LEESU (UMR MA 102, Université Paris-Est, AgroParisTech), 6-8 avenue Blaise Pascal, Champs-sur-Marne, 77455, Marne-la-Vallée Cedex 2, France,
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2014 Apr;21(8):5379-90. doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-2388-0. Epub 2013 Dec 24.
This paper compares the removal performances of two complete wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) for all priority substances listed in the Water Framework Directive and additional compounds of interest including flame retardants, surfactants, pesticides, and personal care products (PCPs) (n = 104). First, primary treatments such as physicochemical lamellar settling (PCLS) and primary settling (PS) are compared. Similarly, biofiltration (BF) and conventional activated sludge (CAS) are then examined. Finally, the removal efficiency per unit of nitrogen removed of both WWTPs for micropollutants is discussed, as nitrogenous pollution treatment results in a special design of processes and operational conditions. For primary treatments, hydrophobic pollutants (log K ow > 4) are well removed (>70 %) for both systems despite high variations of removal. PCLS allows an obvious gain of about 20 % regarding pollutant removals, as a result of better suspended solids elimination and possible coagulant impact on soluble compounds. For biological treatments, variations of removal are much weaker, and the majority of pollutants are comparably removed within both systems. Hydrophobic and volatile compounds are well (>60 %) or very well removed (>80 %) by sorption and volatilization. Some readily biodegradable molecules are better removed by CAS, indicating a better biodegradation. A better sorption of pollutants on activated sludge could be also expected considering the differences of characteristics between a biofilm and flocs. Finally, comparison of global processes efficiency using removals of micropollutants load normalized to nitrogen shows that PCLS + BF is as efficient as PS + CAS despite a higher compactness and a shorter hydraulic retention time (HRT). Only some groups of pollutants seem better removed by PS + CAS like alkylphenols, flame retardants, or di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP), thanks to better biodegradation and sorption resulting from HRT and biomass characteristics. For both processes, and out of the 68 molecules found in raw water, only half of them are still detected in the water discharged, most of the time close to their detection limit. However, some of them are detected at higher concentrations (>1 μg/L and/or lower than environmental quality standards), which is problematic as they represent a threat for aquatic environment.
本文比较了两座完全污水处理厂(WWTP)对《水框架指令》中列出的所有优先物质以及其他关注的化合物(包括阻燃剂、表面活性剂、农药和个人护理产品(PCP))的去除性能(n=104)。首先,比较了物理化学层流沉淀(PCLS)和初次沉淀(PS)等初级处理。然后,分别考察了生物过滤(BF)和传统活性污泥(CAS)。最后,讨论了两座 WWTP 单位脱氮量对微污染物的去除效率,因为含氮污染处理会导致工艺和运行条件的特殊设计。对于初级处理,疏水性污染物(log K ow >4)对于两个系统都被很好地去除(>70%),尽管去除率有很大的变化。PCLS 允许污染物去除率提高约 20%,这是由于更好地去除悬浮物和可能对可溶性化合物施加的凝结剂影响。对于生物处理,去除率的变化要小得多,大多数污染物在两个系统中都被比较好地去除。疏水性和挥发性化合物通过吸附和挥发被很好地(>60%)或非常好地(>80%)去除。一些易于生物降解的分子在 CAS 中被更好地去除,表明生物降解更好。考虑到生物膜和絮体之间的特性差异,预计污染物在活性污泥上的吸附也会更好。最后,使用微污染物负荷归一化去除率对全球工艺效率进行比较表明,尽管 PCLS+BF 的紧凑度更高且水力停留时间(HRT)更短,但它与 PS+CAS 一样有效。只有一些污染物组似乎被 PS+CAS 更好地去除,如烷基酚、阻燃剂或邻苯二甲酸二(2-乙基己基)酯(DEHP),这要归功于更长的 HRT 和生物质特性带来的更好的生物降解和吸附。对于这两种工艺,在原水中发现的 68 种分子中,只有一半仍在排放水中被检测到,大多数情况下接近检测限。然而,其中一些分子的浓度较高(>1μg/L 且/或低于环境质量标准),这是一个问题,因为它们对水生环境构成威胁。