0% found this document useful (0 votes)
71 views35 pages

PDF

This document provides an acknowledgement and abstract for a thesis on investigating inhibition of sulphate reducing bacteria (SRB) using ferric chloride in an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor treating sulphate enriched wastewater. The acknowledgement thanks various individuals and organizations for their support. The abstract summarizes that ferric chloride was added to the reactor at different COD/SO42- ratios and FeCl3 dosages to inhibit SRB. Scanning electron microscopy images showed the effect of FeCl3 on sludge morphology and SRB presence. Ferric chloride addition improved methane yield production.

Uploaded by

Umar Farouq
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
71 views35 pages

PDF

This document provides an acknowledgement and abstract for a thesis on investigating inhibition of sulphate reducing bacteria (SRB) using ferric chloride in an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor treating sulphate enriched wastewater. The acknowledgement thanks various individuals and organizations for their support. The abstract summarizes that ferric chloride was added to the reactor at different COD/SO42- ratios and FeCl3 dosages to inhibit SRB. Scanning electron microscopy images showed the effect of FeCl3 on sludge morphology and SRB presence. Ferric chloride addition improved methane yield production.

Uploaded by

Umar Farouq
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 35

iii

Dedicated to my beloved mother, Allahyarham father, and supportive family.


iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the name of ALLAH S.W.T, the most gracious, the most compassionate.
Alhamdulillah, first and foremost, thanks Allah S.W.T. for giving me the passion and
strength to complete this thesis within the time.

I would like to express my gratitude to Prof Madya Dr Muhammad Ali


Muhammad Yuzir and Dr Norhayati Abdullah for being my advisor for the past 2
years. Thank you for introducing me to the exciting world of anaerobic wastewater
treatment. Both of you always seemed to provide me with the right degree of
guidance in order to keep me motivated and continuing on the path to my research.

I would like to thank to all environmental lab student and staff at Department
of Civil Engineering in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, especially to Ain, Budi, En.
Azreen, and En Razali who helps me a lot during the sampling process and
laboratory work. Furthermore, this research could not have been performed without
important funding sources, Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS), awarded
from Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia (KPT).

I would like to express my gratitude to Mr Hairil and Mr Zul for providing


the sewage sludge from Indah Water Konsortium (IWK), wastewater treatment
treatment plant, Ulu Tiram, Johor for research purposes. In addition, I would like to
thank to Kak Atiqah and Ang because helping me for several months in lab teaching
me on how to grow pure cultures anaerobically.

And finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my beloved family
and all my fellow friends, who always provide me encouragement and spiritual
support. It absolutely helped me to show up for work, even at times when I was less
than enthusiastic about research. Thank you so much. May ALLH S.W.T rewards
you with goodness. Jazakumullahu khairan kathira. As salam.
v

ABSTRACT

Sulphate is a common constituent of industrial or domestic effluent and sometimes


presents in high concentration. In anaerobic treatment, the reduction of sulphate to sulphide by
sulphate reducing bacteria (SRB) leads to a number of problems. One of the major problems is
low methane production. In order to retrieve successful anaerobic treatment of sulphate enriched
wastewater, it is essential to control sulphate reduction in anaerobic digestion processes.
Therefore, the aim of this research is to investigate the inhibition of SRB using ferric chloride
(FeCl3) in an Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) reactor treating sulphate enriched
wastewater. The UASB performance was observed based on pH, soluble chemical oxygen
demand (sCOD) removal efficiency, total volatile fatty acids (VFAs), methane production,
composition and yield. A 4 litres UASB was operated under anaerobic conditions using synthetic
wastewater for 120 days. The study was carried out in two phases. Phase 1 investigated the
performance of UASB during start-up period. Phase 2 investigated the ability of FeCl 3 to inhibit

SRB in anaerobic treatment of sulphate enriched wastewater at COD/SO 42- ratios of 5.3, 2.5 and
1.3. Results showed that sCOD removal efficiency during the start-up period was more than 80%

and methane production and composition observed were 9 L.day -1 and 67(±2%), respectively.
Results of Phase 2 showed that sCOD removal efficiency average values were 78%, 80% and

70%. Methane yield average values were 0.9, 1.2 and 1.3 L CH 4.gCODdestroyed-1 when FeCl3
dosage of 10.2, 22.2 and 44.5 mM respectively were used. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM)
was used to observe the microbial morphology of anaerobic sludge. The result showed that when

UASB was operated at COD/SO42- ratio of 1.3, abundant of filamentous rods and long-rod shape

bacterium were dominantly attached to the sludge compared to COD/SO 42- ratio of 2.5. The
sludge consisted mainly of rod-shape bacteria which presumably referred to the common shape
of SRBs species. However, when UASB was added with FeCl 3 at dosage of 22.2 mM and 44.5
mM, the sludge contained no rod-shape bacteria and the morphology of sludge showed the
presence of iron sulphide precipitated. The addition of FeCl 3 promotes substantially to an even
higher methane yield production.
vi

ABSTRAK

Sulfat adalah komponen lazim di dalam effluen perindustrian atau domestik dan
kadang-kadang hadir dalam kepekatan yang tinggi. Di dalam rawatan secara anaerobik,
pengurangan sulfat kepada sulfida oleh bakteria pengurangan sulfat (SRB) akan membawa
kepada beberapa masalah. Salah satu dari masalah utama adalah penjanaan metana yang
rendah. Langkah mengawal pengurangan sulfat di dalam proses pencernaan anaerobik adalah
amat penting. Oleh itu, tujuan kajian ini dijalankan adalah untuk menyiasat perencatan SRB
dengan menggunakan ferik klorida (FeCl 3) dalam reaktor anaerobik enapcemar alir naik
(UASB) bagi merawat air sisa yang mengandungi kandungan sulfat yang tinggi. Prestasi
UASB dinilai berdasarkan pH, permintaan oksigen kimia (sCOD) terlarut, jumlah asid lemak
meruap (VFAs), komposisi dan penjanaan gas metana. Sebuah UASB yang berisipadu
sebanyak 4 liter telah beroperasi dalam keadaan anaerobik dengan menggunakan air sisa
sintetik selama 120 hari. Kajian ini telah dijalankan dalam dua fasa. Fasa 1 dijalankan bagi
menilai prestasi UASB pada tempoh permulaan. Fasa 2 pula dijalankan untuk menyiasat
keupayaan FeCl3 untuk merencat SRB dalam kaedah rawatan secara anaerobik bagi air sisa
yang mengandungi kandungan sulfat pada nisbah COD/SO 42- sebanyak 5.3, 2.5 dan 1.3.
Keputusan menunjukkan bahawa kecekapan penyingkiran sCOD adalah lebih daripada 80%
dan pengeluaran dan komposisi gas metana dicatat adalah 9 L.hari -1 dan 67 (± 2%).
Keputusan kajian Fasa 2 pula menunjukkan bahawa purata kecekapan penyingkiran sCOD
adalah 78%, 80% dan 70%, manakala purata penghasilan gas metana adalah sebanyak 0.9,
1.2 dan 1.3 L CH4.gCODtermusnah-1 apabila dos FeCl3 ditambah masing-masing pada 10.2, 22.2
dan 44.5 mM. Mikroskop imbasan elektron (SEM) telah digunakan untuk melihat morfologi
mikrob dalam enapcemar anaerobik. Keputusan menunjukkan apabila UASB beroperasi
pada nisbah COD/SO42- 1.3, lebih banyak bakteria rod berfilamen dan rod panjang yang
dominan telah melekat pada enapcemar berbanding pada nisbah COD/SO 42- 2.5. Enapcemar
tersebut yang terdiri daripada bakteria berbentuk rod yang sama dengan bentuk kebiasaan
spesies SRBs. Walau bagaimanapun, apabila UASB ditambah dengan FeCl 3 pada dos 22.2
mM dan 44.5 mM, enapcemar didapati bebas daripada kandungan bakteria berbentuk rod
dan kehadiran ferik sulfida dapat dilihat pada morfologi enapcemar. Penambahan FeCl 3
didapati dapat menggalakkan penjanaan gas metana yang lebih tinggi.
vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE


DECLARATION ii

DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES xi
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
LIST OF ABBREVATIONS xvii
1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Problem Statements 3

1.3 Objective of the Study 3

1.4 Scope of Study 4

1.5 Significances of Study 4

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 5

2.1 Introduction 5
2.2 Anaerobic Digestion 5

2.3 Advantages of Anaerobic Digestion 7

2.4 Limitations of Anaeobic Digestion 9


viii
2.5 Stages of Anaerobic Digestion 10

2.6 Microbiology of anaerobic digestion 11

2.7 Anaerobic digestion variants 14

2.8 Types of anaerobic reactors 15

2.9 Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket 17

2.9.1 Treatment principles and concept 17

2.9.2 Granular sludge 20

2.10 Environmental conditions in anaerobic digestion 21

2.10.1 pH and alkalinity 21

2.10.2 Temperature 22

2.10.3 Nutrient requirements 22

2.10.4 Toxicity and inhibitions 23

2.11 Important process parametes 26

2.11.1 Organic loading 26

2.11.2 Hydraulic loading 27

2.11.3 Mixing 27

2.11.4 Feed characteristic 27

2.12 Sulphate enriched wastewater 28

2.12.1 Competition between sulphate reducing bacteria and

methane producing bacteria in sulphate rich anaerobic


treatment 29
2.12.2 Sulphate reduction 33

2.12.3 Sulphide toxicity 36

2.12.4 Inhibition of sulphate reducing bacteria sulphide

toxicity 37
2.13 Summary of literature review 40
ix
3 MATERIALS AND METHODS 42

3.1 Introduction 42
3.2 Experimental Design 42

3.3 Experimental Materials 43

3.3.1 Details of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) 43

3.4 Methods 47

3.4.1 Feeds and nutrients 47

3.4.2 Feeding during start-up phase 49

3.4.3 Feeding during treatment sulphate enriched wastewater 49

3.4.4 Seeding the Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) 50

3.4.5 Sampling and analysis 51

3.4.5.1 Detection of sulphate reducing bacteria using

Sani - Check SRB 52


3.4.5.2 Hungate’s rolling tube method for isolation

sulphate reducing bacteria 53


3.4.5.3 Cell fixation for scanning electron microspopy

(SEM) 54
3.4.5.4 Soluble chemical oxygen demand (sCOD) 56

3.4.5.5 pH 58

3.4.5.6 Total suspended solid and volatile suspended

solid 58
3.4.5.7 Volatile fatty acid 60

3.4.5.8 Sulphate 61

3.4.5.9 Bubble counter meter 61

3.4.9.10Biogas analysis 62

4 OPERATIONAL START-UP OF UASB TREATING

SYNTHETIC WASTEWATER 64
4.1 pH 64
x
4.2 Soluble COD removal 65

4.3 Total volatile fatty acid (VFAs) 67

4.4 Methane production and composition 69

4.5 Total suspended solid and volatile suspended solid 70

5 TREATMENT OF SULPHATE ENRICHED WASTEWATER

AND SULPHATE ENRICHED WASTEWATER AND


INHIBITION OF SULPHATE REDUCING BACTERIA
USING FERRIC CHLORIDE IN UPFLOW ANAEROBIC
SLUDGE BLANKET 72
5.1 pH 72
5.2 Soluble COD removal 73
5.3 Total volatile fatty acids (VFAs) 75

5.4 Methane production and composition 77

5.5 Total suspended solid and volatile suspended solid 81

5.6 Sulphate reduction 82

6 MICROBIOLOGICAL STUDY FOR BACTERIA IN

UPFLOW ANAEROBIC SLUDGEBLANKET 85


6.1 Detection of sulphate reducing bacteria using Sani-Check
SRB kit 85
6.2 Isolation of sulphate reducing bacteria 87
6.3 Microscopic study using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) 89
7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 94

7.1 Conclusions 94
7.2 Recommendations 96
REFERENCES 98

APPENDICES A-B 115-118


xi

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE


2.1 Types of anaerobic bioreactor 15

2.2 Anaerobic bioreactor treating high strength wastewater. 16

2.3 Typical characteristics of sulphate-enriched industrial 29

wastewaters.
2.4 Stoichiometry and Standard Free Enthalpy Change for 35

Sulfate-Reducing, Acetogenic, and Methanogenic


Reactions (Thauer et al., 1977)(ΔGᵒ ҆ at 37ᵒC in
kJ/reaction).
2.5 Measures to reduce the reactor sulphide concentration. 40

Thus allowing the integration of methanogenesis and


sulphate reduction (Pol et al., 1989).
3.1 Composition of synthetic wastewater for UASB 48

anaerobic bioreactor.
3.2 Summary of the UASB operating conditions during start- 49

up
3.3 Summary of the UASB operating conditions during 50

treatment of sulphate enriched wastewater


3.4 Analysis and sampling schedule. 51

3.5 Composition of Postgate’C medium for growth and 53

isolation of sulphate reducing bacteria (SRB)


3.6 Summary of reactor sampling schedule of UASB system 55

for SEM study on day 50, 85, 96, 105 and 120
3.7 General fixation schedule for sludge cell 55

4.1 Summary of the UASB operating conditions during start- 66

up
xii

6.1 Consortium of sulphate reducing bacteria (SRB) in 86


anaerobic sludge taken from Indah Water Konsortium
(IWK), sewerage treatment plant.
6.2 Total numbers of identified colonies from serially 87

diluted anaerobic sludge sample using Rolling Tube


Technique (Hungate, 1969).
xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE


2.1 Carbon flow to methane in anaerobic digesters with the 13

microorganism responsible for each step. Sources from


Guher and Zehnder, 1983.
2.2 Schematic Diagram of an Upflow Anaerobic Sludge 18

Blanket (UASB) reactor (Sources from Chernicharo,


2007).
2.3 Scheme of anaerobic degradation of organic compounds 30

in the presence of sulphate.


3.1 Experimental framework 44

3.2 Schematic Experimental set-up 45

3.3 Close-up of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) 45

during start-up
3.4 Detail design of Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) 46
3.5 Sani-Check sulphate reducing bacteria test kit 52

3.6 a) Fresh Postgate’C medium; b) Clear medium turn to 54

black indicates the SRBs growth; c) Solidified agar


3.7 HACH DRB 200 57

3.8 HACH DR 5000 UV-Vis Spectrophotometer 57

3.9 pH meter 58

3.10 Dual Head Pump 59

3.11 Oven 59

3.12 Digital Muffle Furnace 60

3.13 Bubble counter meter 62


xiv

3.14 Portable Biogas Analyzer, GeoTech 5000 63


4.1 Influent and effluent pH profile in UASB during reactor 65

start-up.
4.2 Contribution of soluble chemical oxygen demand 66

(sCOD) within in reactor and effluent (mg.L-1) and total


COD removal (%) of the UASB reactor at different
organic loading rate (OLR).
4.3 Total volatile fatty acids (VFAs) concentration in reactor 68

and effluent at different organic loading rate (OLR).


4.4 Methane production and composition at different organic 70

loading rate (OLR).


4.5 Total Suspended Solid (VSS) and Total Suspended Solid 71

(TSS)
5.1 pH profiles in UASB and effluent in each OLR at 72
2-
different COD/SO4 . Legends above the graph represent
2-
the COD/SO4 ratio and dosage of FeCl3 added during
the operational reactor shown by the dashed line.
5.2 Contribution of soluble COD profile within in reactor 74
-1
and effluent (mg.L ) and total COD removal (%) of the
2-
UASB at different COD/SO4 . Legends above the graph
2-
represent the COD/SO4 ratio and dosage of FeCl3 added
during the operational reactor shown by the dashed line.
5.3 Total VFAs concentration profile in reactor and effluents 76
2-
of UASB at different COD/SO4 . Legends above the
2-
graph represent the COD/SO4 ratio and dosage of FeCl3
(mM) added during the operational reactor shown by the
dashed line.
5.4 Methane productions in each OLR of UASB at different 77
2-
COD/SO4 . Legends above the graph represent the
2-
COD/SO4 ratio and dosage of FeCl3 (mM) added
during the operational reactor shown by the dashed line.
5.5 Proportion of CH4 (%) and H2S (ppm) in the biogas at 78
2-
different COD/SO4 . Legends above the graph represent
2-
the COD/SO4 ratio and dosage of FeCl3 (mM) added
during the operational reactor shown by the dashed line.
5.6 2- 80
Methane yield in each COD/SO4 ratio of UASB at

different OLR. Legends above the graph represent the


xv

2-
COD/SO4 ratio and dosage of FeCl3 (mM) added
during the operational reactor shown by the dashed line.

5.7 Total Suspended Solid (TSS) and Volatile suspended 82


solid (VSS) of mixed liquor in UASB throughout the
experiments. Legends above the graph represent the
2-
COD/SO4 ratio and dosage of FeCl3 (mM) added
during the operational reactor shown by the dashed line.
5.8 Contribution of sulphate within in reactor and effluent 83
-1
(mg.L ) and sulphate removal efficiencies (%) in
Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) at different
2-
COD/SO4 . Legends above the graph represent the
2-
COD/SO4 ratio and dosage of FeCl3 (mM) added
during the operational reactor shown by the dashed line.
6.1 -3 -4 89
Growth of SRB colonies isolated from 10 and 10

dilution factor. SRB were inoculated and grown on


Postgate’s C medium using Hungate’s techniques.
6.2 Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) showing the 91

microstructure looks like shape of granules during start-


up on day 50 (1500 x magnification).
6.3 Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) showing the 91

microstructure of sludge of at COD/SO42- ratio of 2.5 on


day 76 (10 000 x magnification).
6.4 Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) showing the 92

microstructure of sludge treatment with FeCl3 dosage of


22.2 mM on day 86 (1000 x magnification).
6.5 Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) showing the 92

microstructure of sludge at COD/SO42- ratio of 1.3 on


day 96 (5000 x magnification).
6.6 Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) showing the 93

microstructure of sludge after treatment with FeCl3


dosage of 44.5 mM on day 120 (1000 x magnification).
6.7 Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) was taken from 93

different angles of Figure 6.6a showed iron sulphide


precipitated on day 120 (10 000 x magnification).
xvii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

UASB - Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket


APHA - American Public Health Association
COD - Chemical Oxygen Demand
sCOD - Soluble Chemical Oxygen Demand
2- - Sulphate
SO4
- Sulphide
S2-
2- - COD to sulphate ratio
COD/SO4
2- - Potassium Sulphate
K2SO4
FeCl3 - Ferric Chloride
mM - milimolar
CH4 - Methane
H2S - Hydrogen Sulphide
VFA - Volatile Fatty Acids
OLR - Organic Loading Rate
HRT - Hydraulic Retention Time
TSS - Total Suspended Solid
VSS - Volatile Suspended Solid
SMP - Soluble Microbial Poduct
SRB - Sulphate Reducing Bacteria
MPB - Methane Producing Bacteria
SEM - Scanning Electron Microscopic
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Nowadays, residential and industrial sector in Malaysia generates a large amount


of wastewater which may affect the environmental life. Wastewater from these sources
often contains chemicals which need a proper treatment before discharged to the
receiving water such as river or stream. Wastewater treatment processes are divided into
three major types: physical, chemical and biological. Biological treatment processes have
found wide application in the treatment of domestic and industrial wastewater. Biological
processes are substantially cheaper compared to physical or chemical methods. There are
two major types of the biological methods used, namely aerobic and anaerobic processes.
Aerobic process was very popular back in 1960s (Visser, 1995). However, due to energy
crisis in the early 1970s, anaerobic digestion processes was almost exclusively used for
the digestion of sewage sludge.

Anaerobic system has more advantages compared to aerobic proces such as a low
investment technology, warranting no aeration equipment, reduced sludge disposal
facility, and the prime advantage of methane (CH 4) recovery. Traditionally, anaerobic
technologies were used for treatment of wastewater especially those derived from
wastewater treatment plant. Sludge is categorized as organic material, which could be
used to produce useful energy by product which is methane gas. Anaerobic digestion is a
natural biological process which involves the breakdown of organic matter by
microorganism under anaerobic conditions. Anaerobic digestion mainly produces two
main products which are biogas and digestate. The biogas produced
2

consists of CH4 and carbon dioxide (CO2). Meanwhile, the digestate resulting from
this process was nutrient-rich and can be directly used as fertilizer.

Moreover, previous research shows high rate of anaerobic treatment system


which can retain high amount of biomass, even at low hydraulic retention time.
Therefore, this contributes to the development of a suitable reactor design,
troubleshooting the treatment problem and solving the errors. Upflow Anaerobic
Sludge Blanket (UASB) introduced by Lettinga and Vinken (1980) was able to treat
high-strength wastewater. It has been installed across countries to treat a wide range
of industrial wastewater (Metcalf and Eddy, 2003). The design is simple, easy to
construct and low in maintenance and operating cost and has the ability to withstand
fluctuations in pH, temperature and influent substrate concentration (Alvarez et al.,
2006; Tiwari et al., 2006). Moreover, the formations of anaerobic granular sludge
submerged beneath the reactor are considered as the key features of successful UASB
reactor concept for anaerobic treatment of industrial effluent. A dense sludge bed is
established at the bottom of the reactor, where all biological transformation takes
place (Stronach et al., 1986). Basically, it takes several months to develop the
granulated sludge, and sometimes, seed is supplied from other facilities to accelerate
the start-up process. As a result, the development of range reactor design led to any
suitable for treatment of low, medium and high strength wastewater.

Sulphate enriched wastewater was generated from many industries such as


food processing (molasses, seafood, edible oil, etc.), pharmaceutical, petroleum and
pulp and paper. The common problems related to sulphate enriched wastewater are
associated to the production of H2S, a reduction of CH4 yield, low COD removal
efficiency, toxicity to other bacteria, odours and corrosion problems. In Malaysia, the
domestic or industry sewage and wastewater need proper treatment in order to meet
the strict water quality legislation for environmental protection according to
Environmental Quality Act 1974. In addition, the emitted amount of sulphide
allowed by the Department of Environmental Malaysia (DOE) under Enviromental
-1
Quality (Industrial Effeluents) Regulations 2009 is only 0.5 mg.L .

Therefore, this study was performed to evaluate the ability of Ferric Chloride
(FeCl3) to inhibit activity of SRB and treatment efficiency in laboratory-scale systems
2-
operating on synthetic wastewater. The impact of COD/SO 4 at HRT constant and
3

variable organic substrate loading by varying feed concentration in the UASB was
examined. Furthermore, the influence of addition of FeCl 3 on microbial community
inside UASB was also investigated. Due to time constraint, it was decided to conduct
2-
intermittent feed of COD/SO4 and FeCl3 alternately because in this study, there is
only one peristaltic pump for feeding process. In order to alleviate chemical reaction
occuring in the feed tank, UASB were operated in intermittent feeding, with either
2-
COD/SO4 or FeCl3 at certain time.

1.2 Problem Statement

An approach towards appropriate technology for the treatment of recalcitrant


sulphate enriched wastewater has become imperative due to strict water quality
legislation for environmental protection. Due to high sulphate content in wastewater, and
is sometimes present in high concentrations, the production of high level of sulphide is
toxic to both sulphate reducing bacteria (SRB) and methane production bacteria (MPB).
Its accumulation in the digestion reactors usually causes inhibition effects on organic
removal and methane production, and can even result in system failure. Even though
there are many publications on the treatment of high-sulphate wastewaters, there are no
published reports on anaerobic treatment of wastewater enrich with sulphate in
conjunction to anaerobic sludge as well as resulting higher methane yield at the end of
the process. The SRB will be the key factor of success of the study. SRB will either
inhibit due to addition of iron, or MPB will be predominant towards the ability to
enhance methane yield, which will be investigate well. This study attempts to evaluate
how these two microbes compete for substrate, addressing the usage of FeCl 3 which may
affect the inhibition of SRB in the anaerobic reactor technology in Malaysian industries
to treat sulphate enriched wastewaters.

1.3 Objective of the Study

The objectives of the study are as follows:


4

i. To investigate the performance of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB)


during start-up period using synthetic wastewater.
ii. To investigate the treatment of sulphate enriched wastewater and inhibition of
sulphate reducing bacteria (SRB) using ferric chloride (FeCl3) in UASB.
iii. To study the microbial populations of the sludge under Scanning Electron
Microscopic (SEM).

1.4 Scope of the study

The current study mainly focuses on treatment of sulphate enriched wastewater


and inhibition of sulphate reducing bacteria. At the starting point of this project, the
UASB had only been run on synthetic wastewater for 2 months, before introduced to
2-
treatment of COD/SO4 ratios of 5.3, 2.5 and 1.3. The performance of UASB was
evaluated based on soluble COD removal efficiency, pH stability, volatile fatty acids
(VFAs), sulphate removal and methane production, composition and yield.

1.5 Significance of study

This study will contribute to better understanding on the application of iron as


reducing bacteria agent and could provide a new approach to control negative
impacts by SRB approach on controlling quantity and quality of effluents
characteristics. The supplementation of dosage iron as electron acceptor may change
the outcome of substrate competition between SRB and methanogens bacteria. These
iron sources can be examined to be utilized in anaerobic system to inhibit SRBs.
Furthermore, it was a preliminary investigation to provide a new approach to control
negative impacts by SRBs in order to be implemented to by other Malaysian
wastewater treatment plant systems as well.
REFERENCES

Ahring, B. K. (1995). Methanogenesis in thermophilic biogas reactors. A. Van Leeuw.


67, 91–102.

Álvarez, J. A., Ruiz, I., Gòmez, M., Presas, J., Soto, M. (2006). Start-up alternatives
and performance of an UASB pilot plant treating diluted municipal wastewater
at low temperature. Bioresource Technology, 97(14): 1640–1649.

Altaş, L. (2009). Inhibitory effect of heavy metals on methane-producing anaerobic


granular sludge. J Hazard Mater; 162:1551–6.

Anderson, G.K. and Yang, G. (1992). pH control in anaerobic treatment of industrial


wastewaters. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 188, 551-567.

Angelidaki, I., Schmidt, J.E., Sørensen, A.H., Batstone, D., Ellegard, L. (2007).
Applications of the anaerobic digestion process. Course compendium from the
course Environmental Biotechnology. Institute of Environment and Resources,
DTU.

American Public Health Association (APHA). In: Greenberg, A.E., Eaton, A.D.,
Clisceri, L.S., Rice, E.W, 2005. (Eds.). Standard methods for examination of
water and wastewater, 21th Ed., Washington, DC., USA.

Application of biological treatment systems for sulfate-rich wastewaters. (2006).


Advanced Biological Treatment Processes for Industrial Wastewaters
Principles and Applications, IWA Publishing, London, UK.

Archer, D.B. and Kirsop, B.H. (1990). The microbiology and control of anaerobic
digestion. In: Anaerobic digestion: a waste treatment technology. Wheatley A.
(Eds.), Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York, 43- 91.
99

Ayoob, T., Eqbali, A., and Hashemian, S.J. (2003). The effect of organic loading rate
on the performance of UASB reactor treating slaughterhouse effluent.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 40. 1–11

Aydinol, F. I. T., Yetilmezsoy, K. (2010). A fuzzy-logic-based model to predict


biogas and methane production rates in a pilot-scale mesophilic UASB reactor
treating molasses wastewater. J. Hazard Mater. 182 (1–3), 460–471

Barker, D. J. and Stuckey, D. (1999). A review of soluble microbial products ( SMP)


in wastewater treatment system. Water Res. 33 914), 3.6.-3082

Barrera, E. L., Spanjers, H., Romero, O., Rosa, E. and Dewulf, J. (2014).
Characterization of the sulfate reduction process in the anaerobic digestion of a
very high strength and sulfate rich vinasse. Chemical Engineering Journal, 248,
383-393.

Barton, L. L., (2009). Chapter 2 Biochemistry, Physiology and Biotechnology of


Sulfate Reducing Bacteria, in Advances in Applied Microbiology. Academic
Press. 41-98.

Blonskaja, V., Menert, A., Kurissoo, T. and Vilu, R. (2001). Biological oxidation in
anaerobic digestion of sulfate rich wastewaters. 9th World Congress, Anaerobic
Digestion, Proceedings.

Brito, A. G., Rodrigues, A. C. and Melo L. F. (1997). Granulation during the start-up
of a UASB reactor used in the treatment of low strength wastewaters.
Biotechnology Letters, 19 (4), 363–367.

Cadavid, D. L., Zaiat M. and Foresti, E. (1999). Performance of horizontal flow


anaerobic immobilized sludge (HAIS) reactor treating synthetic substrate
subjected to decreasing COD to sulphate ratios. Water Science Technologies,
39. 99-106.

Calli, B., Mertoglu, B., Inanc, B. and Yenigun, O. (2005). Effects of high free
ammonia concentrations on the performances of anaerobic bioreactors. Process
Biochem; 40:1285–92.
100

Chao-hai, Wei., Wen-xiang, Wang., Zhi-yi, Deng. and Chao-Fei, Wu. (2007).
Characteristics of high-sulphate wastewater treatment by two-phase anaerobic
digestion process with Jet-loop anaerobic fluidized bed. Journal of
Environmental Sciences, 19. 264-270.

Chelliapan, S., (2006). Treatment of pharmaceutical wastewater containing


macrolide antibiotics by up-flow anaerobic stage reactor. The Environmental
Engineering Research Group, School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
Ph.D. thesis, University of Newcastle, UK.

Chelliapan, S., Yuzir, A., Md Din. M. F. and P.J. Sallis. (2011). Anaerobic Pre-
Treatment of Pharmaceutical Wastewater using Packed Bed Reactor.
International Journal of Chem Eng and Apps, Vol.2, No. 1

Chernicharo, C. A. L. (2007). Anaerobic reactors, biological wastewater treatment


series. Volume 4, IWA Publication, London.

Choi, E. and Rim, J. M. (1991). Competition and Inhibition of Sulfate Reducers and
Methane Producers in Anaerobic Treatment. Water Science and Technology,
23(7-9), 1259-1264.

Colleran, E., Finnegan, S., and Lens, P. (1995). "Anaerobic Treatment of Sulfate
Containing Waste Streams."Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek International Journal
of General and Molecular Microbiology, 67(1), 29-46

Cruz Viggi, C., Pagnanelli, F., Cibati, A., Uccelletti, D., Palleschi, C. and Toro, L.
(2010). Biotreatment and bioassessment of heavy metal removal by sulphate
reducing bacteria in fixed bed reactors. Water Research. 44(1): p. 151-158.

Davydov, A., Chuang, K. T., and Sanger, A. R. (1998). Mechanism of H2S oxidation
by ferric oxide and hydroxide surfaces. Journal of Physical Chemistry B 102
(24), 4745–4752.

Dewaters, J. E., Zander, A. K. and Grimberg, S.J. (1999). The use of ferric salts for
controlling sulfide odors in high-strength pulp and paper manufacturing wastes.
Environmental Engineering Science, 16 (6), 441–450.
101

Dezham, P., Rosenblum, E. and Jenkins, D. (1988). Digester gas H 2S control using
iron salts. Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 60 (4), 514–517.

Dohnalek, D. A. and Fitzpatrick, J. A. (1983). The chemistry of reduced sulfur


species and their removal from groundwater supplies. Journal American Water
Works Association, 75 (6), 298–308.

Elferink, S. J. W. H., Visser, A., Pol, L. W. H. and Stams, A. J. M. (1994). "Sulfate


Reduction in Methanogenic Bioreactors." Fems Microbiology Reviews, 15(2-3),
119-136.

Enviromental Quality Act 1974. (2009). Laws of Malaysia, Regulations, Rules and
Orders. Enviromental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations. p 421-423

Etangs, A. (1997). Definition of optimal conditions for the hydrolysis and


acidogenesis of a pharmaceutical microbial biomass. Process Biochemistry,
Vol. 125, 32(6), 515–521.

Fang, H. H. P. (1997). Inhibition of bioactivity of UASB bio granules by


electroplating metals. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 69, 2425-2429.

Field, J. (2002). Anaerobic granular sludge bed technology pages, anaerobic granular
sludge bed reactor technology. Available at (http://www.uasb.org/discover/
agsb.htm#egsb UASB and EGSB). (Accessed: 27/05/2014)

Francisco, J. C., Spyros G. P. and van Haandel, A. C. (2006). Advanced biological


treatment processes for industrial wastewaters: principles and applications.
IWA Publishing, London, UK.

Freese, L. H. and Stuckey, D. C. (2004). Anaerobic treatment of sulphate-enriched


wastewater. Water Management, 157, 187-195.

Foresti, E. (2002). Anaerobic treatment of domestic sewage: established technologies


and perspectives. Water Science and Technology, 45 (10), 181-186.

Frostell, B. (1985). Process control in anaerobic wastewater treatment. Water


Science and Technology, 17, 173-189.
102

Gerardi, M. H. (2003). The Microbilogi of anaerobic digesters. John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., Publication, Wiley-Interscience, USA.

Gillberg, L., Hansen, B., Karlsson, I., Nordström, A.E., and Pålsson, A. (2003).
About water treatment. Kemira Kemwater.

Gizjen, H. J. (2002). Anaerobic Digestion for sustainbale development: a natural


approach. Water research and technology. Vol, 45 (10): 321-328

Gonzalez-Silva, B. M., Briones-Gallardob, R., Razo-Floresa, E. and Celisa, L. B.


(2009). Inhibition of sulfate reduction by iron, cadmium and sulfide in granular
sludge. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2009. 172(1): p. 400-407.

Gujer, W. and Zehnder, A. J. B. (1983). Conversion processes in anaerobic digestion.


Water Science and Technology, 15, 127-167.

Gunnerson, C. G. and Stuckey, D. C. (1986) Anaerobic Digestion: principles and


practices for biogas systems. The World Bank Technical Paper, Number 49,
Washington, USA.

Harada, H., Uemura, S. and Momonoi, K. (1994). Interaction between sulfate-


reducing bacteria and methane producing bacteria in UASB reactors fed with
low strength wastes containing different levels of sulfate, Water Research, Vol.
28 (2), 355-367.

Heertjes, P. M. and van der Meer, R.R. (1978). Dynamics of liquid flow in an upflow
reactor used for anaerobic treatment of wastewater. Biotechnology and
Bioengineering, 20 (10), 1577-1594.

Henze, M. (1983). Anaerobic treatment of waste water in fixed film reactors - a


literature review, Water Sci Technol, 15, 1–101.

Henze, M., Harremoës, P., la Cour Jansen, J. and Arvin, E. (1995). Wastewater
treatment, biological and chemical processes. Springer-Verlag.

Hilton, B. L. and Oleszkiewicz, J. A. (1988). "Sulfide-Induced Inhibition of Anaerobic


Digestion."Journal of Environmental Engineering-Asce,114(6), 1377-1391.
103

Hilton, M. G. and Archer, D. B. (1988). Anaerobic digestion of a sulfate-rich


molasses wastewater: Inhibition of hydrogen sulfide production. Biotechnology
and Bioengineering, 31(8), 885–8.

Hobson, P.N. and Wheatley, A. D. (1993). Anaerobic digestion: modern theory and
practice. Publication Elsevier Applied Science, London, UK.

Huang G. H., Anderson W.P. and Baetz B. W. (1994). Environmental input-output


analysis and its application to regional solid-waste management planning. J
Environmental Management 42(1):63–79

Hungate, R. E. (1969). A roll tube method for cultivation of strict anaerobes.


Methods Microbial., 3, 117-132.

Ince, B. K., Selcuk, A. and Ince, O. (2002). Effect of a chemical synthesis-based


pharmaceutical wastewater on performance, acetoclastic methanogenic activity
and microbial population in an upflow anaerobic filter. Journal of Chemical
Technololgy and Biotechnology, 77, 711-179.

Isa, M. H. and Anderson, G. K. (2005). Molybdate inhibition of sulphate reduction in


two-phase anaerobic digestion. Process Biochemistry, 40 (6): p. 2079-2089.

Isa, Z., Grusenmeyer, S. and Verstraete, W. (1986a). Sulfate Reduction Relative to


Methane Production in High-Rate Anaerobic-Digestion - Microbiological
Aspects. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 51(3), 580-587.

Isa, Z., Grusenmeyer, S. and Verstraete, W. (1986b). Sulfate Reduction Relative to


Methane Production in High-Rate Anaerobic-Digestion - Technical Aspects.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 51(3), 572-579.

Iza, J. (1991). Fluidized bed reactors for anaerobic wastewater treatment. Water Sci
Technol, 24(8), 109–132.

Karhadkar, P. P., Audic, J.-M., Faup, G.M. and Khanna, P. (1987). Sulfide and
Sulfate inhibition of methanogenesis. Wat. Res. 21, 1061.
104

Khanal, S. K. and Huang, J. C. (2003). ORP-based oxygenation for sulfide control in


anaerobic treatment of high-sulfate wastewater. Water Research, 37(9): p. 2053-
2062.

Kiely, G. (2007). Environmental Engineering. Tata Mc Graw-Hill Publising Company


Ltd.

Koster, I. W. and Lettinga, G. (1984). The influence of ammonium–nitrogen on the


specific activity on pelletized methanogenic sludge. Agric Waste; 9:205–16.

Koster, I. W., Rinzema, A., de Vegt, A.L. and Lettinga, G. (1986). Sulfide inhibition
of the methanogenic activity of granular sludge at various pH-levels. Wat. Res.
20(12), 1561–1567.

Krapivina, M., Kurissoo, T., Blonskaja, V., Zub, S. and Vilu, R. (2007). Treatment of
sulphate containing yeast wastewater in an anaerobic sequence batch reactor.
Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences, 56, 1, 38-52.

Kristjansson, J. K., Schonheit, P. and Thauer, R. K. (1982). Different Ks-Values for


Hydrogen of Methanogenic Bacteria and Sulfate Reducing Bacteria - an
Explanation for the Apparent Inhibition of Methanogenesis by Sulfate. Archives
of Microbiology, 131(3), 278-282.

Kroiss, H., Plahl-Wabnegg, F. and Savardal, K. (1985). Anaerobic treatment of


viscose wastewater. Water Science and Technology, 17, 231-239.

Last, S. (2010). Biogas Plants Receive Political Backing in Many Countries. Biogas
Methane Explained and other articles. 14-16.

Lens, P. N. L., Visser, A., Janssen, A. J. H., Pol, L. W. H. and Lettinga, G. (1998).
"Biotechnological treatment of sulfate-rich wastewaters." Critical Reviews in
Environmental Science and Technology, 28(1), 41-88.

Lettinga, G. and Vinken J, N. (1980). Feasibility of the Upflow Anaerobic Sludge


Blanket (UASB) process for the treatment of low-strength wastes. In:
Proceedings 35th Ind. Waste Conf., Purdue University, West Lafayette,
Ind.USA, PP 625-634.
105

Lettinga, G. and Handeel, V. (1995). Anaerobic digestion and wastewater treatment


systems. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 67(1), 3–28

Lettinga, G., Hobma, S. W., Pol, L. W. H., Zeeuw, W. D., Grin, P. and Roersma, R.
(1983). Design operation and economy of anaerobic treatment, Water Sci.
Technol. 15, 177–195.

Lettinga, G., Velsen, A. F. M. V. A. N. and Hobma, S.W. (1980). Use of the Upflow
Sludge Blanket ( USB ) Reactor Concept for Biological Wastewater Treatment ,
Especially for Anaerobic Treatment, XXII, 699–734.

Lettinga, O. and Pol, L. W. H. (1991). Uasb-process design for various types of


wastewaters, Wat. Sci. Tech 24(8) 87-108.

Li , C. and Fang, H. H. P. (2007). Inhibition of heavy metals on fermentative


hydrogen production by granular sludge. Chemosphere; 67:668–73.

Li, J., Yu, L., Wang, D., Zhang, P. and Ji, Z. (2014). Performance and granulation in
an Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) reactor treating saline sulfate
wastewater. Biodegradation, 25. 127-136.

Li, Y. Y., Lam, S. and Frangi, H. H. P. (1996).Interaction between methanogenic,


sulphate-reducing and syntrophic acetogenic bacteria in the anaerobic
gedradation of benzoate. Water Research, 30. 1555-1562.

Lovley, D. R. (1985). Minimum threshold for hydrogen metabolism in methanogenic


bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 49, 1530–1531.

Maillacheruvu, K. Y., Parkin, G. F., Peng, C. Y., Kuo, W. C., Oonge, Z. I. and
Lebduschka, V. (1993). Sulfide Toxicity in Anaerobic Systems Fed Sulfate and
Various Organics. Water Environment Research, 65(2), 100-109.

Marchaim, U. and Krause, C. (1993). Propionic to acetic acid ratios in overloaded


anaerobic digestion. Bioresource Technology, 43, 195–203.

Massé, D. I., Masse, L. and Croteau, F. (2003). The effect of temperature


fluctuations on psychrophilic anaerobic sequencing batch reactors treating
swine manure. Bioresource Technology. 89, 57-62
106

Maree, J. P. and Strydom, W. F. (1985). Biological removal of sulphate reduction in


upflow packed bed reactor. Wat. Res. 19, 1101-1106

McCartney, D. M. and Oleszkiewicz, J. A. (1991). Sulfide inhibition of anaerobic


degradation of lactate and acetate. Wat. Res. 25, 203–209.

McCartney, D. M. and Oleszkiewicz, J. A. (1993). Competition between


Methanogens and Sulfate Reducers - Effect of Cod Sulfate Ratio and
Acclimation. Water Environment Research, 65(5), 655-664.

McCarty, P. (1964). Anaerobic Waste Treatment Fundamentals: Chemistry &


Microbiology.

McCarty, P. L. (2001). The development of anaerobic treatment and its future. Water
Sci Technol 44(8):149–156

McCarty, P. L. and Smith, D. P. (1986). Anaerobic wastewater treatment.


Enviromental Science Technology 20, 1200-1206

Metcalf and Eddy. (2003). Wastewater Engineering - Treatment and Reuse. 4 th edition,
revised by Tchobanoglous. G and Burton, F. L. New York. Mc Graw-Hill, Inc,.

Mizuno, O., Li, Y.Y. and Noike, T. (1994). Effects of Sulfate Concentration and
Sludge Retention Time on the Interaction between Methane Production and
Sulfate Reduction for Butyrate. Water Science and Technology, 30(8), 45-54.

Mizuno, O., Li, Y.Y. and Noike, T. (1998). The behaviour of sulphate-reducing
bacteria in acidogenic phase of anaerobic digestion. Water Research, 32, 1626-
1634.

Nachaiyasit, S. and Stuckey, D. C. (1997a). The effect of shock loads on an


anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR), 1. Step changes in feed concentration at
constant retention time. Water Research, 31, 2737-3747.

Nachaiyasit, S. and Stuckey, D. C. (1997b). The effect of shock loads on an


anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR), 2. Step and transient hydraulic shocks at
constant feed strength. Water Research, 31, 2747-2755.
107

Nielsen, H. A., Lens, P., Vollersten, J. and Hvitved-Jacobsen, T. (2005). Sulfide-iron


interactions in domestic wastewater from a gravity sewer. Water Research,
39(12): 2747-2755.

O'Flaherty, V., Lens, P., Leahy, B. and Colleran, E. (1998). Long-term competition
between sulphate-reducing and methane-producing bacteria during full-scale
anaerobic treatment of citric acid production wastewater. Water Research,
32(3), 815-825.

2-
O’Reilly, C. and Colleran, E. (2006). Effect of infuent COD/SO4 ratios on
mesophilic anaerobic reactor biomass populations: physico-chemical and
microbiological properties. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 56, 141–153.

Obarsky, B. J. and Cirello, J. (1987). Sulfur removal of polysulfide rubber


manufacturing wastewater by anaerobic treatment, Industrial Waste Conference
33th Purdue Univ.,402 - 408.

Oktem, Y. K., Ince, O., Sallis, P. J., Donelly, T. and Ince, B. K. (2008). Anaerobic
treatment of a chemical synthesis-based pharmaceutical wastewater in a hybrid
upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor. Bioresource Technology. 99(5): 1089-
1096.

Okabe, S., Nielsen, P. H., Jones, W. L. and Characklis, W. G. (1995). Sulfide


product inhibition of Desulfovibrio desulfuricans in batch and continuous
cultures. Wat. Res. 29, 571–578.

Omil, F., Lens, P., Pol, L. H. and Lettinga, G. (1996). Effect of upward velocity and
sulphide concentration on volatile fatty acid degradation in a sulphidogenic
granular sludge reactor. Process Biochemistry, 31(7), 699-710.

Omil, F., Lens, P., Visser, A., Pol, L. W. H. and Lettinga, G. (1998). Long-term
competition between sulfate reducing and methanogenic bacteria in UASB
reactors treating volatile fatty acids. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 57(6),
676-685.
108

Oonge, Z., and Parkin G. F. (1992). Poisoning of sulfate reduction with molybdenum
th
in anaerobic reactors fed glucose. In: Proceedings of the 45 Industrial Waste
Conference, Purdue University, USA;1992; p. 441-450

Padival, N. A., Kimbell, W. A. and Redner, J. A. (1995). Use of iron salts to control
dissolved sulfide in trunk sewers. Journal of Environmental Engineering-Asce
121 (11), 824–829.

Parawira, W., Murto, M., Zvauya, R. and Mattiason, B. (2005). Comparative


Performance of a UASB Reactor and an Anaerobic Packed-Bed Reactor When
Treating Potato Waste Leachate, Renewable Energy, 31, pp. 893-903.

Parawira, W., Read, J. S., Mattiasson, B. and Björnsson, L. (2008). Energy


production from agricultural residues: High methane yields in pilot-scale two-
stage anaerobic digestion. Biomass and Bioenergy, 32(1), 44–50.

Parkin, G. F., Sneve, M.A. and Loos, H. (1991). Anaerobic Filter Treatment of Sulfate
Containing Wastewaters. Water Science and Technology, 23(7-9), 1283-1291.

Paula, Jr. and Foresti, E. (2009).Sulfide toxicity kinetics of a UASB reactor. Braz J
Chem Eng; 26:669–75.

Percheron, G., Bernet, N. and Moletta, R. (1997). Start-up of anaerobic digestion of


sulfate wastewater. Bioresource Technology, 61(1), 21-27.

Poh, P. E. and Chong, M. F. (2014). Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket-hollow


centered packed bed (UASB-HCPB) reactor for thermophilic palm oil mill
effluent (POME) treatment. Biomass and Bioenergy, 67, 231-242.

Pol, L. W. H., Lopes, C., Lettinga, G. and Lens P. N. L. (2004). Anaerobic sludge
granulation. Water research, 38, pp. 1376-1389.

Pol, L. W. H (1989). The phenomenon of granulation of anaerobic sludge, PhD


Thesis (Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen).

Postgate, J. R. (1984). The Sulphate reducing bacteria. Cambridge University Press,


Cambridge.
109

Poulton, S. W., Krom, M. D., Van Rijn, J. and Raiswell, R. (2002). The use of
hydrous iron (iii) oxides for the removal of hydrogen sulphide in aqueous
systems. Water Research, 36 (4), 825–834.

Reis, M. A. M., Almeida, J. S., Lemos, P. C. and Carrondo, M. J. T. (1992). Effect of


hydrogen sulfide on growth of sulfate-reducing bacteria. Biotech. Bioeng. 40,
593–600.

Rinzema, A., van Lier, J. and Lettinga, G. (1988). Sodium inhibition of acetoclastic
methanogens in granular sludge from a UASB reactor. Enzyme and Microbial
Technology, 10(1), 24–32.

Rittmann, B. E. and McCartey, P. L. (2001). Environmental Biotechnology: principles


and applications, McGraw-Hill International Edition, New York, USA.

Sam-soon, P. A., Loewenthal, R. E., Dold, P. L. and Mariais, G. V. R. (1991). A long


chain fatty acid, oleate, as sole substrate in upflow anaerobic sludge bed
(UASB) systems. Water SA, 16, 165–170.

Schmidt, J. E. and Ahring, B. K. (1996). Granular sludge formation in up-flow


anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors. Biotechnology and Bioengineering,
49, 229-246.

Schonheidt, P., Kristjansson, J. K. and Thauer, R. K. (1982). Kinetic Mechanism for


the ability of sulfate reducers to out-compete methanogens for acetate. Arch.
Microbial. 132:285-288.

Seghezzo, L. Z. G., Van Lier, J. B., Hamelers, H. V. M. and Lettinga, G. (1998). A


review: the anaerobic treatment of sewage in UASB and EGSB reactors,
Bioresource Technology, 65, pp. 175-190.

Siegert, I. and Banks, C. (2005). The effect of volatile fatty acid additions on the
anaerobic digestion of cellulose and glucose in batch reactors. Process
Biochemistry, 40, 3412-3418.

Silva, A. J., Varesche, M.B., Foresti, E. and Zaiat, M. (2002). Sulphate removal from
industrial wastewater using a packed-bed anaerobic reactor. Process
Biochemistry, 37, 927-935.
110

Shamsudin, A. H. (2012). Development of renewable energy in Malaysia strategic


initiatives for carbon reduction in the power generation sector. Procedia
Engineering, 49, 384 – 391

Smith, L. C., Elliot, D. J. and James, A. (1996). Mixing in up-flow anaerobic filters
and its influence on performance and scale-up. Water Research, 30, 3061-3073.

Speece, R. E. (1996). Anaerobic biotechnology for industrial wastewater. Archae


Press, Tennessee, USA.

Speece, R. E. (1983). Anaerobic biotechnology for industrial wastewater treatment.


Environmental Science & Technology, 17(9), 416A–27A.

Speece, R. E. and McCarty, P. L. (1964). Nutrients requirements and biological


solids accumulations in anaerobic digestion. Adavances in Water Pollution
Research. 2, 195-221.

Stadlbauer, E. A., Achenbach R., Doll, D., Jehle B., Kufner, B., Oey, L. and Quurck,
J. (1992). Design and performance of pulsed anaerobic digesters. Water Sci.
Tech, 25(7), 351–360.

Stetter, K. O., Huber, R., Blochl, E., Kurr, M., Eden R,D., Fielder M., Cash, H. and
Vance, I. (1993). Hyperthemophilic archea are thriving in the deep north sea
and Alaskan oil reservoirs. Nature, 365; 743-745.

Stronach, S. M., Rudd, T. and Lester, J. N. (1986). Anaerobic digestion processes in


industrial wastewater treatment. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.

Stucki, G., Hanselmann, K. W. and Hürzeler, A. (1993). Biological sulfuric acid


transformation: reactor design and process optimization. Biotech Bioeng. 41,
303–315.

Sorensen, J., Christensen, D. and Jorgenesn, B. B. (1981). Volatile fatty acids and
hydrogen as substrates for sulfate-reducing bacteria in anaerobic marine
sediment. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 42, 1, 5-11.

Souza, M. E. (1986). Criteria for the utilization, design and operation of UASB
reactors. Water Sci. Technol. 18 (12), 55–69
111

Szewzyk, U. and Schink, B. (1991). Attachment to amorphous iron sulfide increases


the activity of strictly anaerobic, gallic acid-degrading bacteria. FEMS
Microbiology Letters, 78(1): p. 115-120.

Tanaka, S. and Lee, Y. H. (1997). Control of sulfate reduction by molybdate in


anaerobic digestion. Water Science and Technology. 36, (12); 143–150.

Takashima, M. and Speece R. E. (1989). Mineral nutrient requirements for high-rate


methane fermentation of acetate at low SRT. Res J Water Pollut C ;61:1645–50.

Tiwari, M. K., Guha, S., Harendranath, C.S. and Tripathi, S. (2006). Influence of
extrinsic factors on granulation in UASB reactor. Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology, 71(2): 145–154.

Tebo, B. M. and Obraztsova, A.Y. (1998). Sulfate-reducing bacterium grows with


Cr(VI), U(VI), Mn(IV), and Fe(III) as electron acceptors. FEMS Microbiology
Letters. 162(1): p. 193-198.

Thauer, R. K. Jungermann, K. and Decker, K. (1977). Energy conservation in


chemotrophic anaerobic bacteria. Bacteriol. Rev. 41, 100–180.

Utgikar, V. P., Tabak, H. H., Haines, J. R. and Govind, R. (2003). Quantification of


toxic and inhibitory impact of copper and zinc on mixed cultures of sulfate-
reducing bacteria. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 82 (3), 306–312.

Uyanik, S. (2001). Process performance and bacterial population dynamics in


conventional and modified anaerobic baffled reactors (ABR) treating industrial
wastewaters. Ph.D. thesis, University of Newcastle, UK.

van den Heuvel, J. C., Verschuren, P. G., Beeftink, H. H. and de Beer, D. (1992).
Determination of the critical concentration of inhibitory products in a repeated
fed-batch culture. Biotechnology Techniques, 6, 33–8.

van Haandel, A. C. and Lettinga, G. (1995). Anaerobic sewage treatment - a practical


guide for regions with a hot climate. Wiley, New York, UK.
112

Vilela, R. S., Damianovic, M. H. R. Z. and Foresti, E. (2014). Removing organic


matter from sulfate-rich wastewater via sulfidogenic and methanogenic
pathways. Water Science & Technology, 69 (8), 1669 - 1675

Visser, A. (1995). The anaerobic treatment of sulphate containing wastewater, PhD


Thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, Netherlands.

Visser, A. Pol, L.W.H. and Lettinga, G. (1996). Competition of methanogenic and


sulfidogenic bacteria. Water Science and Technology, 33(3), 99-110.

Weijma, J., Bots, E. A. A., Tandlinger, G., Stams, A. J. M., Pol, L. W. H. and
Lettinga, G. (2002). Optimisation of sulphate reduction in a methanol-fed
thermophilic bioreactor. Water Research, 36(7), 1825-1833.

Weiland, T. T. and Rozzi, A. (1991). The start-up, operation and monitoring of high-
rate anaerobic treatment system: Discusser's Report. Water Science and
Technololgy 24, 257-277.

Widdel, F. (1988). Microbiology and ecology of sulfate- and sulfur-reducing


bacteria. In: Biology of Anaerobic Microorganisms, pp. 469–586. (Zehnder, A.
J. B., Ed.) John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Winfrey, M. R. and Zejkus, J. G. (1977). Effect of sulfate on carbon and electron


flow during methanogenesis in freshwater sediments. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
33, 275–281.

Wolfe, R. S., Rosenweig, A. C. and Ragsdale, S. W. (2011). Techniques for


Cultivating Methanogens, Methods in Enzymology, Volume 494, Page 1-21.

Wu, Bingtao. and Zhou, W. (2010). Investigation of soluble microbial products in


anaerobic wastewater treatment effluents. J Chem Technol Biotechnol ; 85:
1597– 1603.

Yamaguchi, T., Harada, H., Hisano, T., Yamazaki, S. and Tseng, I. C. (1999).
Process behavior of UASB reactor treating a wastewater containing high
strength sulfate. Wat. Res., 33, 3182-3190.
113

Yilmaz, T., Erdirencelebi, D. and Berktay, A. (2012). Effect of COD/SO 4 ratio on


anaerobic treatment of landfill leachate during the start-up period.
Environmental Technology, 33 (3), 313-320, 2012.

Yoda, M., Kitagawa, M. and Miyayii, Y. (1987). Long term competition between
sulfate reducing and methane producing bacteria in anaerobic biofilm. Water
Res. 21: 1547–1556.

Yuzir, A. and Sallis, P. (2008) The effect of (RS)-MCPP Degradation under anoxic
conditions (Sulphate Reducing Bacteria): 1, Advances in Water and Wastewater
Treatment Technologies, 16-36.

Yuzir, A., Abdullah, N., Chelliapan, S. and Sallis, P. (2013). Effect of Mecoprop
(RS)-MCPP on the biological treatment of synthetic wastewater in an anaerobic
membrane bioreactor. Bioresource Technology, 133, 158–65.

Zhang, S. J., Liu, N. R. and Zhang, C. X. (2012). Study on the performance of


modified UASB process treating sewage. Adv. Mater. Res. 610–613, 2174–2178.

Zhou, H-B, and Qiu, G-Z. (2006). Inhibitory effect of ammonia nitrogen on
specificmethanogenic activity of anaerobic granular sludge. J Cent South Univ;
13:63–7.

Zub, S., Kurissoo, T., Menert, A. and Blonskaja, V. (2008). Combined biological
treatment of high-sulphate wastewater from yeast production. Water and
Environment Journal, 22. 274–286

You might also like