Advertisement

Respirometric Evaluation of Toxicity of 2,4-Dichlorophenol Towards Activated Sludge and the Ability of Biomass Acclimation

  • P. Van Aken
  • N. Lambert
  • R. Van den Broeck
  • J. Degrève
  • R. Dewil
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 4)

Abstract

In the present research, both direct and co-metabolic biodegradation of 2,4-dichlorophenol by mixed activated sludge cultures are investigated by performing respirometric experiments. Firstly, the biomass inhibition due to the toxic pollutant is studied by performing a respirometric toxicity detection experiment. A lag phase for the activity of the biomass showed up because of 2,4-dichlorophenol. The length of the lag phase increased by increasing the concentration of 2,4-dichlorophenol. At higher concentrations, the micro-organisms required more adaption time to the presence of the toxic pollutant. Remarkably, the biomass restored its activity partially. Furthermore, respirometric experiments are performed for several days to investigate biomass acclimation towards the repeated addition of 2,4-dichlorophenol. A significant decrease of the reaction time needed was obtained by biomass acclimation. Immediately after the second addition, an increase of the biomass activity combined with both COD and 2,4-dichlorophenol degradation were observed. The biomass was able to adapt and even to degrade the toxic pollutant. At the second addition, this acclimation period was not necessary.

Keywords

Chlorophenol Cometabolic biodegradation Respirometry 

References

  1. Aktas Ö (2012) Effect of S0/X0 ratio and acclimation on respirometry of activated sludge in the cometabolic biodegradation of phenolic compounds. Bioresource Technol 111:98–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al Momani F, Sans C, Esplugas S (2004) A comparative study of the advanced oxidation of 2,4-dichlorophenol. J Hazard Mater 107(3):123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armenante PM, Kafkewitz D, Lewandowski GA, Jou CJ (1999) Anaerobic–aerobic treatment of halogenated phenolic compounds. Water Res 33(3):681–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jung MW, Ahn KH, Lee Y, Kim KP, Rhee JS, Park JT, Paeng KJ (2001) Adsorption characteristics of phenol and chlorophenols on granular-activated carbons (GAC). Microchem J 70(2):123–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Oller I, Malato S, Sánchez-Pérez JA (2011) Combination of advanced oxidation processes and biological treatments for wastewater decontamination - a review. Sci Total Environ 409(20):4141–4166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Pomiès M, Choubert JM, Wisniewski C, Coquery M (2013) Modelling of micropollutant removal in biological wastewater treatments: a review. Sci Total Environ 443:733–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ricco G, Tomei MC, Ramadori R, Laera G (2004) Toxicity assessment of common xenobiotic compounds on municipal activated sludge: comparison between respirometry and Microtox®. Water Res 38(8):2103–2110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Tabrizi GB, Mehrvar M (2004) Integration of advanced oxidation technologies and biological processes: recent developments, trends, and advances. J Environ Sci Heal A 39(11–12):3029–3081CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Van Aken
    • 1
  • N. Lambert
    • 1
  • R. Van den Broeck
    • 1
  • J. Degrève
    • 2
  • R. Dewil
    • 1
  1. 1.PETLab, Department of Chemical EngineeringKU LeuvenSint-Katelijne-WaverBelgium
  2. 2.Biological and Chemical Systems Technology, Reactor Engineering and Safety Section, Department of EngineeringKU LeuvenHeverleeBelgium

Personalised recommendations