Advertisement

Modeling and performance improvement of an anaerobic–anoxic/nitrifying-induced crystallization process via the multi-objective optimization method

  • Hongliang Dai
  • Wenliang Chen
  • Lihong Peng
  • Xingang WangEmail author
  • Xiwu LuEmail author
Research Article
  • 15 Downloads

Abstract

The trade-off between energy savings and emission reductions of an activated sludge process is a multi-objective problem relating to several potentially conflicting objectives. Therefore, the optimal modification of an anaerobic–anoxic/nitrifying/induced crystallization (A2N-IC) process by multi-objective optimization method was studied in this work. The multi-objective optimization model comprised three evaluative indices, (effluent quality (EQ), operation cost (OC), and total volume (TV) of structures), and 14 process parameters (decision variables) solving by non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II) in MATLAB. The trade-off relationships among EQ, OC, and TV were investigated under 30 days of dynamic influent with different constraint conditions. A series of Pareto solutions were obtained, and one Pareto solution was selected for further analysis. Results showed improved effluent concentrations of chemical oxygen demand (COD), total nitrogen (TN), ammonia-nitrogen (NH4+-N), and total phosphorous (TP) under the optimized strategy compared to the original strategy, where the average effluent concentrations decreased by 2.22, 0.47, 0.13, and 0.02 mg/L, respectively. The values of EQ and OC decreased from 0.015 kg/day and 0.15 ¥/m3 to 0.0023 kg/day and 0.12 ¥/m3, respectively, while the TV increased from 0.31 to 0.33 m3. These results indicated that the multi-objective optimization method is useful for modifying activated sludge processes.

Keywords

Multi-objective optimization Energy-saving and emission-reduction Denitrifying phosphorus removal Phosphorus recovery 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research has been supported by the Major Science and Technology Project of Water Pollution Control and Management in China (No. 2017ZX07202004-002), the National Science and Technology Support Program in China (No. 2015BAL01B01), the Social Development Project of Zhenjiang (No. 2016014), and the Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31400448). We thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments that improved the manuscript. The English in this document has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English. For a certificate, please see http://www.textcheck.com/certificate/IOT2Kd.

References

  1. Ali M, Siarry P, Pant M (2018) An efficient differential evolution based algorithm for solving multi-objective optimization problems. Eur J Oper Res 217:404–416Google Scholar
  2. Alsofyani IM, Idris NRN (2013) A review on sensorless techniques for sustainable reliablity and efficient variable frequency drives of induction motors. Renew Sust Energ Rev 24:111–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beraud B, Steyer J, Lemoine C et al (2008) Optimization of WWTPs control by means of multi-objective genetic algorithms and sensitivity analysis. Comput Aided Chem Eng 25:539–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beraud B, Lemoine C, Steyer J (2009) Multi-objective genetic algorithms for the optimization of wastewater treatment processes. Super Contr 218:163–195Google Scholar
  5. Bertone E, Stewart RA, Zhang H, O'Halloran K (2016) Hybrid water treatment cost prediction model for raw water intake optimization. Environ Model Softw 75:230–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen W, Yao C, Lu X (2014) Mathematical modeling and modification of an activated sludge benchmark process evaluated by multiple performance criteria. Korean J Chem Eng 31:1330–1338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen W, Lu X, Yao C (2015) Optimal strategies evaluated by multi-objective optimization method for improving the performance of a novel cycle operating activated sludge process. Chem Eng J 260:492–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Copp JB (2002) The COST simulation benchmark: description and simulator manual. Office for Official Publications of the European Community, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  9. Dai H, Chen W, Lu X (2016) The application of multi-objective optimization method for activated sludge process: a review. Water Sci Technol 73:223–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dai H, Wu Y, Peng L, Dai Z, Li X, Lu X (2017a) Effects of calcium on the performance, bacterial population and microbial metabolism of a denitrifying phosphorus removal system. Bioresour Technol 243:828–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dai H, Dai Z, Peng L et al (2017b) Metagenomic and metabolomic analysis reveals the effects of chemical phosphorus recovery on biological nutrient removal system. Chem Eng J 328:1087–1097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dai H, Chen W, Dai Z, Li X, Lu X (2017c) Efficient model calibration method based on phase experiments for anaerobic-anoxic/nitrifying (A2N) two-sludge process. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:19211–19222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Emami N, Sobhani R, Rosso D (2018) Diurnal variations of the energy intensity and associated greenhouse gas emissions for activated sludge processes. Water Sci Technol 77:1838–1850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Flores-Alsina X, Bonmati A, Poch M et al (2007) Multi-criteria evaluation tools to support the conceptual design of activated sludge systems. Water Sci Technol 56:85–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Flores-Alsina X, Rodríguez RI, Sin G et al (2008) Multi-criteria evaluation of wastewater treatment plant control strategies under uncertainty. Water Res 42:4485–4497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guerrero J, Guisasola A, Vilanova R, Baeza JA (2011) Improving the performance of a WWTP control system by model-based setpoint optimisation. Environ Model Softw 26:492–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guerrero J, Guisasola A, Comas J et al (2012) Multi-criteria selection of optimum WWTPs control set-points based on microbiology-related failures, effluent quality and operating costs. Chem Eng J 188:23–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hakanen J, Miettinen K, Sahlstedt K (2011a)Wastewater treatment: new insight provided by interactive multiobjective optimization. Decis Support Syst 51:328–337Google Scholar
  19. Hakanen J,Miettinen K, Sahlstedt K et al (2011b)Wastewater treatment: new insight provided by interactive multi-objective optimization. Decis Support Syst 51:328–337Google Scholar
  20. Hakanen J, Sahlstedt K, Miettinen K (2013) Wastewater treatment plant design and operation under multiple conflicting objective functions. Environ Model Softw 46:240–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hauduc H, Rieger L, Oehmen A, van Loosdrecht MCM, Comeau Y, Héduit A, Vanrolleghem PA, Gillot S (2013) Critical review of activated sludge modeling: state of process knowledge, modeling concepts, and limitations. Biotechnol Bioeng 110:24–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Henze M, Gujer W, Mino T, Matsuo T, Wentzel MC, Marais GR, van Loosdrecht MCM (1999) Activated sludge model no. 2d, ASM2d. Water Sci Technol 39:165–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Iqbal J, Guria C (2009) Optimization of an operating domestic wastewater treatment plant using elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm. Chem Eng Res Des 87:1481–1496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johansson S, Ruscalleda M, Colprim J (2017) Phosphorus recovery through biologically induced precipitation by partial nitritation-anammox granular biomass. Chem Eng J 327:881–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li C, Zhang J, Liang S, Ngo HH, Guo W, Zhang Y, Zou Y (2013) Nitrous oxide generation in denitrifying phosphorus removal process: main causes and control measures. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:5353–5360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lu HF, Zhang GM, Dai X, Schideman L, Zhang Y, Li B, Wang H (2013) A novel wastewater treatment and biomass cultivation system combining photosynthetic bacteria and membrane bioreactor technology. Desalination 322:176–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lv XM, Shao MF, Li CL, Li J, Xia X, Liu DY (2014) Bacterial diversity and community structure of denitrifying phosphorus removal sludge in strict anaerobic/anoxic systems operated with different carbon sources. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 89:1842–1849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mjalli FS, Alasheh S, Alfadala HE (2007) Use of artificial neural network black-box modeling for the prediction of wastewater treatment plants performance. J Environ Manag 83:329–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mokhtari H, Hasani A (2017) An energy-efficient multi-objective optimization for flexible job-shop scheduling problem. Comput Chem Eng 104:339–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Peng YZ, Wu CY, Wang RD, Li XL (2011) Denitrifying phosphorus removal with nitrite by a real-time step feed sequencing batch reactor. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 86:541–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shi J, Lu X, Yu R, Zhu W (2012) Nutrient removal and phosphorus recovery performances of a novel anaerobic-anoxic/nitrifying/induced crystallization process. Bioresour Technol 121:183–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sweetapple C, Fu G, Butler D (2014) Multi-objective optimisation of wastewater treatment plant control to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Water Res 55:52–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Takács I, Patry GG, Nolasco D (1991) A dynamic model of the clarification–thickening process. Water Res 25:1263–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Walker D, Jakovljević D, Savić D, Radovanović M (2015) Multi-criterion water quality analysis of the Danube River in Serbia: a visualisation approach. Water Res 79:158–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wang N, Zhao WJ, Wu N et al (2017) Multi-objective optimization: a method for selecting the optimal solution from Pareto non-inferior solutions. Expert Syst Appl 74:96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wu X, Yang Y, Wu G, Mao J, Zhou T (2016) Simulation and optimization of a coking wastewater biological treatment process by activated sludge models (ASM). J Environ Manag 165:235–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yuan Z, Pratt S, Batstone DJ (2012) Phosphorus recovery from wastewater through microbial processes. Curr Opin Biotechnol 23:878–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhang R, Xie WM, Yu HQ et al (2014) Optimizing municipal wastewater treatment plants using an improved multi-objective optimization method. Bioresour Technol 157:161–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zou H, Wang Y (2016) Phosphorus removal and recovery from domestic wastewater in a novel process of enhanced biological phosphorus removal coupled with crystallization. Bioresour Technol 211:87–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Environmental and Chemical EngineeringJiangsu University of Science and TechnologyZhenjiangPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.School of Energy and EnvironmentSoutheast UniversityNanjingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations