A plant-wide modelling comparison between membrane bioreactors and conventional activated sludge. (February 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mannina, Giorgio; Cosenza, Alida; Rebouças, Taise Ferreira
• Is Part Of: Bioresource technology. Volume 297(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-02
• Subjects: Mathematical modelling -- WWTP -- Plant-wide model -- Simple model -- Greenhouse gases -- Energy demand; Biomass -- Periodicals; Biomass energy -- Periodicals; Bioremediation -- Periodicals; Agricultural wastes -- Periodicals; Factory and trade waste -- Periodicals; Organic wastes -- Periodicals; Bioénergie -- Périodiques; Déchets agricoles -- Périodiques; Déchets industriels -- Périodiques; Déchets organiques -- Périodiques; Déchets (Combustible) -- Périodiques; 662.88
• DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122401
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0960-8524

Abstract

Graphical abstract: Highlights: Comparison between conventional activated sludge (CAS) and membrane bioreactor (MBR) Higher indirect greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) for MBR than CAS. Influent carbon to nitrogen ratio influences nitrification in MBRs. In MBR the membrane aeration favors the stripping of dissolved GHG. MBR energy consumption higher than CAS. Abstract: A comprehensive plant-wide mathematical modelling comparison between conventional activated sludge (CAS) and Membrane bioreactor (MBR) systems is presented. The main aim of this study is to highlight the key features of CAS and MBR in order to provide a guide for an effective plant operation. A scenario analysis was performed to investigate the influence on direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and operating costs of (i) the composition of inflow wastewater (scenario 1), (ii) operating conditions (scenario 2) and (iii) oxygen transfer efficiency (scenario 3). Scenarios show higher indirect GHG emissions for MBR than CAS, which result is related to the higher energy consumption in MBR. The simultaneous variation of the investigated factors (scenario 4) exacerbates direct and indirect GHG emissions for both CAS and MBR. Indeed, during scenario 4 a maximum direct GHG emissions of 0.94 kgCO2eq m −3 and 1.56 kgCO2eq m −3 for CAS and MBR, respectively, was obtained.