Advertisement

Bioprocess Evaluation of Petroleum Wastewater Treatment with Zinc Oxide Nanoparticle for the Production of Methane Gas: Process Assessment and Modelling

  • A. AhmadEmail author
Article
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

The process evaluation of zinc oxide nanoparticle (ZnO NP) was added to enhance the degradation of petroleum wastewater (PWW) fermentation system with different mixing ratios for enhancing methane production. The results showed that the highest methane yield and total solids (TS) removal ratio reached 485 mL/g-VS L PWW added and 81.9% at the ZnO NP g-VS L PWW ratio of 4.5:15, respectively. The proposed model CO2 sequester 545 mL CO2/L PWW, production rate 750 mL CH4 g-VS L PWW/h, and CH4 yield was 4.85 L CH4 g-VS L PWW at 4.5:15 of ZnO NP g-VS L PWW. The kinetic analysis indicated that the modified Gompertz model best fitted the actual evolution of methane yields, as evidenced by the low root mean square prediction error (RMSPE) as well as high correlation difference between (Diff.%) the predicted and actual values. The parameters analyses were highlighted that the PWW digestion with ZnO NP substantially enhanced the hydrolysis rate (khyd), methanogenesis potential (fd), lag phase time h (λ), and methane production rate (Rm) of PWW. The evolution of soluble metabolites, utilization of ZnO NP and carbohydrates were also improved by co-fermentation.

Keywords

ZnO nanoparticle PWW degradation Methane yield CO2 and solid wastes reduction System evaluation 

Abbreviations

PWW

Petroleum wastewater

VS

Volatile solids

COD

Chemical oxygen demand (g/L)

Alk

Alkalinity

BOD

Biochemical oxygen demand (mg/L)

D

Dilution rate, 1/HRT (day_1)

L

Liter

NH3-N

Ammonia nitrogen (mg/L)

O&G

Oil and grease (mg/L)

OLR

Organic loading rate (kg/m3/day)

S

Substrate concentration in the reactor (mg/L)

S1

Influent substrate concentration (mg/L)

S2

Effluent substrate concentration (mg/L)

SCOD

Soluble chemical oxygen demand (mg/L)

SRT

Solid retention time (day)

SS

Suspended solid (mg/L)

t

Time (day)

MLSS

Mixed liquor suspended sludge (mg/L)

SVI

Sludge volume index (mL/L)

TN

Total nitrogen (mg/L)

TS

Total solid (mg/L)

TVS

Total volatile solid (mg/L)

UASFF

Upflow anaerobic sludge fixed film

V

Volume reactor (L)

VFA

Volatile fatty acid (mg/L)

TC

Total carbon

VSS

Volatile suspended solid (mg/L)

SSV

Sludge settling velocity (m/h)

SMA

Specific methanogenic activity

Y

measured methane yield (L/g CODadded)

fd

methane potential (mL g COD L POMEadded)

Diff.%

Difference between

Rm

Methane production rate (mL/g COD/h)

khyd

Hydrolysis rate (g COD/day)

n

Shape factor

λ

Lag phase time (h)

S.E.E

Standard error of estimate

RMSE

Root mean square prediction error

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the deanship of scientific research (DSR) at the University of Nizwa (UNIZWA) for this research by the Research Cluster Group Energy, Environment and Sustainable technology.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Wake, H. (2005). Oil refineries: a review of their ecological impacts on the aquatic environment. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 62(1-2), 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Salehi, E., Madaeni, S. S., Shamsabadi, A. A., & Laki, S. (2014). Applicability of ceramic membrane filters in pretreatment of coke-contaminated petrochemical wastewater: economic feasibility study. Ceramics International, 40(3), 4805–4810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kesavan, P. L., & Victor, J. (2005). Partial identifiably of parameters in Monod kinetics and statistical analysis of residuals. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 24(2), 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benali, M., Gerbaud, V., & Hemati, M. (2009). Effect of operating conditions and physico–chemical properties on the wet granulation kinetics in high shear mixer. Powder Technology, 190(1-2), 160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ahmad, A., & O-Aljasser, A. (2013). Anaerobic nitrogen, sulfide, and carbon removal in anaerobic granular bed reactor. Environmental Progress.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.11882.
  6. 6.
    Guo-Ping, S., Han-Qing, Y., & Xiao-Yan, L. (2008). Stability of sludge flocs under shear conditions. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 38, 302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chitu, T. M., Oulahna, D., & Hemati, M. (2011). Wet granulation in laboratory-scale high shear mixers: effect of chopper presence, design and impeller speed. Powder Technology, 206(1–2), 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ahmad, A. (2014). A novel application of red mud-iron on granulation and treatment of palm oil mill effluent using upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor. Environmental Technology, 35(21), 2718–2726.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2014.919034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Lucas, A., Rodriguez, L., Villaserior, J., & Fernandez, F. J. (2005). Biodegradation kinetics of stored wastewater substrates by mixed microbial culture. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 26(2-3), 191–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahmad, A., & Wahid, Z. A. (2014). Immobilized cement kiln dust enhances biomass and neutralizing of palm oil mill effluent for biogas production. Environmental Progress, 34(3), 736–743.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.12057.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lombi, E., Donner, E., Tavakkoli, E., Turney, T. W., Naidu, R., Miller, B. W., & Scheckel, K. G. (2012). Fate of zinc oxide nanoparticles during anaerobic digestion of wastewater and post-treatment processing of sewage sludge. Environmental Science & Technology, 46(16), 9089–9096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ahmad, A., & Ghufran, R. (2014). Evaluation of the bio-kinetics of cement kiln dust in an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor for treatment of palm oil mill effluent as a function of hydraulic retention time. Separation and Purification Technology, 133, 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ahmad, A., Ghufran, R., & Wahid, Z. A. (2011a). Role of calcium oxide in sludge granulation and methanogenesis for the treatment of palm oil mill effluent using UASB reactor. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 198, 40–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vlyssides, A., Barampouti, E. M., & Mai, S. (2008). Determination of granule size distribution in a UASB reactor. Journal of Environmental Management, 86(4), 660–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shariati, S. R. P., Bonakdarpour, B., Zare, N., & Ashtiani, F. Z. (2011). The effect of hydraulic retention time on the performance and fouling characteristics of membrane sequencing batch reactors used for the treatment of synthetic petroleum refinery wastewater. Bioresource Technology, 102(17), 7692–7699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang, G., Dai, X., Zhang, D., He, Q., Dong, B., Li, N., & Ye, N. (2018). Two-phase high solid anaerobic digestion with dewatered sludge: improved volatile solid degradation and specific methane generation by temperature and pH regulation. Bioresource Technology, 259, 253–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mu, H., Chen, Y., & Xiao, N. (2011). Effects of metal oxide nanoparticles (TiO2, Al2O3, SiO2 and ZnO) on waste activated sludge anaerobic digestion. Bioresource Technology, 102(22), 10305–10311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ahmad, A. (2018). Process evaluation for petroleum wastewater co-digestion with rye grass to enhance methane production. Waste and Biomass Valorization, 1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-018-0473-9.
  19. 19.
    Zamanzadeh, M., Parker, W. J., Verastegui, Y., & Neufeld, J. D. (2013). Biokinetics and bacterial communities of propionate oxidizing bacteria in phased anaerobic sludge digestion systems. Water Research, 47(4), 1558–1569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Latif, M. A., Ahmad, A., Ghufran, R., & Wahid, Z. A. (2011a). Integrated application of upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor for the treatment of wastewaters. Water Research, 45(16), 4683–4699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim, J., Lee, S., & Lee, C. (2013). Comparative study of changes in reaction profile and microbial community structure in two anaerobic repeated-batch reactors started up with different seed sludges. Bioresource Technology, 129, 495–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Al-Malack, M. H. (2006). Determination of biokinetic coefficients of an immersed membrane bioreactor. Journal of Membrane Science, 271, 46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Latif, M. A., Ahmad, A., Ghufran, R., & Wahid, Z. A. (2011b). Effect of temperature and organic loading rate on upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor (USBR) by treating liquidized food waste. Environmental Progress, 3, 114.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhen, G. Y., Lu, X. Q., Kobayashi, T., Li, Y. Y., Xu, K. Q., & Zhao, Y. C. (2015). Mesophilic anaerobic co-digestion of waste activated sludge and Egeria densa: performance assessment and kinetic analysis. Applied Energy, 148, 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ahmad, A., & Ghufran, R. (2018). Review on industrial wastewater energy sources and carbon emission reduction: towards a clean production. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2018.1423647.
  26. 26.
    Dai, X., Li, X., Zhang, D., Chen, Y., & Dai, L. (2016). Simultaneous enhancement of methane production and methane content in biogas from waste activated sludge and perennial ryegrass anaerobic co-digestion: the effects of pH and C/N ratio. Bioresource Technology, 216, 323–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zheng, Y. M., & Yu, H. Q. (2007). Determination of the pore size distribution and porosity of aerobic granules using size-exclusion chromatography. Water Research, 41(1), 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kim, H. W., Nam, J. Y., & Shin, H. S. (2011). A comparison study on the high-rate co-digestion o sewage sludge and food waste using a temperature-phased anaerobic sequencing batch reactor system. Bioresource Technology, 102(2011), 7272–7279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pastor, L., Ruiz, L., Pascual, A., & Ruiz, B. (2013). Co-digestion of used oils and urban landfill leachates with sewage sludge and the effect on the biogas production. Applied Energy, 107(2013), 438–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nyberg, L., Turco, R. F., & Nies, L. (2008). Assessing the impact of nanomaterials on anaerobic microbial communities. Environmental Science & Technology, 42(6), 1938–1943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dai, X., Li, X., Zhang, D., Chen, Y., & Dai, L. (2016). Simultaneous enhancement of methane production and methane content in biogas from waste activated sludge and perennial ryegrass anaerobic co-digestion: the effects of pH and C/N ratio. Bioresource Technology, 216(2016), 323–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nizami, A. S., & Jerry, D. (2011). Murphy, Optimizing the operation of a two-phase anaerobic digestion system digesting grass silage. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(17), 7561–7569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gao, D., Liu, L., Liang, H., & Wu, W. M. (2011). Aerobic granular sludge: characterization, mechanism of granulation and application to wastewater treatment. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 31(2), 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chen, J. J. (2010). Biomass to renewable energy processes. Boca Raton London: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    El-Mashad, H. M. (2013). Kinetics of methane production from the co-digestion of switch grass and Spirulina platensis algae. Bioresource Technology, 132, 305–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ahmad A (2012) Calcium oxide cement kiln dust for granulation of palm oil mill effluent Patent and Trademark Office, United States Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, USA, Patent No. 20120285884A1.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mu, H., Zheng, X., Chen, Y., Chen, C., & Liu, K. (2012). Response of anaerobic granular sludge to a shock load of zinc oxide nanoparticles during biological wastewater treatment. Environmental Science & Technology, 46(11), 5997–6003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ahmad, A., Ghufran, R., & Wahid, Z. A. (2011a). Bioenergy from anaerobic degradation of lipids in palm oil mill effluent. Biomass and Bioenergy. Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology, 10, 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Otero-González, L., Jim, A. F., & Sierra-Alvarez, R. (2014). Fate and long-term inhibitory impact of ZnO nanoparticles during high-rate anaerobic wastewater treatment. Journal of Environmental Management, 135, 110–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, College of Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of NizwaNizwaSultanate of Oman

Personalised recommendations