Skip to main content

Impacts of Denitrification on Biological Phosphorus Removal Using Several Carbon Source Types

Buy Article:

$17.50 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Or sign up for a free trial

Abstract:

The effects of denitrification on phosphorus release and uptake of EBPR systems have been investigated using acetate, methanol, and MicroC‐G ™ as carbon sources. MicroC‐G ™ is a proprietary chemical marketed as a carbon source for denitrification. Batch experiments were performed using actual wastewater from a wastewater treatment plant that performs EBPR. Nitrate-rich effluent was mixed with influent wastewater to simulate a denitrification system that uses internal mixed-liquor return. The results show that adding acetate to EBPR system promotes complete denitrification, but it delays phosphorus release. When acetate was added above the stoichiometric need, complete denitrification was obtained and more phosphorus was released. However phosphorus uptake, during the anaerobic period, was hindered resulting in high effluent phosphorus concentration. Therefore, it is necessary to balance phosphorus release in the anoxic zone with phosphorus uptake in the aerated zone, when both, denitrification and phosphorus removal are to be attained using acetate. Methanol was able to support denitrification, but the kinetic rates were very slow. While denitrification could be achieved within 40 minutes using acetate, more than 120 minutes were needed when methanol was used. As a consequence phosphorus release only occurred after 120 minutes when all nitrate had been reduced. Methanol use as a carbon source for denitrification, in EBPR systems, would therefore require increased anoxic retention times. MicroC‐G ™ works well to promote denitrification and the kinetics is as fast as that for acetate. However, MicroC‐G ™ does not promote phosphorus release in the anoxic zone. More studies are needed to understand why MicroC‐G ™ does not favor P-release. In summary, EBPR plants considering implementation of denitrification have to carefully consider the carbon source to be used. Acetate works well, but too much acetate will hinder uptake of phosphorus in the aerobic zone. Methanol addition will require greater retention times, depending on the level of denitrification to be achieved.

Keywords: Biological phosphorus removal; Denitrification; EBPR; Phosphorus removal

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2175/193864709793952387

Publication date: 2009-01-01

More about this publication?
  • Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation is an archive of papers published in the proceedings of the annual Water Environment Federation® Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC® ) and specialty conferences held since the year 2000. These proceedings are not peer reviewed.

    A subscription to the Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation includes access to most papers presented at the annual WEF Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC) and other conferences held since 2000. Subscription access begins 12 months after the event and is valid for 12 months from month of purchase. A subscription to the Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation is included in Water Environment Federation (WEF) membership.

    WEF Members: Sign in (right panel) with your IngentaConnect user name and password to receive complimentary access. Access begins 12 months after the conference or event
  • Subscribe to this Title
  • Membership Information
  • About WEF Proceedings
  • WEFTEC Conference Information
  • Learn about the many other WEF member benefits and join today
  • Ingenta Connect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more