Jessica A. MacDonald, Benjamin Najm, Tzahi Cath and William A. Mitch*,
{"title":"以反渗透为基础的饮用水回用处理系统净化厌氧处理的城市二级污水出水","authors":"Jessica A. MacDonald, Benjamin Najm, Tzahi Cath and William A. Mitch*, ","doi":"10.1021/acsestwater.5c00535","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >As a pretreatment to potable reuse trains, anaerobic secondary treatment could reduce the energy demand and footprint compared to aerobic secondary treatment. Long-term pilot tests linked a reverse osmosis (RO)-based potable reuse treatment system to a pilot-scale staged anaerobic fluidized membrane bioreactor (SAF-MBR). A membrane-aerated bioreactor removed sulfide in SAF-MBR effluent prior to RO. The RO operated for ∼120 days at 15 LMH and 67–83% water recovery, with a final feed pressure during each cycle of ∼9–10 bar. When the final pressure increased to ∼12 bar, chemical cleaning reestablished membrane performance, and a membrane autopsy indicated reversible fouling by biomass and phosphate-based minerals. MS2 bacteriophage spiking tests indicated at least 5–6-log removal each by RO and UV/H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> advanced oxidation process (AOP) treatment at ∼730 mJ/cm<sup>2</sup> average UV fluence. A 1,100 mJ/cm<sup>2</sup> average UV fluence met treatment goals for 1,4-dioxane and indicators for other organic contaminants. Halogenated DBPs in the chlorinated final effluent were ∼5-fold lower than potable reuse trains fed by aerobic secondary effluent. <i>N</i>-Nitrosodimethylamine was well below California’s 10 ng/L Notification Limit. An operating cost comparison indicated that a potable reuse train fed by SAF-MBR effluent ($0.69/m<sup>3</sup>) is cost-competitive to that fed by aerobic secondary effluent ($0.69/m<sup>3</sup>).</p>","PeriodicalId":93847,"journal":{"name":"ACS ES&T water","volume":"5 8","pages":"4877–4886"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Purifying Anaerobically Treated Municipal Secondary Wastewater Effluent by a Reverse Osmosis-Based Potable Reuse Treatment Train\",\"authors\":\"Jessica A. MacDonald, Benjamin Najm, Tzahi Cath and William A. Mitch*, \",\"doi\":\"10.1021/acsestwater.5c00535\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >As a pretreatment to potable reuse trains, anaerobic secondary treatment could reduce the energy demand and footprint compared to aerobic secondary treatment. Long-term pilot tests linked a reverse osmosis (RO)-based potable reuse treatment system to a pilot-scale staged anaerobic fluidized membrane bioreactor (SAF-MBR). A membrane-aerated bioreactor removed sulfide in SAF-MBR effluent prior to RO. The RO operated for ∼120 days at 15 LMH and 67–83% water recovery, with a final feed pressure during each cycle of ∼9–10 bar. When the final pressure increased to ∼12 bar, chemical cleaning reestablished membrane performance, and a membrane autopsy indicated reversible fouling by biomass and phosphate-based minerals. MS2 bacteriophage spiking tests indicated at least 5–6-log removal each by RO and UV/H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> advanced oxidation process (AOP) treatment at ∼730 mJ/cm<sup>2</sup> average UV fluence. A 1,100 mJ/cm<sup>2</sup> average UV fluence met treatment goals for 1,4-dioxane and indicators for other organic contaminants. Halogenated DBPs in the chlorinated final effluent were ∼5-fold lower than potable reuse trains fed by aerobic secondary effluent. <i>N</i>-Nitrosodimethylamine was well below California’s 10 ng/L Notification Limit. An operating cost comparison indicated that a potable reuse train fed by SAF-MBR effluent ($0.69/m<sup>3</sup>) is cost-competitive to that fed by aerobic secondary effluent ($0.69/m<sup>3</sup>).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS ES&T water\",\"volume\":\"5 8\",\"pages\":\"4877–4886\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS ES&T water\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsestwater.5c00535\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS ES&T water","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsestwater.5c00535","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Purifying Anaerobically Treated Municipal Secondary Wastewater Effluent by a Reverse Osmosis-Based Potable Reuse Treatment Train
As a pretreatment to potable reuse trains, anaerobic secondary treatment could reduce the energy demand and footprint compared to aerobic secondary treatment. Long-term pilot tests linked a reverse osmosis (RO)-based potable reuse treatment system to a pilot-scale staged anaerobic fluidized membrane bioreactor (SAF-MBR). A membrane-aerated bioreactor removed sulfide in SAF-MBR effluent prior to RO. The RO operated for ∼120 days at 15 LMH and 67–83% water recovery, with a final feed pressure during each cycle of ∼9–10 bar. When the final pressure increased to ∼12 bar, chemical cleaning reestablished membrane performance, and a membrane autopsy indicated reversible fouling by biomass and phosphate-based minerals. MS2 bacteriophage spiking tests indicated at least 5–6-log removal each by RO and UV/H2O2 advanced oxidation process (AOP) treatment at ∼730 mJ/cm2 average UV fluence. A 1,100 mJ/cm2 average UV fluence met treatment goals for 1,4-dioxane and indicators for other organic contaminants. Halogenated DBPs in the chlorinated final effluent were ∼5-fold lower than potable reuse trains fed by aerobic secondary effluent. N-Nitrosodimethylamine was well below California’s 10 ng/L Notification Limit. An operating cost comparison indicated that a potable reuse train fed by SAF-MBR effluent ($0.69/m3) is cost-competitive to that fed by aerobic secondary effluent ($0.69/m3).