Thesis - faculty.ait.ac.th - Asian Institute of Technology

More documents

Recommendations

Info

leachate characteristics, it may be necessary to pre-treat leachate prior to discharge in wastewater treatment plants so that it does not upset the biological process nor cause any operational and maintenance problems in the treatment plant. In determining a treatment scheme for leachate treatment, it is also necessary to determine whether the leachate effluent meets sewer or water body discharge standards. 2.5 Leachate Composition and Characteristics During the first few years (< 5 years), the landfill is in acidogenic phase and the leachate generated is generally referred to as “young” or carbon-based leachate due to the high concentration of organic carbon present. Landfill greater than 10 years old are generally in the methanogenic phase and the leachate generated is referred to as “old” or nitrogen-based leachate (Mavinic, 1998). Table.2.1 gives the characteristic of leachate present in acidogenic and methanogenic phases. Table 2.1 Leachate Characteristic in Acidogenic and Methanogenic Phase in a Landfill (Ehrig, 1998) Parameter Unit Average Range Acidogenic Phase pH 6.1 4.5 to 7.5 BOD5 mg/L 13,000 4,000 to 40,000 COD mg/L 22,000 6,000 to 60,000 BOD5/COD 0.58 - SO4 mg/L 500 70 to 1,750 Ca mg/L 1,200 10 to 2,500 Mg mg/L 470 50 to 1,150 Fe mg/L 780 20 to 2,100 Mn mg/L 25 0.3 to 65 Zn mg/L 5 0.1 to 120 Methanogenic Phase pH 8 7.5 to 9 BOD5 mg/L 180 20 to 550 COD mg/L 3,000 500 to 4,500 BOD5/COD 0.06 - SO4 mg/L 80 10 to 420 Ca mg/L 60 20 to 600 Mg mg/L 180 40 to 350 Fe mg/L 15 3 to 280 Mn mg/L 0.7 0.03 to 45 Zn mg/L 0.6 0.03 to 4 The differences in leachate quality can be due to varied reasons, which can be categorised into four major divisions, namely the waste (type of waste, degree of decomposition, and possible seasonal variance), landfill environment (phase of degradation, humidity, temperature etc.), filling technique (compacting, cover, height of landfill layers, etc.) and sampling (method of analysis and point of sample collection). The factors affecting the leachate quality is inter-related and affects the overall variance in leachate quality and characterization. The changes in the BOD/COD, 8
COD/TOC, VS/FS and VFA/TOC ratios of leachate are depends greatly on the age of the landfill (Chian and DeWalle, 1976; Kylefors, 1997). Figure 2.3 represents the trend of leachate variation and over the period of time in the landfill. During the initial stages, the landfill is aerobic rich in biodegradable organic content. As the landfill age increases, the microorganism present in the landfill tend to degrade these organic compounds into inorganic components. When anaerobic phase begins, the COD starts increasing causing a decrease in BOD/COD ratio. This decrease in BOD/COD ratio observed, suggests the change in biodegradability of the leachate with time. For young landfill, the ratio is around 0.5-0.8 while it reaches almost 0.1 in the old landfill. The reason for low biodegradability in the old landfill could be due to the presence of humic and fluvic acids. Figure 2.3 Variation in Significant Pollutant Ratios with Increase in Age of the Landfill (Chian and DeWalle, 1976) The ammonium concentration in the leachate also varies with age of the landfill, with young leachate having a high COD (>5,000 mg/L) and low nitrogen content (< 400 mg N/L) and old leachate having a high concentrations of ammonia (> 400 mg N/L) and recalcitrant compounds and a low biodegradable organic fraction (BOD5/COD = 0.1). Municipal solid waste landfill in Asia (except Japan) is characterized by 60 to 90 % organic waste and 3 to 18 % plastic (Agamuthu, 1999). Leachate characteristics of landfills surveyed in Asia including Thailand, Europe, and America are presented in Table 2.2. The characteristic of leachate from different landfill site as reported show a great variation. It is dependent on the solid waste composition, landfill site location, and local climate. The BOD and COD concentrations decrease as the landfill age increases. 9
Page 1 and 2: APPLICATION OF MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR
Page 3 and 4: Abstract Landfill leachate is a com
Page 5 and 6: Table of Contents Chapter Title Pag
Page 7 and 8: 4.5.6 Cost Analysis for Operation 1
Page 9 and 10: 4.4 Effect of Free Ammonia Concentr
Page 11 and 12: 4.16 COD Concentration in the Influ
Page 13 and 14: MWCO Molecular Weight Cut-off MWW M
Page 15 and 16: 1.1 Background Chapter 1 Introducti
Page 17 and 18: generally unsuccessful in removal o
Page 19 and 20: 2.1 Introduction Chapter 2 Literatu
Page 21: In the municipal solid waste landfi
Page 25 and 26: Table 2.3 presents the general leac
Page 27 and 28: Ground water 2.7.1 Seasonal Variati
Page 29 and 30: Table 2.5 Variation of COD, BOD & B
Page 31 and 32: entails the re-circulation of leach
Page 33 and 34: Table 2.8 Summary of Biokinetic Coe
Page 35 and 36: that extensive loss of nitrogen (up
Page 37 and 38: ammonia could only be achieved when
Page 39 and 40: Table 2.10 Treatment Efficiencies o
Page 41 and 42: Activated Carbon Adsorption Granula
Page 43 and 44: Colloidal material as well as metal
Page 45 and 46: iologically, physical-chemical proc
Page 47 and 48: Ammonia Stripping Air stripping of
Page 49 and 50: These systems are land intensive wh
Page 51 and 52: the biological treatment can be rep
Page 53 and 54: Table 2.16 Typical Leachate Composi
Page 55 and 56: influent reached 200 mg/L. For the
Page 57 and 58: Table 2.18 Advantages and Disadvant
Page 59 and 60: through the effluent. Different ope
Page 61 and 62: Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids and D
Page 63 and 64: 2.12 Yeasts 2.12.1 Introduction The
Page 65 and 66: Nishihara ESRC Ltd. (2001) studied
Page 67 and 68: nitrification-denitrification proce
Page 69 and 70: Table 3.1 Composition of Simulated
Page 71 and 72: 3.4.1 Ammonia Toxicity The experime
Page 73 and 74:
Figure 3.4 Experiments Conducted to
Page 75 and 76:
Leachate Option Ammonia Stripping R
Page 77 and 78:
MW larger than 50 kDa, (2) MW betwe
Page 79 and 80:
Figure 3.7 Flowchart Showing Ammoni
Page 81 and 82:
Chapter 4 Results and Discussion 4.
Page 83 and 84:
COD Removal Effeciency (%) COD Remo
Page 85 and 86:
MLSS (mg/L) 14000 12000 10000 8000
Page 87 and 88:
Specific Growth Rate ( d -1 ) 0.50
Page 89 and 90:
change in the predominant species w
Page 91 and 92:
Table 4.4 Effect of Free Ammonia Co
Page 93 and 94:
Table 4.5 Substrate Utilization by
Page 95 and 96:
4.3.1 Initial Membrane Resistance P
Page 97 and 98:
when compared with the present stud
Page 99 and 100:
COD Removal Efficiency (%) 90 80 70
Page 101 and 102:
(2) TKN Removal Efficiency Prior to
Page 103 and 104:
As there was no significant improve
Page 105 and 106:
The probable reason for frequent fo
Page 107 and 108:
Ammonia Concentration (mg/L) Ammoni
Page 109 and 110:
concentration after treatment. Othe
Page 111 and 112:
After the chemical cleaning of the
Page 113 and 114:
emoval of 38%. A higher removal in
Page 115 and 116:
Influent BOD (mg/L) Influent BOD (m
Page 117 and 118:
(3) TKN Removal Efficiency The TKN
Page 119 and 120:
Figure 4.34 gives the overall TKN r
Page 121 and 122:
fraction and slowly biodegradable C
Page 123 and 124:
BOD (mg/L) BOD (mg/L) 6000 5000 400
Page 125 and 126:
Figure 4.39 Molecular Weight Cut-of
Page 127 and 128:
COD (mg/L) 8000 6000 4000 2000 COD
Page 129 and 130:
Though, the obtained COD removal ef
Page 131 and 132:
cake used on the top of the membran
Page 133 and 134:
Chapter 5 Conclusions and Recommend
Page 135 and 136:
0.02, respectively. This can be con
Page 137 and 138:
References Abeling, U., and Seyfrie
Page 139 and 140:
Brown, M.J., and Lester, J.N., 1980
Page 141 and 142:
Diamadopoulos, E., 1994. Characteri
Page 143 and 144:
Grady, C.P.L., Daigger, G.T., and L
Page 145 and 146:
Keenan, J.D., Steiner, R.L., and Fu
Page 147 and 148:
Martin, G.M.A., Auzmenti, A.I., and
Page 149 and 150:
Pohland, F.G., and Harper, S.R., 19
Page 151 and 152:
Shin, H.S., An, H., Kang, S.T., Cho
Page 153 and 154:
Visvanathan, C., Ben Aim, R., and P
Page 155 and 156:
Appendix A Pictures of Experiments
Page 157 and 158:
Raw Leachate YMBR Effluent BMBR Eff
Page 159 and 160:
Appendix B Leachate Characteristics
Page 161 and 162:
Table B-2 Acclimation of Mixed Yeas
Page 163 and 164:
Appendix C Experimental Data of Bio
Page 165 and 166:
y: Where: OUR at line g: This is th
Page 167 and 168:
Table C-3 Experimental Results for
Page 169 and 170:
Appendix D Membrane Resistance Stud
Page 171 and 172:
Table D-3 Experimental Data for Det
Page 173 and 174:
Table D-4 Experimental Data for Det
Page 175 and 176:
Pressure (kPa) Pressure (kPa) 25 20
Page 177 and 178:
Appendix E MBR without Ammonia Stri
Page 179 and 180:
Day HRT (h) pH COD (mg/L) Feed Reac
Page 181 and 182:
Day HRT (h) pH COD (mg/L) Feed Reac
Page 183 and 184:
Table E-3 Variation in TMP with Tim
Page 185 and 186:
Appendix F Ammonia Stripping Studie
Page 187 and 188:
Table F-5 Pilot Scale Study on Ammo
Page 189 and 190:
Table G-1 Feed, Reactor and Effluen
Page 191 and 192:
Table G-3 Feed, Reactor and Effluen
Page 193 and 194:
Appendix H Other Studies 179
Page 195 and 196:
Table H-2 Membrane Resistance of th
Page 197:
Table H-6 Chemical Cost for the Yea
show all

Thesis - faculty.ait.ac.th - Asian Institute of Technology

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?