Nitrous oxide emission mitigation during low–carbon source wastewater treatment: effect of external carbon source supply strategy
- 60 Downloads
Nitrous oxide (N2O) generated during biological nitrogen removal in wastewater treatment processes has contributed an important proportion to the global warming effect. To evaluate the possibility of N2O emission mitigating by changing carbon source supply strategies, nitrogen transformation characteristics and N2O emissions with methanol one-time dosing and step dosing were investigated. Two sets of laboratory-scale sequencing batch biofilm reactors (SBBRs) were conducted to treat real domestic wastewater with low carbon source. The results revealed that reactors with methanol step dosing showed a lower N2O emission of 0.0402 ± 0.0016 mg/(L·h), together with a higher total nitrogen and ammonia nitrogen removal efficiencies of 83.30% ± 1.21 and 93.45% ± 1.20, respectively. While N2O emission from conventional one-time dosing reactors was 0.0741 ± 0.0025 mg/(L·h), total nitrogen and ammonia nitrogen removal efficiencies were 75.71% ± 0.54 and 88.45% ± 0.59, respectively. The N2O emission factor of SBBR was reduced from 6.26% ± 0.21 to 3.40% ± 0.14 with methanol step dosing. Moreover, nitrification rates in aerobic phases were reduced, while denitrification rates in anoxic phases were elevated. Hence, carbon source step dosing enhanced nitrogen removal and reduced N2O emission compared with one-time dosing, which is a simply achievable strategy for N2O emission reduction in highly automated systems like wastewater treatment plants.
KeywordsWastewater treatment Nitrous oxide Carbon source Sequencing batch biofilm reactor Nitrogen removal Methanol
The work reported here was financially supported by the National Key Technology R&D Program of China (2011BAJ07B03).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Association (APHA), WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Chai H, Shen Y, Su C et al (2017) Nitrogen removal and nitrous oxide emission on sequencing batch biofilm reactor at different C/N ratio. Fresenius Environ Bull 26:6712–6719Google Scholar
- Ding DH, Feng CP, Jin YX (2010) Effect of C/N ratio on nitrogen removal in a novel sequencing batch biofilm reactor. International Conference on Bioinformatics & Biomedical Engineering. IEEE. doi: 0.1109/ICBBE.2010.5517614Google Scholar
- Frijns J, Roorda J, Mulder M (2008) Op weg naar een klimaatneutrale waterketen. H2O 41(10): 36–37Google Scholar
- IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. In: Contribution of working group iii contribution to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Jin Y, Li X (2012) Nitrogen and phosphorus removal in synthetic domestic wastewater using SBBR technology. Appl Mech Mater 209-211:1906–1909. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.209-211.1906 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Khanitchaidecha W, Nakaruk A, Koshy P, Futaba K (2015) Comparison of simultaneous nitrification and denitrification for three different reactors. Biomed Res Int. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/901508
- Lemaire R, Meyer R, Taske A, Crocetti GR, Keller J, Yuan Z (2006) Identifying causes for N2O accumulation in a lab-scale sequencing batch reactor performing simultaneous nitrification, denitrification and phosphorus removal. J Biotechnol 122:62–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2005.08.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lew B, Stief P, Beliavski M, Ashkenazi A, Svitlica O, Khan A, Tarre S, de Beer D, Green M (2012) Characterization of denitrifying granular sludge with and without the addition of external carbon source. Bioresour Technol 124:413–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.08.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Liang W, Yu C, Ren H, Geng J, Ding L, Xu K (2015) Minimization of nitrous oxide emission from CASS process treating low carbon source domestic wastewater: effect of feeding strategy and aeration rate. Bioresour Technol 198:172–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.08.075 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Massara TM, Malamis S, Guisasola A, Baeza JA, Noutsopoulos C, Katsou E (2017) A review on nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions during biological nutrient removal from municipal wastewater and sludge reject water. Sci Total Environ 596:106–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Poughon L, Dussap CG, Gros JB (2001) Energy model and metabolic flux analysis for autotrophic nitrifiers. Biotechnol Bioeng 72:416–433. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0290(20000220)72:4<416::aid-bit1004>3.3.co;2-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Waki M, Yasuda T, Yokoyama H, Hanajima D, Ogino A, Suzuki K, Yamagishi T, Suwa Y, Tanaka Y (2009) Nitrogen removal by co-occurring methane oxidation, denitrification, aerobic ammonium oxidation, and anammox. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 84:977–985. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-009-2112-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wunderlin P, Lehmann MF, Siegrist H, Tuzson B, Joss A, Emmenegger L, Mohn J (2013) Isotope signatures of N2O in a mixed microbial population system: constraints on N2O producing pathways in wastewater treatment. Environ Sci Technol 47:1339–1348. https://doi.org/10.1021/es303174x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Xiang Y, Shao Z, Kang W, Zou B, Chai H (2016) Effect of biofilm density on nitrous oxide emissions and treatment efficiency on sequencing batch biofilm reactor. Water Air Soil Pollut 227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-016-3009-6