Department of Biomedical, Chemical, and Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Cincinnati, 701 Engineering Research Center, 2901 Woodside Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0012, USA.
Department of Biomedical, Chemical, and Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Cincinnati, 701 Engineering Research Center, 2901 Woodside Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0012, USA.
J Environ Sci (China). 2017 Jul;57:54-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jes.2016.12.008. Epub 2016 Dec 29.
This study investigated the removal of hydrophobic trichloroethylene (TCE) in the presence of methanol (co-metabolite) in a biotrickling filter, which was seeded with fungi at pH4. Starvation was chosen as the biomass control strategy. Two systems, Biofilter I (methanol:TCE 70:30) and Biofilter II (methanol:TCE 80:20) were run in parallel, each with varying composition ratios. The TCE loading rates for both biofilters ranged from 3.22 to 12.88g/m/hr. Depending on the ratio, methanol concentrations varied from 4.08 to 27.95g/m/hr. The performance of the systems was evaluated and compared by calculating removal kinetics, carbon mass balance, efficiencies and elimination capacities. Methanol was observed to enhance TCE removal during the initial loading rate. However, methanol later inhibited TCE degradation above 6.44g TCE/m/hr (Biofilter I) and 3.22g TCE/m/hr (Biofilter II). Conversely, TCE did not impede methanol removal because over 95% methanol elimination was consistently achieved. Overall, Biofilter I was able to outperform Biofilter II due to its greater resistance towards methanol competition.
本研究在 pH4 条件下,以真菌为接种物的生物滴滤器中考察了甲醇(共代谢物)存在时对疏水性三氯乙烯(TCE)的去除情况。选择饥饿作为生物量控制策略。两个系统,生物滤池 I(甲醇:TCE 为 70:30)和生物滤池 II(甲醇:TCE 为 80:20)平行运行,每个系统的组成比都不同。两个生物滤池的 TCE 负荷率范围为 3.22 至 12.88g/m/hr。根据比例的不同,甲醇浓度范围为 4.08 至 27.95g/m/hr。通过计算去除动力学、碳质量平衡、效率和去除容量来评估和比较系统的性能。在初始负荷率下,甲醇被观察到能增强 TCE 的去除。然而,当 TCE 负荷率超过 6.44g TCE/m/hr(生物滤池 I)和 3.22g TCE/m/hr(生物滤池 II)时,甲醇随后抑制了 TCE 的降解。相反,TCE 并没有阻碍甲醇的去除,因为始终实现了超过 95%的甲醇去除率。总体而言,由于对甲醇竞争的更大抗性,生物滤池 I 能够优于生物滤池 II。