3] KI – Aiba inhibition coefficient, [g m-3] KIA KM – Michaelis constant [g m-3] L – leachate production M – mol MAP – magnesium ammonium phosphate MBBR – Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor MBR – Membrane assisted BioReactor MLSS – Mixed Liquors Suspended Solids, [g l-1] A AAOB Anammox AOB AOX ATP ATU B BABE BOD CANON COD d d.w.

DEAMOX DEMON

ix

Grzegorz Cema

MSW mwa mwd NO NOB OLAND OUR P PBS PFC Q r R rA RBC rpm S Sba Sbd SBR Se Sharon Si SNAP SS TOC UASB VFA Vmax VSS WWTP XOcs ΔUs ΔUw υa υd

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

– municipal solid wastes – molecular weight of electron acceptor – molecular weight of electron donor – nitrite oxide – aerobic Nitrite Oxidizing Bacteria – Oxygen-Limited Autotrophic Nitrification Denitrification – Oxygen Uptake Rate – precipitation – phosphate-buffered saline – polyurethane foam cubes – inflow rate, [m3 d-1] – substrate utilization rate, [g m-3d-1] – surface run-off – substrate utilization rate, [g m-2d-1] – Rotating Biological Contactor – revolutions per minute – substrate concentration, [g m-3] – bulk liquid electron acceptor substrate concentration – bulk liquid electron donor substrate concentration – sequencing batch reactor – effluent substrate concentration, [g m-3] – Single reactor system for High Ammonium Removal Over Nitrite – inflow substrate concentration, [g m-3] – Single-stage Nitrogen removal using the Anammox and Partial nitritation – Suspended Solids, [g l-1] – total organic carbon, [g O2 m-3] – Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Bed reactor – volatile fatty acids – the maximum utilization rate constant, [g m-2d-1]; [g m-3d-1] – Volatile Suspended Solids, [g l-1] – WasteWater Treatment Plant – xenobiotic organic compounds – change in soil moisture storage – change in moisture content of the refuse components – molar stoichiometric reaction coefficient for electron acceptor (moles) – molar stoichiometric reaction coefficient for electron donor (moles

x

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

L IST OF PA PERS This thesis is based on the following papers, which are appended at the end of the thesis and referred to by their Roman numbers: I.

II. III. IV.

V. VI.

VII.

Cema G., Plaza E., Surmacz-Górska J., Trela J., Miksch K. (2005). Study on evaluation of kinetic parameters for Anammox process. In: Proceedings of the IWA Specialized Conference Nutrient Management in Wastewater Treatment Processes and Recycle Streams, Krakow Poland, 1921 September 2005, 379-388.

Cema G., Szatkowska B., Plaza E., Trela J., Surmacz-Górska J. (2006). Nitrogen removal rates at a technical-scale pilot plant with the one-stage partial nitritation/Anammox process. Water Science and Technology, 54(8), 209-217.

Szatkowska B, Cema G., Plaza E., Trela J., Hultman B. (2007). One-stage system with partial nitritation and Anammox processes in moving-bed biofilm reactor. Water Science and Technology, 55(8-9), 19-26.

Cema G, Płaza E., Trela J., Surmacz-Górska J., (2008). Dissolved oxygen as a factor influencing nitrogen removal rates in a one-stage system with partial nitritation and Anammox process. In: Proceedings of the IWA Biofilm Technologies Conference, 8 – 10 January 2008, Singapore. Submitted for publication in Water Science and Technology.

Cema G., Pietrala A., Płaza E., Trela J., Surmacz-Górska J. (2009). Activity assessment and kinetic parameter estimation in single stage partial nitritation/Anammox. Submitted for publication in Journal of Hazardous Materials.

Cema G., Wiszniowski J., Żabczyński S., Zabłocka-Godlewska E., Raszka A., SurmaczGórska J. (2007). Biological nitrogen removal from landfill leachate by deammonification assisted by heterotrophic denitrification in a rotating biological contactor (RBC). Water Science and Technology, 55(8-9), 35-42.

Cema G., Raszka A., Stachurski A., Kunda K., Surmacz-Górska J., Płaza E. (2009). A one-stage system with partial nitritation and Anammox processes in Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC) for treating landfill leachate. In: Proceedings of the IWA Conference Processes in Biofilms: Fundamentals to Applications, Davis, USA, 13-16 September 2009. Submitted for publication in Journal of Hazardous Materials.

Other publications related to this research not appended in the thesis: International journals/books Cema G., Wiszniowski J., Żabczyński S., Zabłocka-Godlewska E., Raszka A., Surmacz-Górska J., Płaza E., (2008). Simultaneous nitrification, anammox and denitrification in aerobic rotating biological contactor (RBC) treating landfill leachate. In: Management of pollutants emission from landfills and sludge. Pawłowska & Pawłowski (eds). Taylor & Francis Group, London, 211-218.

Conference publications Żabczyński S., Raszka A., Cema G., Surmacz-Górska J. (2009). Nitrifiers populations and kinetic parameters analysis of membrane – assisted bioreactors. In: Proceedings of the IWA 2nd Specialized Conference Nutrient Management in Wastewater Treatment Processes. Kraków, Poland, 69 September 2009. xi

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Cema G., Płaza E., Surmacz-Górska J. and Trela J. (2005). Activated sludge and biofilm in the Anammox reactor – cooperation or competition? In: Integration and optimization of urban sanitation systems, Joint Polish-Swedish Seminars, Cracow, 2005, TRITA-LWR.REPORT 3018, 129 – 138.

Cema G., Surmacz-Górska J. and Miksch K. (2004). Implementation of anammox process in the membrane assisted bioreactor. In: Integration and optimization of urban sanitation systems, Joint PolishSwedish Seminars, Stockholm, 2005, TRITA-LWR.REPORT 3017, 81-92.

Surmacz- Górska J., Cema G., and Miksch K. (2004). Deamonification process in membrane assisted bioreactors. In: Integration and optimization of urban sanitation systems, Joint Polish-Swedish Seminars, Wisła, 2003, TRITA-LWR.REPORT 3007, 81-91.

Reports & compendia Trela J., Płaza E., Hultman B., Cema G., Bosander J., Levlin E. (2008). Evaluation of one-stage deammonification. VA-Forskrapport nr 2008-18, (in Swedish) Trela J., Hultman B., Płaza E., Szatkowska B., Cema G., Gut L., Bossander J. (2006). Development of a basis for design, operation and process monitoring of deammonification at municipal wastewater treatment plants. VA-Forskrapport nr 2006-15, (in Swedish).

xii

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

A BSTRACT The legal requirements for wastewater discharge into environment, especially to zones exposed to eutrophication, lately became stricter. Nowadays wastewater treatment plants have to manage with the new rules and assure better biogenic elements’ removal, in comparison with the past.

There are some well-known methods of diminishing concentrations of these compounds, but they are ineffective in case of nitrogen-rich streams, as landfill leachate or reject waters from dewatering of digested sludge. This wastewater disturbs conventional processes of nitrificationdenitrification and raise necessity of building bigger tanks. The partial nitritation followed by Anaerobic Ammonium Oxidation (Anammox) process appear to be an excellent alternative for traditional nitrification/denitrification. The process was investigated in three different reactors – Membrane Bioreactor (MBR), Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) and Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC). The process was evaluated in two options: as a two-stage process performed in two separate reactors and as a one-stage process. The two-step process, in spite of very low nitrogen removal rates, assured very high nitrogen removal efficiency, exceeding even 90% in case of the MBBR. However, obtained results revealed that the one-step system is a better option than the two-step system, no matter, what kind of nitrogen-rich stream is taken into consideration.

Moreover, the one-step process was much less complicated in operation. Performed research confirmed a hypothesis, that the oxygen concentration in the bulk liquid and the nitrite production rate are the limiting factors for the Anammox reaction in a single reactor. In order to make a quick and simple determination of bacteria activity, the Oxygen Uptake Rate (OUR) tests were shown as an excellent tool for evaluation of the current bacteria activity reliably, and without a need of using expensive reagents. It was also shown, that partial nitritation/Anammox process, could be successfully applied at temperatures much lower than the optimum value. Performed Fluorescent in situ Hybridization (FISH) analyses, proved that the Anammox bacteria were mainly responsible for the nitrogen removal process.

Key words: Anammox; biofilm system; landfill leachate; nitrogen removal; reject water; removal rates

1

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

tion/denitrification. These processes proceed well with typical municipal wastewater. Nevertheless, there are also nitrogen-rich wastewater streams like landfills leachate or reject waters from dewatering of digested sludge for which, traditional nitrification/denitrification can be generally ineffective due to free ammonia inhibition and unfavourable biodegradable carbon content for denitrification. Because of high requirements for oxygen and necessity of addition external carbon source, treating such nitrogen-rich streams with traditional nitrification/denitrification would become expensive and not sustainable. Ammonia can be also removed by physical/ chemical processes.

However, they have several disadvantages like odour production, air pollution or high cost of chemicals.

Partial nitritation followed by Anaerobic Ammonium Oxidation (Anammox) may be an alternative for such streams. In the partial nitritation, only half of ammonium is converted to nitrite and then ammonium and nitrite are transformed into nitrogen gas in the Anammox reaction. The ammonium is oxidized under anoxic conditions with nitrite as electron acceptor. Hence, the combination of partial nitritation with the Anammox process results in reduction of energy consumption for aeration and additionally no external electron donor has to be added. For these reasons, it is a very interesting way of wastewater management with comparison to traditional nitrification/denitrification.

I – I N TRODUCTION Nowadays, water is one of the most precious components on earth. It is part of all living cells and is a key resource in society. Over 70% of our planet is covered by surface water. However, around 97% is comprised of salty water in the oceans. The rest is freshwater. Most of this, about 69%, is locked up in the glaciers and icecaps. From the remaining freshwater, most occurs as a ground water and only about 0.3% is found as surface water in lakes and rivers. With growing people population and the same increasing human consumption of water combined with increasing pollution of water sources, careful use, management, treatment and water reuse becomes therefore absolutely essential.

One of the problems associated with freshwater pollution is nutrients discharge into surface water causing acceleration of the eutrophication process. Although, natural eutrophication may take a thousand of years, due to human activity, this process is rapidly intensified by increasing aquatic plant nutrient inputs to water bodies. Thus, the term “eutrophication” has become synonymous with “excessive fertilization” or the input of sufficient amounts of aquatic plant nutrients, which causes the growth of excessive amounts of algae and/or aquatic macrophytes in a water body (Petts, 2005). During last few decades, a huge numbers of land waters areas all over the world have been affected by eutrophication. It is also a serious problem concerning the Baltic Sea, which due to its special geographical and climatological characteristics is highly sensitive to the environmental impacts of human activities. Hence, wastewater, in its untreated form, cannot be discharged directly into environment and there is a need for its appropriate treatment.

Nitrogen is essential for living organisms as a part of proteins; however, it is also one of the nutrients causing eutrophication problems.

Nowadays, the biological methods are commonly used for treatment of municipal wastewater and some industrial sewage. In most wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), nitrogen is removed by biological nitrifica-

II – B ACKG ROUND II-1. The Anammox process As the Anammox process is object of study in this thesis, the introduction to the process and its characteristics organisms are described briefly in this chapter.

Nitrogen cycle and the discovery of the Anammox process In nature inorganic nitrogen atoms can exist in different oxidation states from -3 (NH4+) to +5(NO3-). Most of the nitrogen compounds representing these oxidation states can be converted to each other through mi-

2

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Norg.

N2 NH3

Nitrificationn

N2H4

Denitrification N2O

NH2OH

Fig. 1. Scheme of the nitrogen cycle.

Anammox Assimilation

NO

Fixation NO2

Ammonification Dissimilation

NO3

crobial activity (Kartal, 2008). The turnover of nitrogen in biosphere is known as the nitrogen cycle (Fig. 1). Nitrogen oxidation state is changed by different microorganisms, that carry out catabolic reactions (nitritation, nitratation, denitrification, dissimilatory nitrate reduction and Anaerobic Ammonium Oxidation (Anammox), anabolic reactions (ammonium uptake, assimilatory nitrate reduction and nitrogen fixation), and ammonification (Dapena Mora, 2007).

In the beginning of the 20th century, most of reactions depicted in the N-cycle were already known for a long time, and the N-cycle was assumed to be complete. In this complete N-cycle, there was no reaction accounting for the possibility of the anaerobic oxidation of ammonium (Kartal, 2008). In 1977, Engelberd Broda used thermodynamic calculation – standard free energy values of chemical reaction – to make a prediction on the existence of chemolitoautotrophic bacteria capable of oxidizing ammonium using nitrite as electron acceptor. These bacteria were known as “Lithotrophs missing from

nature”. Mulder et al. (1995) experimentally confirmed Broda’s prediction two decades later. However, they hypothesized that ammonium conversion was nitrate-depended.

Van de Graaf et al. (1995) proved the biological character of the process. Van de Graaf and co-workers (1996) showed that presence of nitrite as electron acceptor is essential for Anammox activity and not nitrates as it was initially supposed. In 1999, Strous et al.

(1999), basing on analysis of the 16S rRNA gene sequence, identified “missing lithotrophs” as a new, autotrophic member of the order Planctomycetales. They were found in both wastewater treatment plants and natural systems (Table 1) (Zhang et al., 2007). Almost 30 – 50% of gaseous nitrogen production is attributed to the Anammox bacteria in nitrogen cycle (Dalsgaard et al., 2005; Arrigo, 2005; Op den Camp et al., 2006). Their distinct phenotypic characteristics involve red colour, budding production, crateriform structure on the cell surface, intracellular compartment “anammoxosome”, and intracytoplasmic membrane containing ladderane

Table 1. Anammox bacteria discovered up-to-date (after Zhang et al., 2007).

Genus Brocadia Kuenenia Scalindua Others

Species Candidatus Brocadia anammoxidans Candidatus Brocadia fulgida Candidatus Kuenenia stuttgartiensis Candidatus Scalindua brodae Candidatus Scalindua wagneri Candidatus Scalindua sorokinii Candidatus Jettenia asiatica Candidatus Anammoxoglobus propionicus

3

Source Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Wastewater Seawater Not reported Synthetic water

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

lipid. As a special organelle in the cell, anammoxosome was considered to have three functions: (1) providing a place for catabolism; (2) generating energy for ATP synthesis through proton motive force across the anammoxsome membrane; (3) protecting the bacteria from the proton diffusion and intermediate toxicity due to their impermeable membranes (Zhang et al., 2007).

nium oxidation. Ammonium is oxidized by hydroxylamine (NH2OH) to form hydrazine.

Reducing equivalents derived from N2H4 then reduce nitrite to form hydroxylamine and N2 (Fig. 2A). Nitrate formation could generate reducing equivalents for biomass growth. Strous et al. (2006) based on genomic analysis of Kuenenia Stuttgartiensis indicated that nitrite oxide (NO) could also be an intermediate. According to this new pathway, nitrite was first reduced to nitric oxide; ammonium was then combined with NO to form hydrazine, which was later oxidized to dinitrogen gas (Kartal, 2008)(Fig. 2B). Different metabolic pathway was proposed by Kartal (2008). According to his suggestion Anammox catabolism starts with one electron reduction of NO2- to NO, this is potentially followed by a three electron reduction of NO to NH2OH. This step could be followed by the condensation of hydroxylamine and ammonia to form hydrazine and the to dinitrogen gas (Fig. 2C).

Generally, nitrite is not directly converted to hydrazine but via hydroxylamine and/or nitrite oxide (van der Star, 2008). Figure 2 shows a schematic representation of three possible metabolic pathways.

Recent studies showed that Anammox bacteria were capable of nitrate reduction with organic acids as electron donors and the same out-compete heterotrophic denitrifiers for these compounds. The end product of nitrate reduction by Anammox bacteria is dinitrogen gas. It was also showed that Anammox bacteria are also able to reduce nitrate to ammonium using organic acids as electron donor (Fig. 3). In this way, Anammox bacteria are capable of producing their

Brief process overview In the Anammox process, ammonium is converted with nitrite as electron acceptor in a ratio 1:1.32, respectively, to dinitrogen gas (Strous et al., 1998) (eq. 1).

NH +4 + 1,32NO −2 + 0,066HCO 3− + 0.13H + → 1,02N 2 + 0,26NO 3− + 0,066CH 2 O 0.5 N 0,15 + 2.03H 2 O

(1)

The main product of the anaerobic ammonia oxidation is dinitrogen gas, nevertheless around 10% of nitrogen in the influent is converted to nitrate nitrogen. General nitrogen balance shows ammonium to nitrite to nitrate ratio of 1:1.32:0.26. The Anammox bacteria have very strong affinity for their substrates, ammonium and nitrite. The affinity constant values for ammonium and nitrite are below 5µM (Kartal et al., 2007).

Substantial uncertainty exists on the intermediates in the catabolism (van der Star, 2008).

Based on the 15N-labelling experiments hydrazine (N2H4) was identified as an intermediate of the process. The occurrence of free hydrazine, a rocket fuel, in microbial nitrogen metabolism is rare, if not unique (Kartal e al., 2007). Van de Graaf et al. (1997) based on 15 N-labbeling experiments proposed a possible metabolic pathway for anaerobic ammo

A

NO2ˉ

B

NO2ˉ

C

NO2ˉ NO

NH4+

NH2OH

NH4+

NO

NH4+

NH2OH

N2H4

N2H4

N2H4

N2

N2

N2

4

Fig. 2. Different hypotheses on the Anammox catabolic pathway.

Additional potential intermediate are: A) hydroxylamine, B) nitric oxide, C) or hydroxylamine and nitric oxide (van der Star, 2008).

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

NH4

2007). It was also demonstrated that common denitrification substrates methanol and ethanol severely inhibited Anammox bacteria at a concentration below 1 mM. High salinity up to 30 g l-1 salt concentration cause reversible inhibition (Kartal et al., 2007).

Anammox

Application of the Anammox bacteria

denitrification N2O

NO

N2

dissimilatory nitrate reduction NO3

+

NO2

Operation and investment cost of wastewater treatment plant can be decreased by using innovative technologies based on new biological conversion methods. Due to negative environmental aspects of nitrogen discharge to recipients and increasingly stringent effluent standards, the effective nitrogen removal is necessary. Biological removal of high nitrogen concentrations from wastewater is very expensive when there is a lack of biodegradable organic carbon. Increasing requirements concerning nitrogen concentration in treated wastewater and increasing cost of the treatment exert a necessity of development a new method for biological nitrogen removal.

Recently, Anammox process was developed and proposed as a new technology for treating streams containing high concentration of ammonia nitrogen and low concentration of organic carbon. However, the Anammox process requires nitrite as electron acceptor for anaerobic oxidation of ammonium, and for its application in wastewater treatment, different setups are used to provide nitrite: 1-reactor or 2-reactors systems. The common purpose in the application of all the systems is providing Anammox bacteria with nitrite (Kartal et al., 2007). Generally, part of am-

N2

Fig. 3. Two possible routes of nitrate reduction by Anammox bacteria (Kartal, 2008).

own ammonium (and nitrite) to perform their “standard” catabolism (Kartal et al., 2007; Kartal, 2008, van der Star, 2008).

Egli et al. (2001) demonstrated that the Anammox bacteria were active within the range of temperatures from 6 to 43°C with the optimum at 37°C. For the optimal temperature, the pH range is between 6.5 and 8.5 (Gut, 2006). Inhibition studies showed, that Anammox bacteria are reversibly inhibited by very low levels (< 1µM) of oxygen concentrations and irreversibly inhibited by high nitrite concentrations (>10 µM). Egli et al. (2001) showed that Kuenenia Stuttgartiensis has a higher, but still low, tolerance to nitrite.

When the nitrite concentration was more than 5 mM for a longer period (12h), the Anammox activity was completely lost. However, the activity could be restored by addition of trace amounts (±50 µM) of the Anammox intermediate, hydrazine (Li et al., 2004; Op den Camp et al., 2007; Kartal et al., Aerated reactor + NH4 +

oxygen →

NO2

+

NH4 + oxygen → NO2

-

nitrifiers

-

NO3 +sulfide/COD→ NO2

-

denitrifiers

nitrifiers +

-

NH4 + NO2 → N2 +

-

NH4 + NO2 → N2

Anammox

Anammox One aerated reactor

+

-

NH4 + NO2 →N2

Anammox One non‐aerated reactor

Non aerated reactor A

B

C

Fig. 4. Simple scheme illustrating different Anammox configurations and different sources of nitrite: A) Nitritation and Anammox in Two-reactors in series, B) Nitritation and Anammox in one single reactor, C) Partial denitrification of nitrates to nitrites with the Anammox process in one non-aerated reactor.

5

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

monium is converted to nitrite and then the remaining ammonium and the formed nitrite is converted to dinitrogen gas by Anammox bacteria. Additionally, recently a new process was developed which combines the anaerobic ammonium oxidation with denitrifying conditions using sulphide as an electron donor for the production of nitrite from nitrate within anaerobic biofilm (Kalyuzhnyi et al., 2006). In Figure 4 there is shown the Anammox process in different configurations and different sources of nitrite.

The processes of nitritation and Anammox were observed and studied in different configurations, types of reactors and under various conditions. Parallel research, performed by a few research groups in different countries, has led to several names for processes where Anammox organisms play a major role (Table 2). This situation leads to an unclear terminology in the literature. Van der Star et al. (2007) proposed to clarify this situation by using the following descriptive terms:

•

The anammox process for the anoxic conversion of ammonium and nitrite to dinitrogen gas.

•

One-reactor nitritation-anammox process as the occurrence of the nitrite production and the anammox process in one reactor.

•

Two-reactor nitritation-anammox process for the partial oxidation of ammonium to nitrite in an aerated reactor, followed by an anoxic reactor, where only anammox process takes place.

•

One-reactor denitrification-anammox process for the anoxic processes of denitrification from nitrate to nitrite, combined with the anammox process.

•

The anammox reactor for the reactor in which only the anammox process takes place.

•

Anammox organism: the dedicated organisms capable of performing the anammox process.

Two reactor nitritation-Anammox

Partial nitritation/Anammox process is based on two processes. First assumed, that ammoTable 2. Process options and names for nitrogen removal systems involving the Anammox process (after van der Star et al., 2007) Process name

Number of reactors 2

Source of nitrite NH4+ Nitritation

Alternative process names

SHARONa – anammox b Two stage OLAND Two stage deammonifiation + One-reactor 1 NH4 Nitritation Aerobic deammonification Nitritation-anammox OLANDb c CANON Aerobic/anoxic deammonification deammonification d SNAP e DEMON DIBf g Two-reactor 1 NO3¯ DEAMOX h denitrification Denitrification denammox anammox anammoxi a – acronym of Sustainable High rate Ammonium Removal Over Nitrite, b – acronym of Oxygen-Limited Autotrophic Nitrification Denitrification, c – acronym of Completely Autotrophic Nitrogen removal Over Nitrite, d – acronym of Single-stage Nitrogen removal using the Anammox and Partial nitritation, e – names only refers to the process in a SBR under pH-control, f - acronym of Deammonification in Internal-aerated Biofilm system, g – DEnitrifying AMmonium OXidation h – DENitrification-anAMMOX process i – System where anammox was found originally. Whole process was originally designated as “anammox” Two-reactor Nitritation-anammox

6

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Â

sludge liquor generally contains enough alkalinity (in the form of bicarbonate) to compensate for the acid production if only 50% of the ammonium is oxidized. In this manner, exact ratio for full nitrogen removal in the Anammox process can be obtained (van Dongen et al., 2001a).

influent

Partial nitritation (Partial SHARON)

One reactor Nitritation-Anammox

The ability of bacterial cultures to create biofilm brings a possibility to enhance biological wastewater treatment efficiency.

Moreover, the ability of Anammox and Nitrosomonas species to grow within the same biofilm layer enabled to design a one-stage system for nitrogen removal. Simultaneous performance of nitritation and Anammox processes can lead to a complete autotrophic nitrogen removal in one single reactor. In a one-stage process ammonium oxidizers in the outer layer of the biofilm can co-exist with the Anammox organisms present in the inner layer. In this way, oxygen that inhibits the Anammox process is consumed in the outer layer of the biofilm and Anammox bacteria are protected from oxygen. The combination of these two processes - partial nitritation and Anammox- in one reactor is illustrated in Fig. 6.

Simultaneous nitritation and Anammox were observed and studied in various types of reactors under different conditions. Aeration devices and reactor configuration determine the transfer of air to the bulk phase. A transfer from the bulk phase over a boundary layer to the biofilm limits oxygen transfer to the bacteria. Also the limitation determined by hydrodynamics conditions is very important (van Hulle et al., 2003). In the moving bed bioreactor, the oxygen concentration has a great influence on the nitrification rate when the oxygen is rate-limiting (Hem et al., 1994). Also, it was proved that nitrite production rate is the rate-limiting step for the Anammox process in a single-stage system (Szatkowska et al., 2007). Intermittent aeration can also be used to secure a suitable ratio of oxygen and oxygen free conditions in the biofilm.

Anammox

effluent

Fig. 5. Scheme of the two-stage partial nitritation/Anammox process.

nium is partly oxidized to nitrite in the partial nitritation stage and then nitrite react with remaining ammonium in the Anammox stage. The nitritation of ammonium to nitrite is conducted by aerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria (AOB), a total nitrification should be avoided and the effluent should contain around 50% of the ammonium and 50% of nitrite. Different strategies can be used to selective retention of AOB bacteria in the system and to prevent further nitrite oxidation to nitrate by aerobic nitrite oxidizers, including the control of temperature, hydraulic retention time, alkalinity, the pH-value, dissolved oxygen concentration in the reactor as well as the amount of free ammonia (Paredes et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2007). The combination of two processes - partial nitritation and Anammox - in two reactors in series is illustrated in Figure 5.

Van Dongen et al. (2001a) showed that the Sharon (Single reactor system for High Ammonium Removal Over Nitrite) process could be successfully combined with the Anammox, creating two-stage process for treating reject water originating from dewatering of digested sludge. When the Sharon reactor is used to provide the feed for the Anammox process, only 50% of the ammonium needs to be converted to nitrites. Since

7

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

wastewater

Partial nitritation

aerobic zone

Fig. 6. Scheme of onestep partial nitritation/Anammox process within the biofilm.

anaerobic zone carrier

A combination of partial nitritation/Anammox process can also be establish in one single reactor under oxygen limited conditions what is principle of the so-called CANON process. The CANON process was investigated as an alternative to use conventional activated sludge for treatment of wastewater limited by organic carbon substrate (Third, 2003). Appropriate ammonium and DO (dissolved oxygen) concentration enable the consumption of oxygen by AOB (aerobic Ammonium Oxidizing Bacteria) to an extent in which DO concentration is not over the threshold toxic to the Anammox bacteria. The oxygen-limited conditions below 0.5% air saturation provide an adequate environment on a stable interaction between Nitrosomonas-as aerobic microorganisms and Planctomycete-like anaerobic bacteria (Sliekers et al., 2002; Ahn, 2006). The growth of NOB (aerobic Nitrite Oxidizing Bacteria) (and subsequent nitrate production) is prevented due to their lower affinity for oxygen compared to AOB and for nitrite compared to Anammox bacteria. Subsequently, the produced nitrite, an inhibitor to AOB, is used as an electron acceptor by the Anammox bacteria (Zhang et al., 2007; Vázquez-Padín et al., 2008). The obtaining of the micro-aerobic

influent

Anaerobic Reactor (AR)

conditions for the CANON process can be achieved in different kind of systems like SBR and gas-lift (Vázquez-Padín et al., 2008).

One-reactor denitrification-Anammox

Recently, a new process was developed. It is a combination of the anaerobic ammonium oxidation with denitrifying conditions using sulphide as an electron donor for production of nitrite from nitrate within anaerobic biofilm (Kalyuzhnyi et al., 2006). The principal flow diagram of this concept for treatment of high strength, strong nitrogenous and sulphate bearing wastewater is shown in Fig. 7.

In the first stage of this process, anaerobic mineralization of organic nitrogen takes place. Next, the effluent from this reactor (rich in ammonia and sulphide) is partly fed to the nitrifying reactor to generate mainly nitrate and the rest directly to the DEAMMOX reactor. In the final DEAMOX stage, both flows are mixed together for consecutive realisation of nitrite production mainly from nitrate using sulphide as an electron donor and for the Anammox process (Kalyuzhnyi et al., 2006; Szatkowska, 2007).

Nitrifying Reactor (NR)

NO 3- + (NO 2 -) DEAMOX reactor

NH4 + , (NS -) Fig. 7. Flow diagram of the DEAMOX concept (Kalyuzhnyi et al., 2006).

8

effluent

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Summary

to implementation of the EU Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) (Kohler N. & Perry, 2005). Nevertheless, municipal waste landfilling is still a very important issue in the waste management system in Europe and the rest of the world.

Waste disposal to landfills, in general, is an easy and low-cost waste management option but it raises environmental concerns. During the process of waste degradation, landfills produce waste products in three phases.

These are solid (i.e., degraded waste); liquid (i.e., leachate, which is water polluted with wastes); and gas (usually referred to as landfill gas) (Butt et al., 2007). The major potential environmental impact related to landfill leachate generation is pollution of groundwater and surface water (El-Fadel et al., 1997; Kjeldsen et al., 2002).

In Poland due to stricter regulations (Act on Wastes of 27 April 2001 with following changes), which transposed EU legislation requirements on waste management into the Polish national legislation, the amount of deposited wastes has to be decreased. Implementing this legislation is connected with the necessity of taking up a number of important actions, including limiting the amounts of biodegradable waste sent to the dumping sites. However, because of economical issues, landfills are the most attractive disposal route for municipal solid waste in Poland (Wiszniowski 2006a). About 90% of municipal solid waste is currently disposed of in landfill sites (â&#x20AC;&#x153;Environment 2007â&#x20AC;? by Central Statistical Office). Many existing landfills are of an ageing design with no properly designed foundations, so the leachate can easily penetrate into the surrounding groundwater (Suchecka et al., 2006).

The problem with landfill leachate production and management is one of the most important issues associated with the sanitary landfills. Environmental regulations require controlling the leachate level, which means that excess leachate must be removed and disposed of. Because of variable leachate composition from different landfills, leachate treatment methods have not been unified so far (Kulikowska and Klimiuk, 2007).

Application of the Anammox process in wastewater treatment can lead to significant reduction of operational costs. Compared to conventional nitrification-denitrification dependent nitrogen removal systems, the Anammox allows over 50% of the oxygen to be saved (only half of the ammonia has to be oxidized to nitrite instead of full oxidation to nitrates). Furthermore, because The Anammox is an autotrophic process, the problem regarding the supply of an electron donor (to support conventional denitrification) is circumvented and no organic carbon source is needed. Additionally, Anammox bacteria oxidize ammonium under anoxic conditions with nitrite as the electron acceptor, and converse energy for CO2 fixation. This is in great concern because taxes on CO2 may even incur further significant cost in future if WWTPs are not excluded from this charge.

Hence, the cost and CO2 emission are reduced by 60% to 90%, respectively (Fux, 2003; Op den Camp et al., 2007; Kartal et al., 2007).

The Anammox process is particularly suited for high nitrogen loaded industrial wastewaters that lack a carbon source. Different ammonium-rich streams (piggery manure, urine, digested fish canning effluents, tannery wastewater, landfill leachate, sludge liquors) have been studied with regard to the Anammox process application for its treatment. As the application of the Anammox process for landfill leachate and sludge liquors originating from dewatering of digested sludge, treatment is an objective of this study, the characteristics and different treatment methods for nitrogen elimination from these streams are introduced briefly here.

II-2. Landfill leachate - characteristics and treatment methods for nitrogen elimination In most countries, sanitary landfilling is the most common way to eliminate municipal solid wastes (MSW) (Renou et al., 2008). Up to 95% of total MSW collected worldwide is disposed of in landfills (Kurniawan et al., 2006). In Europe, the number of permitted or legal landfills appears to have declined due 9

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Landfill leachate generation Leachate is produced when water and/or other liquids seep through the wastes deposited in a landfill. Its production is the result of precipitation, surface runoff, infiltration, storage capacity, etc. (Heyer and Stegmann, 2002). Biochemical conditions, seasonal water regime of the landfill and changes in the solid waste composition affect both the quality and the quantity of these wastewaters (Gut, 2006). The water balance on the landfill site can be summarized as follows (Blakey, 1992): (2) L = P – R – ΔUs − ET – ΔUw Where: L – leachate production, P – precipitation, R – surface run-off, ΔUs – change in soil moisture storage, ET – actual evaporative losses from the bare-soil/evapotranspiration losses from a vegetated surface, ΔUw – change in moisture content of the refuse components.

Inorganic macrocomponents – Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, K+, NH4+, Fe2+, Mn2-, Cl-, SO42-, and HCO3-,

•

Heavy metals – Cd, Cr, Cu Pb, Ni and Zn,

•

Xenobiotic organic compounds (XOCs) – originating from households or industrial chemicals and present in relatively low concentrations in the leachate (usually less than 1.0 g m-3 of individual compound). These compounds include, among others, a variety of aromatic hydrocarbons, phenols, chlorinated aliphatic and adsorbable organic halogens (AOX).

Leachate composition may also be characterized by different toxicity, determined using toxicological tests (Vibrio fischeri, Daphnia similes, Artemia salina etc.), which proved indirect information on the content of pollutants that may be harmful to a particular class of organisms (Kjeldsen et al., 2002; Renou et al., 2008). Toxicity is a consequence of contaminants mixture, their synergistic or antagonistic effects, and different physicalchemical properties, and toxicity tests may thus give more information about potential environmental impact than do chemical analyses alone (Marttinen et al., 2002). The toxicity tests have confirmed the potential dangers of landfill leachate and the necessity of treating it (Kjeldsen et al., 2002; Renou et al., 2008).

There are many factors affecting the quality of the leachate, however among many others, the age of the landfill in particular influences the composition of the leachate (Renou et al., 2008). Data presented by Kulikowska and Klimiuk (2007) indicate that the landfill age has a significant effect especially on organic compounds and variation of these parameters with time may have important implications in leachate management. Three types of leachate can be classified by landfill age: young, intermediate and stabilized (Amokrane et al., 1997; Poznyak et al., 2008). Generally, young landfills contain large amounts of readily biodegradable organic matters and as a result of rapid anaerobic fermentation of this matter leachate normally contains high concentration of volatile fatty acids (VFA).

In addition, the climate has a great influence on leachate generation because the input of precipitation and loses through evaporation.

Moreover, leachate production depends also on the nature of the wastes themselves (Renou et al., 2008).

Landfill leachate composition The landfill leachate is very high and complex polluted wastewater. The mixtures of high organic and inorganic contaminants may be found there as a result of biological, chemical and physical processes at landfills, which are combined with waste composition and landfill water regime (Heyer and Stegmann, 2002; Poznyak et al., 2008). The composition of landfill leachate depends on many various factors like age of landfill, climate, nature of deposited wastes and also varies in composition from site to site. Landfill leachate contains four main groups of compounds (Christensen et al., 2001; Kjeldsen et al., 2002): •

•

Dissolved organic matter – expressed as Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) or Total Organic Carbon (TOC), including CH4, volatile fatty acids and more refractory compounds,

10

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

With time, when landfill enters the methanogenic phase, the biodegradable fraction of organic pollutants decreases and the VFA are converted to biogas. Consequently, organic matter and BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) to COD ratio decreases significantly and the organic compounds are dominated by refractory compounds (Welander et al., 1998; Neczaj et al., 2007). In contrast, the concentration of ammonia does not decrease, and often constitutes a major long-term pollutant in leachate (Kjeldsten et al., 2002).

Authors also suggested that neither heavy metals nor xenobiotic organic compounds, but ammonia would be the most concern in the long run as theory and model simulations show. The main sources of nitrogen are proteins, which accounts for approximately 0.5% of dry weight of municipal solid wastes.

The hydrolysis of the polypeptide chains is disadvantaged in energetic terms and this is apparently the reason for the slow kinetics of protein hydrolysis, which in turn causes the slow release of ammonia. Nitrogen can trigger off eutrophization in receiving watercourses and therefore its removal from landfill leachate, e.g., by biological treatment, is required (Jokela et al., 2002).

options available. There are many advantages of operating a landfill as a bioreactor. The leachate recycling not only improves their quality, but also shortens the time required for waste stabilization. Among others, additional advantages are: in situ leachate treatment and improvement of the landfill gas production rate, which may be favourable for energy recovery. This will tend to produce stabilized leachate containing relatively low concentration of biodegradable organic carbon but high concentrations of ammonia and persistent organic compounds (Knox, 1985; Jianguo et al., 2007; Renou et al., 2008). However, Price et al. (2003) showed that it is possible to remove ammonia from leachate by ex-situ nitrification of ammonia followed by usage of the landfill as an anaerobic bioreactor for denitrification.

Few years ago, the treatment of landfill leachate together with municipal wastewater was a common solution. However, this option is not advised due to presence of organic inhibitory compounds and accumulation of hazardous compounds from the leachate, which consequently leads to reduce treatment efficiency and increase the effluent concentration (Waleander et al., 1998; Renou et al., 2008). Moreover, Aktas and Çeçen (2001) observed nitrification inhibition and nitrite accumulation to about 85 – 100% of the total NOx-N, when leachate was mixed with domestic wastewater.

Landfill leachate treatment review – nitrogen removal As mentioned above, landfills leachate characteristics depend on several factors, as type of wastes collected, seasonal variation of the precipitation, the age of landfill and others.

These factors show the complexity of this wastewater and therefore indicate that there is no universal solution for its treatment.

According to Renou et al. (2008), conventional landfill leachate treatment can be performed in three ways: •

leachate transfer – recycling and combined treatment with domestic sewage,

•

chemical and physical methods,

•

biological treatment – aerobic and anaerobic processes.

Chemical and physical methods

Because of toxic nature of stabilized leachate, these effluents are difficult to deal with and biological processes are very inefficient.

Therefore, alternative technologies based on physical-chemical stages are required (Rivas et al., 2004). These processes include reduction of suspended solids, colloidal particles, floating material, colour and toxic compounds by flotation, coagulation/flocculation, adsorption, chemical oxidation and air stripping.

Physical-chemical treatments for the landfill leachate are used in addition at the treatment line (pre-treatment or last purification) or to treat a specific pollutant (e.g. stripping - for ammonia removal) (Renou et al., 2008).

Specifically, ammonia has been identified, as one of the major toxicants to microorganisms

Leachate transfer

Recycling of the leachate back through the top has been largely used in the past decade, because it was one of the least expensive 11

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

effective method for removal of ammonium, because of its high reaction rate and low residual ammonium concentration (Li et al., 1999). On the other hand, in spite of very high ammonia removal exceeding even 98%, struvite precipitation may be expensive due to high cost of chemicals, especially magnesium chloride (Ozturk et al., 2003; Calli et al., 2005; He et al., 2007). However He et al.

(2007) demonstrated that about 44% of chemical cost might be saved by using the MAP decomposition residues as the sole magnesium and phosphate sources. Additionally, Li et al. (1999) pointed out that high salinity formed in the treated leachate during precipitation by using MgCl2·6H2O and NaHPO4·12H2O, which may affect microbial activity in the following biological processes.

Other solution for ammonium removal from landfill leachate is ion exchange as an alternative treatment option. The ion exchange is more competitive to other methods because of little influence of the low temperature.

Clinoptilolite, one of natural zeolites, was found very effective in removing ammonia from water and wastewater (Wang et al., 2006). Zeolite is known to possess a higher selective ion-exchange capability for ammonium ion than Ca2+ and Mg2+, even when the concentration of the latter is higher than the former (Junga et al., 2004). Nevertheless, the presence of competitive ions such as K+, Na+, Ca2+ and Mg2+ in landfill leachate can reduce the ammonium adsorption capacity and increase equilibrium-making time. However, experimental results indicate that ammonia can be removed by 84% from leachate using clinoptilolite as an ion exchanger (Kietlińska and Renman, 2005).

in the treatment system, suggesting that pretreatment prior to the biological treatment system is required to reduce the concentration of NH4-N (Kim et al., 2007). Generally, it is a well known fact, that volatile fatty acid content decrease with landfill age and neither biological nitrification nor denitrification is not appropriate due to low COD to NH4-N ratio (the lack of sufficient electron donors in leachate and the high energy requirements for aeration) (He et al., 2007).

The most common physical-chemical method for ammonia removal from leachate is air stripping which allows removing up to 93% of ammonia (Li et al., 1999; Marttinen et al., 2002; Renou et al., 2008). If this method is to be efficient, the medium needs to have high pH value and the contaminated gas phase must be treated with either H2SO4 or HCl. A major concern about ammonia air stripping is releasing NH3 into the atmosphere, which causes severe air pollution if ammonia cannot be properly absorbed by neither H2SO4 nor HCl. Other drawbacks are the calcium carbonate scaling of the stripping tower, when lime is used for pH adjustment, and the problem of foaming which imposes to use a large stripping tower (Li et al., 1999).

Additionally, since the leachate from an aged landfill contains high alkalinity just like a strong pH buffering system, the pH variation before and after stripping, will consume a large amount of alkali and acid (Li et al., 1999). Moreover, Marttinen et al. (2002) reported that in some cases stripping and ozonation increased toxicity in spite of COD and ammonia removal. This may be a result of oxidation of specific organic compounds to more toxic ones. This is on great importance in case following biological treatment or discharges into environment.

As an alternative to eliminate high level of NH4-N in leachate, the precipitation of NH4N by forming magnesium ammonium phosphate (MAP, struvite, MgNH4PO4·6H2O) can be applied. Kim and co-workers (2007) demonstrated that struvite precipitation is an excellent pre-treatment process. Formation of magnesium ammonium phosphate, a crystal with a solubility as low as 0.0023 g per 100 ml H2O, has been considered to be an

Biological treatment

In spite of stable treatment effects, and preferable adaptability to the changes of wastewater quality and quantity, physical/chemical methods have several shortcomings: odour, air pollution, high chemical costs, highenergy consumption and excess sludge production (Bae et al., 1997; Liang and Liu, 2007). The main reason to select a biological process for nitrogen removal is the lower price compared to the physicochemical methods (Dapena Mora, 2007). The biologi12

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

cal nitrification/denitrification is probably the most efficient and the cheapest process to eliminate nitrogen from leachate. However, specific toxic substances and/or presence of bio-refractory organics can inhibit biological treatment (Wiszniowski et al., 2006b). Moreover, there are other problems associated with biological nitrogen removal.

Young landfills contain higher concentration of biodegradable organic matter and ammonia, what is conductive factor for biological denitrification. On the other hand, the mature landfill leachate contains relatively lower concentration of degradable organic material but higher concentrations of ammonia and the same the external carbon source addition is needed. The activity of nitrifying bacteria is a function of temperature, pH, ammonia concentration and nitrifying biomass concentration. The growth rate of nitrifying microorganisms is also slow and might be inhibited by metals and hazardous materials. The low amount of bioavailable phosphorus in landfill leachate may limit the nitrification process or cause bulking sludge problems. Additionally, landfill sites exist in a wide range of environments, including areas with cool climate and achieving nitrification at low temperature requires large aeration basin volume or high biomass concentration in the aeration unit (Hoilijoki et al., 2000; Isaka et al., 2007).

Ilies and Mavinič (2001) investigated the nitrification and denitrification processes at operating temperatures down to 10ºC in the activated sludge system. The nitrification process appeared to be unaffected (to any great extent) by a decrease in ambient temperatures to 14ºC. However, when temperature dropped to 10ºC, the nitrification intensity drop between 10 and 30% was observed.

Authors primarily attributed nitrification inhibition to low operating temperature, although they identified also other possible factors like too short aerobic hydraulic retention time (HRT) and increasing level of nitrous acid associated with low pH-value. But, Hoilijoki et al. (2000) proved that nitrification is feasible even at temperature as low as 10, 7 and even 5ºC. However, at 5ºC complete nitrification was obtained in the activated sludge system with addition of carrier mate-

rial, whereas activated sludge without carriers was able to remove only 61% of ammonium.

Authors suggested that nitrifying microorganisms were attached to the carrier material and somehow stabilised the process at low temperature. Also Welander et al. (1997) conducted nitrification of landfill leachate at temperature of 10ºC, using plastic carrier material for biofilm growth. Authors proved that using suspended-carrier biofilm technology brings no risk for loss of biomass due to separability problems. Moreover, low temperatures have only weak negative effect on nitrification rate. They suggested that this phenomenon could be explained by oxygen diffusion into the biofilm, so the decreased specific reaction rate at lower temperatures is masked by deeper penetration of oxygen in the biofilm, resulting in larger mass of active nitrifiers. Also Jokela et al. (2002) confirmed that nitrification of landfill leachate at low temperatures at range of 10 and even 5ºC is possible using biofilm systems.

The most important issue concerning N removal is to ensure appropriate C to N ratio. The optimum COD/NO3-N ratio for denitrification depends on the nature of the carbon source and on operating conditions of the system. Generally, the biological process is especially efficient in treatment young landfill leachate rich in volatile fatty acids (Wiszniowski et al., 2006b). For leachate characterized by BOD5/COD ratio above 0.5, Surmacz-Górska (2000) proposed three systems for biological treatment: membrane bioreactor, rotating biological contactor and system with pre-denitrification and microorganisms immobilized on suspended carrier.

The best results were obtained in the system consisted of activated sludge with predenitrification and microorganisms immobilized on suspended carrier. However, the post-denitrification with the external source of organic carbon is recommended to remove remaining nitrites and nitrates. Im and co-workers (2001) proposed anaerobicaerobic system including simultaneous methanogenesis and denitrification to treat organic and nitrogen compounds in immature leachate. The BOD5/COD and C/N ratio were 0.44 and 14, respectively and com13

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

plete N removal was achieved with raw landfill leachate as a carbon source. Much more complicated is situation with mature leachate containing relatively low concentration of biodegradable organic material but high concentration of ammonia. For that reason a supplementary source of organic carbon is needed (Wiszniowski et al., 2006b; Zhang et al., 2007). Kaczorek and Ledakowicz (2006) achieved the 99% removal of inorganic nitrogen compounds using sodium acetate as external carbon source in two-sludge system with secondary denitrification. Ilies and Mavinič (2001) used methanol as supplementary carbon source for denitrification in 4-stage Bardenpho system (without anaerobic stage).

Additionally, the authors reported inhibition of denitrification when operating temperature dropped from 20 to 17ºC and finally to 10ºC. Welander and co-workers (1998) accomplished denitrification using initially acetic acid and later methanol as external carbon source. The study was performed under realistic conditions (variations in temperature and leachate composition, etc.), and the temperature of the leachate varied between 10 and 26ºC. One of the main advantages of this system compared to activated sludge is weak temperature dependence. In addition, Loukidou and Zoubolis (2001) performed denitrification using methanol and found out that the attached-growth biomass treatment method may be an interesting option comparing to the conventional activated sludge process.

Due to shortage of organic carbon source for denitrification of mature landfill leachate and cost of external carbon source addition it was important to obtain technology that facilitates enhanced nitrogen removal under the condition of low carbon source. Denitrification via nitrite instead of nitrate saved the oxygen requirement for nitrite oxidation and 40% of the carbon demand. A biodegradable COD to NO2-N ratio greater than 2.5 may ensure complete denitrification when shortcut nitrification takes place (Bae et al., 1997; Canziani et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2007). The oxidation of ammonium to nitrite has usually been carried out using the Sharon technology. However, this technology could not be suitable for treatment of influents with vari-

able nitrogen loads, such as landfill leachate, because of possible stability problems when receiving ammonium loading shocks (Ganigué et al., 2007). Canziani and coworkers (2006) tested nitrogen removal from mature leachate by partial nitritation in membrane bioreactor and subsequent denitrification in a moving bed biofilm reactor. It was shown that a stable partial nitritation of ammonium to nitrite might be accomplished with temperature higher than 30ºC and free ammonia concentration higher than 2.5 g m-3.

However, a low dissolved oxygen concentration, kept under 0.5 g m-3, remains the key control parameter for partial nitritation. Under these conditions; it was possible to oxidize more than 85% of influent nitrogen to nitrite. Peng and co-workers (2008) reported other possibility for controlling partial nitritation of ammonium to nitrite. They showed that the main factor achieving and maintaining nitritation is a proper range of free ammonia concentration obtained by dilution recycled final effluent. It inhibits nitrite oxidizing bacteria but not ammonium oxidizing bacteria. Isaka et al. (2007) observed a partial nitrification performed by nitrifying bacteria entrapped in a gel carrier. In the study, nitrification reactor was operated at high dissolved oxygen concentration levels; low temperature, and infinite sludge retention time, therefore partial nitrification was possible because of free ammonia inhibition. One more method for controlling the oxidation of ammonium to nitrite is presented by Ganigué and co-workers (2007). In their study, the ammonium conversion to nitrite was achieved and controlled by alkalinity availability. Nevertheless, in this study occurred only partial ammonium oxidation to nitrite occurred, because the researchers wanted the Anammox process to take place.

Due to the limitations of biological processes associated with low C/N ratio, high-energy consumption and unstable running, there was a need to search for new treatment methods.

It appeared that the Anammox process could be a good alternative for traditional nitrification denitrification of mature landfill leachate by reducing oxygen and carbon source requirements and assuring high nitrogen re14

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

tics, technical applicability and constraints, effluent discharge alternatives, costeffectiveness, regulatory requirements and environmental impact. A combination of physicochemical and biological treatments is required to achieve effective removal of NH4â&#x20AC;&#x201C;N and COD with a substantial amount of biodegradable organic matter. In most cases, physicochemical treatments are suitable for pre-treatment of stabilized leachate to complement the biological degradation process (Kurniawan et al., 2006). In case of the Anammox process, there is a need to make more detailed research concerning on dependence the process on temperature decrease.

moval efficiency. However, in spite that the Anammox process was known in the mid nineties, there are still very few papers concerning the process for landfill leachate treatment. In the end of that decade, Helemer and Kunst (1998) observed a loss of inorganic nitrogen of up to 90% in the nitrification step of rotating biological contactor under low DO conditions. Moreover, Siegrist and co-workers (1998) also observed extensive loss of nitrogen (up 70% of ammonium oxidized) in a nitrifying rotating biological contactor treating ammonium rich landfill leachate. Authors suggested two hypotheses for this autotrophic nitrogen removal: autotrophic denitrification by Nitrosomonas or by the Anammox process. Performed detailed analyzes of composition and spatial structure of the microbial community in the biofilm on the RBC (Egli et al., 2001; Egli et al., 2003) proved that the Anammox bacteria were exclusively present in the deeper part of the biofilm. Zhang and Zhou (2006) used a bench scale UASB reactor for removal of nitrogen from leachate by means of the Anammox process. The results showed that the average removal efficiencies of ammonium, nitrite and total nitrogen were 87.5%, 74.9% and 79.6% respectively, corresponding to the average ratio of removed nitrite-toammonium equal to 1.14 during the steady phase of the Anammox activity. Liang and Liu (2008) used bench scale up-flow fixed bed biofilm reactors for two-step partial nitritation and the Anammox process to remove nitrogen. About 60% of ammonium and 64% of nitrite nitrogen were simultaneously removed in the Anammox reactor.

II-3. Reject water - characteristics and treatment method for nitrogen removal Not only landfill leachate is with reason considered as problematic. As it turns out, recycled streams within the wastewater treatment plant may also contribute to magnitude nitrogen load in the inlet. Liquors arising from dewatering of sludge by belt presses, centrifuges or alternative dewatering measures are referred to as sidestreams (Thornton et al., 2007). Usually during anaerobic sludge digestion, organic carbon is partially converted to methane gas, while about 50% of the nitrogen, bound in the sludge, is released as ammonium (Siegrist, 1996; van Dongen et al., 2001a). This sludge liquor contains relatively high concentration of ammonium nitrogen (typically 200 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 700 g m-3) and a relatively low content of biodegradable organic matter.

Additionally in the reject water the ratio of HCO3-:NH4+ is normally equal to 1.1:1 (van Dongen et al., 2001a; van Dongen et al., 2001b; Thorton et al., 2007). In Table 3 the example of average reject water composition is presented.

Summary It is important to note that the selection of the most suitable treatment methods for landfill leachate depends on their characteris-

15

Grzegorz Cema

Component SS COD + NH4 -N P-total HCO3HCO3 /N ratio Temperature pH

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Unit -3 gm g m-3 -3 gm -3 gm g m-3 + -1 mol HCO3 (mol NH4 -N) °C -

Values 675 1500 – 2000 800 – 900 19.3 3000 0.98 35 8.2

crystals from impurities of the anaerobic digester. First, precipitates were dissolved in acid and the pollutions were removed by centrifugation. The clarified supernatant was re-precipitated by adjusting its pH with caustic. It was shown that in the two steps process white MAP crystals could be obtained with over 85% recovery. However, to perform precipitation the pH-value must be increased up to 9 usually with NaOH solution, what generates additional cost. Generally, struvite precipitation may be expensive because of high chemical cost, especially magnesium chloride (Ozturk et al., 2003).

Besides this, sludge disposal costs also increase since use of MAP could increase the mass of dry solids for disposal by 50%. Additionally, the lacks of reliable ammonia monitor for such dirty liquors make the process difficult to control (Jeavons et al., 1998).

As an alternative to eliminate high level of NH4-N from reject water, there is used ammonia air or steam stripping. Ammonia in reject water is mainly present as ammonium ion. By raising the pH-value the ammonium is converted to ammonia, which is readily soluble in water. When contacted with a gaseous phase, the ammonia will be transferred from water phase to the gaseous phase. The main difference between air and steam stripping is the treatment of the ammonia-rich gaseous phase (Janus and van der Roest, 1997). In order to achieve an increase of the reject water pH-value above 10, NaOH or Ca(OH)2 is added. Sludge flocks and precipitated as CaCO3 due to pH increase and have to be removed in a presedimentation step (Siegrist, 1996). Siegrist (1996) demonstrated NH3 removal efficiency up to 97% at supernatant temperature between 10 – 22°C. The greatest advantage of

Despite of the fact that the volumetric supernatant flow is only around 2% of the total influent wastewater, contains up to 25% of the total nitrogen load into WWTP. Additionally it is usually returned to the head of the sewage treatment works (Siegrist, 1996; Janus and van der Roest, 1997; Thornton et al., 2007; Dosta et al., 2007). This is especially dubious in case when the latter has limited aeration/nitrification/denitrification capacity.

Conventional biological extension requires additional volume of aeration tanks and consequently a substantial investment (Janus and van der Roest, 1997; Volcke et al., 2006). In some cases enlarge or modifying the operation of the mainstream processes already on site and this may be the most cost-effective options. However, some works may not have this option available and on sites, where sidestreams comprise a significant proportion of the total ammonium loading on the mainstream processes, a possible option is to treat directly the sidestream (Thornton et al., 2007).

Generally, the chemical, physical and biological processes are feasible to recycle or eliminate ammonium from reject waters.

Chemical and physical methods One of the methods is precipitation of ammonium in the form of magnesium ammonium phosphate MgNH4PO4 (MAP) by addition of phosphoric acid and magnesium oxide. The process is according to following reaction when the thermodynamic solubility product is exceeded (Siegrist, 1996; Çelen and Türker, 2001): Mg 2+ + NH 4+ + PO 34− + 6H 2 O → → MgNH 4 PO 4 ⋅ 6H 2 O

Table 3. Example of average reject water composition (Dosta et al., 2007).

(3)

Çelen and Türker (2001) developed a twostep purification process to recover MAP 16

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

the ammonia stripping is relatively simple operation not affected by wastewater fluctuation if pH and temperature remain stable (Szatkowska, 2007). A major concern about ammonia air stripping is releasing NH3 as it was mentioned before.

Other available method of treatment is ion exchange by materials selective to the ammonium ion. Most of the research undertaken has studied the effectiveness of naturally occurring materials, mainly zeolites. Today the most suitable zeolite for this process is clinoptilolite, a selective aluminosilicate of volcanic provenance, which shows an ammonium exchange capacity in the range 0.94 21.52 g NH4+ N kg-1 (Thornton et al., 2007).

Mackinnon et al. (2003) demonstrated that ion exchange using a new material, known by the name MesoLite, shows strong potential for the removal of ammonia from sludge liquors and an opportunity to concurrently reduce phosphate levels. MesoLite shows an ammonium exchange capacity in the range 45 - 55 g NH4+ N kg-1. Using MesoLite materials, over 90% reduction of ammonia was achieved in the side stream. Thornton and co-workers (2007) confirmed that MesoLite is highly selective for the ammonium ion.

Authors showed that over 95% of it was removed from belt press liquors with an initial ammonium nitrogen concentration exceeding 600 g m-3. The ion exchange is more competitive comparing to others methods because of little dependency at the low temperatures.

content of the supernatant was low, therefore a carbon source (methanol) had to be added for appropriate denitrification performance.

The process temperature was close to the inlet temperature of supernatant which was about 20 – 30 °C. Moreover, author stated that addition of excess sludge from supernatant treatment would enhance performance of nitrification in wastewater treatment in winter. Hwang et al. (2000) analysed two types of upflow biofilm reactor packed with granular floating polystyrene (GFP) and polyurethane foam cubes (PFC) to investigate the denitrification performance in reject waters. The results showed that very high denitrification rate was achieved in both types of biofilm reactor because the high concentration of volatile fatty acids contained in reject water provided the effective donors for denitrification.

Operational costs of the biological nitrogen removal process stem from oxygen and organic matter requirements for nitrification and denitrification, respectively. Due to the fact, that nitrite is intermediary compound in both steps: nitrification and denitrification, it would be convenient to procure a partial nitrification up to nitrite and then denitrification starting from nitrite. This approach will produce savings in the oxygen needs during nitrification, a reduction in the denitrification organic matter requirements, plus a decrease in surplus sludge production (Ciudad et al., 2004). Fux et al. (2004a) investigated nitrogen removal by nitritation followed by denitrification with carbon addition in the SBR reactor.

They obtained efficient and robust nitrogen elimination at a total hydraulic retention time of 1 day via the nitrite pathway. The removal efficiency was amounted to 85 – 90% and ethanol was used as electron donor for denitrification at a ratio of 2.2 gCOD g-1 N removed. Another way to eliminate nitrogen from the sludge liquor is the Sharon process.

Due to a short retention time of biomass (approximately 1 day) and high temperature (35°C), the nitrite oxidisers are washed out and only nitrites are formed in the Sharon reactor. The process is performed without sludge retention. For oxidation of ammonium to nitrite, 25% less oxygen is necessary

Biological treatment Biological treatment is generally considered as the best available treatment of sludge liquors. However, high strength ammonia liquors are proved to be difficult to treat biologically, due to the toxicity of ammonia and its oxidation products at particular pH values. The alkalinity in digested sludge liquor is generally not sufficient to allow full nitrification and an additional alkalinity source needs to be added to maintain the pH (Jeavons et al., 1998).

Siegrist (1996) investigated separate intermittent nitrification/denitrification of digester supernatant. Because degradable organic 17

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

than for the oxidation of ammonium to nitrate. For denitrification of nitrite, 40% less methanol is needed than for denitrification of nitrate. Denitrification is used to control the pH-value (Hellinga et al., 1998; van Dongen et al., 2001a). The first full-scale application of the Sharon process has been constructed at the Rotterdam Dokhaven WWTP. It was possible to achieve an N-removal efficiency of 90%, and the process was stable despite load variations and some process disturbances. The process requires high temperature; however, heat production by biological conversion appeared to be significant, due to the high inlet concentration, and contributes to the optimal operating temperature of 30 40째C (Mulder et al., 2001).

The BABE (Bio Augmentation Batch Enhanced) process is another technique for treatment of sludge liquor. The principle of this process is to implement nitrification reactor in the sludge return line, the so-called BABE reactor. It can be fed with an internal N-rich flow. Also, limited amount of activated sludge from main process is recycled over the BABE reactor. Hence, the nitrification capacity of an activated sludge process can be augmented by the addition of nitrifiers cultivated in the BABE reactor. Practical results of the full-scale application of the BABE technology showed that the augmentation effect of applying the BABE process improved the nitrification rate of the sludge with almost 60% (Salem et al., 2003; Salem et al., 2004).

Since the Anammox bacteria were discovered, a new alternative appeared for treatment of sludge liquor (Gut, 2006). In order to relieve the main wastewater treatment plant, reject water treatment with a combined Sharon-Anammox process seems to be a promising option. The Sharon process can be operated without denitrification, what is especially interesting in view of coupling the former with the Anammox process (van Dongen et al., 2001a). The simulation results indicate that significant improvements of the effluent quality of the main wastewater treatment plant can be realized. The best results were obtained by means of cascade feedback control of the Sharon effluent ni-

trite-to-ammonium ratio through setting an O2-set-point that is tracked by adjusting the air flow rate. Additionally, an economic analysis of operating cost index shows that implementation of this operation mode warrants the associated investment costs (Volcke et al., 2005; Volcke et al., 2006). Van der Star et al. (2007) described the first full-scale Anammox reactor. The operation was compared with parameters previously reported in studies on laboratory scale. The maximum attained conversion of 9.5 kg N m-3d-1 was limited by the available influent load and was not a maximum volumetric conversion of the Anammox reactor.

Rosenwinkel et al. (2005) investigated the simultaneous process in the Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) treating reject water. It was possible to remove up to 80% of the ammonia nitrogen load from sludge dewatering on Hattingen WWTP. The nitrogen removal from reject water led to higher stability of the activated sludge tanks of the WWTP and reduced nitrogen load in the influent (Rosenwinkel and Cornelius, 2005).

Recently, a full-scale application of partial nitritation/Anammox process was successfully achieved in SBR reactor at the wastewater treatment plant in Strass, Austria (Innerebner et al., 2007). This pH-controlled system reached the designed elimination capacity of 300 kg N day-1 at the end of 2004.

Both aerobic and anaerobic ammoniaoxidizing bacteria were enriched in the biomass and due to the high NH4-N/COD ratio of 2.5 to 3 in the influent flow, autotrophic processes were dominant. The process was operated in a SBR system providing intermittent aeration governed by three control mechanisms: time-, pH-, and dissolved oxygen (DO) control.

Summary Generally, separate sludge dewatering liquor treatment mostly requires new tanks or a comprehensive modification of available reactors. The overall investment costs are therefore significantly reduced if the separate treatment operates at high volumetric reaction rates. Furthermore, the dewatering liquor normally needs to be stored prior sepa-

18

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

•

rate treatment, as the sludge dewatering facilities are often operated intermittently (Fux et al., 2004a). With a wide variety of technologies for reject water treatment, the question rises, which process is the best? For each treatment processes there is case-specific limitation, which sets the main goals for the side-stream treatment. Besides pure process engineering aspects, also other aspects such as: start-up time, risk of failure, flexibility and others have to be taken into account (van Loosdrecht and Salem, 2005).

•

Estimation of kinetic constants of nitrogen removal process by usage of batch tests.

The more specific objectives of the research included: •

studying the Anammox process in Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor treating reject water originating from dewatering of digested sludge, and to obtain long-lasting and stable Anammox process,

•

studying the Anammox process in the Rotating Biological Contactor treating real landfill leachate, and to obtain longlasting and stable Anammox process,

•

finding correlations between the factors that influence the functioning of the Anammox bacteria and to determine suitable conditions in order to obtain maximum removal rates,

•

defining the most important parameters influencing bacterial activity to oxidize ammonium with nitrite to nitrogen gas,

•

investigating the optimal oxygen condition for purpose of maximum nitrogen removal rate by batch tests application,

•

determination of the respiration rate for the partial nitritation process by application of OUR (oxygen uptake rate) tests with addition of ATU (inhibition of nitritation step) and NaClO3 (inhibition of nitratation step),

•

developing the Anammox process in the Membrane assisted BioReactor.

III – A IM OF THE THESIS Biological nitrogen removal used to purify wastewater with high ammonium content can become a major cost factor of wastewater treatment, in particular when the wastewater contains little amounts of biologically degradable carbon compounds. Moreover, the operational and investment cost can be saved with the use of new biological conversion methods and technology. Partial nitritation/Anammox is an excellent example of such new process, where oxygen and aeration energy are largely reduced and no external carbon source is required. The partial nitritation/Anammox process has the potential to be more cost-efficient than nitrification/denitrification. The process can be applied for treatment of ammonium-rich wastewaters such as landfill leachate or sludge liquor originating from dewatering of digested sludge.

The aim of these studies was to investigate nitrogen removal from ammonium-rich streams with application of the Anammox process.

The main goal of the investigations was to study the process performance and to estimate nitrogen removal rates in the partial nitritation/Anammox process applied in different systems. The process was established in three different reactors (Membrane assisted BioReactor, Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor and Rotating Biological Contactor).

The main objectives of this study were: •

To establish potential process bottlenecks and influence of operation parameters on process performance,

IV – M ATERIAL S AND M ETHODS IV-1. Membrane (MBR)

assisted

bioreactor

Reactor operation The Anammox process for nitrogen removal from synthetic wastewater was investigated in the laboratory scale Membrane assisted BioReactor (MBR). The liquid volume in the reactor was 0.036 m3 and the reactor was provided with synthetic wastewater by

To compare different systems applied for the Anammox process, 19

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

medium composition were gradually changed. The scheme of the MBR is shown in Figure 8, while the changes in operational conditions of the MBR are listed in Table 4.

Analytical procedure During the research period, the samples were taken from influent, effluent and the mixed liquor three times a week. The efficiency of the biological treatment was followed in terms of the general parameters such as: COD (dichromate method), ammonia (Kjeltec System 1026 Tecator), nitrite and nitrate (colorimetric method). Moreover, the process was monitored by measurements of the following parameters: flow rate, pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen and the biomass concentration in the bulk liquid. The free ammonia and free nitrous acid concentrations were calculated according to Anthonisen et al. (1976).

Additionally, respiratory activity of the first and the second stage of the nitrification were measured as described by Surmacz-Górska et al. (1996). Mensuration of dissolved oxygen uptake by the bacterial culture and during the subsequent addition of the selective inhibitors was conducted (Fig. 9).

A completely closed reactor vessel (volume = 110 ml) was used for the measurements. The reactor was equipped with oxygen electrode connected with the recorder. Mixed liquors samples were collected from the MBR reactor, aerated by shaking the sample, and transferred to the vessel, which was carefully closed, with no remaining air bubbles.

During the measurement, samples were mixed using a magnetic stirrer.

Fig. 8. Scheme of the investigated MBR system.

peristaltic pump and the same way permeate was sucked out. The effluent pump was connected with flat sheet membrane cartridge (Fig. 8).

Synthetic medium was made of tap water and additionally adjusted by NaHCO3, Na2HPO4, NaNO2 and NH4Cl in order to reach nitriteto-ammonium ratio of 1.32:1 (Strous et al.

1998). To check the reactor’s management with virtual medium, at the end of the experiment the landfill leachate from the municipal landfill in Gliwice (Poland) was added to the synthetic medium up to 10% of its volume. The reactor was equipped with a heater to keep temperature stable above 30ºC, and with vertical stirrer to ensure proper mixing.

During the research period, the Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT) and the synthetic Table 4. Operation conditions of the MBR. Parameter Reactor volume Membrane cartridge surface Flow rate Hydraulic retention time (HRT) COD0 + NH4 - N0 NO2 - N0 Biomass concentration Temperature pH

Unit 3 m 2 m m3 d-1 d -3 g O2 m -3 gm -3 gm -1 g MLSS l ºC -

20

value 0.036 0.1 0.009 – 0.023 4 – 1.52 4.9 – 60 17.8 – 74.5 21.8 – 98.1 3.5 – 12.4 33.8 ± 0.6 7.9 ± 0.1

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

to determine nitrogen removal rates. Tests were performed in 2 L reactor. Activated sludge from membrane assisted bioreactor was stirred for 24 hours without aeration and feeding in order to remove substrate and starving the sludge. The water bath was used to keep the same temperature like in the reactor. After 24 hours, sludge was thickened to 0.2 L and then reactor was filled with synthetic feeding media up to 2 L. Collected samples were immediately analysed for inorganic nitrogen compounds. Additionally, temperature, dissolved oxygen and pH were measured during the batch tests.

Inhibited

by NaClO3

Nitrite oxidation + Ammonia oxidation

Inhibited

by ATU

Ammonia oxidation

+

+

Organic carbon oxidation

Organic carbon oxidation

Organic carbon oxidation

Fig. 9. Schematic representation of the action of NaClO3 and ATU on the respiratory activity (Surmacz-Górska et al., 1996).

Sodium chlorate (2ml of 12% NaClO3 solution) was used as an inhibitor of the nitrite oxidizers whereas allylthiourea (2ml of 0.028% ATU solution) as an inhibitor of ammonium oxidizing bacteria. The respiratory activity of heterotrophs was also calculated as the remaining oxygen uptake after additions of inhibitors.

IV-2. Moving Bed Biofilm (MBBR) – Two step process

Reactor operation The Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) was constructed by the PURAC Company and was located at the Himmerfjärden Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP), southwest of Stockholm by the Himmerfjärden bay.

The pilot plant was running since 2002. Results from the start-up period are presented in Trela et al., (2004) and Szatkowska (2004).

The technical-scale pilot plant was designed for studies of the two step partial nitritation/Anammox process in two reactors of 2.1 m3 each, in series. A partial nitritation process was in the first reactor with Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT) of 2 days followed by the Anammox process in the second reactor with HRT of 3 days. Reactors were filled, to 50% of their volume, with Kaldnes biofilm carriers. The influent reject water, from dewatering of the digested sludge, was continuously pumped to the first reactor and

Membrane cartridge KUBOTA membrane cartridge type 203 was used. Membrane sheets are ultrasonic-welded on both surfaces of the membrane panel.

They are made of chlorinated polyethylene with nominal 0.4 µm pore size. Effective surface area was equal to 0.1 m2. Between the panel and the membrane sheets, a spacer is laid to distribute filtered liquid into series of channels that lead to a nozzle on top of the cartridge. Moreover, the spacer prevents membrane sheets from sticking onto membrane panel (Shino et al., 2004).

Batch tests Two batch tests were performed during the research period in order to confirm presence of the Anammox process in the reactor and

Conductivity

Conductivity DO

Settling tank (buffer)

pH, T

Reactor

Settling tank

Conductivity Settling tank

pH, T

Effluent Air

R1

Deoxidising Dilution with tap water column

R2 Internal recirculation

External recirculation

Fig. 10. Pilot plant configuration; R1 – partial nitritation reactor, R2 – Anammox reactor ( internal and external recirculation introduced in the transition period from 2-step towards 1-step), (based on Gut, 2006).

21

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Fig. 11. Photo of the technical-scale pilot plant. Partial nitritation reactor on the right side and the Anammox reactor on the left side.

density polyethylene HDPE. Their density was equal to 0.96 kg l-1. The standard types, used in this research, had dimension of 9.1 mm in diameter and the length of 7.2 mm.

Each Kaldnes carrier is shaped as a small cylinder with a cross on the inside of the cylinder and “fins” on the outside (Fig. 12).

The carriers were suspended in the reactors and were in continuous movement. Since the biomass is growing primary on the protected surface on the inside of the carriers (Rusten et al., 2006), only the effective biofilm surface area of the carriers is given in Table 5. The total surface area consists of both inner and outer surfaces, while the effective surface area is that where biofilm seems to be attached. Bur the outer surface of the carrier is continuously cleaned from the biofilm by the frequent collisions between carriers' elements. Application of these carriers allowed achieving total specific surface area of the biofilm equal to 690 m2 in 1 m3 of carriers

next the Anammox reactor was fed with effluent from the first step (Fig. 10). The effluent from the first reactor was diluted with tap water. The nitrogen influent load to the Anammox reactor was increased during February – July 2004 period by stepwise decrease of the flow rate of the tap water used. In the start-up period of the Anammox reactor operation, the pH was adjusted by dosage of a Na2CO3 and NaHCO3 solution to keep pH-value around 8. Both reactors were divided into three zones and each zone had a mechanical stirrer. To keep appropriate temperature conditions, the heaters were situated in the first zone of each reactor.

Additionally, in the partial nitritation reactor blowers were used, to ensure aeration for ammonium oxidation. The technical details of pilot plant are presented in Table 5.

Biofilm carrier material The Kaldnes carriers were made of a highParameter No. of reactors Volume of each reactor No. of zones in each reactor Reactor 1 filling by Kaldnes carriers Reactor 2 filling by Kaldnes carriers Effective surface area in R1 Effective surface area in R2 Volume of settling tank (buffer) Volume of settling tanks

Unit 3 m % % 2 m 2 m 3 m 3 m

22

value 2 2.1 3 46 51 483.5 530.2 0.8 0.125

Table 5. Technical parameters of technical scale pilot plant – two-stage process.

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

•

pH-meter – WTW pH 330,

•

DO probe – YSI 550A (YSI incorporated),

•

thermometer – HI 9063 microcomputer K-thermo couple thermometer (HANNA instruments, Labassco),

•

conductivity meter – TDS Meter (HACH).

Additionally, the pilot plant was equipped with on-line devices. The on-line equipment consisted of Cerlic BB2 device measuring the oxygen concentration. The pilot plant was also provided with two conductivity meters (Dr Lange Analon Cond 10), located in the settling tanks.

Fig. 12. Photos of the Kaldnes carrier material and biofilm on it.

and an effective specific surface area of the biofilm equal to 500 m2 in 1 m3 of carriers (Welander et al., 1998; Ødegaard et al., 2000; Ødegaard et al., 2006).

Analytical procedure During the study, samples of both influent and effluent (each reactor) were collected and analysed for inorganic nitrogen forms, alkalinity, total nitrogen and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD). Chemical analyses were conducted using the Dr. Lange test tubes.

Samples from batch tests were analysed using AQUATEC-TECATOR 5400 ANALYZER (flow-injection system based on VIS spectrophotometry). Before analyses, all samples were filtrated through 25-μm prefilter followed by a 0.45-μm filter. Moreover, the process was monitored on a daily basis by manual measurements of physical parameters (flow rate, pH, temperature, conductivity and dissolved oxygen concentration in the bulk liquid) in the influent, effluent and within the reactor. Moreover, a biofilm thickness was measured. For measurement, several Kaldnes carriers were randomly collected from the pilot plant. To get a proper picture of the biofilm, the carriers were cut into thin slices.

Then the carriers were scanned with a resolution of 2400 pixels per cal. and the biofilm thickness was measured using Gimp2 software. Twenty different measurements of biofilm thickness were made for each carrier.

The physical parameters were measured using following equipments:

Batch tests In order to estimate nitrogen removal rates in different periods of pilot plant operation, several batch tests for studies of nitrogen uptake rates were performed. One series of these tests were divided into four groups (Table 6) in order to recognize significance of the activated sludge and Kaldnes biofilm. In each test, in one bottle, condensed sludge from the Anammox reactor was used while medium used in the second bottle was different in each group. In the first group, Kaldnes carriers and sludge from R2 were used whereas in the second group Kaldnes carriers and filtrated supernatant. In the third group, Kaldnes was rinsed out in order to remove sludge covering the carriers during pulling out from the reactor. The first time the Kaldnes were rinsed out in tap water and the second time by filtered supernatant (to eliminate negative impact of tap water on biofilm) having the same temperature like in the pilot.

Additionally, to confirm previous results, in the fourth group three tests were made: one with activated sludge, second with medium from R2 and the third with rinsed Kaldnes carriers and filtered supernatant.

Additionally for estimation of the Michaelis-

Table 6. Different batch tests combinations (K – Kaldnes; S – concentrated sludge; NR – not rinsed; R – rinsed).

Group 1 Test 1 and Test 2 S K+S

Group 2 Test 3 and Test 4 S K (NR)

Group 3 Test 5 and Test 6 S K (R)

23

S

Group 4 Test 7 K+S

K (R)

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Menten kinetic parameters for the Anammox reaction, series of four batch tests were performed. The values of Vmax and KM were estimated separately for ammonium and nitrite using Lineweaver-Burk, Eadie-Hofstee and Hanes-Woolf. The procedure of test performance is presented in Paper I. IV-3. Moving Bed Biofilm (MBBR) – one step process

DO

Settling tank (buffer)

pH, T

Settling tank

Air

Fig. 13. Flow diagram of the pilot-plant with one-stage partial nitritation and Anammox processes.

Reactor

Reactor operation The pilot plant experiment has been run for more than 3 years as a two-stage process where partial nitritation and Anammox took place in two separate reactors (see chapter IV-2). The reactors might be operated in series or parallel. In March 2005 the pilot plant was modified and an experiment with recirculation of a nitrate-rich Anammox effluent to the nitritation reactor was started (Fig. 10). It was intended to denitrify nitrates in the first zone of reactor 1; zones 2 and 3 of the nitritation reactor were connected and in zone 1 the aeration was ceased to obtain oxygen-free conditions for denitrification.

After a few weeks, nitrogen loss was observed in reactor 1. It was due to the fact that Anammox bacteria found excellent conditions to develop its bacteria culture in zone 1.

Hence, Anammox was seeded throughout the reactor. Then recirculation was stopped and aeration was switched on again in zone 1 to develop a two-step biofilm layer, an outer layer with oxygen-rich conditions for nitrifiers and an inner layer for the Anammox growth. At first the reactor was divided into two zones (zones 2 and 3 were connected), later on all partitions were opened and reactor was set as completely mixed reactor. The reactor was filled up to 50% of its volume with Kaldnes biofilm carriers, as biofilm Parameter No. of reactors Volume of reactor No. of zones in reactor Reactor filling by Kaldnes carriers effective surface area Volume of settling tank (buffer) Volume of settling tank

Conductivity

Conductivity

carriers providing an effective surface area of 250 m2 m-3 of the reactor volume. The Kaldnes carriers in the reactor were in a continuous movement due to work of vertical mixers and air supply from the bottom of the reactor. The MBBR was supplied with reject water from sludge dewatering after anaerobic digestion in the preliminary phase, the hydraulic retention time (HTR) was equal to 1 day. To estimate influence of a nitrogen load increase in the following period HRT was shortened to 16 hours. Then, the HRT was again increased to one day. The technical details of pilot plant are presented in Table 7.

Previous work in this area (Szatkowska and Płaza, 2006), demonstrated that the Anammox process could be operated at a temperature range below 30-35oC, therefore, the process proceeded at a natural temperature of incoming supernatant. Only in winter time an additional heater was supplied to keep temperature above 20ºC. The scheme of the pilot plant is presented in Figure 13.

Analytical procedure and biofilm carriers were described above in chapter IV-2.

Unit 3 m % 2 m 3 m 3 m

24

value 1 2.1 2, later 1 46 483.5 0.125 0.125

Table 7. Technical parameters of technical scale pilot plant – onestage process.

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

were placed in a water bath to keep the temperature constant. Additionally, the magnetic stirrers were used to assure appropriate mixing of medium during the tests. The vessels could be supplied with air and/or additions of nitrite. Samples were taken every half hour for measurement of inorganic nitrogen components. Parallel to the sampling, measurements of pH-value, DO, conductivity and temperature were performed. The specific conditions of each series of test were different and specific test performance according to tests objectives can be found in Paper II, III, IV and V.

Determination of the dry weight of biomass developed on Kaldnes carrier To evaluate dry weigh of the biomass attached to the carriers, 50 carriers were taken from the reactor and dried in 105°C up to stable weight. Each series consisted of three independent repeats in order to avoid potential measurement errors. Then the biofilm was carefully removed under water stream. In order to completely get rid of remaining biomass, the carriers were placed in vessel with 2M sodium hydroxide solution. A week later, carriers were rinsed again by tap water stream, dried in 105°C and weighted again.

The dry weight of biomass developed on carrier can be expressed as follows: B=

d-e 50

Oxygen uptake rates tests Six series of OUR test were performed. Series 1-4 were conducted on fresh medium, taken directly form the pilot-plant. Series 5th and 6th were conducted on medium after one and two days starving, respectively. At every test day, the suspended solids and volatile suspended solids were analyzed. Moreover, immobilized biomass concentration was analyzed.

The tests were performed in a tightly closed vial equipped with a DO probe and a stirrer, and lasted about 10 minutes each. The concentrations of sodium chlorate and allylthiourea were 17 mM and 43 µM, respectively.

The concentration of the former compound was chosen according to Gut et al. (2005).

The research proved that the dose of sodium chlorate at level of 20 mM proposed by Surmacz-Górska et al. (1996) had an inhibitory effect on ammonia oxidizing bacteria in this particular system, and a lower one was determined.

(4)

Where: d – mass of 50 Kaldnes carriers after drying [mg]; e – mass of 50 Kaldnes carriers after washing the biomass from carriers and drying [mg]; B – the dry weight of biomass developed on carrier [mg d.w.]

Batch tests In order to estimate nitrogen removal rates in different periods of the pilot plant operation, five series of batch tests for studies of nitrogen uptake rates were performed. The specific objective of each series is presented in Table 8.

All batch tests were performed in a one-litre vessel that was filled with 50% Kaldnes carriers from the pilot plant reactor. An effective specific biofilm surface of 0.25 m2 per 1 dm3 of a reactor bottle was provided. The bottles

Table 8. Objectives of the following batch tests series.

Series

Tests amount

1

19

2

8

3

12

4

20

5

32

Objective • Estimation of the influence of conditions in the pilot-plant on nitrogen removal rates.

• Test with addition of allylthiourea to examine more closely the nature of nitrogen removal mechanism.

• Estimation of the nitrogen removal rate at oxygen rich, oxygen free and oxygen rich with artificial nitrite conditions.

• Study of the influence of different dissolved oxygen concentrations on nitrogen removal rates.

• Evaluation of bacteria population activity and estimation of nitrogen removal kinetic parameters.

25

Paper no II II III IV V

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Effluent

discs

Fig. 14. Flow scheme of the RBC.

Influent

Drive motor

External carbon source

The aim of the tests performed on fresh medium was to evaluate changes in bacteria activity during the pilot-plant performance.

Whereas the tests performed on starved medium were made in order to evaluate kinetic parameters of the aerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria (AOB). The detailed test performance can be found in Paper V. For calculation of inhibitory effect observed due to substrate excess, the Haldane model was used (eq. 5).

rA =

Vmax ⋅ S S2 KM + S + KI

Moreover, in few cases it was impossible to fit Aiba model at all.

The Aiba model: rA =

⎛ S Vmax ⋅ S exp⎜⎜ − KM + S ⎝ K IA

⎞ ⎟⎟ ⎠

(6)

Where: rA – the substrate utilization rate [g m-2d-1]; Vmax – the maximum substrate uptake rate [g m-2d-1]; S – the substrate concentration [g m-3]; KM – half-saturation (Michaelis) coefficient [g m-3]; KIA – the Aiba inhibition coefficient [g m-3].

(5)

IV-4. Rotating (RBC)

Where: rA – the substrate utilization rate [g m-2d-1]; Vmax – the maximum substrate uptake rate [g m-2d-1]; S – the substrate concentration [g m-3]; KM – half-saturation (Michaelis) coefficient [g m-3]; KI – the Haldane inhibition coefficient [g m-3].

Biological

Contactor

Reactor operation A lab-scale Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC) with partially immersed discs was used. The RBC consisted of three equally sized stages. For each stage there were four discs fixed to the centre horizontal shaft. The effective disc area in each stage was 0.87 m2 and the disc submergence was 41%. A developed surface area for biofilm was provided with doormat (PE) fixed to discs. Oxygen

The Aiba model (eq. 6) was also checked, however, the correlation coefficient in each case was worse then in the Haldane model.

Fig. 15. Photos of the lab-scale rotating biological contactor.

26

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Parameter No. of stages No. of discs per stage Total number of discs Disc diameter Total surface area available for growth Disc submergence Liquid volume

Unit m 2 m % 3 m

+

NH4 -N NO2 -N NO3 -N COD BOD

Unit -3

gm -3 gm -3 gm -3 g O2 m -3 g O2 m

Table 9. Characteristics of the rotating biological contactor.

in order to denitrify nitrites and nitrates after the nitrification and Anammox process.

In the later period, the glucose dosage was stopped and the characteristics of the influent was changed. For development of the simultaneous nitritation/Anammox process, the contactor was supplied only with the ammonium nitrogen and no longer supplied with additional nitrite. In the first period, the contactor was provided with leachate from old landfill site in Gliwice. The leachate was collected from the pond and later on from the concrete chamber being a retention tank.

Due to the fact, that ammonium concentration in the leachate was low, not exceeded 100 g N-NH4+ m-3, the NH4Cl solution was added to reach high nitrogen concentration around 700 ± 50 g N-NH4+ m-3. In the later period of research, the leachate form Gliwice’s landfill was replaced by leachate from young landfill in Zabrze. The change of the leachate feeding the contactor was gradual.

The leachates from both landfill sites were mixed gradually in the following ratios: 2:1, 1:1, 1:2, 0:1 for leachate from Gliwice and Zabrze, respectively. As a matter of fact that the landfill leachate from Zabrze was characterized by high concentration of ammonia nitrogen exceeding 1000 g N-NH4+ m-3, the addition of artificial NH4Cl solutions was stopped. The characteristics of pure landfill leachates from landfill sites in Gliwice and Zabrze are presented in Table 10.

transfers from the air to the RBC unit in three ways: oxygen absorption at the liquid film over the biofilm’s surface when the biofilm is in the air; direct oxygen transfer happening at the air–water interface caused by the turbulence created by the rotator movement; and direct oxygen absorption by the microorganisms during the air exposure (Rodgers and Zhan, 2003). The RBC unit was covered by polystyrene foam to prevent the growth of algae by light exclusion. The scheme of the RBC is shown in Figure 14 and the design characteristics of the RBC are listed in Table 9.

The contactor was supplied with municipal landfill leachate and artificial NaNO2 and NH4Cl solutions to reach high nitrogen concentration and appropriate excess of nitrite over ammonium oscillating around the NO2:NH4 ratio 1.3:1 for Anammox process.

Nitrogen loading rates applied to the first stage of the RBC were gradually increased from 3 to 6 g N m-2d-1. Three research periods can be differentiated basing on the increasing nitrogen concentration in the influent (period I: day 1 to 36; period II: day 36 to 91; period III: day 91 to 176). Additionally, an appropriate dose of sodium bicarbonate NaHCO3 was added to neutralize the alkalinity decrease during the nitrification process.

Glucose, as an external carbon source, was introduced in the third part of the contactor

Parameter

value 3 4 12 0.225 2.61 41 0.014

Gliwice pond chamber < 10 100 0,5 0,1 76 17 250 370 100 120

27

Zabrze 1100 0,1 0,7 1500 950

Table 10. The characteristics of the leachate from landfill sites In Gliwice and Zabrze.

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Analytical procedure

probes; the sequences and targeted sites are listed in Table 11.

The probes EUB338, EUB338 II and EUB338 III were mixed together (EUB338 mix) in proportion 1:1:1 in order to detect all bacteria.

The probes, chosen from the probeBase database (Loy et al., 2003), were 5’ labeled with the dye FLUOS (5(6)carboxyfluorescein-N-hydroxysuccinimide ester), Cy3 or Cy5. Both the probes and unlabeled competitor oligonucleotides were obtained from Biomers, Ulm, Germany.

Prior to microscope observations samples were embedded in Citifluor (Citifluor Ltd, UK) to reduce the fluorochrome fading (bleaching). A scanning confocal microscope (Zeiss LSM 510) equipped with an Ar-ion laser (488nm) and two HeNeLasers (543nm and 633nm) were used to examine the microbial community. Image processing was performed using the standard software package delivered with the instrument (Zeiss LSM version 3.95).

During the research, samples were collected from the influent, effluent and each stage of the contactor twice a week. The efficiency of the biological treatment was followed in terms of the general parameters such as: COD (dichromate method), ammonia and organic nitrogen (Kjeltec System 1026 Tecator), nitrite, and nitrate. Moreover, the process was monitored by measuring other parameters: flow rate, pH, temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO). No specific heating was applied and the temperature was kept constant at 17 ± 2.4 ºC.

FISH – Fluorescent in situ Hybridization Detached biofilm samples were fixed with paraformaldehyde solution (4% paraformaldehyde in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), pH 7.2) at 4 °C for 3 hours and washed subsequently in PBS. Fixed samples were stored in PBS: ethanol (1:1) solution at -20 °C. In situ hybridization was performed as described previously by Daims et al. (2005). 16S rRNA targeted fluorescence labelled oligonucleotide

Table 11. List and description of probes used for the analysis. probe NEU

most halophilic and halotolerant Nitrosomonas spp.

CTEcompetitor NEU Claster 6a192 Competitor claster 6a192 Ntspa662 Competitor Ntspa662 NIT3 Competitor NIT3 EUB338 EUB338 II EUB338 III Pla46

Amx820

probe sequence

target site

FA %

Ref .

CCC CTC TGC TGC ACT CTA

653 – 670

40

1

TTC CAT CCC CCT CTG CCG

653 – 670

target organisms

Nitrosomonas oligotropha lineage

genus Nitrospira

Nitrobacter spp.

CTT TCG ATC CCC TAC TTT CC CTT TCG ATC CCC TGC TTC C

35

192 – 211

2 2

GGA ATT CCG CGC TCC TCT

662-679

GGA ATT CCG CTC TCC TCT

662-679

CCT GTG CTC CAT GCT CCG

1035 – 1052 1035 – 1052 338 - 355 338 - 355 338 - 355 46 - 63

35 35 35 30

5 6 6 7

820 - 841

40

8

CCT GTG CTC CAG GCT CCG most Bacteria Planctomycetales Verrucomicrobiales Planctomycetales anaerobic ammoniumoxidizing bacteria, Candidatus `Brocadia anammoxidans' and Candidatus `Kuenenia stuttgartiensis'

192 – 211

1

GCT GCC TCC CGT AGG AGT GCA GCC ACC CGT AGG TGT GCT GCC ACC CGT AGG TGT GAC TTG CAT GCC TAA TCC AAA ACC CCT CTA CTT AGT GCC C

35

3 3

40

4 4

Ref: 1 – Wagner et al., 1995, 2 – Adamczyk et al., 2003, 3 – Daims et al., 2001, 4 – Wagner et al., 1996, 5 – Amann et al., 1990, 6 – Daims et al., 1999, 7 – Neef et al., 1998, 8 – Schmid et al., 2001.

28

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Denitrifying bacteria analysis

Batch tests

Material used for microbiological analysis was collected from three stages of the contactor.

Two 10 g samples of biofilm were prepared from each stage. One of them was used for determination of dry mass. The second sample was inserted into Erlenmeyer flask containing 90 ml of 0.85% NaCl and then was vigorously shaken on the rotary shaker for 15 min. Afterwards the sample was left for 2 min. to allow sedimentation of large particles and was then used for preparing various dilutions. Suspensions prepared in this way were used for isolation of denitrifying bacteria. For titre determination of denitrifying bacteria liquid Giltay medium was used.

Inoculated samples were incubated at 26 ºC for 48 hours. After incubation from positive samples 0.1 ml of inoculum was taken and transferred onto nutrient agar plates for isolation of pure denitrifying bacteria cultures. Inoculated plates were incubated at 26 ºC for 48 hours. After incubation, single cultures of bacteria were isolated and purified on Petri dishes with nutrient agar. Pure strains were used for inoculation of the liquid Giltay medium to recheck their ability for denitrification and their morphology, Gram reaction and oxidase reaction were determined. For identification of oxidase-positive bacteria strains API 20 NE (standardized system for non-enteric bacteria strains) was used and for oxidase-negative bacteria strains API 20 E (standardized system for enteric bacteria strains).

During operation of the lab-scale rotating biological contactor, it became possible to perform some batch tests for studies of nitrogen uptake rates. The most essential thing associated with this RBC reactor was that test had to be done directly in the reactor. It was impossible to take part of the rotating disc for test without destroying of the whole reactor. That was the main disadvantage of these tests as they could negatively influenced the continuous process occurring in the reactor. One day before the test, the feed of the leachate to the contactor was stopped in order to starve the bacteria and to remove remaining COD to exclude heterotrophic denitrification during the test. Additionally, the first stage of the contactor was tightly separated from the rest of the reactor. After 24 hours, NaNO2 and NH4Cl solutions mixture were added to the first stage of the contactor to obtain initial ammonium and nitrite concentrations. The test lasted two hours and samples were collected every 15 minutes and analyzed for inorganic nitrogen forms. Additionally, temperature, dissolved oxygen and pH were measured during the batch test.

V – R ESULTS AND DISC USSION V-1. Membrane (MBR)

Assisted

Bioreactor

Process performance evaluation Implementation of the Anammox process into the Membrane Assisted BioReactor (MBR) was the aim of performed

Table 12. Characteristics of the influence medium and operational parameters of the MBR reactor.

Parameter NH4-N in.

NO2-N in.

NO2-N/NH4-N N removal efficiency COD0 Biomass concentration Flow rate HRT Temperature pH-value in. pH-value reactor

Unit -3

gm -3 gm % -3 gO2 m -3 kg MLSS m 3 -1 m d d ºC -

Average

Min.

Max.

St. dev.

49.5 53.9 1.08 38.9 43.9 7.3 0.016 2.58 33.9 8.0 7.9

17.8 21.8 0.59 0 4.9 3.5 0.009 1.52 32 7.6 7.5

74.5 98.1 1.44 74.9 60 12..4 0.023 4.1 35.8 8.1 8.1

14.5 20.3 0.18 16.4 17.2 2.8 0.005 0.9 0.7 0.1 0.1

29

Samples No. 53 53 53 53 12 38 47 37 52 52 52

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

inorg N in N-NO2 out

200 180

N-NO3 out

HRT

160

Nitrogen concentration [g N m -3 ]

inorg N out N-NH4 out

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1

23

54

78

96

105

114

126

138

148

161

170

180

Time [days]

Fig. 16. Nitrogen conversion during start-up of the Anammox process in the membrane assisted bioreactor (Cema et al., 2004).

experiment. Therefore, it was necessary to provide condition favourable for growth of appropriate bacteria. The bacteria cultivation took place at the temperature above 30°C, at very low dissolved oxygen concentration (below 0.3 g O2 m-3) and at average pH-value in the influent corrected and maintained around 8. The pH in the reactor was usually the same as in the influent, what agrees with theories (Schalk et al., 1998, Siegrist et al., 1998). Exceptional occurrence of the process’ brake-downs caused the pH drop, as the first stage of nitrification prevailed over the Anammox.

The temperature was kept above 30ºC, with average value of 33.8 ± 0.6ºC. In the influent

% of removal

NO2-N/NH4-N ratio

140

NO 2-N/NH 4 -N ratio

1.6

120

1.4

100

1.2 1

80

0.8

60

0.6

40

0.4

20

0.2 0

N removal [g m -3 ] and N removal efficiency[%]

removal

1.8

medium a very low content of biodegradable organic carbon was maintained in order to prevent over-growth of the heterotrophs.

Moreover, the nitrite-to-ammonium ratio in the influent to the reactor was around 1:1 which is close to the stoichiometric value of 1.32:1 (Strous et al., 1998). During the experiment, the nitrogen load to the reactor was gradually increased from 0.01 to 0.09 kg N m-3d-1. The operational parameters and characteristics of the influent medium are presented in Table 12.

At the beginning of the experiment, nitrite nitrogen was the main product of ammonia oxidation (Fig. 16).

0 1

23

54

78

96

105

114

126

138

148

161

170

180

189

Time [days]

Fig. 17. Nitrogen removal and nitrogen removal efficiency in the membrane assisted bioreactor (Cema et al., 2004).

30

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

0.08

0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 0

A

0.02

0.06

0.08

N loading rate [kg N m-3d-1] 0.14

[kg N m -3d-1]

0.04

NItrogen removal rate

0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02

y = 0.8654x - 0.0245 R² = 0.1599

0.01 0.00

B

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

N loading rate [kg N m-3d-1]

Nitrogen loading rate

MLSS

0.12

12

0.10

10

0.08

8

0.06

6

0.04

4

0.02

2

0.00

C

14

Fig. 18. A) Correlation between nitrogen loading and nitrogen removal rate, B) Correlation between nitrogen loading and nitrogen removal rate (for stable level of loading after 121st day of experiment), C) variations of nitrogen loading rate, nitrogen removal rate and biomass concentration in the MBR (Cema et al., 2004).

MLSS [g l -1]

y = 0.5202x - 0.0054 R² = 0.9656

0.035

N removal rate [kg N m-3d-1]

N removal rate [kg N m-3d-1]

0.04

0 0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Time [days]

thermore, hydraulic retention time (HRT) was gradually diminished from 4 to 1.5 days.

The changes, made the nitrate production drop and slight increase of nitrite and ammonia concentration was noticed. Total nitrogen removal efficiency again increased within 14 days from 4.1% to 63.8%. Moreover, very intensive gas production in the reactor was observed. Due to the fact, that nitrite nitrogen was being completely removed in the reactor, the nitrite-to-ammonium ratio in the influent was changed from 1:1 to 1:32 according to stoichiometric value. After this change, nitrogen removal efficiency increased to the maximum value equal to 74.9%. Since then, process break-down and drastically drop of nitrogen removal efficiency to 25.4% were observed (Figure 17). Also, gas production in the reactor stopped. Moreover, nitrite nitrogen concentration rose to value of 74 g NO2ÂŻ-N m-3, which is a toxic value for the Anammox activity (Fux et al., 2002, Schmidt et al., 2003). It seems probable, that such an

During first 30 days of the experiment, nitrogen removal efficiency decreased from 27 to 10 % (Fig. 17). It seems most probable, that this reduction of nitrogen removal efficiency was mainly caused by high nitrite nitrogen concentration in the reactor equal to 64.8 g NO2-N m-3 on average. This concentration was even higher than 60 g NO2-N m-3 reported by Fux et al. (2002) as the toxic value for the Anammox bacteria activity, even causing its loss. Therefore, the total nitrogen concentration in the influent had to be reduced from 100 g N m-3 to 40 g N m-3. As a result of this change, the nitrite concentration in the reactor dropped significantly to level below 6 g NO2-N m-3. At the same time nitrate nitrogen was the main product of ammonia oxidation. In order to suppress the nitrate production, the inorganic nitrogen load to the reactor was raised. For this purpose, total nitrogen concentration in the influent to the reactor was increased gradually up to the value around 100 g N m-3. Fur31

OUR [g O2 m-3h-1]

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

12

OUR Ammonium oxidizing bacteria

10

OUR Nitrite oxidizing bacteria

Fig. 19. Oxygen uptake rate of ammonium oxidizing and nitrite oxidizing bacteria in the MBR (Cema et al., 2004).

8 6 4 2 0 0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

Time [days]

unexpected breakdown of the Anammox process was caused by very intensive growth of algae (Chlorophyta) on the wall of the reactor. Due to high nitrite concentration, influent nitrogen load had to be reduced to nearly 50% (Figure 16). Additionally, reactor was covered with aluminium foil to protect from the light and algae growth. These changes caused increase of nitrogen removal efficiency to 51%. However, the process was very unstable. On the other hand, it seems most probable that the salt precipitation which interfered with microbial activity could be other reason of the nitrogen removal efficiency decrease (Trigo et al., 2006). This could be an explanation of such sudden breakdown of the process and its further instability.

The other possibility of these problems was the fact, that the mineral elements like K, Fe or Mg was not added to the influent medium even as it is obvious that they were present in the tap water used for the influent medium preparation. Nevertheless, it was decided to introduce these mineral elements to the reactor by addition of real landfill leachate to the synthetic wastewater up to 5-10% of its volume. This caused slight increase of the nitrogen removal, which reached 44%, on average, at the end of research period.

Figure 18a shows that the nitrogen removal rate increased parallel with growth of the nitrogen-loading rate. On the one side, this may be due to adaptation of the bacteria; on the other hand, when the nitrogen-loading rate was stable between 86th and 110th day of the experiment, also nitrogen removal rate was stable despite biomass concentration

increase (Fig. 18c). After increasing of the nitrogen-loading rate, the intensive rise of nitrogen removal rate was observed and also nitrogen removal efficiency has been improved. It is highly probable, that the Anammox bacteria work better with higher capacity. The correlation between nitrogen loading rate on the stable level 0.075 – 0.09 kg N m-3d-1 and nitrogen removal rate (Fig. 18b) is very low. It is rather unlikely that these nitrogen removal rates are correlated with nitrogen loading rate. Therefore, the good linear correlation was found only within the low range of the nitrogen loads. For high range of the nitrogen-loading rate, the mechanism of nitrogen removal is more complex, what indicated that there were additional inhibitors. It could be possible, that such a high nitrogen-loading rate was too high for bacteria activity and it was the first signal of the process breakdown after 142nd days of the experiment. The other possibility is that the Anammox bacteria had lost in a competition for ammonia with aerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria.

Interesting information about microorganisms’ activity gave Oxygen Uptake Rate (OUR) measurements (Fig. 19).

The Anammox process is strictly anaerobic process; however, no one has grown pure cultures of these bacteria in the laboratory.

Other microorganisms are essential to remove one or more toxic products – nitrite, oxygen, organic matter or free radicals – or they might be required to provide essential nutrient (Mohan et al., 2004). Membrane assisted bioreactor used for start-up of the Anammox process was used earlier for nitri32

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

NO2/NH4

NO3/NH4

1.6

1.2

1.5 1.0 0.5

1.0 0.8 0.6

0.0

0.4

-0.5

0.2 0.0

-1.0

A

y = -0.0163x + 1.5011 R2 = 0.6142

1.4

2.0

NO 3- /NH 4+

NO 2- /NH 4+ and NO

3

-

/NH 4 +

2.5

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

Time [days]

200

B

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

N removal efficiency [%]

Fig. 20. A) Conversion ratio of nitrite and ammonium and between nitrate production and ammonium conversion (negative values – nitrite build up took place), B) Relationship between nitrogen removal efficiency and conversion ratio of nitrate production and ammonium conversion (data from 78th to 148th day – from start of the nitrogen removal to process breakdown).

(Strous et al., 1998). On the other hand, the conversion ratio of nitrate production to ammonium conversion was 0.76 ± 0.31 what was much higher than the stoichiometric one.

This phenomenon showed that high nitrite oxidizers activity occurred in the reactor, what is in agreement with results obtained in OUR tests. Interesting information could be seen from the correlation between nitrogen removal efficiency and nitrate production to ammonium conversion ratio in period from start of the nitrogen removal to process breakdown in 148th day. Along with nitrogen removal efficiency increase, the nitrate production to ammonium conversion ratio was decreasing (Fig. 20B) whereas at the same time, nitrite to ammonium conversion ratio was stable amounted to 1.31. These facts indicate that with decreasing activity of nitrifiers, the Anammox activity and probably amount of the Anammox bacteria was rising.

After process breakdown, the nitrate production to ammonium conversion ratio rapidly increased up to 1.04 in average, consequently leading to loss of the Anammox activity.

fication of high ammonia nitrogen concentration, therefore it is possible that the nitrifiers were still present in the reactor. Measurements of OUR activity of ammonium oxidizers and nitrite oxidizers gave much lower results than in earlier research (SurmaczGórska et al. 2004), but these bacteria were still present in the MBR. There were some relationship between OUR of the ammonium and nitrite oxidizers and nitrite and nitrate nitrogen concentration in the reactor. It was especially clearly seen during the process breakdown. At the same time nitrite concentration significantly increased and the OUR of the ammonium oxidizers increased considerably and along with increase of OUR of nitrite oxidizers. Also increase of nitrate concentration was observed (Fig. 19).

More information about process stoichiometry, especially in relation to results of OUR test, are given by the ratio of nitrate production to ammonium consumption (NO3-/NH4+), as well as the ratio between nitrite conversion and ammonium conversion (NO2-/NH4+) (Fig. 20) (the ratios were calculated as the molar ratio of nitrogen).

The average conversion ratio of nitrite and ammonium nitrogen during the whole research was 1.05 ± 0.69. However, from start of the nitrogen removal to process breakdown in 148th day, the average ratio was equal to 1.31 ± 0.26, which is similar to value stemming from the Anammox stoichiometry

Nitrogen conversion The tests were carried out in order to verify whether the Anammox process did take in the reactor. During first hours of the test, the nitrogen removal was not observed. At the same time, the parallel removal of ammonium and nitrite nitrogen with increase of 33

Grzegorz Cema

NO3-N NH4-N inorg. N t=0

140

NO2-N Total inorg. N

120

100

A

80 60 40 20 0 0

4

8

NO3-N NH4-N inorg. N - t=0

140

N concetration[g N m -3]

120

N concetration [g N m-3]

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

12

16

20

24

100 80 60 40 20 0

B

Time [hours]

Fig. 21. Example of nitrogen conversion in the batch tests, A) 125th day of the experiment, B) 132nd day of the experiment (Cema et al., 2004).

NO2-N inorg. N

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

Time [hours]

nitrates concentration was observed. Despite the fact, that there was no nitrogen removal on the beginning of the tests, after 24 hours, decrease of inorganic nitrogen concentration was noticed on the level of 34.5 and 24%, respectively. Nitrates were the main product of nitrogen oxidation. The nitrite-toammonium removal rate ratio during the whole test was equal to 2.59, and was much higher than the stoichiometric one for the Anammox process. It confirms the result of OUR tests that the aerobic nitrite oxidizing bacteria are still present and active in the reactor; but on the other hand, the Anammox process occurs in the MBR. It seems probable that lower than in the MBR nitrogen removal efficiency and none nitrogen removal during first few hours of the tests were caused by too high nitrite concentration in the reactor, at the beginning of the tests.

Nitrogen removal started after partial nitrite consumption by nitrite oxidizers (Fig. 21A and B).

V-2. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor – two step process

Process performance evaluation The partial nitritation/Anammox system was designed as a two-step process consisting of an initial partial nitritation reactor (R1) followed by an Anammox reactor (R2), where the nitrogen removal took place. The process was operated at a temperature above 30°C to keep favorable conditions for growth of the Anammox bacteria for which 37°C is the optimal temperature (Egli et al., 2001). The pH-value in the effluent was within the range from 7.6 to 9.2 and was higher than in the influent (equal to 7.3±0.4). This phenomenon is in accordance with theory of the Anammox process, in which a certain pH-value increase is expected due to consumption of hydrogen ions during cell synthesis. Consequently, there was no need for pH-value adjustment by dosage of a Na2CO3 and NaHCO3 solutions as it was in the start-

Table 13. Characteristics of the influent medium and operational parameters of the two-stage MBBR reactor.

Parameter

NH4-N in NO2-N in NO2-N/NH4-N N removal efficiency COD0 Suspended solids Flow rate HRT Temperature reactor pH-value in pH-value out

Unit -3

gm -3 gm % -3 gO2 m -3 g SS m 3 -1 m d d ºC -

Average

Min.

Max.

St. dev.

124.4 157.3 1.3 86.0 185.4 670 0.52 3.1 31.4 7.3 8.3

32.3 71.5 0.7 49.4 100.0 335 0.36 1.8 21.4 5.7 7.6

201.0 220.5 2.2 97.4 374.0 1165 0.85 5.1 42.7 8.5 9.2

31.0 29.5 0.3 8.6 76.3 312 0.04 0.3 2.7 0.4 0.3

34

Samples No. 41 41 41 53 20 13 184 184 199 199 199

Ninorg. reduction

N reduction efficiency [%]

120

NO2-N/NH4-N ratio

N load

N removal rate

2,4 2,2 2,0 1,8 1,6 1,4 1,2 1,0 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0,0

100 80 60 40 20 0 0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

NO2-N/NH4-N ratio and Nitrogen load and removal rate [g m -2 d-1]

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

300

Time [days]

Fig. 22. Variations of nitrite-to-ammonium ratio, nitrogen removal efficiency and nitrogen load and removal rate.

up period of the Anammox reactor operation (Gut, 2006). The DO concentration was kept at a low level of 0.14 Âą 0.07 g O2 m-3 in spite that the reactor was not airtight. Moreover, the nitrite-to-ammonium ratio in the influent to the reactor was kept around the stoichiometric value equal to 1.32:1. Table 13 shows the parameters of the Anammox MBBR and characteristics of the influent medium.

The Anammox reactor worked as a movingbed reactor that combined activated sludge and biofilm cultures. The Anammox reactor was operated steadily obtaining high removal of total inorganic nitrogen with an average value of 254 g N m-3, which corresponded to average efficiency of 87%. The reactor was loaded with nitrogen with the average value of 0.28 g N m-2d-1 corresponded to an average nitrogen removal rate amounting to 0.25 g N m-2d-1. The maximum obtained nitrogen removal rate was equal to 0.39 g N m-2d-1 (Fig. 22).

During the process, the ammonium and nitrite nitrogen were removed almost completely and the nitrate nitrogen was the main nitrogen form in the effluent from the reactor. The nitrate nitrogen formation was measured to 6.9% (on average) of the removed inorganic nitrogen with comparison to theoretically expected value of 11%. Differences between experimental data and theory can be explained by the fact that the heterotrophic bacteria were also present in

the reactor. However, the Anammox process was the main cause of nitrogen removal due to average low drop in the COD concentration equal to 63.7 g O2 m-3. The stoichiometric use of COD in heterotrophic denitrification (neglecting cell synthesis) is 1.72 g COD per gram of reduced nitrite nitrogen, what indicated that less than 15% of nitrogen could have been removed due to heterotrophic denitrification. Also other factors, like presence of nitrite and ammonia in an optimal ratio and efficient biomass retention (biofilm system), indicate dominant role of the Anammox process. Moreover presence of the Anammox bacteria (Brocadia anammoxidans and Kuenenia stuttgartiensis) were proved by means of using the FISH technique (FISH analysis for the pilot plant reactor were made thank to courtesy of the research group from the Delft University of Technology, Kluyvert Laboratory for Biotechnology, the Netherlands). Later tests, performed by a research group of the Gotheborg University, Department of Chemistry, Sweden, confirmed that Brocadia anammoxidans was present in the Anammox reactor (Gut, 2006). Despite of fluctuations in nitrogen load and variable nitrite-to-ammonium ratio in the influent (Fig. 22), there were no problems with keeping stable values of nitrogen, below 50 g m-3, in the effluent from the reactor. However, too high nitrite-to-ammonium ratio has an adverse influence on the Anammox process.

35

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Conversion ratios: NO 2- :NH 4+ and NO 3 -/NH 4 +

2.5

NO3/NH4

NO2 -/NH4 + = 1.32 according to stoichiometry

2.0

NO2/NH4

1.5

1.0 NO3 -/NH4 + = 0.26 according to stoichiometry

0.5 0.0 0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

300

Time [days]

Fig. 23. Conversion ratio of nitrite and ammonium and between nitrate production and ammonium conversion.

The nitrite-to-ammonium ratio exceeding 2.0 caused significant decrease of nitrogen removal efficiency.

The ratio of nitrate production to ammonium consumption (NO3-/NH4+), as well as the ratio between nitrite conversion and ammonium conversion (NO2-/NH4+) gave some additional information about the process stoichiometry (Fig. 23).

The average conversion ratio of nitrite and ammonium (NO2-/NH4+) during the whole research period was 1.35 Âą 0.27 and was a little bit higher than these values found by Strous and co-workers (1998). Additionally, the conversion ratio between nitrate production and ammonium conversion was 0.15 Âą 0.07 what was much lower than the stoichiometric value of 0.26. These data suggested that the Anammox process was

dominating in the system; however, the lower production of nitrates and higher conversion of nitrite than stemming from stoichiometry was mainly caused by some heterotrophic denitrification process.

During the research period, concentration of suspended solids in the Anammox reactor was very changeable (Fig. 24). The average values were 1.57 kg m-3 and 1.14 kg m-3 for SS and VSS respectively. It was obvious that such high concentration of suspended biomass must have had some impact on process performance. Owing to stable results, it seems probable that the activated sludge had rather positive influence on the process.

Sludge concentration [kg m-3]

6

SS

VSS

5 4 3 2 1 0 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 z1 z3 1

31

50

64

78

92

106 120 132 150 199 251 274 295

Time [days]

36

Fig. 24. Variations of the suspended solids (SS) and volatile suspended solids (VSS) in the Anammox reactor (Cema et al., 2005).

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Sludge concentration Table

Nitrogen removal rate -3 -1

gN m d

Test 2

Sludge Kaldnes (NR) Sludge Kaldnes (NR)

Test 3

Test 4

Test 5 Test 6

Test 7

Sludge Kaldnes (R) Sludge Kaldnes (R) Sludge K+S Kaldnes (R)

4.50

3.21 0.30

136.1

0.051

3.77

2.67

76.0

n/a

0.33

0.23

2.60 0.05 3.90 0.08

1.96 0.04 2.70 0.06

3.86 0.31 0.02

2.90 0.26 0.02

Group 3 0.030 n/a 0.052 n/a Group 4 91.2 0.031 37.4 n/a 0 n/a

58.0 0 139.7 0

were obtained in the test with condensated activated sludge. However, in these tests the nitrification activity and oxidation of ammonia nitrogen prevailed over nitrite removal.

Additionally, high pH drop was noticed, what confirms the presence and activity of aerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria. Nevertheless, removal of total inorganic nitrogen indicated, that the Anammox bacteria could also live in the suspended biomass. In the test with not rinsed out Kaldnes carriers and filtrated supernatant, the VSS concentration was equal to 0.23 kg m-3 as the sludge stuck to the

60

N-NO3

55 50 45 40 35 30 25

65

55 50 45 40 35 30

N-NH4

N-NO2

N-NO3

25

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270

Time [min]

B

55 45 35 25 N-NH4

N-NO2

N-NO3

15 5

20

20

A

1.20 0.37 2.77 0.88

0.39

N concentration [g m-3]

N concentration [g m-3]

N-NO2

3.30 0.73 3.80 1.20

n/a

To confirm the hypothesis of the positive effect of activated sludge on the process, as well as to check if the Anammox process occurs mainly in biofilm, several batch tests were performed. In Table 14 concentrations of SS, VSS and nitrogen removal rates are presented for each batch test.

In Figure 25 example profiles of nitrogen conversion during batch tests are presented.

Generally, the highest nitrogen removal rates N-NH4

gVSS/L

77.9

Assessment of bacterial activity in biofilm and activated sludge

60

gSS/L

N concentration [g m-3]

Sludge K+S Sludge K+S

Test 1

gN/gVSS·d

Group 1 82.8 0.069 140.6 n/a 283.2 0.102 197.7 n/a Group 2 62.6 0.020

14. Nitrogen removal rates and sludge concentrations in batch tests (K=S – Kaldnes carrier and sludge; NR – not rinsed; n/a – not analysed).

0 30 60 90 120150180210240270

Time [min]

C

0

60 120 180 240 300 360 420

Time [min]

Fig. 25. Example of nitrogen conversion during batch test A) for condensed sludge, B) Test for Kaldnes carriers and filtrated supernatant, C) Test for Kaldnes carriers (rinsed-out) and filtrated supernatant.

37

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

The amount of nitrifiers in the biofilm on Kaldnes carriers is insufficient to perform deoxidation. Interesting is also, that in the tests with the activated sludge, dissolved oxygen concentration was always a little bit lower than in the tests with the mixture of Kaldnes carriers and sludge. These results, might confirm the hypothesis that nitrifiers are present mainly in the activated sludge.

Both in the mixture of Kaldnes carriers and sludge and in the tests with the activated sludge alone, it could be observed that along with the increase of VSS concentration, also nitrogen removal rate was increasing (Fig. 26A and 26B). However, much smaller concentration of VSS in the tests performed with combined biofilm and activated sludge is related to much higher nitrogen removal than that observed in the test with activated sludge only. It can indicate two hypotheses: firstly, the Anammox bacteria are present in higher percentage in biocenosis of biofilm than in the biocenosis of activated sludge. Secondly, it is possible that nitrifiers, present in the sludge, create favourable conditions for Anammox bacteria on the biofilm by con-

300

300

-3

d -1 ] -3

d -1 ]

y = 291.18x + 2.6776 R2 = 0.8959

250

N rem. [g N m

N rem. [g N m

200 150 100 50

250

150 100 50

0

0 0

A

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

VSS [g l -1]

B

250 N remmoval rate [g N m -3d -1 ]

-3

d -1 ]

300

N rem. [g N m

y = 115.65x - 176.69 R2 = 0.9027

200

y = 115.65x - 176.69 R2 = 0.9027

200 150 100

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

180

0.09

150

0.075

120

0.06

90

0.045

60

0.03

30

0.015

0

50

0 2.38 2.77 2.671.96 2.7 2.9

0

C

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

VSS [g l -1]

2.7

2.9

VSS [g VSS l-1]

D

2.7

VSS [g l -1]

N rem.

38

gN/gV SS

Fig. 26. A) Correlation between VSS concentration and average N removal rate in the tests with mixture of Kaldnes carriers and sludge, B) Correlation between VSS concentration and average N removal rate in the 2.9 tests with condensed sludge, C) Relationship between N concentration (in t = 0) to VSS ratio and N removal rate (test with condensed sludge), D) Relationship between VSS concentration, N removal rate and N to VSS ratio in the tests with condensed sludge.

Nitrogen to VSS ratio [gN/gVSS]

Kaldnes carriers while they were taken out of the liquor. In these tests, the average nitrogen removal rates were lower than in the tests with condensed sludge. Also, the ratio of nitrite-to-ammonium removal rate was below 1 what indicated that there was also some nitrifiersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; contribution in the biofilm population. Based on calculations of nitrogen removal by activated sludge, and assuming that sludge, in bottle with Kaldnes carriers, works in the same way like activated sludge alone, it was proved that mainly biofilm is responsible for nitrogen removal. The results for the tests with rinsed Kaldnes carriers and filtrated supernatant (Fig. 25C) were surprising, because nitrogen removal was not detected.

Instead, minor oxidation of ammonium to nitrite was noticed. High oxygen concentration during the test could be the main reason of this situation, which could inhibit the Anammox process. Before the test, the bottle was flushed with nitrogen gas to obtain oxygen free condition. However, during the experiment oxygen concentration exceeded 0.5 g O2 m-3. It seems most probable that nitrifiers, which are present mostly in activated sludge, play a role of oxygen removers.

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

sumption of oxygen that can diffuse into the liquid, which do not happen in activated sludge.

On Figure 26C and 26D, relationships between nitrogen to VSS ratio and nitrogen removal rates are presented for the tests performed only with the concentrated sludge alone. The decrease of nitrogen removal rate along with the increase of nitrogen to VSS ratio was observed in different tests. Because in none of the tests with the activated sludge there were no problems with sustaining proper oxygen concentration, it seems most probable that it is mainly due to increase nitrogen load in the tests. Moreover, with the increase in nitrogen load, the nitrogen removal rates were decreasing. It could be a little surprising that at such low nitrogen load during the test the efficiency in nitrogen removal deteriorated. Explanation of this could be that in the batch tests very high concentration of nitrogen forms are reached at the beginning of the test, which is significantly higher than in the system with continuous flow. Such high concentration of the nitrogen could suppress the bacteria responsible for nitrogen removal.

process efficiency in the pilot plant operated at Himmerfjärden WWTP was on average 84% also confirms this hypothesis.

The moving-bed system is adequate to gain cooperation of many bacterial cultures in removing nitrogen. The results from this study on the Anammox reactor demonstrated that there is the nitrifying activity present in the Anammox reactor and it is concentrated chiefly in the activated sludge. The cooperation of activated sludge and biofilm on Kaldnes carriers is responsible for total effect of nitrogen removal but Anammox activity focuses on biofilm on Kaldnes carriers.

Estimation of kinetic parameters One of the main aims of this thesis was to estimate the kinetic parameters of nitrogen removal. Due to this reason several batch test were performed to evaluate bacteria activity in the reactor and to determine kinetic constants of ammonium and nitrite removal for the Anammox process were calculated (Paper I). Three different methods were used for determination of the kinetic parameters, and the highest correlation was reached for the Hanes-Woolf method. According to this method, value of Km and Vmax for ammonium removal was 5.74 gNH4-N m-3 and 77.52 g NH4-N m-3d-1 (0.31 g NH4-N m-2d-1) and for nitrite removal 6.53 gNO2- N m-3 and 90.09 gNO2- N m-3d-1 (0.36 gNO2- N m-2d-1), respectively. Since, in the reactor were present Anammox bacteria as well as nitrifiers and heterotophs, the obtained results of the kinetic parameters refer to the complex systems more than to the particular microorganism. In such system, the interaction between different microorganisms may have a big influence on the received results. Received Michaelis constant both for nitrite and ammonium nitrogen are quite high. Additionally, van Dongen and co-workers (2001a) discovered that a biofilm thickness of even 0.2 mm is yet active. Up to this depth, the conversions can be calculated without taking into account diffusion limitation. These facts indicate that the mass transfer effect in the biofilm and the laminar layer above the biofilm is negligible compared to the Michaelis constant.

Cooperation or competition?

Performed batch tests proved that in the Anammox reactor nitrifiers were present. It seems probable that it is mainly due to the spreading of nitrifying bacteria from the partial nitritation reactor to the second reactor. Obtained results show that nitrifiers are mostly in the activated sludge and their amount on biofilm is insignificant. The results of these batch tests were also confirmed

by OUR tests performed by Gut (2006). By OUR test it was also proved that AOB culture was more dynamic than NOB culture.

Some substrate competition between nitrifiers and the Anammox bacteria could be possible. On the other hand, the tests showed that nitrifiers are responsible for oxygen consumption. Oxygen diffusion into mixed liquor can inhibit the nitrogen removal. It appears that it is rather some cooperation of different type of bacteria than competition, what was proven by the performed batch tests. The fact that under the period of testsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; execution nitrogen removal 39

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

1000

Nitrogen concentration [g m

-3

]

Grzegorz Cema

in NH4-N

out NH4-N

out NO2-N

out NO3-N

900

N inorg out external recirculation

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

300

325

350

375

400

425

450

Time [days]

Fig. 27. Nitrogen conversion in the partial nitritation reactor.

the whole period, it was possible to achieve nitrite-to-ammonium ratio in the effluent from the reactor equal to 1.3 ± 0.2, which is close to stoichiometry of the Anammox reaction. It was feasible to reach such favourable ratio by combination of several factors that favour ammonium oxidizing bacteria over nitrite oxidizers. The sludge liquor, used in presented study, had an influent alkalinityto-ammonium ratio around 1.3 - 1.4 resulting in 58 ± 7% ammonium oxidation ensuring proper feeding media for the Anammox reactor. Drop in pH-value, presence of free ammonia that exceeded 20 g NH3 m-3 (in the first zone of the reactor) and free nitrous acid up to 5 g HNO2 m-2 (in zone 2 and 3 of R1), temperature exceeding 30°C allowed to suppress nitrite-oxidizing bacteria. As a result, the nitrate nitrogen concentration in the effluent from the partial nitritation reactor not exceeded 20 g m-3 on average. Fux and

V-3. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor –from two-step towards one-step process Originally, the technical-scale pilot-plant was designed for studies of two-stage partial nitritation/Anammox process in two reactors in series. Stable partial nitritation is an essential precondition for Anaerobic Ammonium Oxidation in a two-step process (Fux, 2003).

The HRT fluctuated from 1.6 to 3.3 days, with an average value equal to 2 ± 0.3 days.

The reactor was supplied directly with reject water from dewatering of digested sludge that contained high concentration of ammonium nitrogen varying from 260 to 917 g m-3 with an average value amounted to 609.4 ± 167 g m-3 (Fig. 27).

The average ammonium loading rate was 1.08 g NH4-N m-2d-1 and the specific nitrite production rate during stable partial nitritation period was 0.57 g NO2-N m-2d-1. During

Total nitrogen concentration [g m-3]

800

influent

Fig. 28. Total inorganic nitrogen in the influent and effluent from partial nitritation reactor.

effluent

700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 275

300

325

350

375

400

Time [days]

40

425

450

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

co-workers (2004b) reported that after eleven months of operation of partial nitritation MBBR reactor, significant nitrate production occurred. Authors explained this phenomenon as a result of the adaptation of existing nitrite oxidizers or the accumulation of a new species. The average DO concentration was 3 g O2 m-3 and decrease of this value to 1.5 g O2 m-3 caused only temporal decrease of nitrate production and it increased again within 40 days. Jianlong and Ning (2004) demonstrated that partial nitritation was steadily obtained at DO concentration of 1.5 g O2 m-3. In our research, it was possible to obtain stable partial nitritation with only minor production of nitrates with the average DO concentration equal to 1 g O2 m-3. Generally, at low DO, Nitrosomonas is growing faster than Nitrobacter, so nitrite will be enriched (Rosenwinkel and Cornelius, 2005).

In 339th day of the experiment, the external recirculation from the effluent of the Anammox reactor to the first zone of the partial nitritation reactor was applied. Simultaneously the aeration of the first zone of the R1 was swiched-off. The aim of introduced changes was to remove the nitrate nitrogen generated in the Anammox process by heterotrophic denitrification by remaining organic acids from anaerobic digestion. However, introduced recirculation initiated a significant reduction of nitrogen (Fig. 28) that could not be explained by heterotrophic denitrification. The average nitrogen removal efficiency was equal to 37% during that period.

It seems that created condition turned out to be favourable to Anammox microorganisms.

High nitrogen removal in the first reactor was observed just after one-month period of recirculation. Such fast observed activity of the Anammox bacteria could be explained by two phenomena. At first, the Anammox microorganisms were already present in the nitrifying biofilm. It was proved by the FISH analysis that in partial nitritation reactor except Nitrosomonas sp. also some Anammox bacteria were present in the biofilm. Moreover, the external recirculation allowed seeding the partial nitritation reactor with the Anammox bacteria derived from the Anam-

mox reactor. Rosenwinkel and Cornelius (2005) described the same phenomenon that after decrease of DO concentration in the partial nitritation reactor the nitrogen loss occurred which was not caused by heterotrophic denitrification (based on the COD balance). The authors suggested that it is necessary to first build up a biofilm structure in the carrier material, which can be in the next step seeded with the Anammox microorganisms.

Due to the high nitrogen removal in the first reactor, it was decided to change process from two-step into one-step process.

V-4. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor – onestep process

Process performance evaluation Both the partial nitritation and the Anammox processes took place in a single reactor. Table 15 presents statistical evaluation of the parameters measured during operation of the pilot plant.

During the operational period, a pH-value in the effluent from the reactor was equal to the influent value. While the partial nitritation reaction takes place, a large decrease in pH value is normally observed, whereas a rise of pH value is characteristic for the Anammox reaction as cell synthesis occurs. Simultaneous performance of both processes resulted in ions compensation and therefore the pH drop in the one-stage system was minimal.

The pH level was rather constant, with the average values of 7.84 ± 0.11 in the influent to the reactor and 7.84 ± 0.24 in the outlet of the system. The sporadic drop of the pH value in the outlet was mainly as a result of stops in the inflow to the pilot plant.

Temperature is a very important factor influencing the biological processes. It is especially key factor for the Anammox process, which has optimum temperature on the level of 37 oC. When the reactor was operated as a partial nitritation reactor in two-step process, the average temperature exceeded 30oC. However, due to the fact that it was proved that the Anammox process can be operated at a temperature below the range of 30-35oC (Szatkowska and Płaza, 2006; Szatkowska, 2007), the process did not required additional 41

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Table 15. Characteristics of the influent medium and operation parameters of the one-stage MBBR reactor.

Parameter

Unit

NH4-N in

gm

N removal efficiency

-3

% -3

COD0

gO2 m

Suspended solids

g SS m 3

Flow rate

Average

Min.

Max.

St. dev.

577.0

351.0

945.0

87.4

Samples No. 102

58.7

32.8

90.4

12.6

102

209.9

177.0

271.0

27.1

14

261

87

950

267

10

-3

-1

m d

2.0

1.5

2.9

0.3

102

HRT

d

1.1

0.7

2.7

0.3

197

Temperature reactor

ºC

24.7

17.0

31.9

2.44

397

-

7.84

7.38

8.30

0.11

377

pH-value in pH-value out

-

DO reactor

gO2 m

-3

7.84

6.87

8.60

0.24

389

2.03

0.07

7.13

0.95

391

DO concentration [g

m -3 ]

heating as the digester supernatant temperature was at 25 ± 2.4ºC. Due to this fact, the system worked under natural temperature of incoming supernatant with the average temperature in the reactor equal to 24.2 ± 2.6 ºC. Additional heater was supplied only during the winter period to keep temperature stable.

The dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration (Fig. 29), as the most vital one for proper course of the simultaneous partial nitritation/Anammox process, was monitored over the period described.

Since ammonium nitrogen concentration in the bulk liquid is much higher than the oxygen or nitrite nitrogen concentration, ammonium diffusion will not limit the process.

Nitrite is produced in outer layer by nitrifiers

but is mainly consumed by the Anammox culture in inner layer what means that oxygen is therefore the main limiting factor controlling the overall rate of the partial nitritation/Anammox process in biofilm reactors.

Particularly, it should be taken under consideration that dissolved oxygen is also responsible for inhibition of the Anammox process.

Under high values of oxygen concentration process efficiency can be significantly reduced. The average value of dissolved oxygen concentration during operational period until 656th day of research was 2.3 ± 0.8 g O2 m-3.

A big fluctuation, which can be observed in Fig. 29, was mainly due to centrifuges breakdowns, which resulted in no influent coming to the system, as well as electricity breakdowns that caused diffusers stops. After 656th

7.0 6.0

ave rage DO conce ntration 2.3±0.8

Inte rm itte nt ae ration

5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

Time [days]

Fig. 29. Variations of dissolved oxygen concentration in the reactor. From 656th day of research, intermittent aeration was applied (dashed line stands for average values during aeration mode).

42

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Conductivity [mS cm

-1

]

8

in out

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

Time [days]

Fig. 30. Variations of the conductivity in the inflow and effluent from the reactor.

day of research, the intermittent aeration system was tested with cyclic turn on/off the aeration system. The aeration mode was 35 minutes with 25 minutes mode without aeration. After 723rd day of research, the cycles were changed to 30 minutes of aeration and 30 minutes without. The average oxygen concentration during aeration time was equal to 3.1 Âą 0.6 g O2 m-3. During that period, values of DO were more stable in spite of more often breakdown noticed in the pilot plant.

The process was also monitored by conductivity measurements since Szatkowska (2004, 2007) proved, that it an excellent indicator for process monitoring (Figure 30).

The removal of two main ions coexisting in supernatant as ammonium and hydrogen

Nitrogen concentration [g N m -3]

1000

NH4-N in

N inorg. out

carbonate resulted also in conductivity depletion. The drop in conductivity value in the reactor is because of ammonia oxidation to nitrite and in the same time alkalinity consumption in the nitritation process as well as nitrogen loss during the Anammox process.

It can be also observed that curves of conductivity measurements at the influent and the effluent run parallel.

The system was supplied directly with supernatant that contained high concentrations of ammonium varying from 351-945 g m-3 (Fig. 31) with an average value amounted to 577 Âą 87.4 g m-3 (Table 15). During the process, part of ammonium was oxidised to nitrite that reacted with remaining ammonium to dinitrogen gas and nitrates. The total inorganic nitrogen elimination for the whole NO2-N out

NH4-N out

NO3-N out

900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1

36

71

94 113 127 154 197 241 283 316 350 388 435 479 522 570 612 675 724 765

Time [days]

Fig. 31. The nitrogen variations in the partial nitritation/Anammox reactor.

43

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

analysed period was 58.7 ± 12.6 % on average. At the same time the average removal of ammonium nitrogen amounted to 66.1 ± 13.9%, what indicates that, in the outlet from the pilot plant, there was still high concentration of ammonia. The mean value of ammonium nitrogen in the effluent from the reactor was equal to 198.6 ± 98.6 g NH4-N m-3.

During the operational period, about 38.5 g m-3 of nitrates was produced, what was around 10.1% of the removed ammonium nitrogen. This value is very close to a stoichiometric one, which is equal to 11%.

Figure 31 shows the nitrogen variations in the partial nitritation/Anammox reactor.

The detailed description of the pilot plant operations is described in Paper II, III, IV and V.

II). However, after short time, the adaptation to the new condition was observed. The average nitrogen removal rate was higher than compared to the period with lower flow rate. Batch tests confirmed, that in spite of initial negative effect of increased flow rate, the system could easily adapt to the new conditions. The investigations performed by Jin et al. (2008), showed the similar results concerning tolerance of the reactor to the flow rate shock. Additionally, authors stated that the tolerance of Anammox reactor to substrate concentration shock could be weaker than to flow rate shock. In practice, it is suggested that mixing characteristics is a key factor in selection of reactor configurations for Anammox and an equalizing tank or recycling line is necessary to cope with serious influent substrate concentration shock (Strous et al., 1997; Jin et al., 2008).

In order to more detailed examine of nitrogen elimination mechanism, the tests with addition of allylthiourea (selective inhibitor of Nitrosomonas bacteria) were performed.

These tests proved that mainly the Anammox bacteria are responsible for nitrogen removal (Paper II).

Influence of conditions in the pilot-plant on nitrogen removal dynamics

N removal rate [g N m

-2

d -1 ]

One of the crucial things concerning design of reactor for nitrogen removal is their stability in case of hydraulic and substrate concentration shocks. It is especially relevant in case of the Anammox process, which is known as very sensitive one. In order to investigate of the sudden change in the hydraulic regime in the pilot plant, several batch tests were performed. It was shown, that the shock change in the flow rate and the same in the substrate loading rate to the reactor could temporarily decrease the nitrogen removal efficiency and the same – the nitrogen removal rates (Paper

Dissolved oxygen influence on the nitrogen removal rate In simultaneous partial nitritation/Anammox process, nitrite availability for the Anammox bacteria has a great impact on overall nitrogen removal rates. Generally, it is dependent

5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 119 day 126 day 128 day 162 day 119 day 126 day 128 day 162 day 119 day 126 day 128 day 162 day no DO

DO Nrem

NH4-N

DO+NO2 NO2-N

Fig. 32. Juxtaposition of the tests with anoxic conditions (noDO), aerobic conditions (DO) and aerobic conditions with addition of a NaNO2 solution (DO+NO2-N).

44

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

series

KM

Vmax -2 -1

-1 -1

KI -3

g m d

g (g d.w.) d

gN-NH4 m

5

th

1.64

0.13

3.01

1417

6

th

2.03

0.10

3.38

1519

on the nitritation rate. In order to determine the significance of the presence of the nitrite on the overall nitrogen removal rate, several batch tests were performed. Estimation of the nitrogen removal rate at oxygen rich and oxygen free conditions was made. Moreover, additional series of batch tests in aerobic condition with addition of a NaNO2 solution were performed. Investigation of the influence of additional nitrite supply to the batch volume was the main aim of these tests (Paper III). Figure 32 shows the results from all batch tests.

Obtained results proved, that the nitrite concentration seems to be the rate-limiting factor for the simultaneous nitritation/Anammox process. Moreover, the tests showed that the best results were obtained for those performed under anoxic conditions.

It could be explained by competition for substrate by aerobic and anaerobic ammonium oxidizers or by partial penetration of the oxygen into the inner, Anammox layer of the biofilm. These results revealed that more detailed investigation on dissolved oxygen influence is necessary. Due to this reason the impact of the oxygen concentration on the nitrogen removal rates was examined (Paper IV). It turned out, that the highest nitrogen removal rates were obtained for the dissolved oxygen concentration around 3 g O2 m-3.

However, it can be stated, that the dissolved oxygen concentration above 2 g O2 m-3 had not significant effect on the nitrogen removal rates. On the other hand, at a DO concentration of 4 g O2 m-3 increases of nitrite and nitrate nitrogen concentration in the batch reactor were noticed. It was also observed that increase of biofilm thickness during the operational period had no influence on nitrogen removal rates in the pilot plant.

gN-NH4 m

-3

Table 16. Kinetic parameters estimated for batch tests.

Evaluation of kinetic parameters Previous tests confirmed that in the single stage partial nitritation/Anammox process, the activity of the aerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria and the nitrite production rated had a great impact on the overall reactor performance (Paper III and IV). For that reason, it was necessary to evaluate a simple method, allowing to monitor the activity of aerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria. The oxygen uptake rate (OUR) measurements turned out to be an excellent tool for estimation of the activity of different microorganism (Paper V). Application of OUR tests allows measuring the bacteria activity quickly and with good repeatability, and without a need of using expensive chemicals. Other tests were designed to determine kinetic parameters of reactions performed by aerobic organisms in bacterial community. The experiments showed that due to very high inhibition coefficient the aerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria seems to be very resistant to high substrate concentration. Generally it can be stated, that inhibition effect of ammonia nitrogen can be neglected.

Additionally, for evaluation of the different bacteria activity and to determine kinetic parameters of nitrogen removal several series of batch test were performed (Paper V).

Tests were performed in different periods of pilot-plant operation in order to evaluate the influence of long time process operation on kinetic parameters. The results of calculated parameters are presented in table 16.

Obtained results of Vmax, are significantly higher than the results obtained for two-step process (Paper I). These results showed that one-step simultaneous partial nitritation/Anammox process is a better option that two-step system.

45

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Table 17. Characteristics of the influent medium and operational parameters of the two-stage RBC. Parameter

Unit

NH4-N in NO2-N in NO2-N/NH4-N N removal efficiency COD0 Flow rate HRT Temperature reactor pH-value in pH-value out DO I stage

Average

Min.

Max.

St. dev.

421.0 524.1 1.3 71.7 669.2 0.004 3.3 17.0 8.1 7.9 2.6

176.0 215.4 0.7 4.4 200.0 0.002 2.2 12.0 7.0 6.5 1.6

658.8 830.0 2.3 98.4 1700.0 0.006 6.9 23.6 8.6 9.0 4.4

148.8 181.0 0.3 18.6 217.5 0.001 0.8 2.7 2.4 0.7 0.7

-3

gm -3 gm % -3 gO2 m 3 -1 m d d ºC -3 gO2 m

During the operational period, a slight decrease in pH-value between influent and effluent was noticed. The pH-value in the influent was equal to 8.1 ± 2.4 whereas in the effluent it was 7.9 ± 0.7. During the partial nitritation reaction, a large decrease in pH value is normally observed, while a rise of pH value is characteristic for the Anammox reaction due to cell synthesis. The decrease of pH value indicates that there is intensive first step of nitrification in the first stage of the reactor.

Nitrogen loading rates applied to the first stage of the RBC were gradually increased from 3 to 6 g N m-2d-1, and based on the increasing nitrogen concentration in the influent three research period can be differentiated (Fig. 33). The influent ammonium

V-5. Rotating Biological Reactor – two step process

Process performance evaluation The RBC was run for six months at 17 ± 2.4ºC which was much lower than the optimum temperature reported for the Anammox process (Paper VI). However, Siegrist et al. (1998) observed a significant nitrogen loss (ranging from 27 to 68%) in RBC during the treatment of stabilized leachate at temperatures ranging from 15 to 20ºC, but they were not sure whether it resulted from the Anammox process or from autotrophic denitrification. Table 17 presents statistical evaluation of the parameters measured during operation of the RBC.

Nitrogen concentration [g N m -3]

1600

influent

1400

Period I

Samples No. 44 44 44 41 42 44 44 43 41 43 31

Stage I

effluent Period III

Period II

1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1

8

18 25 32 38 50 57 64 71 81 88 106 113 121 127 136 143 148 155 165 171

Time [days]

Fig. 33. Inorganic nitrogen removal in RBC.

46

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Nitrogen Compounds and COD [g N m-3]

1400

NO3-N

NO2-N

NH4-N

The process of nitrogen removal predominated in the first stage of the contactor, providing 88 and 95% ammonium and nitrite nitrogen removal, respectively, during the whole period of operation. In Figure 34 an example of nitrogen profiles in the RBC unit in period I (day 18), period II (day 53) and period III (day 116) are shown. These profiles confirm that the process of inorganic nitrogen removal predominated in the first stage of the contactor. Moreover, it was associated with high nitrate production as a result of aerobic nitrification. Further removal of remaining nitrates took place in the third stage of the contactor where glucose as external carbon source was added. Additionally, the nitrite-to-ammonium ratio was also changeable in the influent and varied from 0.7 to 2.3 (Paper VI). However, it seems that this variation had no influence on the inorganic nitrogen removal efficiency.

Additional information about process stoichiometry are given by the ratio between nitrate production and ammonium consumption (NO3-/NH4+), as well as the ratio between nitrite conversion and ammonium conversion (NO2-/NH4+) (Fig. 35). The average conversion ratio of nitrite-to-ammonium was equal to 1.46, varied from 0.7 to 4.3, and was higher than value described by Strous and co-workers (1998). However, this ratio was comparable to 1.43 obtained in the rotating biological contactor by Wyffels and coworkers (2003). Substantial fluctuations of

COD

1200 1000 800 600 400 200

18

53

Out

St. II

St. III

In

St. I

Out

St. II

St. III

In

St. I

Out

St. II

St. III

In

St. I

0

116

Fig. 34. Example of nitrogen profile in the RBC (days: 18, 53 and 116).

and nitrite nitrogen concentration were gradually increased and remained within the range of 176 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 658.8 g N m-3 and 215.4 839.0 g N m-3 respectively (Fig. 33). The inorganic nitrogen removal efficiency in the first stage of the contactor was 58 Âą 17% on average during the whole operating time and it was comparable during subsequent periods I, II and III (58, 55 and 57% respectively).

This indicates that the nitrogen removal efficiency was independent of the nitrogen load in the applied range. Most probably, the Anammox process was the main cause of nitrogen removal (Paper VI).

Conversion ratios: NO 2- :NH 4+ and NO 3 -/NH 4 +

4.5

NO2/NH4

NO3/NH4

4.0 NO2 -/NH4 + = 1.32 according to stoichiometry

3.5 3.0

NO3 -/NH4 + = 0.26 according to stoichiometry

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Time [days]

Fig. 35. Conversion ratio of nitrite and ammonium and between nitrate production and ammonium conversion.

47

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

100

Nitrogen removal [%]

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1

15

25

36

50

60

71

85

106

116

127

141

148

163

171

Time [days] % N inrg removal

% NH4-N removal

% NO2-N removal

Fig. 36. Ammonium, nitrite and inorganic nitrogen removal efficiency in the first stage of the RBC.

earlier consumption of substrates for nitrification in the first stage and there was no reaction in the second stage of the contactor.

The aerobic conditions, in stage I, were conducive to nitrification proceeding in the system, and resulted in nitrate production amounting to 50% of nitrogen inflow. According to the stoichiometry of the Anammox reaction (Strous et al. 1998), nitrate production should be equal to 11% nitrogen inflow, and the difference was caused by presence of nitrite oxidizers in the biofilm.

Nitrobacter and Nitrospira were the species responsible for oxidation of nitrite to nitrate and they competed for substrate with the Anammox bacteria.

Between the 130th and the 150th day of the experiments, a temporary breakdown of the process performance was observed. It is difficult to explain, because no operating problem was noticed. It is conceivable that the Anammox bacteria are inhibited (reversibly) if exposed to aerobic conditions (Schmidt et al., 2003). For two weeks before this breakdown, the ammonium concentration in stage I dropped much below 20 g NH4-N m-3; this could lead to the process inhibition due to the deeper penetration of oxygen into the biofilm. Siegrist et al. (1998) also observed this phenomenon. It could be also caused by the increase of nitrite nitrogen up to 90 g m-3 on the 123rd day of the experiment, however, on the contrary high peaks of nitrite concentration on the 67th and

the ratio can be explained by the competition between nitrifiers and Anammox bacteria.

The occurrence of nitrification is also confirmed by the drop in pH from 8.1 in the influent to 7.1 in stage I. The conversion ratio between nitrate production and ammonium conversion was 0.84 ± 0.44 what was much higher than the stoichiometric value of 0.26 (Strous et al., 1998). This phenomenon shows that high nitrite oxidizers activity occurred in the first stage of the contactor.

Based on the Anammox process stoichiometry, no more than 30% of produced nitrates were due to anaerobic ammonium oxidation activity.

The ammonium, nitrite and inorganic nitrogen removal efficiencies in the first stage of the RBC unit are shown in Figure 36. During the whole research period, the average ammonium and nitrite nitrogen removal efficiency were on the level of 87.8 ± 15.8% and 94.8 ± 4.8%.

The maximum ammonium and nitrite removal rates were 3.0 and 3.9 g N m-2d-1, respectively. The maximum inorganic nitrogen removal rates were 5.8 g N m-2d-1 (0.93 kg N m-3d-1) with an average value of 2.8 g N m-2d-1 (Paper VI). The aeration of treated medium resulted in the DO concentration amounting to 2.6 ± 0.7 g O2 m-3 in the first stage of the contactor. In the second stage the DO concentration rose to 4.8 ± 0.9 g O2 m-3 probably as a result of

48

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

71st days (around 90 g m-3) did not cause such problems. The Anammox process (for the type Brocadia Anammoxidans) is irreversibly inhibited by nitrite at concentrations exceeding 70 g N m-3 for longer period (Schmidt et al., 2003; Dapena Mora 2007). Egli and coworkers (2001) showed that Kuenenia stuttgartiensis has a tolerance to nitrite even up to 180 g N m-3. However, there is no information about short-term effects of high nitrite nitrogen concentration in the Anammox reactor. This could mean that the process is insensitive to short-term high nitrite concentrations in the reactor (even up to 100 g NO2-N m-3 for several hours). It resulted in only a temporary decrease of nitrogen removal rates. Therefore, the breakdown of the process efficiency could be due to the overlap of these two phenomena: deeper oxygen penetration into the biofilm due to low ammonium concentration in the bulk liquid, as well as high nitrite concentration. The other possibility is that the Candidatus Kuenenia stuttgatiensis was the dominating Anammox bacteria in the reactor and consequently there were more resistant to high nitrite concentration.

The final nitrogen removal was performed in the stage III of the RBC unit by using a supplementary biodegradable organic (glucose) as an external carbon source for denitrification. The average COD/N ratio was equal to 6.2 ± 0.7. The removal of nitrate entering the third stage of the contactor was 34 % on average, which corresponded to a nitrogen removal rate of 0.68 g NO3-N m-2d-1. The average efficiency of inorganic nitrogen removal achieved in the whole RBC was 77%.

Kinetic evaluation of process It was shown that the Stover-Kincannon model can be used to describe the ammonium and nitrite removal rates in the RBC (Paper VI). However, it appeared that the Stover-Kincannon model was not appropriate for the process of the inorganic nitrogen removal (correlation coefficient R = 0.62).

This suggested the existence of different enzyme systems acting in the nitrogen transformations. Probably the lower correlation was due to participation of other microorganisms in nitrogen conversion. For instance Nitrosomonas is able to deammonify and, perhaps to a small extent, heterotrophic denitrifiers able to use small amounts of biodegradable carbon in the influent. The estimated values of the maximum substrate utilization rates (16.72 and 44.05 g m-2d-1 for ammonium and nitrite nitrogen, respectively) showed the possibility of a still higher nitrogen load to the RBC.

Looking for bacteria populations The presence of the Anammox bacteria belonging to Candidatus Brocadia anammoxidans and/or Candidatus Kuenenia stuttgatiensis in the first two stages of the contactor was also proved (by FISH analyses), confirming the main role of the Anammox process in the nitrogen removal in the first stage of the RBC (Paper VI). Additionally, microbial analysis confirmed he presence of nitrifiers in the biofilm (Table 18). These data suggested that the two simultaneous processes of ammonium oxidation and Anammox could occur in one single RBC unit.

Referring to studies of Egli et al. (2003), it was proved that within the RBC biofilm depth, ammonium oxidizing bacteria are on

Table 18. Identified nitrifiers and Anammox bacteria.

Nitrosomonas oligotropha lineage Stage I Stage II Stage III

+ +

Anaerobic ammoniumoxidizing bacteria, Nitrobacter genus Candidatus ‘Brocadia spp.

Nitrospira anammoxidans’ and Candidatus ‘Kuenenia stuttgartiensis’ +++ ++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ + + + Scale: (-) – absence; (+) – few; (++) – middle; (+++) – high availability

Most halophilic and halotolerant Nitrosomonas spp.

49

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Bacteria identified Acinetobacter calcoaceticus Pseudomonas fluorescence Alcaligenes xylodoxidans Pseudomonas alcaligenes Proteus vulgaris Aeromonas salmonicida Aeromonas hydrophila Pseudomonas earuginosa Shigella spp Acinetobacter lwoffi

Stage I + + + -

Stage II + ++ + -

Stage III ++ ++ + + +

Table 19. Identified denitrifying bacteria strains.

++ - Dominating strain

phila were the dominating denitrifying strains in the third stage of the contactor. They are Gram-negative, ubiquitous organisms. They are widespread in the mixed liquor of activated sludge plant when they are involved in the degradation of organic matter. They are known as incompletely denitrifying heterotrophic bacteria showing strong reduction of nitrates to nitrites (Drysdale et al., 1999).

Moreover, some authors have observed that these bacteria preferred oxic conditions for growth but were still able to produce nitrites from nitrates reduction while simultaneously utilising oxygen as a final electron acceptor.

The domination of denitrifiers responsible for partial denitrification of nitrates only to nitrites and the presence of nitrite oxidizers in the stage III may be an explanation of the low efficiency of nitrate removal. The average oxygen concentration in the bulk liquid was 3.0 Âą 1.5 g O2 m-3; this created favourable conditions for nitrifiers that oxidized nitrites produced by Aeromonas spp.

the outer layer, and the Anammox bacteria were only detected in the lower part of the biofilm, defined by penetration depth of the oxygen into the biofilm.

Using commercial identification kits API 20NE and API 20E, in the biofilm from all three stages of the reactor, the denitrifying bacteria strains have been identified (Table 19).

Microbial analysis in the stage I of RBC revealed the presence of denitrifying bacteria such as: Acinetobacter calcoaceticus, Pseudomonas fluorescence and Alcaligenes xylodoxidans, followed by: Pseudomonas fluorescence, Pseudomonas alcaligenes, Proteus vulgaris in stage II (Table 19).

However, the biodegradable organic carbon to nitrogen ratio was unfavourable for heterotrophic denitrification. Therefore, heterotrophic denitrification could not be responsible for nitrogen removal in the first stage of the RBC. The presence of Nitrosomonas spp. in the biofilm suggested that part of the nitrogen loss could be also attributed to denitrifying Nitrosomonas cells located in the lower part of the biofilm. They could use ammonium as electron donors and nitrite as electron acceptor in case of oxygen lack (Bock et al., 1995; Helmer and Kunst, 1998).

The results confirmed presence of Pseudomonas considered as a species responsible for denitrification. It is in agreement with the recent results of Ju et al. (2005) who found that Pseudomonas earuginosa is able to denitrify under aerobic condition when DO concentration exceeded 1 g O2 m-3. Likewise, in an early observation, Bang et al. (1995) reported the presence of aerobic denitrification in the RBC reactor even when the DO concentration exceeded 3 g O2 m-3 in the treated medium. Aeromonas salmonicida, Aeromonas hydro-

Fig. 37. Photos of the biofilm in the denitrification part of the RBC.

50

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

N concentration [g N m

-3

]

1800

influent

Stage I

effluent

1600 Period II

Period I

1400

Period III Perio

1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1

16

31

46

61

76

91

106

121

136

151

166

181

196

211

226

Time [days]

Fig. 38. Inorganic nitrogen removal in RBC.

Glucose appears to be the least efficient carbon source in comparison with the methanol and acetic acid used in previous research. Efficiencies of 83 to 97% in nitrogen removal respectively were achieved for the both organic carbon sources (unpublished data).

Additionally, it seems that with glucose as an external carbon source, intensive biofilm growth accompanied nitrate reduction and aerobic degradation. In the third stage of the RBC very intensive growth was observed, and discs were completely covered with a white, fluffy biofilm (Fig. 37) Moreover, different denitrifying bacteria strains were noticed when methanol and acetic acid were applied (unpublished data).

For biofilm fed with methanol the following bacteria strains have been identified: Aeromonas hydrofilla, Aeromonas salmonicida (dominating strain), Aeromonas mausoucida, Pseudomonas aeruginosa (dominating strain), Pseudomonas fluorescence and for biofilm fed with acetic acid: Pseudomonas shigellides, Pseudomonas alcaligenes and Aeromonas sorbia.

During the operational period it was proved that, the process is insensitive to short-term high nitrite concentrations in the reactor (even up to 100 g NO2-N m-3 for several hours) (Paper VI).

V-6. Rotating Biological Reactor – onestep process

Process performance evaluation The Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC) treating real landfill leachate from two Polish landfill sites was running for 8 months with average operational temperature equal to 20.6 ± 1.1°C. Three research periods can be differentiated based on the increasing nitrogen concentration in the influent (period I: day 1 to 45; period II: day 45 to 159; period III: day 159 to 230). (Fig. 38). During the first one, the start up of the Anammox process took place. The second one was the period of the stable work of the reactor. The last one was the period when the process inhibition occurred (Paper VII).

The reactor was supplied with landfill leachate that contained high concentration of ammonium nitrogen varying from 891 to 1562 g m-3 with an average value amounted to 1173 ± 234 g m-3 (Fig. 38).

In the third period of reactor operation, strong process inhibition was noticed (Paper VII). The nitrite nitrogen concentration in the reactor exceeded 100 g m-3 and due to this, the nitrogen concentration in the influent, and the same nitrogen load, had to be decreased from above 1000 g m-3 to 300 – 400 g m-3.

After process breakdown, changes in biofilm characteristics in the first stage of the contactor were noticed. During stable process op51

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Fig. 39. Photos of the biofilm in the first stage of the contactor A) 69th day, Period II – stable process performance, B) 222th day, Period III – after process inhibition.

decreased. Interesting is also comparison of the test from second and third period of experiment. In the test performed in the third period, a slight increase of nitrite nitrogen concentration after 60 minutes was observed, whereas in second period nitrites concentration decreased for whole test. It could be concluded, that mainly the Anammox process was inhibited during the breakdown of the process performance, and it seemed that partial nitritation was not affected.

eration, intensive biofilm growth was observed. Process inhibition caused significant biofilm detachment from the disc, and at the same time biofilm changed colouring from light to very dark brown (Fig. 39).

Nitrogen conversion

Nitrogen concentration [g m-3]

200

NH4-N

NO2-N

NO3-N

180 160 140 120 100

A

80 60 40 20 0 0

20

40

60

80

Time [min]

100 120 140

Nitrogen concentration [g m-3]

Additional information about process performance in the first stage of the RBC gave batch tests carried out in second and third period of the experiment. Fig. 40A and B shows the nitrogen conversion during the batch tests.

In both test, the ammonium nitrogen removal during the whole test was higher than nitrite nitrogen while in the Anammox process should be the opposite situation according to the stoichiometric reaction. However, two subsequent processes – aerobic oxidation to nitrite and the Anammox process, used ammonium nitrogen. It was also interesting that the nitrogen removal was higher during first 40 minutes of the test. This phenomenon could be explained by very high nitrite nitrogen concentration during the batch tests, which exceeded 100 g m-3 what caused the Anammox process inhibition and the same nitrite removal rate after 40 minutes 200

Kinetic evaluation of process The analysis of data indicated that the StoverKincannon model well described the process of ammonium and inorganic nitrogen removal (Paper VII). Due to the fact, that obtained value of KB (the saturation constant), the equation become the equation of the first order reaction (González-Martínez and Duque-Luciano, 1991). The StoverKincannon equation can be rewritten as: rA = K ⋅

Q ⋅ Si A

Where: K – is a proportionality coefficient.

N-NH4

N-NO2

N-NO3

180 160 140 120 100

B

80 60 40 20 0 0

(7)

20

40

60

80

Time [min]

52

100 120 140

Fig. 40. Example of nitrogen conversion in the batch tests A) Period II, B) Period III.

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Table 20. Identified nitrifiers and the Anammox bacteria in the first stage of the contactor (AOB – ammonium oxidizing bacteria; NOB – nitrite oxidizing bacteria; AAOB – anaerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria).

AOB

Day 16 44 75 110 135 169 200 236

K=

AAOB; B. anammoxidans Nitrosomonas and/or K. Nitrosomonas sp.

Nitrobacter sp.

Nitrospira sp. oligotropha stuttgartiensis +++ ++ ++ + ++++ ++ +++ + ++++ + ++++ + + +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ ++++ +++ Scale: (-) – absence; (+) – few; (++) – middle; (+++) – high availability; (++++) - dominant

Vmax KB

NOB

Nitrosomonas oligotropha were present only during the first period of the experiment and in the first stage of the contactor also at the beginning of the second period, and it did not develop to a larger sized population under the operating conditions of the reactor.

Egli and co-workers (2003) analysed changes in bacteria population during the start-up of the simultaneous partial nitritation/Anammox process in the RBC. They identified Nitrosomonas eurpaea/eutropha, Nitrosomonas urea/oligotropha and Nitrosomonas communis in the reactor, however, N. europea/eutropha become the dominating stain in the reactor. This might indicating, that also in presented research this bacteria strain was dominating aerobic ammonium oxidizer in the system.

Nitrobacter sp. and Nitrospira sp. were identified as bacteria responsible for aerobic nitrite oxidation. However, theses bacteria were identified only during the first period of the experiment when nitrates were the main product of ammonium oxidation. In the later period when nitrate production was much

(8)

The relation between load and the removal rate results is linear for the tested values of load to the reactor, according to the model proposed by Eckenfelder (GonzálezMartínez and Duque-Luciano, 1991).

Looking for bacteria populations Microbial analysis (FISH) confirmed the coexistence of nitrifiers and the Anammox bacteria belonging to Candidatus Brocadia anammoxidans and/or Candidatus Kuenenia stuttgatiensis in the rotating biological contactor (Paper VII). These data confirm the main role of the simultaneous partial nitritation/Anammox process in the nitrogen removal. In table 20, 21 and 22 result of bacteria population analysis in the first, second and third stages of the contactor are presented, respectively.

During the whole research period the Nitrosomonas sp. were the main aerobic ammonium oxidizers all stages of the contactor. The

Table 21. Identified nitrifiers and the Anammox bacteria in the second stage of the contactor.

AOB

Day 16 44 75 110 135 169 200 236

NOB

AAOB; B. anammoxidans Nitrosomonas and/or K. Nitrosomonas sp.

Nitrobacter sp.

Nitrospira sp. oligotropha stuttgartiensis +++ + ++ + +++ ++ +++ + +++ + +++ + + +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ ++++ +++ Scale: (-) – absence; (+) – few; (++) – middle; (+++) – high availability; (++++) - dominant

53

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Table 22. Identified nitrifiers and the Anammox bacteria in the third stage of the contactor.

AOB

Day 16 44 75 110 135 169 200 236

NOB

AAOB; B. anammoxidans Nitrosomonas and/or K. Nitrosomonas sp.

Nitrobacter sp.

Nitrospira sp. oligotropha stuttgartiensis +++ + +++ + +++ + +++ + +++ +++ + +++ + +++ + +++ + +++ + Scale: (-) – absence; (+) – few; (++) – middle; (+++) – high availability; (++++) - dominant

inner part of the biofilm (Egli et al., 2003), it may explain such late detection of these bacteria. The Anammox bacteria predominated mainly in the first and second stage of the contactor, however they were also detected in the last stage. Interesting is, that amount of the Anammox bacteria became stable after process breakdown. It was possible that there was rather inhibition of bacteria activity than cell’s death.

lower, probably some other bacteria, which were not identified, were responsible for second step of nitrification. Generally, nitrite oxidizing bacteria were present in much lower quantity than the aerobic ammonium oxidizers.

The presence of Candidatus Brocadia anammoxidans and/or Candidatus Kuenenia stuttgatiensis, especially in the first two stages of the RBC, was also proved. However, they were detected in the middle of the second period in 110 day of experiment, whereas, high nitrogen removal efficiency exceeding 70% were form 45th day. It can be as a result of the methodology of samples collection for FISH analysis. For bacteria analysis, detached biofilm samples from bottom of the reactor were collected. Taking under consideration, that the Anammox bacteria are present in the

VI – S YSTEMS COMPARISON Table 23 compiles results from performed studies with operation of one- and two-step partial nitritation/Anammox in different reactors – MBR, MBBR and RBC. During the performed research, it was possible to achieve high nitrogen removal efficiency in all systems. In all systems the

Table 23. Results and operational parameters for all described systems. parameter

unit

N rem.

N-load N-load N rem. rate N rem. rate NH4-N in NO2-N in NO2-Nconv/NH4-Nconv NO3-Nprod/NH4-Nconv pH-value in pH-value out DO Temp. reactor

% -3 -1 kg m d -2 -1 gm d -3 -1 kg m d -2 -1 gm d -3 gm -3 gm -3 gm °C

MBR** 47.5±12.7 0.06±0.02 0.03±0.018 49.5±14.5 53.8±20.3 1.05±0.69 0.8±0.46 8.0±0.1 8.0±0.1 <0.2 33.9±0.7

MBBR*** two-step 86.0±8.6 0.07±0.01 0.28±0.06 0.06±0.01 0.25±0.05 124.4±31.0 157.3±29.5 1.35±0.27 0.15±0.07 7.3±0.4 8.3±0.3 0.14±0.07 31.4±2.7

MBBR one-step 58.7±12.6 0.6±0.1 2.42±0.06 0.34±0.08 1.39±0.31 577.0±87.4 0.1±0.05 7.8±0.1 7.8±0.2 2.03±0.95 24.7

RBC two-step 58 ±17* 0.9±0.24* 4.74±1.1* 0.53±0.20* 2.80±1.20* 421.0±148.8 524.1±181.0 1.46±0.57 0.84±0.44* 8.1±2.4 7.9±0.7 2.6±0.7* 17.0±2.7

RBC**** one-step 74.6±9.5* 1.12±0.23* 5.99±1.24* 0.83±0.32* 2.55±1.73* 755.5±380.9 0.32±0.29* 8.1±0.5 8.3±0.7 1.8±0.7* 20.6±1.5

* - for the first stage of the RBC where the Anammox process took place; ** - For MBR results for period from 78th to 148th day – from start of the nitrogen removal to process breakdown; *** - Results only for the Anammox reactor; **** - Results for stable process operation – period II.

54

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

120

N inorg.

NH4-N

NO2-N

removal efficiency [%]

100 80 60 40 20 0

MBR

MBBR two-step

MBBR one-step

RBC two-step

RBC one-step

Fig. 41. Ammonium, nitrite and inorganic nitrogen removal efficiency – comparison of different systems. (For MBR results for period from start of the nitrogen removal to process breakdown; for RBC one-stage results for stable process operation – period II; for RBC two-stage as well one-stage results are for the first stage of the contactor where Anammox process took place).

Anammox process took place what was confirmed by FISH analysis (with except for MBR – no FISH assay was performed). Reactors were supplied with different feeding media. The MBR was supplied with synthetic wastewater, MBBR with reject water from dewatering of digested sludge and the RBC was supplied with municipal landfill leachate from two landfill sites. The highest average nitrogen removal efficiency equal to 86% during the whole research was achieved for two-step partial nitritation/Anammox process in the Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor, but the N-load was very low. The lowest value was achieved for the MBR and was equal to 47.5 ± 12.7%. However it should be stated that in the MBBR reactor, the Anammox process was already working, whereas in the MBR, the start-up of the process took place.

In Figure 41 the comparison of ammonium, nitrite and inorganic nitrogen removal efficiency in different system are presented. For the MBR, the results for period from 78th to 148th day are presented – from start of the nitrogen removal to process breakdown.

Additionally, also for RBC one-step system, the results from stable process operation are presented. Generally, the highest removal efficiency was achieved for the MBBR twostep process, and the lowest for MBR reac-

tor. Very high removal efficiency of ammonium and nitrite nitrogen achieved for the MBBR two-step and RBC two-step and the values were on the similar level. However, in the RBC reactor the inorganic nitrogen removal efficiency was much lower than in the MBBR and was equal to 58 ± 17% on average during the whole operating time.

The difference between these two systems was mainly in the nitrate production to ammonium conversion ratio. In the MBBR twostep, this ratio was equal to 0.15± 0.07 and was lower than the stoichiometric one, whereas in the two-step RBC the ratio was equal to 0.84 ± 0.44 indicating high nitrite oxidizers activity in the first stage of the contactor. It should be stated that in the twostep RBC the DO concentration was much higher, on the level of 2.6 g m-3, while in the two-step MBBR it was 0.14 g m-3 on average.

The DO concentration in the two-step RBC was comparable rather with values obtained in single stage systems. Comparing single stage systems, where partial nitritation and Anammox took place in one single reactor, the nitrogen removal efficiency was higher in the RBC than MBBR, and was equal to 75.7% on average (in the second period) compared to 58.7% achieved in the MBBR. 55

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

0,9

5

0,8

4,5

0,7

4

N removal rate [g N m-2d-1]

N removal rate [kg N m-3d-1]

Grzegorz Cema

3,5

0,6 0,5

2,5

0,4 0,3

2

1,5

0,2 0,1

1

0,5

0

0 MBR

A

3

MBBR two-step

MBBR RBC two- RBC oneone-step step step

MBR

B

MBBR two-step

MBBR RBC two- RBC oneone-step step step

Fig. 42. A) Nitrogen removal rates in kg N m-3d-1 – comparison of different systems; B) Nitrogen removal rates in g N m-2d-1 - comparison of different systems. (For MBR results for period from start of the nitrogen removal to process breakdown; for RBC one-stage results for stable process operation – period II; for RBC two-stage as well one-stage results are for the first stage of the contactor where Anammox process took place).

0.08 kg N m-3d-1, whereas in single unit a mean nitrogen removal rate of 0.8 kg N m-3d-1 was observed.

Conducted studies showed that nitrogen removal rates in the two-step RBC system (equal to 2.8 ± g N m-2d-1 and 0.53 ± 0.20 kg N m-3d-1, in the first stage of the contactor) were lower than for one-step process (4.57 ± 1.10 g N m-2d-1 and 0.83 ± 0.17 kg N m-3d-1, in the first stage of the contactor for stable process operation - period II). Additionally in the two-step RBC higher nitrate production to ammonium conversion ratio was noticed, and it was 0.84 ± 0.44 and 0.32 ± 0.29 (0.17 for stable process operation) for two-step and one-step respectively. In the two-step RBC nitrite nitrogen from influent was oxidized by nitrite oxidizers to nitrates, whereas in one-step process nitrite oxidizers loosed the competition for nitrite with the Anammox bacteria. During the whole research, the highest removal rates were achieved for the one-step RBC and were 2.5 time higher that for one-step MBBR system.

AOB and Anammox bacteria are slow growing microorganisms which optimal temperature of operation is around 30°C. For this reason, Anammox and CANON process were mostly applied to effluents with tem-

It can also be noticed (from standard deviation values), that during whole operational period in the RBC much higher fluctuation in the nitrogen removal efficiency was recorded.

However also there were higher fluctuations in influent ammonium concentration than in the one-step MBBR. It also seems that characteristics of the landfill leachate influenced the process performance in a higher extend than the reject water.

Obtained values of nitrogen removal rates in MBBR system, showed that one-step partial nitritation/Anammox process is a better option for reject water treatment that twostep process. The average inorganic nitrogen removal rate in two-step MBBR system was 0.25 ± 0.05 g N m-2d-1 (0.06 ± 0.01 kg N m3 -1 d ) and was five time lower than in one-step MBBR system where achieved 1.39 ± 0.31 g N m-2d-1 (0.34 ± 0.08 kg N m-3d-1). Figure 42A and B show the nitrogen removal rates in all investigated systems.

Vázquez-Padín and co-workers (2009) observed similar difference in nitrogen removal rates between two-step and one step process.

They used sequencing batch reactors (SBR) for treating supernatant of an anaerobic digester. The combined system allowed the removal of nitrogen loading rates around

56

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

the temperature dependence is strongly affected by the type of Anammox culture used.

In table 24 there is a comparison of conditions (temperature and DO concentration) and results in different systems for one-step partial nitritation/Anammox process.

Due to the fact, that the Anammox bacteria are reversibly inhibited by very low concentrations (<1 µM) of oxygen (Kartal et al., 2007), the Anammox process in the MBR reactor and two-step MBBR was operated without any aeration with DO concentration in the bulk liquid below 0.2 g O2 m-3. Additionally, nitrifiers present in both reactors managed with the increased oxygen concentration. Different situation took place in the two-step RBC reactor, in which frequent rotation of the media by the shaft supplies oxygen to the microorganisms both in the biofilm and in the bulk liquid. As a result, the average DO concentration in the first zone of the contactor was equal to 2.6 ± 0.7 g O2 m-3. Such a high DO concentration resulted in significant nitrate nitrogen production. For one-step process, the partial nitritation is a bottleneck of overall reaction.

Generally, nitrification rate in fixed-film systems is often limited by the bulk liquid DO concentration (Metcalf and Eddy, 2004).

Additionally, DO concentration is one of the most often discussed parameter when economic factors are considered in treatment plant operation (Szatkowska, 2007). On the other hand, oxygen affects the Anammox

peratures higher than 30°C (Vázquez-Padín et al., 2009). Therefore, the MBR and two-step MBBR systems were operated at temperatures exceeding 30°C. However, Szatkowska and Płaza (2006) and Dosta et al. (2008) demonstrated that the impact of temperature on Anammox process is significant in case of sudden decrease of temperature. Moreover, authors proved that bacteria exposed for low temperatures for longer period are able to adapt to new conditions and work more efficiently. Due to this reason, the one-step MBBR system worked under natural temperature of incoming reject water with the average temperature in the reactor equal to 24.3 ± 2.6°C. An additional heat was supplied only during winter period to keep temperature stable. Moreover, the average operational temperature for the one-step as well two-step RBC system was even lower and was equal to 20.6 and 17°C for two-step and one-step system, respectively. Also Siegrist et al. (1998) and Egli et al. (2001) observed a significant nitrogen removal in the RBC at temperature below 20°C. Recently a few authors demonstrated that the Anammox process can be operated at temperature below 20°C. Isaka and co-workers (2008) demonstrated that removal activity decreased gradually with decreasing operating temperature, however, it still occurred at 6°C with nitrogen conversion rate equal to 0.36 kg N m-3d-1 with comparison to 2.8 and 6.2 at 22 and 32°C, respectively. Authors stated that

Table 24. Comparison of conditions and nitrogen removal in a one-stage nitrogen removal process.

Reactor type

MBBR MBBR MBBR RBC RBC RBC RBC SBR SNAP biofilm reactor Gas-lift reactor SBR

Application

Sludge liquor Sludge liquor Sludge liquor Landfill leachate Synthetic wastewater Landfill leachate High salinity s.w.

Synthetic wastewater Synthetic wastewater Synthetic wastewater Sludge liquor

T

DO -3

°C

gm

28.0-29.0 20 - 35 24.3 20.6 29.1 15 - 20 n.d.

30.0 35.0 n.d.

18 - 24

0.8 – 2.0 0-4 2.03 1.8 0.57 1-3 <1 0.1 2-3 0.5 0.5

N rem % 71 - 75 80 58.7 75 89 30 - 70 84 n.d.

60 - 80 42 85

N rem -3 -1 kg m d -2 -1 (g m d ) (1.2 – 2.2) (2 – 2.5) 0.34 (1.39) 0.83 (4.57) (7.4) (0.4 – 1.2) 0.48 0.08 n.d.

1.5 0.45

Ref

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

1. Seyfried et al., 2002; 2. Rosenwinkel et al., 2005b; 3. This study; 4. This study; 5. Pynaert et al., 2003 ; 6. Siegrist et al., 1998; 7.Windey et al., 2005; 8. Third. et al., 2005 ; 9. Furukawa et al., 2006; 10. Sliekers et al., 2003; 11. Vázquez-Padín et al., 2008; n.d. - no data; s.w. – synthetic wastewater.

57

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

process since it is a process inhibitor. The average DO oxygen concentration measured in the bulk liquid was equal to 2.03 g O2 m-3 for one-step MBBR reactor and 1.8 g O2 m-3 for one-step RBC system. However, as it was mentioned before, the higher nitrogen removal rates were obtained for the RBC. Other researchers who worked with the MBBR technology report DO concentration between 0.8 and 2 g m-3 (Hippen, 2000; Seyfried et al., 2002). Under such condition, it was possible to reach 75 and 70% of nitrogen removal, respectively. At the DO value equal to 5.9 g m-3, the nitrogen removal amounted only to 10%. According to Johansson et al.

(1998), the nitrogen efficiency removal of 6070% can be obtained under the DO concentration below 1 g m-3. The full-scale MBBR in Germany where one-stage partial nitritation/Anammox process was applied gave 80% of nitrogen removal efficiency at DO in the range of 0-4 g m-3 (Rosenwinkel and Cornelius, 2005). Oxygen condition and nitrogen removal rates presented in this thesis are comparable to results reported by Seyfried et al. (2002). However, the German experiments were run under higher temperatures. Pynaert et al (2003) demonstrated nitrogen removal in the RBC at the level of 89% at the very high nitrogen surface load ranging from 4 to 8 g N m-2d-1. In comparison to RBC presented in this study, they achieved DO concentration equal to 0.57 g O2 m-3. However, their reactor was operated at temperature 29.1°C, what was significantly higher value than 20.6°C presented in this study.

Conducted experiments on different systems with both two- and one-stage partial nitritation/Anammox process demonstrated that one-stage system is a better option for nitrogen removal from ammonium rich streams irrespective of kind of wastewater. It was possible to obtain higher nitrogen removal rates and moreover, one-step system was less complicated in operation as there was no need for nitrite-to-ammonium control in the influent. Additionally, there was no risk with overloading the system with NO2-N, however, the production of NO2-N in the reactor should be controlled as nitrite nitrogen is

process inhibitor in higher concentration.

The one-step process seems to be more cost effective since there need only one reactor and due to higher nitrogen removal capacity, the smaller reactor volume can be used.

Moreover, process can be operated under natural temperature of incoming sludge liquor and in case of RBC reactor even at temperatures below 20°C, therefore the expenses could be reduced.

VII – C ONCLUSIONS The combined partial nitritation/Anammox process was investigated in three different reactors. Additionally process was investigated in two different system configurations as one- and two-step process. The partial nitritation/Anammox process could be successfully applied to treat nitrogen rich streams as landfill leachate and reject water originating from dewatering of digested sludge. Performed research allowed to show differences among used systems and to point out the best system solution. This research has shown that during the start-up period, the Anammox process is very sensitive and unstable. The conclusion are summarised briefly below:

Membrane assisted BioReactor (MBR) 1. The experiments carried out proved that retention of biomass in Membrane assisted BioReactor and long sludge age give possibility for implementation of the Anammox process.

2. At the temperature above 30°C, dissolved oxygen concentration below 0.3 g O2 m-3 and at very low contents of biodegradable organic compounds within 5 months of process operation over 75% of nitrogen removal was reached and very intensive gas production was observed.

3. The research confirmed that very long time, over fourth months, is needed for implementation of the Anammox process.

4. Performed OUR tests bear out presence of ammonium and nitrite oxidizing bacteria in the Anammox reactor.

58

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) – twostep process

plant although the basic conditions like DO concentration, pH and temperature were similar.

1. Performed research proved, that in spite of observed changes in activities of different groups of bacteria in Anammox reactor, it is possible to obtain stable results of nitrogen removal and high process efficiency of nitrogen removal equal to 86.0 ± 8.6%.

2. There is a cooperation of both bacterial cultures (Aerobic ammonium oxidizers and Anammox bacteria) in activated sludge and biofilm in the nitrogen conversions. Due to the fact, that nitrifiers play role of oxygen removers, it was possible to establish stable Anammox process in the reactor.

3. In the batch test with both Kaldnes and sludge, the nitrogen removal capacity is much higher in the tests with concentrated sludge only. The contribution of biofilm on Kaldnes carriers made up the efficient Anammox performance.

4. It is interesting to notice that nitrifiers are outcompeted by Anammox bacteria in the biofilm so that their population is very small, but still active.

5. The kinetic constants of ammonium and nitrite removal for the Anammox process in pilot plant at the Himmerfjäden WWTP were calculated. The best correlation coefficients were found for Hanes-Woolf method. The average value of Km and Vmax for ammonium removal was 6.18 gNH4-N m-3 and 78.21 gNH4-N m-3d-1 and for nitrite removal 6.76 gNO2-N m-3 and 90.80 gNO2-N m-3d-1, respectively.

6. Obtained results of kinetic parameters were not stable during the research period, probably because of most probable very dynamic changes in activities and biomass amounts of different groups of bacteria, which are responsible for Anammox and nitrification process in the reactor.

7. High free ammonia and nitrite concentration during the batch tests (not observed in the pilot) affected nitrifiers and Anammox populations and proved that such type of batch tests are not excellent simulation of condition in the Anammox pilot

Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) – onestep process 1. The biofilm with bacterial culture was able to perform two processes simultaneously.

Adequate hydraulic retention time combined with proper oxygen conditions and nitrogen loads are essential for high nitrogen removal rates.

2. The maximum removal rate, obtained for pilot plant amounted to 2.6 g N m-2d–1, with the average value equal to 1.39 ± 0.31 g N m-2d-1, during the whole research period.

3. The coexistence of aerobic and anaerobic ammonium oxidizers within the biofilm was confirmed by FISH analysis.

4. In conducted batch tests it was shown that the best results are achieved for oxygen concentration around 3 g O2 m-3 with the average nitrogen removal rates on the level of 1.8 ± 0.31 g N m-2 d-1 The highest nitrogen removal rate in batch tests were at DO concentration equal to and amounted to 3.15 g O2 m-3 2.09 g N m-2d-1. At DO concentration equal to 4 g O2 m-3 increase of nitrite concentration in the batch reactor was noticed, and in the same time decrease of inorganic nitrogen removal rates.

5. It was proved, that the Oxygen Uptake Rate tests, as well as the batch tests are great tools that can be applied to the estimation of kinetic parameters of reaction performed by nitrifiers and heterotrophs involved in the one-stage partial nitritation/Anammox process.

6. The kinetic constants of ammonium removal for the partial nitritation/Anammox process in pilot plant at the Himmerfjäden WWTP were calculated. The best correlation coefficients were found for Lineweaver-Burk and Hanes-Woolf methods. The average value of KM and Vmax for ammonium removal was 17.92 g NH4-N m-3 and 6.45 gNH4-N m-2d-1. Six months later, measured Vmax was on the similar level equal to 59

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

6.92 g NH4-N m-2d-1, whereas KM was significantly higher and equal to 37.84 g NH4-N m-3.

7. It was shown, that both aerobic ammonium oxidizers and the ANAMMOX bacteria reveal strong affinity to the substrate, and relatively high resistance for high concentrations of it. The nitrite oxidizing bacteria were much more sensitive, and thus they will always be partly inhibited, which is good from the point of view of the best partial nitritation/Anammox process performance.

8. Additionally, the activity of ammonia oxidizing nitrifiers was very close to the maximal velocity, which indicates, that the operational conditions serve them good.

9. The highest nitrogen removal rate in the batch test simulating the simultaneous partial nitritation/Anammox process amounted to 2.96 g N m-2d-1, for simulation of the Anammox process only it was equal to 5.18 g N m-2d-1.

10.The batch tests showed that the nitrite production seems to be the rate-limiting step for the Anammox reaction in a single reactor.

4. The Stover-Kincannon model can be used to describe the ammonium and nitrite removal rates in the RBC. The estimated values of the maximum substrate utilization rates (16.72 and 44.05 g N m-2d-1 for ammonium and nitrite nitrogen respectively) showed the possibility of still higher nitrogen load to the RBC. 5. The rotating biological contactor with the Anammox process can be successfully operated even at temperatures below 20 °C. 6. The process was insensitive to short-term high nitrite concentrations in the reactor of up to 100 g NO2-N m-3 for several hours.

Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; onestep process 1. Removal of total inorganic nitrogen has been achieved with combination of nitrification, Anammox and denitrification processes.

2. FISH analysis confirmed coexistence of nitrifiers and the Anammox bacteria in one reactor.

3. The maximum inorganic nitrogen removal rates amounting to 6.1 g N m-2d-1 (1.14 kg N m-3d-1) in the first stage of the contactor. The average inorganic nitrogen removal rate during the stable process operation was equal to 4.45 g N m-2d-1 (0.83 kg N m-3d-1). However, during the whole research period the average inorganic nitrogen removal rate during the stable process operation was equal to 2.55 g N m-2d-1 (0.46 kg N m-3d-1).

4. The RBC reactor could be highly loaded with ammonium nitrogen and is able to treat medium of very high its concentration even exceeding 1500 g N m-3.

5. Generally, the process of nitrogen removal predominated in the first stage of the contactor, providing 92 and 61% of ammonium and inorganic nitrogen removal, respectively, during the whole period of operation.

6. The Stover-Kincannon model can be used to describe the inorganic and ammonium nitrogen removal in the RBC. The values of Vmax and KB were estimated as 264.2

Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; twostep process 1. Removal of total nitrogen has been achieved with a combination of different processes: nitrification, Anammox and heterotrophic denitrification processes in one RBC. Moreover, it is also possible that some part of nitrogen was removed due to autotrophic denitrification conducted by Nitrosomonas spp.

2. FISH analysis confirmed coexistence of nitrifiers and the Anammox bacteria in one reactor. Additionally used API tests proved presence of aerobic denitrifying bacteria in the reactor.

3. The maximum removal rates for ammonium and nitrite nitrogen amounting to 3.0 g N m-2d-1 (0.56 kg N m-3d-1) and 3.9 g N m-2d-1 (0.76 kg N m-3d-1) respectively, moreover the maximum inorganic nitrogen removal rates (5.0 g N m-2d-1 (0.93 kg N m-3d-1)) has been achieved

60

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

and 346.4 g N m-2d-1, respectively for inorganic nitrogen and 64.94 and 64.80 g N m-2d-1, respectively, for ammonium nitrogen in the first stage of the contactor.

7. The obtained value of KB for nitrogen removal was much higher than tested loading rates indicating inorganic nitrogen removal according to the first order reaction. The relation between load and the removal rate results is linear for the tested values of load to the reactor.

8. It was proved that RBC with the simultaneous partial nitritation/Anammox process can be successfully operated even at temperatures around 20 °C. 9. The high nitrite concentration can intensify the inhibition effect of the toxic substances present in the landfill leachate.

mox populations and proved that such type of batch tests are not excellent simulation of condition in the Anammox pilot plant although the basic conditions like DO concentration, pH and temperature were similar.

VIII – F UTU RE RESEARCH It has been shown that the systems combining partial nitritation/Anammox process can be successfully applied for separate treatment of different types of nitrogen rich wastewater. Due to increasing pollution of water sources and stricter regulations, interest in new processes like the Anammox is rising.

There is still a lot of problems, which need to be solved. The following aspects may be investigated in future.

• The slow growth rate of the Anammox organisms is one of the most important of the process bottlenecks. The cultivation of slow-growing microorganisms requires efficient retention time of biomass.

The process start-up can be impeded by insufficient biomass build-up and the same, the full-scale implementation requires a longer start-up period compared to other nitrogen removal technologies.

Therefore, one of the most important things in future research is to speed-up this stage.

• The Anammox process is sensitive to high oxygen and nitrite concentrations. In case of lost of the bacteria activity a lot of time is needed for process recovery. That is why, there is a need to draw up a monitoring system for process performance as well as for control of quality of seeding media to prevent process inhibition by some toxics substances.

• There is strong need to identify a toxic substances present in landfill leachate and in others wastewater to prevent future process inhibition.

• In biofilm systems, biokinetic parameters such as substrate affinities, maximum growth rate or maintenance need can not be well assessed due to diffusion limitation (van der Star, 2008). Therefore, the enrichment of the Anammox bacteria in

General 1. The partial nitritation/Anammox process can be successfully applied for separate treatment of reject water from dewatering of digested sludge as well as for nitrogen removal from landfill leachate.

2. Obtained values of nitrogen removal rates showed that one-step simultaneous partial nitritation/Anammox process is a better option than two-step system irrespective of kind of wastewater.

3. The obtained nitrogen removal rates were higher in the one-step system which was additionally less complicated in operation and there was no need for nitrite-toammonium control in the influent.

4. In spite of the low nitrogen removal rates, the two-step MBBR system assured the highest nitrogen removal efficiency and stable long-term process operation.

5. Partial nitritation/Anammox process can be successfully applied at temperatures much lower than the optimum value.

6. The oxygen concentration in the bulk liquid and the nitrite production rates seem to be the rate-limiting step for the Anammox reaction in a single reactor.

7. High free ammonia and nitrite concentration during the batch tests (not observed in the pilot) affected nitrifiers and Anam61

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

â&#x20AC;˘ Due to an influence of mass transfer in biofilm, the biofilm kinetics should be examined. â&#x20AC;˘ Process optimization by using of the mathematical modelling would be an interesting task, which allows also checking the influence of different condition without risk of process inhibition.

suspended culture, give the great opportunity for the research on Anammox physiology. The Membrane Assisted bioreactor seems to be promising and excellent tool for study of the Anammox bacteria.

62

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

R EFERENCES Adamczyk J., Hesselsoe M., Iversen N., Horn M., Lehner A., Nielsen P. H., Schloter M., Roslev P., Wagner M. (2003). The isotope array, a new tool that employs substrate-mediated labelling of rRNA for determination of microbial community structure and function. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 69, 6875-6887.

Ahn J.-H. (2006). Sustainable nitrogen elimination biotechnologies: A review. Process Biochemistry, 41 (8), 1709-1721.

Aktas O., Çeçen F. (2001). Nitrification inhibition in landfill leachate treatment and impact of activated carbon addition. Biotechnology Letters 23, 1607 – 1611.

Amann R.I., Binder B.J., Olson R.J., Chisholm S.W., Devereux R., Stahl D.A. (1990). Combination of 16S rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes with flow cytometry for analyzing mixed microbial populations. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 56, 1919-1925.

Amokrane A., Comel C., Veron J. (1997). Landfill leachates pretreatment by coagulationflocculation. Water Research, 31 (11), 2775 – 2782.

Anthonisen A.C., Loehr R.C., Prakasam T.B.S., Srinath E.G., (1976). Inhibition of nitrification by ammonia an nitrous acid. Journal WPCF (Water Pollution Control Federation), 48 (5), 835 – 852.

Arrigo K.R. (2005). Marine microorganisms and global nutrients cycles. Nature, 437, 349-355.

Bae J-H., Kim S-K., Chang H-S. (1997). Treatment of landfill leachates: ammonia removal via nitrification and denitrification and further COD reduction via nitrification and denitrification and further COD reduction via Fenton’s treatment followed by activated sludge.

Water Science and Technology 36 (12), 341 – 348.

Bang D.-Y., Watanabe Y., Noike T. (1995). An experimental study on aerobic denitrification with polyvinyl alcohol as a carbon source in biofilms. Water Science and Technology, 32 (8), 235 – 242.

Blakey N.C. (1992). “Model Prediction of Landfill Leachate Production” in: Landfilling of waste: leachate. Edited by Christensen T.H., Cossu R., Stegmann R., Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York, Elsevier Science Publishers LTD. Bock E., Schmidt I., Strüven R., Zart D. (1995). Nitrogen loss caused by denitrifying Nitrosomonas cells using ammonium or hydrogen as electron donors and nitrite as electron acceptor. Archives of Microbiology, 163, 16-20.

Broda E. (1977). Two kinds of lithotrophs missing in nature. Zeitschrift für allgemeine Mikrobiologie, 17 (6), 491 – 493.

Butt T.E., Lockley E., Oduyemi K.O.K. (2007). Risk assessment of landfill disposal sites – State of the art. Waste Management, 28, 952 – 964.

Calli B., Mertoglu B., Inanc B. (2005). Landfill leachate management in Istanbul: applications and alternatives. Chemosphere 59, 819 – 829.

CanzianiR., Emondi V., Garavaglia M., Malpei F., Pasinetti E., Buttiglieri G. (2006). Effect of oxygen concentration on biological nitrification and microbial kinetics in a cross-flow membrane bioreactor (MBR) and moving-bed biofilm reactor (MNNR) treating old landfill leachate. Journal of Membrane Science 286, 202 – 212. Çelen I., Türker M. (2001). Recovery of ammonia as struvite from anaerobic digester effluents.

Environmental Technology, 22, 1263-1272.

Cema G., Płaza E., Surmacz-Górska J. and Trela J. (2005). Activated sludge and biofilm in the Anammox reactor – cooperation or competition? In: Integration and optimization of urban sanitation systems, Joint Polish-Swedish Seminars, Cracow, 2005, TRITA-LWR.REPORT 3018, 129 – 138.

63

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Cema G., Surmacz-Górska J. and Miksch K. (2004). Implementation of anammox process in the membrane assisted bioreactor. In: Integration and optimization of urban sanitation systems, Joint Polish-Swedish Seminars, Stockholm, 2004, TRITA-LWR.REPORT 3017, 81-92.

Christensen T.H., Kjeldsen P., Bjerg P.L., Jensen D.L., Christensen J.B., Baun A., Albrechtsen HJ., Heron G. (2001). Biogeochemistry of landfill leachate plumes. Applied Geochemistry, 16 (7-8), 659-718.

Ciudad G., Robilar O., Muñoz P., Ruiz G., Chamy R., Vergara C. and Jeison D. (2005). Partial nitrification of high ammonia concentration wastewater as a part of a shortcut biological nitrogen removal process. Process Biochemistry, 40, 1715-1719.

Daims H, Stoecker K, Wagner M. (2005). Fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of prokaryotes. /In/ Advanced Methods in Molecular Microbial Ecology, (Osborn AM, Smith CJ, ed.). Bios-Garland, Abingdon, UK., 213-239.

Daims H., Nielsen J.L., Nielsen P.H., Schleifer K.H., Wagner, M. (2001). In situ characterization of Nitrospira-like nitrite-oxidizing bacteria active in wastewater treatment plants. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 67, 5273-5284.

Daims H., Brühl A., Amann R., Schleifer K.-H., Wagner M. (1999). The domain-specific probe EUB338 is insufficient for the detection of all Bacteria: Development and evaluation of a more comprehensive probe set. Systematic and Applied Microbiology, 22, 434-444.

Dalsgaard T., Thamdrup B., Canfield D.E. (2005). Anaerobic ammonium oxidation (anammox) in the marine environment. Research in Microbiology, 156 (4), 457-464.

Dapena Mora A., (2007). Wastewater treatment by anammox process: A short-circuit in the natural nitrogen cycle. PhD thesis, Departamento de Ingeniería Química, Universidare de Santiago de Compostela.

Dosta J., Fernández I., Vázquez-Padín J.R., Mosquera-Corral A., Campos J.L., Mata-Álvarez J., Méndez R. (2008). Short- and long-term effects of temperature on the Anammox process. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 154 (1-3), 688-693.

Dosta J., Galí A., Benabdallah El-Hadj T., Macé S., Mata-Álvarez J. (2007). Operation and model description of a sequencing batch reactor treating reject water for biological nitrogen removal via nitrite. Bioresource Technology, 98, 2065 – 2075.

Drysdale G.D., Bux F., Kasan H.C. (1999). Denitrification by heterotrophic bacteria during activated sludge treatment. Water SA, 25 (3), 357–362.

Egli K., Bosshard F., Werlen C., Lais P., Siegrist H., Zehnder A.J.B., van der Meer J.R. (2003).

Microbial Composition and Structure of a Rotating Biological Contactor Biofilm Treating Ammoniu-Rich Wastewater without Organic Carbon. Microbial Ecology 45, 419 – 432.

Egli K., Fanger U., Alvarez P.J.J., Siegrist H., van der Meer J.R., Zehnder A.J.B. (2001). Enrichment and characterisation of an anammox bacterium from rotating biological contactor treating ammonium-rich leachate. Archives of Microbiology 175, 198 – 207.

El-Fadel M., Findikakis A.N., Leckie O.J. (1997). Environmental Impacts of Solids Wastes Landfilling. Journal of Environmental Management, 50, 1 – 25.

Fux C., Velten S., Carozzi V., Solley D., Keller J. (2004a). Efficient and stable nitritation and denitritation of ammonium-rich sludge dewatering liquor using an SBR with continuous loading. Water Research, 40, 2765 – 2775.

Fux C, Huang D., Moti A., Siegrist H. (2004b). Difficulties in maintaining long term partial nitritation of ammonium-rich sludge digester liquids in a moving-bed biofilm reactor (MBBR). Water Science and Technology, 49 (11-12), 53-60.

Fux C. (2003). Biological nitrogen elimination of ammonium-rich sludge digester liquids. PhD Thesis, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich. DISS. ETH NO. 15018.

64

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Fux C., Boehler M., Huber P., Brunner I., Siegrist H. (2002). Biological treatment of ammoniumrich wastewater by partial nitritation and subsequent anaerobic ammonium oxidation (anammox) in a pilot plant. Journal of Biotechnology, 99, 295 – 306.

Furukawa K., Lieu P.K., Tokitoh H., Fujii T. (2006). Development of single-stage nitrogen removal using anammox and partial nitritation (SNAP) and its treatment performances.

Water Science and Technology 53 (6), 83-90.

Ganigué R., López H., Balaguer m.D., Colprim J. (2007). Partial ammonium oxidation to nitrite of high ammonium content urban landfill leachates. Water Research 41, 3317 – 3326.

González-Martínez S., Duque-Luciano J. (1991). Aerobic submerged biofilm reactors for wastewater treatment. Water Research, 26 (6), 825-833.

Gut L. (2006). Assessment of a partial nitritation/Anammox system for nitrogen removal. Trita-LWR. LIC:2034, licentiate thesis.

Gut L., Płaza E., Długołęcka M., Hultman B. (2005). Partial nitritation process assessment. Vatten, 61, 175-182.

He S., Zhang Y., Yang M., Du W., Harada H. (2007). Repeated use of MAP decomposition residues for the removal of high ammonium concentration from landfill leachate. Chemosphere, 66, 2233 – 2238.

Hellinga C., Schellen A.A.J.C., Mulder J.W., van Loosdrecht M.C.M., Heijnen J.J. (1998). The SHARON process: an innovative method for nitrogen removal from ammonium-rich wastewater. Water Science and Technology, 37 (9), 135-142.

Helmer Ch., Kunst S. (1998). Simultaneous nitrification/denitrification in an aerobic biofilm system. Water Science and Technology, 37 (4 – 5), 183 – 187.

Hem L.J., Rusten B., Ødegaard H. (1994). Nitrification in a moving bed biofilm reactor. Water Research, 28 (6), 1425 – 1433.

Heyer K.–U., Stegmann R. (2002). Leachate management: leachate generation, collection, treatment and costs. Available from: http://ifas-hamburg.de/pdf/leachate.pdf Hippen A., Helmer C., Kunst S., Rosenwinkel K- H., Seyfried, C. F. (2000). Sixth years of practical experiences with aerobic/anoxic deammonification in biofilm systems. IWA Conference, Paris, France, 3-7, July 2000.

Hoilijoki T.H., Kettunen R.H., Rintala J.A. (2000). Nitrification of anaerobically pretreated municipal landfill leachate at low temperature. Water Research, 34 (5), 1435 – 1446.

Hwang Y., Yoneyama Y., Noguchi H. (2000). Denitrification characteristics of reject water in upflow biofiltration. Process Biochemistry, 35, 1241 – 1245.

Ilies P., Manivic D.S. (2001). The effect of decreased ambient temperature on the biological nitrification and denitrification of a high ammonia landfill leachate. Water Research 35 (8), 2065 – 2072.

Im J-H., Woo H-J., Choi M-W., Han K-B., Kim C-W. (2001). Simultaneous organic and nitrogen removal from municipal landfill leachate using an anaerobic-aerobic system. Water Research 35 (10), 2403 – 2410.

Innerebner G., Heribert Insama H., Franke-Whittlea I.H., Wett B. (2007). Identification of anammox bacteria in a full-scale deammonification plant making use of anaerobic ammonia oxidation. Systematic and Applied Microbiology, 30 (5), 408-412.

Isaka K., Date Y., Kimura Y., Sumina T., Tsuneda S. (2008). Nitrogen removal performance using anaerobic ammonium oxidation at low temperatures. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 282, 32-38.

65

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Isaka K., Yoshie S., Sumino T., Inamori Y., Tsuneda S. (2007). Nitrification of landfill leachate using immobilized nitrifying bacteria at low temperatures. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 37, 49 – 55.

Janus H.M., van der Roest H.F. (1997). Don’t reject the idea of treating reject water. Water Science and Technology, 35 (10), 27 – 34.

Jeavons J., Stokes L., Upton J., Bingley M. (1998). Successful sidestream nitrification of digested sludge liquors. Water Science and Technology, 38 (3), 111 – 118.

Jianguo J., Guodong Y., Zhou D., Yunfeng H., Zhonglin H., Xiangming F., Shengyong Z., Chaoping Z. (2007). Pilot-scale experiment on anaerobic bioreactor landfills in China. Waste Management, 27, 893 – 901.

Jianlong W., Ning Y. (2004). Partial nitrification under limited dissolved oxygen conditions. Process Biochemistry, 39 (10), 1223-1229.

Jin R-c., Hu B-l., Zheng P., Qaisar M., Hu A-h., Islam E. (2008). Quantitative comparison of stability of ANAMMOX process in different reactor configurations. Bioresource Technology, 99 (6), 1603-1609.

Johansson P., Nyberg A., Beier M., Hippen A., Seyfried C. F. and Rosenwinkel K-H. (1998). Cost efficient sludge liquor treatment. In: Joint Polish–Swedish Reports, Report No 3. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, TRITA-AMI Report 3048, 65-72.

Jokela J.P.Y., Kettunenb R.H., Sormunena K.M., Rintalaa J.A. (2002). Biological nitrogen removal from municipal landfill leachate: low-cost nitrification in biofilters and laboratory scale in-situ denitrification. Water Research, 36, 4079 – 4087.

Ju L.-K., Chen F., Xia Q. (2005). Microaerobic denitrifica-tion of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by online NAD(P)H fluo-rescence. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, 32, 622 628.

Junga J-Y., Chunga Y-C., Shinb H-S., Sona D-H. (2004). Enhanced ammonia nitrogen removal using consistent logical regeneration and ammonium exchange ofzeolite in modified SBR process. Water Research, 38, 347 – 354.

Kaczorek K., Ledakowicz S. (2006). Kinetics of nitrogen removal from sanitary landfill leachate.

Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, 29, 291 – 304.

Kalyuzhnyi S., Gladchenko M., Mulder A., Versprille B. (2006). DEAMOX-New biological nitrogen removal process based on anaerobic ammonia oxidation coupled to sulphidedriven conversion of nitrate into nitrite. Water Research, 40, 3637-3645.

Kartal B. (2008). Ecophysiology of the anammox bacteria. PhD thesis. Department of Microbiology, Radbound University Nijmegen. Nijmege, ISBN 978 90 90227 14 6.

Kartal B., van der Star W.R.L., Schmid M.C., van de Pas-Schoonen K., Picioreau C., Abma W.R., Op den Camp H., Jetten M.S.M., van Loosdrecht M., Strous M. (2007). Anammox Process: State Of The Art. In: Proceeding of the CLONIC Final Workshop, 19 – 20th April 2007 Barcelona, Spain, 8-21.

Kietlińska A., Renman G. (2005). An evaluation of reactive filter media for treating landfill leachate. Chemosphere, 61, 933 – 940.

Kim D., Ryu H-D., Kim M-S., Kim J., Lee S-J. (2007). Enhancing struvite precipitation on potential for ammonia nitro gen removal in municipal landfill leachate. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 146, 81 – 85.

Kjeldsen P., Barlaz M.A., Rooker A.P., Baun A., Ledin A., Christensen T.H. (2002). Present and Long-Term Composition of MSW Landfill Leachate: A Review. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 32 (4), 297 – 336.

Knox K. (1985). Leachate treatment with nitrification of ammonia. Water Research, 19 (7), 895 – 904.

66

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Kohler N., Perry E. (2005). Report on Implementation of the Landfill Directive in the 15 Member States of the European Union 04523371. REF ENV.A.2/ETU/2004/0016.

Kulikowska D., Klimiuk E. (2007). The effect of landfill age on municipal leachate composition.

Bioresource Technology, Article in press.

Kurniawan T.A., Lo W.H., Chan G.Y. (2006). Physico-chemical treatments for removal of recalcitrant contaminants from landfill leachate. Journal of Hazardous Materials. B129, 80 – 100.

Li X.Z., Zhao Q.L. Hao X.D. (1999). Ammonium removal from landfill leachate by chemical precipitation. Waste Management, 19, 409 – 415.

Li X., Zen G., Rosenwinkel K.H., Kunst S., Weichgrebe D., Cornelius A., Yang Q. (2004). Start up of deammonification process in one single SBR system. Water Science and Technology, 50 (6), 1-8.

Liang Z., Liu J. (2008). Landfill leachate treatment with a novel process: Anaerobic ammonium oxidation (Anammox) combined with soil infiltration system. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 151, 202 – 212.

Liang Z., Liu J-x. (2007). Control factors of partial nitritation for landfill leachate treatment. Journal of Environmental Science, 19, 223 – 229.

Loy A., Horn M., Wagner M. (2003). probeBase - an online resource for rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes. Nucleic Acids Research, 31, 514-516.

Loukidou M. X., Zouboulis A. I. (2001). Comparison of two biological treatment processes using attached-growth biomass for sanitary landfill leachate treatment. Environmental Pollution, 111 (2), 273 – 282.

Mackinnon I.D.R., Barr K., Miller E., Hunter S., Pinel T. (2003). Nutrient removal from wastewaters using high performance materials. Water Science and Technology, 47 (11), 101 – 107.

Marttinen S.K., Kettunen R.H., Sormunen K.M., Soimasuo R.M., Rintala J.A. (2002). Screening of physical-chemical methods for removal of organic material, nitrogen and toxicity from low strength landfill leachates. Chemosphere, 46, 851 – 858.

Metcalf & Eddy (2004). Wastewater Engineering. Treatment- Disposal-Reuse. McGraw-Hill Int. Editions, Civil engineering Series. Fourth edition.

Mohan S., Dennison V., Schmid M., Richardson D., Cole J., (2004). We all needfriends – but why can’t Anammox bacteria live alone? In: Proceedings of the “EU 5th framework IcoN Symposium: Anammox: new sustainable N-removal from waste water”, Ghent, 19-24 September.

Mulder J. W., van Loosdrecht M.C.M., Hellinga C., van Kempen R. (2001) Full-scale application of the SHARON process for treatment of rejection water of digested sludge dewatering.

Water Science and Technology, 43 (11), 127 – 134.

Mulder A., van de Graaf A.A., Robertson L.A., Kuenen J.G. (1995). Anaerobic ammonium oxidation discovered in denitrifying fluidized bed reactor. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 16, 177184.

Neczaj E., Kacprzak M., Lach J., Okoniewska E., (2007). Effect of sanitation on combined treatment of landfill leachate and domestic sewage in SBR reactor. Desalination, 204, 227 – 233.

Neef A., Amann R., Schlesner H., Schleifer K.-H. (1998). Monitoring a widespread bacterial group: in situ detection of planctomycetes with 16S rRNA-targeted probes. Microbiology, 144, 3257-3266.

Op den Camp H.J.M., Jetten M.S.M. Strous M. (2007). “Anammox” in: Biology of the nitrogen cycle.

Edited by Bothe H., Ferguson S.J. Newton W.E., Elsevier B. V., Amsterdam, Netherlands.

67

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Op den Camp H.J.M., Kartal B., Guven D., van Niftrik L.A.M.P., Haaijer S.C.M., van der Star W.R.L., van de Pas-Schoonen K.T., Cabezas A., Ying, Z., Schmid M.C., Kuypers M.M.M., van de Vossenberg J., Harhangi H.R., Picioreanu C., van Loosdrecht M.C.M., Kuenen J.G., Strous M. and Jetten M.S.M., (2006) Global impact and application of the anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing (anammox) bacteria. Biochemical Society Transactions, 34, part 1, 174-178.

Ozturk I., Altinbas M., Koyuncu I., Arikan O., Gomec-Yangin C. (2003). Advanced physicochemical treatment experiences on young municipal landfill leachates. Waste Management, 23, 441 – 446.

Paredes D., Kuschk P., Stange F.ԝ, Müller R. A., Köser H. (2007). Model experiments on improving nitrogen removal in laboratory scale subsurface constructed wetlands by enhancing the anaerobic ammonia oxidation. Water Science and Technology, 56 (3), 145 – 150.

Peng Y., Zhang S., Zeng W., Zheng S., Mino T., Satoh H. (2008). Organic removal by denitritation and methanogenesis and nitrogen removal by nitritation from landfill leachate. Water Research, 42, 883 – 892.

Petts G. (2005). “Environmental flows” in: Water Encyclopedia, Volumes 1 – 5 edited by Lehr J., Keeley J., Lehr J., Kingery T.B., John Willey & Sons. New Jersey, United States of America.

Poznyak T., Bautista G.L., Chairez I., Córdova R.I., Rios L.E. (2008). Decomposition of toxics pollutants in landfill leachate by ozone after coagulation treatment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 151, 202 – 212.

Price G.A., G., Barlaz M.A., Hater G.R. (2003). Nitrogen management in bioreactor landfills.

Waste Management, 23, 675 – 688.

Pynaert K., Smets B.F., Wyffels S., Beheydt D., Siciliano S.d., Vestraete W. (2003). Characterization of an Autotrophic Nitrogen-Removing Biofilm from a Higly Lab-Scale Rotating Biological Contactor. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 69, 3626 – 3635.

Renou S., Givaudan J. G., Poulain S., Dirassouyan F., Moulin P. (2008). Landfill leachate treatment: Review and opportunity. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 150, 468 – 493.

Rivas F.J., Beltán F., Carvalho F., Acedo B., Gimeno O. (2004). Stabilized leachates: sequential coagulation-flocculation + chemical oxidation process. Journal of Hazardous Materials B116, 95 – 102.

Rodgers M., Zhan X.-M. (2003). Moving-medium biofilm reactors. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 2, 213-224.

Rosenwinkel K-H., Cornelius A., Ruhrverband D.T. (2005). Full-scale application of the deammonification process for treatment of sludge water. In: Proceeding of the IWA Specialized Conference: Nutrient Management in Wastewater Treatment, Processes and Recycle Streams, 19 – 21 September 2005, Kraków, Poland, 483 – 491.

Rosenwinkel K-H., Cornelius A. (2005). Deammonification in the Moving-Bed Process for Treatment of Wastewater with High Ammonia Content. Chemical Engineering and Technology, 28 (1), 49-52.

Rusten B., Eikebrokk B., Ulgenes Y., Lygren E. (2006). Design and operations of the Kaldnes moving bed biofilm reactors. Aquacultural Engineering, 34, 322 – 331.

Salem S., Berends D.H.J.G., van der Roest H.F., van der Kuij R.J., van Loosdrecht M.C.M. (2004) Full-scale application of the BABE technology. Water Science and Technology, 50 (7), 87-96.

Salem S., Berends D.H.J.G., Heinen J.J., Van Loosdrecht M.C.M. (2003). Bio-augmentation by nitrification with return sludge. Water Research, 37, 1794 – 1804.

68

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Seyfried C. F., Rosenwinkel K. H., Hippen A. (2002). Deammonification: a cost-effective treatment process for nitrogen-rich wastewaters. WEFTEC 2002 Proceedings 75th Annual Conference and Exposition. McCormick Place, Chicago, Illinois, USA, September 28-October 2, 2002.

Schalk J., Oustad H., Gijs Kuenen J., Jetten M.S.M. (1998). The anaerobic oxidation of hydrazine: a novel reaction in microbial nitrogen metabolism. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 158, 61 – 67.

Schmidt I., Sliekers O., Schmid M., Bock E., Fuerst J., Kuenen J.G., Jetten M.S.M., Strous M. (2003). New concepts of microbial treatment processes for the nitrogen removal in wastewater. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 772, 1 – 12.

Schmid M., Schmitz-Esser S., Jetten M.S.M., Wagner M. (2001). 16S-23S rDNA intergenic spacer and 23S rDNA of anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing bacteria: implications for phylogeny and in situ detection. Environmental Microbiology, 3, 450 – 459.

Shino H., Nishimori K., Kawakami S., Uesaka T., Izumi K. (2004). Introduction to Submerged Flat Sheet Membrane Applications and its Future to be Headed. In. Ultrapure Water Asia 2004, March 2004.

Siegrist H., Reithaar S., Koch G., Lais P. (1998). Nitrogen loss in nitrifying rotating contactor treating ammonium-rich wastewater without organic carbon. Water Science and Technology, 38 (8-9), 241 – 248.

Siegrist H. (1996). Nitrogen removal from digester supernatant – comparison of chemical and biological methods. Water Science and Technology, 34 (1-2), 399 – 406.

Sliekers A.O., Third K.A., Abma, W., Kuenen J.G., Jetten, M.S.M. (2003). CANON and Anammox in a gas-lift reactor. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 218 (2), 339-344.

Sliekers A.O., Derwort N., Campos Gomez J.L., Strous M., Kuenen J.G., Jetten M.S.M. (2002).

Completely autotrophic nitrogen removal over nitrite in one single reactor. Water Research, 36, 2475-2482.

Strous M., Pelletier E., Mangenot S., Rattei T., Lehner A., Taylor M.W., Horn M., Daims H., Bartol-Mavel D., Wincker P., Barbe V., Fonknechten N., Vallenet D., Segurens B., Schenowitz-Truong C., Medigue C., Collingro A., Snel B., Dutilh B.E., Op den Camp H.J.M., Van der Drift C., Cirpus I., Van de Pas-Schoonen K.T., Harhangi H.R., Van Niftrik L., Schmid M., Keltjens J., Van de Vossenberg J., Kartal B., Meier H., Frishman D., Huynen M.A., Mewes H-W., Weissenbach J., Jetten M.S.M., Wagner M., Le Paslier D. (2006). Deciphering the evolution and metabolism of an Anammox bacterium from a community genome. Nature, 440, 790-794.

Strous M., Fuerst J.A., Kramer E.H.M., Logemann S., Muyzer G., van de Pas-Schoonen K.T., Webb R., Kuenen J.G., Jetten, M.S.M. (1999). Missing lithotroph identified as new planctomycete. Nature, 400, 446-448.

Strous M., Heijnen J., Kuenen J. G., Jetten M.S.M. (1998). The sequencing batch reactor as a powerful tool for the study of slowly growing anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing microorganisms. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 50, 589-596.

Strous M., van Gerven E., Zheng P., Kuenen J.G., Jetten M.S.M. (1997). Ammonium removal from concentrated waste streams with the anaerobic ammonium oxidation (ANAMMOX) process in different reactor configurations. Water Research, 31, 1955–1962.

Suchecka T., Lisowski W., Czykwin R., Piatkiewicz W. (2006). Landfill leachate: water recovery in Poland. Filtration and Separation, 43 (5), 34-38.

Surmacz- Górska J., Cema G., and Miksch K. (2004). Deamonification process in membrane assisted bioreactors. In: Integration and optimization of urban sanitation systems, Joint PolishSwedish Seminars, Wisła, 2003, TRITA-LWR.REPORT 3007, 81-91.

69

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Surmacz-Górska J. (2000). Usuwanie zanieczyszczeń organicznych oraz azotu z odcieków powstających w wysypiskach odpadów komunalnych (Removal of organics and nitrogen from landfill leachate). Inżynieria Środowiska, 44, Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej (in Polish).

Surmacz – Górska J., Gernaey K., Demuynck C., Vanrolleghem P., Verstreate W. (1996). Nitrification monitoring in activated sludge by oxygen uptake rate (OUR) measurements. Water Research, 30 (5), 1228 – 1236.

Szatkowska B, Cema G., Plaza E., Trela J., Hultman B. (2007). One-stage system with partial nitritation and Anammox processes in moving-bed biofilm reactor. Water Science and Technology, 55 (8-9), 19-26.

Szatkowska B., Plaza E. (2006). Temperature as a factor influencing the Anammox process performance. Water and Environmental Management Series, Young Researchers 2006, 51-58.

Szatkowska B. (2007). Performance and Control of Biofilm Systems with Partial Nitritation and Anammox for Supernatant Treatment. TRITA-LWR PhD Thesis 1035.

Szatkowska B. (2004). Treatment of ammonium-rich wastewater by partial nitritation/Anammox in a biofilm system. Licentiate thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. TRITALWR.LIC 2023.

Third K.A., Paxman J., Schmid M., Strous M., Jetten M.S.M., Cord-Ruwisch R. (2005). Treatment of nitrogen-rich wastewater using partial nitrification and Anammox in the CANON process. Water Science and Technology, 52 (4), 47-54.

Third K. (2003). Oxygen management for optimisation of nitrogen removal in a sequencing batch reactor. PhD Thesis, School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Murdoch University, Western Australia.

Thornton A., Pearce P., Parsons S.A. (2007). Ammonium removal from digested sludge liquors using ion exchange. Water Research, 41, 433 – 439.

Trela J., Płaza E., Szatkowska B., Hultman B., Bosander J., Dahlberg A-G. (2004). Deammonifikation som en ny process för behandling av avloppsströmmar med hög kvävehalt. Vatten, 60 (2) 119-127 (in Swedish).

Trigo C., Campos J.L., Garrido J.M., Mendez R. (2006). Start-up of the Anammox process in a membrane bioreactor. Journal of Biotechnology, 126, 475 – 487.

Wagner M., Rath G., Koops H.P., Flood J., Amann R. (1996). In situ analysis of nitrifying bacteria in sewage treatment plants. Water Science and Technology, 34, 237-244.

Wagner M., Rath G., Amann R., Koops H.-P., Schleifer K.-H. (1995). In situ identification of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria. Systematic and Applied Microbiology, 18, 251-264.

Wang Y., Liu S., Xu Z., Han T., Chuan S., Zhu T. (2006). Ammonia removal from leachate solution using natural Chinese clinoptilolite. Journal of Hazardous materials, B136, 735 – 740.

Welander U., Henrysson, T., Welander, T. (1998). Biological nitrogen removal from municipal landfill leachate in a pilot scale suspended carrier biofilm process. Water Research, 32 (5), 1564 – 1570.

Welander U., Henrysson, T., Welander, T. (1997). Nitrification of landfill leachate using suspended-carrier biofilm technology. Water Research, 31 (9), 2351 – 2355.

Windey K., Do Bo I., Vestraete W. (2005). Oxygen-limited autotrophic nitrificationdenitrification (OLAND) in a rotating biological contactor treating high-salinity wastewater. Water Research, 39, 4512 – 4520.

Wiszniowski J. (2006a). Combination of the biological and photocatalytic methods in the process of municipal landfill leachate treatment. PhD thesis, Environmental Biotechnology Department, The Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland.

70

Comparative study on different Anammox systems

Wiszniowski J., Robert D., Surmacz-Górska J., Miksch K., Weber J.V. (2006b). Landfill leachate treatment methods: A review. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 4, 51-61.

Wyffels S., Pynaert K., Boeckx P., Vestraete W., Van Cleemput O. (2003). Identification and quantification of nitrogen removal contactor by 15N tracer techniques. Water Research, 37, 1252 – 1259. van de Graaf A.A., de Bruijn P., Robertson L.A., Jetten M.S.M., Kuenen J.G. (1997). Metabolic pathway of anaerobic ammonium oxidizing microorganism in a fluidized bed reactor.

Microbiology, UK., 143, 2415-2421. van de Graaf A.A. , de Bruijn P., Robertson L.A., Jetten M.S.M., Kuenen J.G. (1996). Autotrophic growth of anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing micro-organisms in a fluidized bed reactor. Microbiology, UK, 142, 2187-2196. van de Graaf A.A., Mulder A., de Bruijn P., Jetten M.S.M., Robertson L.A., Kuenen J.G. (1995).

Anaerobic oxidation of ammonium is a biologically mediated process. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 61, 1246-1251. van der Star W. (2008). Growth and Metabolism of Anammox Bacteria. PhD Thesis, ISBN: 978-909022771-9. van der Star W., Abma W.R., Blommers D., Mulder J.W., Tokutomi T., Strous M., picioreau C., Van Loosdrecht M.C.M. (2007). Startup of reactor for anoxic ammonium oxidation: Experiences from the first full-scale anammox reactor in Rotterdam. Water Research, 41 (18), 4149-4163. van Dongen L. G.J.M., Jetten M.S.M., van Loosdrecht, M.C.M. (2001a) The combined Sharon/Anammox Process, A sustainable method for N-removal from sludge water. STOWA Report, IWA Publishing, London, UK. van Dongen L. G.J.M., Jetten M.S.M., van Loosdrecht M.C.M. (2001b). The Sharon-Anammox process for treatment of ammonium rich wastewater. Water Science and Technology, 44 (1), 153-160. van Loosdrecht M.C.M., Salem S. (2005). Biological treatment of sludge digester liquor. In: Proceeding of the IWA Specialized Conference: Nutrient Management in Wastewater Treatment, Processes and Recycle Streams, 19 – 21 September 2005, Kraków, Poland, 13 – 22.

Vázquez-Padín J., Fernádez I., Figueroa M., Mosquera-Corrala A., Campos J-L., Méndez R. (2009). Applications of Anammoxnext term based processes to treat anaerobic digester supernatant at room previous temperature. Bioresource Technology, 100 (12), 2988-2994.

Vázquez-Padín J.R., Pozo M.J., Jarpa M., Figueroa M., Franco A., Mosquera-Corral A., Campos J.L, Méndez R. (2008). Treatment of anaerobic sludge digester effluents by the CANON process in an air pulsing SBR. Journal of Hazardous Materials – in press Available online 24 November 2008.

Volcke E.I.P., Gernaey K.V., Vrecko D., Jeppsson U., van Loosdrecht M.C.M., Vanrolleghem P.A. (2006). Plant-wide (BSM2) evaluation of reject water treatment with a SHARONAnammox process. Water Science and Technology, 54 (8), 93-100.

Volcke E.I.P., Van Hulle S.W.H., Donckels B.M.R., van Loosdrecht M.C.M., Vanrolleghem P.A. (2005). Coupling the SHARON process with Anammox: Model-based scenario analysis with focus on operating costs. Water Science and Technology, 52 (4), 107 -115.

Zhang H-g., Zhou S-q. (2007). Treating leachate mixture with anaerobic ammonium oxidation technology. Journal of Central South University of Technology, 13 (6), 663 – 667.

Zhang S-j., Peng Y-z., Wang S-y., Zheng S-w., Guo J. (2007). Organic matter and concentrated nitrogen removal by shortcut nitrification and denitrification from mature municipal landfill leachate. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 19, 647 – 651.

71

Grzegorz Cema

TRITA LWR PhD Thesis 1053

Ødegaard H. (2006). Innovation in wastewater treatment: the moving bed biofilm process. Water Science and Technology, 53 (9), 17-33. Ødegaard H., Gisvold B., Strickland J. (2000). The influence of carrier size and shape in the moving bed biofilm process. Water Science and Technology, 41 (4-5), 383-391.

“Environment 2007” collective study of the Central Statistical Office (GUS), Poland. Available form: www.stat.gov.pl

72