Next Article in Journal
Increasing River Flows in the Sahel?
Previous Article in Journal
Hydrologic Restoration in the Urban Environment Using Green Roofs
Due to scheduled maintaince work on one of the switches in our server center, our websites and may experience short service dirsuptions of up to 5 minutes on 30 January 2015 00:00 PM EST time.
Water 2010, 2(2), 155-169; doi:10.3390/w2020155

Comparison of Three Systems for Biological Greywater Treatment

1,2,* , 1,2, 2 and 1,2
Received: 3 February 2010 / Revised: 14 April 2010 / Accepted: 15 April 2010 / Published: 22 April 2010
Download PDF [1940 KB, uploaded 22 April 2010]
Abstract: Greywater consists of household wastewater excluding toilet discharges. Three systems were compared for the biological treatment of greywater at a similar hydraulic retention time of approximately 12–13 hours. These systems were aerobic treatment in a sequencing batch reactor, anaerobic treatment in an up-flow anaerobic blanket reactor and combined anaerobic-aerobic treatment (up-flow anaerobic blanket reactor + sequencing batch reactor). Aerobic conditions resulted in a COD removal of 90%, which was significantly higher than 51% removal by anaerobic treatment. The low removal in the anaerobic reactor may have been caused by high concentration of anionic surfactants in the influent (43.5 mg/L) and a poor removal of the colloidal fraction of the COD in up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket reactors. Combined aerobic-anaerobic treatment accomplished a COD removal of 89%, similar to the aerobic treatment alone. Greywater methanization was 32% for the anaerobic system and 25% for the anaerobic-aerobic system, yielding a small amount of energy. Therefore, anaerobic pre-treatment is not feasible and an aerobic system is preferred for the treatment of greywater.
Keywords: aerobic treatment; anaerobic treatment; greywater; surfactants; sludge yield aerobic treatment; anaerobic treatment; greywater; surfactants; sludge yield
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Export to BibTeX |

MDPI and ACS Style

Hernández Leal, L.; Temmink, H.; Zeeman, G.; Buisman, C.J.N. Comparison of Three Systems for Biological Greywater Treatment. Water 2010, 2, 155-169.

AMA Style

Hernández Leal L, Temmink H, Zeeman G, Buisman CJN. Comparison of Three Systems for Biological Greywater Treatment. Water. 2010; 2(2):155-169.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hernández Leal, Lucía; Temmink, Hardy; Zeeman, Grietje; Buisman, Cees J. N. 2010. "Comparison of Three Systems for Biological Greywater Treatment." Water 2, no. 2: 155-169.

Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert