TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative modeling of biological nutrient removal from landfill leachate using a circulating fluidized bed bioreactor (CFBBR)
AU - Eldyasti, Ahmed
AU - Andalib, Mehran
AU - Hafez, Hisham
AU - Nakhla, George
AU - Zhu, Jesse
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors gratefully acknowledge Trojan Technologies, Canada, Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Ontario Center of Excellence (OCE), Canada, and City of London, ON, Canada for their endless support and interest at every stage of this research project.
PY - 2011/3/15
Y1 - 2011/3/15
N2 - Steady state operational data from a pilot scale circulating fluidized bed bioreactor (CFBBR) during biological treatment of landfill leachate, at empty bed contact times (EBCTs) of 0.49, and 0.41d and volumetric nutrients loading rates of 2.2-2.6kgCOD/(m3d), 0.7-0.8kgN/(m3d), and 0.014-0.016kgP/(m3d), was used to calibrate and compare developed process models in BioWin® and AQUIFAS®. BioWin® and AQUIFAS® were both capable of predicting most of the performance parameters such as effluent TKN, NH4-N, NO3-N, TP, PO4-P, TSS, and VSS with an average percentage error (APE) of 0-20%. BioWin® underpredicted the effluent BOD and SBOD values for various runs by 80% while AQUIFAS® predicted effluent BOD and SBOD with an APE of 50%. Although both calibrated models, confirmed the advantages of the CFBBR technology in treating the leachate of high volumetric loading and low biomass yields due to the long solid retention time (SRT), both BioWin® and AQUIFAS® predicted the total biomass and SRT of CFBBR based on active biomass only, whereas in the CFBBR runs both active as well as inactive biomass accumulated.
AB - Steady state operational data from a pilot scale circulating fluidized bed bioreactor (CFBBR) during biological treatment of landfill leachate, at empty bed contact times (EBCTs) of 0.49, and 0.41d and volumetric nutrients loading rates of 2.2-2.6kgCOD/(m3d), 0.7-0.8kgN/(m3d), and 0.014-0.016kgP/(m3d), was used to calibrate and compare developed process models in BioWin® and AQUIFAS®. BioWin® and AQUIFAS® were both capable of predicting most of the performance parameters such as effluent TKN, NH4-N, NO3-N, TP, PO4-P, TSS, and VSS with an average percentage error (APE) of 0-20%. BioWin® underpredicted the effluent BOD and SBOD values for various runs by 80% while AQUIFAS® predicted effluent BOD and SBOD with an APE of 50%. Although both calibrated models, confirmed the advantages of the CFBBR technology in treating the leachate of high volumetric loading and low biomass yields due to the long solid retention time (SRT), both BioWin® and AQUIFAS® predicted the total biomass and SRT of CFBBR based on active biomass only, whereas in the CFBBR runs both active as well as inactive biomass accumulated.
KW - AQUIFAS
KW - BioWin
KW - Circulating fluidized bed
KW - Denitrification
KW - Landfill leachate
KW - Nitrification
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951849536&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.12.115
DO - 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.12.115
M3 - Article
C2 - 21255923
AN - SCOPUS:79951849536
SN - 0304-3894
VL - 187
SP - 140
EP - 149
JO - Journal of Hazardous Materials
JF - Journal of Hazardous Materials
IS - 1-3
ER -
