Related Experiment Videos
Tannery effluent as a carbon source for biological sulphate reduction
G Boshoff1, J Duncan, P D Rose
1Environmental Engineering Research Centre, School of Civil Engineering, Queens University Belfast, David Keir Building, Stranmillis Road, Northern Ireland BT9 5AG, UK. g.boshoff@qub.ac.uk
Water Research
|June 23, 2004
Summary
Tannery effluent effectively reduced sulphate in pilot reactors, with trench and upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactors showing superior performance. This biological sulphate reduction process minimized odour issues despite high sulphide production.
Area of Science:
- Environmental microbiology
- Wastewater treatment technologies
- Anaerobic digestion
Background:
- Tanneries generate effluent rich in organic compounds and sulphates.
- Biological sulphate reduction is a key process in anaerobic wastewater treatment.
- Odour generation is a common challenge in biological sulphate reduction.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate tannery effluent as a carbon source for biological sulphate reduction.
- To compare the performance of three reactor types: UASB, STR, and TR.
- To assess chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal and sulphide production.
Main Methods:
- Pilot-scale testing of upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB), stirred tank reactor (STR), and trench reactor (TR).
- Utilizing tannery effluent as the sole carbon source for sulphate-reducing bacteria.
- Monitoring sulphate removal, COD removal, and sulphide generation.
Main Results:
- Sulphate removals ranged from 60-80% across all reactors at sulphate levels up to 1800 mg/l.
- Trench reactor (TR) and UASB demonstrated higher sulphate removal rates (400-600 mg SO4/l/day) than the STR (250 mg SO4/l/day).
- COD removal efficiency decreased significantly when switching from UASB to STR operation.
- High sulphide concentrations (up to 1500 mg/l) were produced, but odour was minimal due to elevated pH.
Conclusions:
- Tannery effluent is a viable carbon source for biological sulphate reduction.
- TR and UASB reactors are more efficient for sulphate removal compared to STR.
- The process effectively mitigates odour issues associated with sulphide production.