Next Article in Journal
A New Cost-Effective and Eco-Friendly Way to Recover Sulfuric Acid Waste Using Bleaching Soil
Previous Article in Journal
Fluorescent Based Tracers for Oil and Gas Downhole Applications: Between Conventional and Innovative Approaches
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

Treatment of Municipal Activated Sludge by Ultrasound-Fenton Process †

1
Centro de Química de Vila Real (CQVR), Departamento de Química, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro (UTAD), Quinta de Prados, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
2
Escuela Internacional de Doctorado (EIDO), Campus da Auga, Campus Universitário de Ourense, Universi-dade de Vigo, 32004 Ourense, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Presented at the 1st International Electronic Conference on Processes: Processes System Innovation, 17–31 May 2022; Available online: https://ecp2022.sciforum.net.
Eng. Proc. 2022, 19(1), 7; https://doi.org/10.3390/ECP2022-12666
Published: 30 May 2022

Abstract

:
In this work, the efficiency of ultrasound, Fenton, and ultrasound-Fenton (US-Fenton) processes were evaluated separately for the treatment of municipal activated sludge (MAS). Additionally, the effects of operational parameters such as pH, hydrogen peroxide and ferrous iron concentrations, and cavitation time were studied. During the experiments, the chemical oxygen demand (COD) reduction and the volatile solids (VS)/total solids (TS) ratio were evaluated. Under the best operational conditions, ultrasound and Fenton processes achieved 17.3 and 25.9% COD removal, respectively, while the combined US-Fenton process was more efficient with a 94.8% COD reduction. Regarding the VS/TS ratio, the process that showed better results was US-Fenton, reducing the original value of 0.59 to 0.16. The ultrasound and Fenton processes showed a lower VS/TS ratio reduction to 0.26 and 0.22, respectively. In conclusion, the combination of US-Fenton achieves high COD removal and a significant VS/TS ratio reduction of the municipal activated sludge, showing better efficiencies than both processes separately.

1. Introduction

Municipal wastewater treatment produces significant volumes of sludge that requires appropriate treatment so it can be used for another purpose without constituting a threat to the environment, contributing to a sustainable circular economy [1].
Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) are methods that generate radicals, such as hydroxyl radicals (HO•−), with high oxidizing power ( E HO º = 2.80 V) that reduces contaminated organic composites and can be used for water and soil treatment. The Fenton reaction is one of the methods that, through the interaction between ferrous ions (Fe2+) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), generates Fe3+ and HO (Equation (1)). However, it is a complex mechanism because the reaction depends on several factors, such as the pH, H2O2 concentration, and Fe2+ concentration [2,3]. Several studies have been developed in order to optimize the Fenton reaction through association with light, ultrasound, use of nanoparticles, and electrical energy [4,5].
Fe 2 + +   H 2 O 2     Fe 3 + + OH + HO
Ultrasound-Fenton (US-Fenton) is the combination of ultrasounds with the Fenton reaction. The ultrasounds can generate short-lived radical species through the cavitation bubble collapses, allowing the radical concentration to be maintained [6]. Under ultrasound radiation, the waves interact with dissolved gases in the water body, which leads to acoustic cavitation. These phenomena include the following steps: the formation, growth, and implosive collapse of bubbles. The US leads to chemical reactions (bond cleavage), which include splitting the water molecules into a hydrogen atom and hydroxyl radical, as observed in Equations (2)–(4), as follows [7].
H 2 O + US     H + HO
O 2 + US     2 O
H 2 O + O     2 HO
In addition to HO radical production, the application of US allows the regeneration of the ferric iron to ferrous iron, increasing the kinetic rate of the Fenton process, as observed in Equations (5) and (6) [8], as follows:
H2O2 + Fe3+→ Fe(OOH)2+ + H+
Fe ( OOH ) 2 + + US     Fe 2 + + HO
The aim of this work was (1) the characterization of the municipal activated sludge, (2) optimization of the US-Fenton process, and (3) the study of efficiency between ultrasound, Fenton, and US-Fenton treatment processes applied to the sludge.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Reagents and Sludge Sampling

For pH adjustment, sodium hydroxide (NaOH) from Labkem, Barcelona, Spain, and sulphuric acid (H2SO4, 95%) from Scharlau, Barcelona, Spain, were used. For chemical processes, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2 30%), supplied by Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA, and ferrous sulfate heptahydrate (FeSO4·7H2O), supplied by Panreac, Barcelona, Spain, were used.

2.2. Analytical Methods

Before the experiment, different physical–chemical parameters were determined to characterize the municipal activated sludge. Parameters such as pH, COD, total solids, volatile solids, volatile solids and total solids ratio, electrical conductivity, and iron concentration were used (Table 1).
For COD determination, a closed reflux method was used; for total solids (TS) and volatile solids (VS), gravimetric methods were applied, in accordance with standard methods of water and wastewater experiments [9], and reactions were quenched by application of sodium sulfite anhydrous.

2.3. Experimental Set-Up

To study the efficiency of ultrasound and US-Fenton processes in the treatment of municipal activated sludge, an ultrasonic processor (Vibracell Ultrasonic processor VCX 500, Sonics & Materials Inc., Danbury, CT, USA) and a magnetic stirrer (Nahita blue, Navarra, Spain) for Fenton process were used, as shown in Figure 1. During the US-Fenton and Fenton process, the reagents were well mixed to start reacting. The experiments were processed in a 100 mL beaker, the temperature was maintained at 298 K for 60 min, and every 15 min, a sample was taken for analysis.
The optimization of US-Fenton was performed in the following order: (1) variation of pH (3.0–7.0), (2) variation of H2O2 concentration (30–200 mM), (3) variation of Fe2+ concentration, and (4) cavitation time ON (1–5 s), OFF (5 s). After obtaining the optimal conditions, the ultrasound and Fenton processes were performed.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

All the results were analyzed with OriginLab 2019 software (Northampton, MA, USA) to determine the difference between means through analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Tukey’s test was used for the comparison of means, which were considerably different when p < 0.05. The data are presented as mean and standard deviation (mean ± SD).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Ultrasound vs. Fenton vs. US-Fenton Treatment Process

In this section, the US was compared with the Fenton and US-Fenton process, to understand which treatment process is more efficient for MAS treatment. By analysis of the results in Figure 2, it is possible to see that the process that showed the best results was, without a doubt, US-Fenton, reaching 94.8% COD removal, while ultrasound and Fenton reached 17.3 and 25.9%, respectively. The VS/TS ratio was observed to be in the following order: US-Fenton (0.16) < Fenton (0.22) < US (0.26). Clearly, with the combination of US with Fenton, a higher HO radical production occurred, increasing the kinetic rate of COD removal. These results were in agreement with Saleh and Taufic [8], who observed that application of US-Fenton reached higher Methylene Blue and Congo-Red dye removal in comparison to US and Fenton processes.

3.2. Effect of pH

In this section, the US-Fenton process was optimized by variation of the pH (3.0–7.0). As can be observed in Figure 3, pH = 4.0 showed the highest efficiency, with a COD removal of 86.1%. Increasing the pH to 6.0 and 7.0, the COD removal suffers a reduction to 75.1% and 66.4%, respectively. The efficiency reduction at alkaline pH resulted from the iron hydroxides precipitation, which led to lower production of HO radicals and inhibited Fe2+ regeneration [10,11].

3.3. Effect of H2O2 Concentration

To evaluate the effect of H2O2 concentration, different concentrations were tested (30–200 mM). The highest efficiency was achieved with application of [H2O2] = 30 mM, with a COD removal of 94.8% (Figure 4). In addition, the VS/TS ratio was reduced to 0.16, which showed a reduction in the microbial concentration that existed in the MAS. Increasing the H2O2 concentration, a COD reduction of 87.2, 86.1, 78.3, and 69.3%, respectively, was observed for 50, 100, 150, and 200 mM. By increasing the H2O2 concentration to values > 30 mM, the excess of H2O2 induces the consume of HO radicals and produces HO 2 (Equation (7)), which has a low reduction potential, so, less degradation occurs [12,13].
H 2 O 2 + HO     HO 2 + H 2 O

3.4. Effect of Iron Concentration

The Fe2+ acts as a catalyst in the process of generating HO radicals, an optimum concentration that potentiates greater production of radicals must be achieved [14]. In this section, the Fe2+ concentration was varied from 0.5 to 10.0 mM, and in accordance with the results (Figure 5), with application of 2.0 mM Fe2+, a COD removal of 94.8% was achieved. Above 2.0 mM, a decrease in COD removal and higher values of VS/TS ratio were observed. The excess of ferrous ions can lead to a consumption of HO radicals producing Fe3+ and HO (Equation (8)), resulting in less degradation [15].
Fe 3 + + HO     Fe 3 + + HO

3.5. Effect of Cavitation Time ON

The cavitation time plays an important role in the degradation of organic carbon. Therefore, the US-Fenton process was optimized by variation of the cavitation time ON:OFF (1:5, 2:5, 3:5, and 5:5 s:s). The most efficient cavitation time, with a COD removal of 94.8% and a VS/TS ratio of 0.16, was 3 s ON and 5 s OFF (Figure 6). By increasing the contact time (5:5 s:s), the COD removal was observed to decrease to 90.2% with a VS/TS ratio of 0.26. These results were in agreement with Sivagami et al. [16], who observed that increasing the contact time leads to a decrease in PHC degradation in the US-Fenton process.

4. Conclusions

The combination of ultrasound-Fenton (US-Fenton) achieved high COD removal and a significant VS/TS ratio reduction of the municipal activated sludge, showing better efficiencies than both processes separately. The efficiency of the US-Fenton process depends on several variables, mainly pH, concentrations of hydrogen peroxide and ferrous ions, and cavitation time. Under the optimal conditions, 94.8% COD removal and a 0.16 VS/TS ratio is achieved.

Supplementary Materials

The conference presentation file is available at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ECP2022-12666/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.S., N.J. and A.R.T.; methodology, C.S. and N.J.; software, N.J.; validation, C.S., N.J., M.S.L. and J.A.P.; formal analysis, C.S.; investigation, C.S., N.J. and A.R.T.; resources, C.S., N.J. and A.R.T.; data curation, C.S.; writing—original draft preparation, C.S., N.J., and A.R.T.; writing—review and editing, C.S. and M.S.L.; visualization, C.S., M.S.L. and J.A.P.; supervision, M.S.L. and J.A.P.; project administration, J.A.P.; funding acquisition, J.A.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors are grateful for the financial support of the Project AgriFood XXI, operation No. NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000041, and to the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) for the financial support provided to CQVR through UIDB/00616/2020. Ana R. Teixeira also thanks the FCT for the financial support provided through the doctoral scholarship UI/BD/150847/2020.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sousa, R.J.V. De Estratégias de Gestão de Lamas de Estações de Tratamento de Águas Residuais (ETAR); Extrusão de Lamas Para Aplicação Na Agricultura, Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto: Porto, Portugal, 2005; pp. 1–112. [Google Scholar]
  2. Oller, I.; Malato, S. Photo-Fenton applied to the removal of pharmaceutical and other pollutants of emerging concern. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 2021, 29, 100458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ganiyu, S.O.; Sable, S.; El-Din, M.G. Advanced oxidation processes for the degradation of dissolved organics in produced water: A review of process performance, degradation kinetics and pathway. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 429, 132492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Babuponnusami, A.; Muthukumar, K. A review on Fenton and improvements to the Fenton process for wastewater treatment. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2014, 2, 557–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Shi, X.; Tian, A.; You, J.; Yang, H.; Wang, Y.; Xue, X. Degradation of organic dyes by a new heterogeneous Fenton reagent-Fe2GeS4 nanoparticle. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018, 353, 182–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Siddique, M.; Farooq, R.; Price, G.J. Synergistic effects of combining ultrasound with the Fenton process in the degradation of Reactive Blue 19. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2014, 21, 1206–1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Moradi, M.; Elahinia, A.; Vasseghian, Y.; Dragoi, E.-N.; Omidi, F.; Khaneghah, A.M. A review on pollutants removal by Sono-photo -Fenton processes. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 104330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Saleh, R.; Taufik, A. Degradation of methylene blue and congo-red dyes using Fenton, photo-Fenton, sono-Fenton, and sonophoto-Fenton methods in the presence of iron(II,III) oxide/zinc oxide/graphene (Fe3O4/ZnO/graphene) composites. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2018, 210, 563–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. APHA, A.W. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 22nd ed.; American Public Health Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  10. Oliveira, R.; Almeida, M.F.; Santos, A.L.; Madeira, L.M. Experimental Design of 2,4-Dichlorophenol Oxidation by Fenton’s Reaction. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2006, 45, 1266–1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Rahmani, A.R.; Mousavi-Tashar, A.; Masoumi, Z.; Azarian, G. Integrated advanced oxidation process, sono-Fenton treatment, for mineralization and volume reduction of activated sludge. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 168, 120–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Elmobarak, W.; Hameed, B.; Almomani, F.; Abdullah, A. A Review on the Treatment of Petroleum Refinery Wastewater Using Advanced Oxidation Processes. Catalysts 2021, 11, 782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kusic, H.; Koprivanac, N.; Bozic, A.L.; Selanec, I. Photo-assisted Fenton type processes for the degradation of phenol: A kinetic study. J. Hazard. Mater. 2006, 136, 632–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Lin, Y.-P.; Dhib, R.; Mehrvar, M. Recent Advances in Dynamic Modeling and Process Control of PVA Degradation by Biological and Advanced Oxidation Processes: A Review on Trends and Advances. Environments 2021, 8, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Domínguez, J.R.; González, T.; Palo, P.; Cuerda-Correa, E.M. Fenton + Fenton-like Integrated Process for Carbamazepine Degradation: Optimizing the System. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2012, 51, 2531–2538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Sivagami, K.; Anand, D.; Divyapriya, G.; Nambi, I. Treatment of petroleum oil spill sludge using the combined ultrasound and Fenton oxidation process. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 51, 340–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Schematic representation of (I) US and US-Fenton and (II) Fenton processes on the treatment of MAS. (1) equipment for temperature control, (2) ultrasonic processor, (3) 100 mL beaker containing sludge, (4) magnetic stirrer device, and (5) stir bar.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of (I) US and US-Fenton and (II) Fenton processes on the treatment of MAS. (1) equipment for temperature control, (2) ultrasonic processor, (3) 100 mL beaker containing sludge, (4) magnetic stirrer device, and (5) stir bar.
Engproc 19 00007 g001
Figure 2. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS removal with different treatment processes. Experimental conditions: pH = 4, [H2O2] = 30 mM, [Fe2+] = 2.0 mM, cavitation time 3 s ON: 5 s OFF, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Figure 2. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS removal with different treatment processes. Experimental conditions: pH = 4, [H2O2] = 30 mM, [Fe2+] = 2.0 mM, cavitation time 3 s ON: 5 s OFF, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Engproc 19 00007 g002
Figure 3. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS ratio at different pH (3.0–7.0). Experimental conditions: [H2O2] = 100 mM, [Fe2+] = 2.0 mM, cavitation time 3 s ON: 5 s OFF, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Figure 3. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS ratio at different pH (3.0–7.0). Experimental conditions: [H2O2] = 100 mM, [Fe2+] = 2.0 mM, cavitation time 3 s ON: 5 s OFF, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Engproc 19 00007 g003
Figure 4. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS ratio with different [H2O2] (30 mM–200 mM). Experimental conditions: pH = 4, [Fe2+] = 2.0 mM, cavitation time 3 s ON: 5 s OFF, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Figure 4. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS ratio with different [H2O2] (30 mM–200 mM). Experimental conditions: pH = 4, [Fe2+] = 2.0 mM, cavitation time 3 s ON: 5 s OFF, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Engproc 19 00007 g004
Figure 5. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS removal with different [Fe2+] (0.5 mM–10.0 mM). Experimental conditions: pH = 4, [H2O2] = 30 mM, cavitation time 3 s ON: 5 s OFF, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Figure 5. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS removal with different [Fe2+] (0.5 mM–10.0 mM). Experimental conditions: pH = 4, [H2O2] = 30 mM, cavitation time 3 s ON: 5 s OFF, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Engproc 19 00007 g005
Figure 6. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS removal with different cavitation time ON:OFF (1:5, 2:5, 3:5 and 5:5). Experimental conditions: pH = 4, [H2O2] = 30 mM, [Fe2+] = 2.0 mM, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Figure 6. Evaluation of (a) COD removal and (b) VS/TS removal with different cavitation time ON:OFF (1:5, 2:5, 3:5 and 5:5). Experimental conditions: pH = 4, [H2O2] = 30 mM, [Fe2+] = 2.0 mM, A = 40%, T = 298 K, time = 60 min. Means in bars with different letters represent significant differences (p < 0.05) within VS/TS by comparing wastewaters.
Engproc 19 00007 g006
Table 1. Municipal activated sludge characterization.
Table 1. Municipal activated sludge characterization.
ParametersValues
pH6.48 ± 0.02
Chemical oxygen demand (mg O2/L)8512 ± 394
Total solids (mg/L)3250 ± 1040
Volatile solids (mg/L)1920 ± 75
Volatile solid/Total solids (mg/L)0.59
Electrical conductivity (µS/cm)1249 ± 10
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Santos, C.; Jorge, N.; Teixeira, A.R.; Peres, J.A.; Lucas, M.S. Treatment of Municipal Activated Sludge by Ultrasound-Fenton Process. Eng. Proc. 2022, 19, 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/ECP2022-12666

AMA Style

Santos C, Jorge N, Teixeira AR, Peres JA, Lucas MS. Treatment of Municipal Activated Sludge by Ultrasound-Fenton Process. Engineering Proceedings. 2022; 19(1):7. https://doi.org/10.3390/ECP2022-12666

Chicago/Turabian Style

Santos, Carolina, Nuno Jorge, Ana R. Teixeira, José A. Peres, and Marco S. Lucas. 2022. "Treatment of Municipal Activated Sludge by Ultrasound-Fenton Process" Engineering Proceedings 19, no. 1: 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/ECP2022-12666

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop