Abatement of sulfide generation in sewage by glutaraldehyde supplementation and the impact on the activated sludge accordingly

doi:10.1007/s11783-014-0645-1

Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.

2015, Vol. 9

Issue (2) : 365-370 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-014-0645-1

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Abatement of sulfide generation in sewage by glutaraldehyde supplementation and the impact on the activated sludge accordingly

Lehua ZHANG¹,Jingxing MA²,Yinchen JIN¹,Haiqin ZHANG¹,Yongdi LIU¹,Lankun Cai^1,^*(

)

1. State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Environmental Risk Assessment and Control on Chemical Process, School of Resources and Environmental Engineering, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, China
2. Department of Water Pollution Control, Universite Libre de Bruxelles, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium

Download: PDF(142 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

Hydrogen sulfide emission in sewer systems is associated with toxicity, corrosion, odour nuisance and high costs treatment. In this study, a novel method to inhibit sulfide generation from sewage by means of glutaraldehyde supplementation has been suggested and evaluated under anaerobic conditions. Different concentrations of glutaraldehyde at 10, 15, 20, 30 and 40 mg·L^-1 have been investigated. Besides, the possible impacts of glutaraldehyde supplementation on an activated sludge system and an appraisal of the economic aspects are presented as well. As observed from the experimental results, a dosage of 20 mg·L^-1 glutaraldehyde resulted in a significant decrease of the sulfide production by 70%–80% in the simulated sewage. Moreover, the impacts of additional glutaraldehyde at 20 mg·L^-1 on activated sludge, in terms of chemical oxygen demand removal and oxygen uptake rates, were negligible. From an economical point of view, the cost of the commercial glutaraldehyde products required in the operation, which was calculated on the basis of activated sulfide removal avoidance, was around €3.7–4.6 S·kg^-1. Therefore it is suggested that glutaraldehyde supplementation is a feasible technique to abate the sulfide problems in sewer systems. Yet further research is required to elucidate the optimum “booster” dosage and the dosing frequency in situ accordingly.

Keywords corrosion glutaraldehyde sulfate-reducing bacteria sulfide urban sewage

Corresponding Author(s): Lankun Cai

Online First Date: 18 February 2014 Issue Date: 13 February 2015

Cite this article:

Lehua ZHANG,Jingxing MA,Yinchen JIN, et al. Abatement of sulfide generation in sewage by glutaraldehyde supplementation and the impact on the activated sludge accordingly[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(2): 365-370.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-014-0645-1
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2015/V9/I2/365

Tab.1 Characteristics of simulated sewage

Fig.1 Sulfide production in simulated sewage supplemented with different concentrations of glutaraldehyde and inoculated with the anaerobic sludge from Changqiao WWTP (a) and ECUST WWTP(b)

Fig.2 COD of sewage at different glutaraldehyde concentrations after inoculation with aerobic activated sludge

Fig.3 DO concentrations in the supernatant of a reactor inoculated with aerobic activated sludge at different glutaraldehyde concentrations

1	US EPA. Process design manual for sulfide control in sanitary sewer systems. EPA Number: 625174005, 1974
2	Vincke E, Boon N, Verstraete W. Analysis of the microbial communities on corroded concrete sewer pipes–a case study. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2001, 57(5–6): 776–785 https://doi.org/10.1007/s002530100826 pmid: 11778893
3	Tomar M, Abdullah T. Evaluation of chemicals to control the generation of malodorous hydrogen-sulfide in waste-water. Water Research, 1994, 28(12): 2545–2552 https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(94)90072-8
4	Hvitved-Jacobsen T. Sewer systems and processes–microbial and chemical process engineering of sewer networks. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2002, 237–238
5	Zhang L H, de Schryver P, de Gusseme B, de Muynck W, Boon N, Verstraete W. Chemical and biological technologies for hydrogen sulfide emission control in sewer systems: a review. Water Research, 2008, 42(1–2): 1–12 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2007.07.013 pmid: 17692889
6	Boon A G. Septicity in sewers: causes, consequences and containment. Water Science and Technology, 1995, 31(7): 237–253 https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-1223(95)00341-J
7	Boon A G, Alison J V, Boon G K. Avoiding the problems of septic sewage. Water Science and Technology, 1998, 37(1): 223–231 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0273-1223(97)00773-7
8	Bentzen G, Smith A T, Bennet D, Webster N J, Reinholt F, Sletholt E, Hobson J. Controlled dosing of nitrate for prevention of H2S in a sewer network and the effects on the subsequent treatment process. Water Science and Technology, 1995, 31(7): 293–302 https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-1223(95)00346-O
9	Londry K L, Suflita J M. Use of nitrate to control sulfide generation by sulfate-reducing bacteria associated with oily waste. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, 1999, 22(6): 582–589 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jim.2900668 pmid: 10455484
10	Hobson J, Yang G. The ability of selected chemicals for suppressing odour development in rinsing mains. Water Science and Technology, 2000, 41(6): 165–173
11	Gutierrez O, Mohanakrishnan J, Sharma K R, Meyer R L, Keller J, Yuan Z. Evaluation of oxygen injection as a means of controlling sulfide production in a sewer system. Water Research, 2008, 42(17): 4549–4561 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2008.07.042 pmid: 18760816
12	Padival N A, Kimbell W A, Redner J A. Use of iron salts to control dissolved sulfide in trunk sewers. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 1995, 121(11): 824–829 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1995)121:11(824)
13	Zhang L H, Mendoza L, Marzorati M, Verstraete W. Inhibition of sulfide generation by dosing formaldehyde and its derivatives in sewage under anaerobic conditions. Water Science and Technology, 2008, 57(6): 915–919 https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2008.087 pmid: 18413953
14	Bowker R P G, Audibert G A, Shah H J, Webster N A. Detection, control, and correction of hydrogen sulfide corrosion in existing wastewater systems. EPA 832-R-92-001, U.S. EPA Office of Water. Washington, D C, USA, 1992
15	Zhang L H, de Gusseme B, Cai LK, de Schryver P, Marzorati M, Boon N, Lens P, Verstraete W. Addition of an aerated iron-rich waste-activated sludge to controlthe soluble sulphide concentration in sewage. Water and Environmental Journal. 2011, 25(1): 106– 115
16	de Gusseme B, de Schryver P, de Cooman M, Verbeken K, Boeckx P, Verstraete W, Boon N. Nitrate-reducing, sulfide-oxidizing bacteria as microbial oxidants for rapid biological sulfide removal. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 2009, 67(1): 151–161 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2008.00598.x pmid: 19120464
17	Hohreiter D W, Rigg D K. Derivation of ambient water quality criteria for formaldehyde. Chemosphere, 2001, 45(4–5): 471–486 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(01)00061-3 pmid: 11680743
18	Azadi S, Klink K J, Meade B J. Divergent immunological responses following glutaraldehyde exposure. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 2004, 197(1): 1–8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2004.01.017 pmid: 15126069
19	US EPA. Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. Method 376.2, US EPA, 1983
20	Jayakrishnan A, Jameela S R. Glutaraldehyde as a fixative in bioprostheses and drug delivery matrices. Biomaterials, 1996, 17(5): 471–484 https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(96)82721-9 pmid: 8991478
21	National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (NOHSC). Approved criteria for classifying hazardous substances, 3rd ed. National Occupational Health and Safety Commission. Canberra, Australia, 2004
22	Bedino J H. Glutaraldehyde: safe use in embalming and exposure concerns as a preferred alternative to formaldehyde. An official publication of the Research and Education Department. Springfield: The Champion Company, 2004, 2650–2661
23	Takigawa T, Endo Y. Effects of glutaraldehyde exposure on human health. Journal of Occupational Health, 2006, 48(2): 75–87 https://doi.org/10.1539/joh.48.75 pmid: 16612035
24	Smith D R, Wang R S. Glutaraldehyde exposure and its occupational impact in the health care environment. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 2006, 11(1): 3–10 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02898201 pmid: 21432369
25	Lutterbach M T S, de Franca F P. Biofilm formation in water cooling systems. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 1996, 12(4): 391–394 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00340217
26	Anchliya A. New nitrate-based treatments-a novel approach to control hydrogen sulfide in reservoir and to increase oil recovery. SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition. Vienna, Austria, 2006
27	Leung H W. Ecotoxicology of glutaraldehyde: review of environmental fate and effects studies. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2001, 49(1): 26–39 https://doi.org/10.1006/eesa.2000.2031 pmid: 11386713

[1]	Shihao Sun, Tipei Jia, Kaiqi Chen, Yongzhen Peng, Liang Zhang. Simultaneous removal of hydrogen sulfide and volatile organic sulfur compounds in off-gas mixture from a wastewater treatment plant using a two-stage bio-trickling filter system[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(4): 60-.
[2]	Huosheng Li, Hongguo Zhang, Jianyou Long, Ping Zhang, Yongheng Chen. Combined Fenton process and sulfide precipitation for removal of heavy metals from industrial wastewater: Bench and pilot scale studies focusing on in-depth thallium removal[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(4): 49-.
[3]	Jun Li, Wentao Li, Gan Luo, Yan Li, Aimin Li. Effect of nitrobenzene on the performance and bacterial community in an expanded granular sludge bed reactor treating high-sulfate organic wastewater[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(1): 6-.
[4]	Dong Huang, Xiuhong Liu, Songzhu Jiang, Hongchen Wang, Junyan Wang, Yuankai Zhang. Current state and future perspectives of sewer networks in urban China[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2018, 12(3): 2-.
[5]	Jianwei Liu, Kaixiong Yang, Lin Li, Jingying Zhang. A full-scale integrated-bioreactor with two zones treating odours from sludge thickening tank and dewatering house: performance and microbial characteristics[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2017, 11(4): 6-.
[6]	Yu Qi, Jin Li, Rui Liang, Sitong Ji, Jianxiang Li, Meng Liu. Chemical additives affect sulfate reducing bacteria biofilm properties adsorbed on stainless steel 316L surface in circulating cooling water system[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2017, 11(2): 14-.
[7]	Juan QIU,Ping NING,Xueqian WANG,Kai LI,Wei LIU,Wei CHEN,Langlang WANG. Removing carbonyl sulfide with metal-modified activated carbon[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2016, 10(1): 11-18.
[8]	Fen LI,Tao LEI,Yanping ZHANG,Jinzhi WEI,Ying YANG. Preparation, characterization of sludge adsorbent and investigations on its removal of hydrogen sulfide under room temperature[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(2): 190-196.
[9]	Haitao WANG. Ozone kinetics of dimethyl sulfide in the presence of water vapor[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 2013, 7(6): 833-835.
[10]	Daoroong SUNGTHONG, Debra R. REINHART. Control of hydrogen sulfide emissions using autotrophic denitrification landfill biocovers: engineering applications[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng Chin, 2011, 5(2): 149-158.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed