Biological activated carbon (BAC) and membrane bioreactor (MBR) were systematically compared for the drinking water treatment from slightly polluted raw water under the same hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 0.5 h. MBR exhibited excellent turbidity removal capacity due to the separation of the membrane; while only 60% of influent turbidity was intercepted by BAC. Perfect nitrification was achieved by MBR with the 89% reduction in ammonia; by contrast, BAC only eliminated a moderate amount of influent ammonia (by 54.5%). However, BAC was able to remove more dissolved organic matter (DOM, especially for organic molecules of 3,000 ∼ 500 Daltons) and corresponding disinfection by-product formation potential (DBPFP) in raw water than MBR. Unfortunately, particulate organic matter (POM) was detected in the BAC effluent. On the other hand, BAC and MBR displayed essentially the same capacity for biodegradable organic matter (BOM) removal. Fractionation of DOM showed that the removal efficiencies of hydrophobic neutrals, hydrophobic acids, weakly hydrophobic acids and hydrophilic organic matter through BAC treatment were 11.7%, 8.8%, 13.9% and 4.8% higher than that through MBR; while MBR achieved 13.8% higher hydrophobic bases removal as compared with BAC.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
Research Article|
September 01 2009
Comparison of biological activated carbon (BAC) and membrane bioreactor (MBR) for pollutants removal in drinking water treatment
J. Y. Tian;
1State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment (SKLUWRE), Harbin Institute of Technology, No. 73 Huanghe Road, Nangang District, Harbin 150090, China E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
Z. L. Chen;
Z. L. Chen
1State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment (SKLUWRE), Harbin Institute of Technology, No. 73 Huanghe Road, Nangang District, Harbin 150090, China E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
H. Liang;
H. Liang
1State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment (SKLUWRE), Harbin Institute of Technology, No. 73 Huanghe Road, Nangang District, Harbin 150090, China E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
X. Li;
X. Li
2The College of Architecture & Civil Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, 100 Pingleyuan Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022, China E-mail: [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
Z. Z. Wang;
Z. Z. Wang
1State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment (SKLUWRE), Harbin Institute of Technology, No. 73 Huanghe Road, Nangang District, Harbin 150090, China E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
G. B. Li
G. B. Li
1State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment (SKLUWRE), Harbin Institute of Technology, No. 73 Huanghe Road, Nangang District, Harbin 150090, China E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Search for other works by this author on:
Water Sci Technol (2009) 60 (6): 1515–1523.
Citation
J. Y. Tian, Z. L. Chen, H. Liang, X. Li, Z. Z. Wang, G. B. Li; Comparison of biological activated carbon (BAC) and membrane bioreactor (MBR) for pollutants removal in drinking water treatment. Water Sci Technol 1 September 2009; 60 (6): 1515–1523. doi: https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2009.481
Download citation file:
Sign in
Don't already have an account? Register
Client Account
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Could not validate captcha. Please try again.
eBook
Pay-Per-View Access
$38.00