Temperature and feed strategy effects on sulfate and organic matter removal in an AnSBB

Abstract

The objective of this work was to analyze the interaction effects between temperature, feed strategy and COD/[SO42-] levels, maintaining the same ratio, on sulfate and organic matter removal efficiency from a synthetic wastewater. This work is thus a continuation of Archilha et al. (2010) who studied the effect of feed strategy at 30 °C using different COD/[SO42-] ratios and levels. A 3.7-L anaerobic sequencing batch reactor with recirculation of the liquid phase and which contained immobilized biomass on polyurethane foam (AnSBBR) was used to treat 2.0 L synthetic wastewater in 8 h cycles. The temperatures of 15, 22.5 and 30 °C with two feed strategies were assessed: (a) batch and (b) batch followed by fed-batch. In strategy (a) the reactor was fed in 10 min with 2 L wastewater containing sulfate and carbon sources. In strategy (b) 1.2 L wastewater (containing only the sulfate source) was fed during the first 10 min of the cycle and the remaining 0.8 L (containing only the carbon source) in 240 min. Based on COD/[SO42-] = 1 and on the organic matter (0.5 and 1.5 gCOD/L) and sulfate (0.5 and 1.5 gSO42-/L) concentrations, the sulfate and organic matter loading rates applied were 1.5 and 4.5 g/L.d, i.e., same COD/[SO42-] ratio (=1) but different levels (1.5/1.5 and 4.5/4.5 gCOD/gSO42-). When reactor feed was 1.5 gCOD/L.d and 1.5 gSO42-/L.d, gradual feeding (strategy b) showed to favor sulfate and organic matter removal in the investigated temperature range, indicating improved utilization of the electron donor for sulfate reduction. Sulfate removal efficiencies were 87.9; 86.3 and 84.4%, and organic matter removal efficiencies 95.2; 86.5 and 80.8% at operation temperatures of 30; 22.5 and 15 °C, respectively. On the other hand, when feeding was 4.5 gCOD/L.d and 4.5 gSO42-/L.d, gradual feeding did not favor sulfate removal, indicating that gradual feeding of the electron donor did not improve sulfate reduction. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.