Sulfur recovery in the sulfide-oxidizing membrane aerated biofilm reactor: experimental investigation and model simulation

References

• Moghanloo GMM, Fatehifar E, Saedy S, et al. Biological oxidation of hydrogen sulfide in mineral media using a biofilm airlift suspension reactor. Bioresour Technol. 2010;101(21):8330–8335. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2010.05.093
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buisman CJN, Jspeert PI, Hof A, et al. Kinetic parameters of a mixed culture oxidizing sulfide and sulfur with oxygen. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1991;38(8):813–820. doi: 10.1002/bit.260380803
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buisman CJN, Geraats BG, Ijspeert P, et al. Optimization of sulphur production in a biotechnological sulphide-removing reactor. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1990;35(1):50–56. doi: 10.1002/bit.260350108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen AJH, Sleyster R, van der Kaa C, et al. Biological sulphide oxidation in a fed-batch reactor. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1995;47(3):327–333. doi: 10.1002/bit.260470307
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen AJH, Ma SC, Lens P, et al. Performance of a sulfide-oxidizing expanded-bed reactor supplied with dissolved oxygen. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1997;53(1):32–40. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0290(19970105)53:1<32::AID-BIT6>3.0.CO;2-#
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohwacharin J, Annachhatre AP. Biological sulfide oxidation in an airlift bioreactor. Bioresour Technol. 2010;101(7):2114–2120. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.10.093
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krishnakumar B, Majumdar S, Manilal VB, et al. Treatment of sulphide containing wastewater with sulphur recovery in a novel reverse fluidized loop reactor (RFLR). Water Res. 2005;39(4):639–647. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2004.11.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JH, Rene ER, Park HS. Biological oxidation of hydrogen sulfide under steady and transient state conditions in an immobilized cell biofilter. Bioresour Technol. 2008;99(3):583–588. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.12.028
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casey E, Glennon B, Hamer G. Review of membrane aerated biofilm reactors. Resour Conserv Recycl. 1999;27(1–2):203–215. doi: 10.1016/S0921-3449(99)00007-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin KJ, Nerenberg R. The membrane biofilm reactor (MBfR) for water and wastewater treatment: principles, applications, and recent developments. Bioresour Technol. 2012;122:83–94. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2012.02.110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nerenberg R. The membrane-biofilm reactor (MBfR) as a counter-diffusional biofilm process. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2016;38:131–136. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2016.01.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahinkaya E, Hasar H, Kaksonen AH, et al. Performance of a sulfide-oxidizing, sulfur-producing membrane biofilm reactor treating sulfide-containing bioreactor effluent. Environ Sci Technol. 2011;45(9):4080–4087. doi: 10.1021/es200140c
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingvorsen K, Zehnder AJB, Jørgensen BB. Kinetics of sulfate and acetate uptake by desulfobacter postgatei. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1984;47(2):403–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank KL, Rogers KL, Rogers DR, et al. Key factors influencing rates of heterotrophic sulfate reduction in active seafloor hydrothermal massive sulfide deposits. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:1449. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01449
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu J, Zhang Y. Evaluation of the impact of organic material on the anaerobic methane and ammonium removal in a membrane aerated biofilm reactor (MABR) based on the multispecies biofilm modeling. Environ Sci and Poll Res. 2016: 1–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cord-Ruwisch R. A quick method for the determination of dissolved and precipitated sulfides in cultures of sulfate-reducing bacteria. J Microbiol Methods. 1985;4(1):33–36. doi: 10.1016/0167-7012(85)90005-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AWWA. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 21st ed. American Water Works Association; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Wanner O, Reichert P. Mathematical modeling of mixed-culture biofilms. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1996;49(2):172–184. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0290(19960120)49:2<172::AID-BIT6>3.0.CO;2-N
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wanner O, Gujer W. A multispecies biofilm model. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1986;28(3):314–328. doi: 10.1002/bit.260280304
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crank J. Free and moving boundary problem. New York (NY): Clarendon Press; 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Lee MW, Park JM. One-dimensional mixed-culture biofilm model considering different space occupancies of particulate components. Water Res. 2007;41(19):4317–4328. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2007.06.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picioreanu C, van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ. Modelling the effect of oxygen concentration on nitrite accumulation in a biofilm airlift suspension reactor. Water Sci Technol. 1997;36(1):147–156. doi: 10.2166/wst.1997.0034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hao XD, van Loosdrecht MC. Model-based evaluation of COD influence on a partial nitrification-anammox biofilm (CANON) process. Water Sci Technol. 2004;49(11-12):83–90. doi: 10.2166/wst.2004.0810
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishop PL, Zhang TC, Fu Y-C. Effects of biofilm structure, microbial distributions and mass transport on biodegradation processes. Water Sci Technol. 1995;31(1):143–152. doi: 10.2166/wst.1995.0032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henze M, Gujer W, Mino T, et al. Activated sludge models: ASM1, ASM2, ASM2d and ASM3. London: IWA Publishing; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Mora M, López LR, Lafuente J, et al. Respirometric characterization of aerobic sulfide, thiosulfate and elemental sulfur oxidation by S-oxidizing biomass. Water Res. 2016;89:282–292. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2015.11.061
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittmann BE, Power ME, Araujo JC, et al. Microbial ecology of biofilmsMonitoring sulfate-reducing bacteria in heterotrophic biofilms. Water Sci Technol. 1999;39(7):49–56. doi: 10.2166/wst.1999.0326
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar