A Survey on Efficiency of Natural Wastewater Treatment Systems and Activated Sludge for Municipal Wastewater Treatment

Subject Areas : Environment Pullotion (water and wastewater)

Reza Shokoohi ¹ , Abdollah Dargahi ² , Amir Karami ³

1 - - Professor of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
2 - Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Ardabil University of Medical Sciences, Assistant Professor of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Ardabil University of Medical Sciences, Ardabil, Iran. *(Corresponding Author)
3 - Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran

Received: 2016-02-04 Accepted : 2018-04-24 Published : 2020-03-20

Keywords: Wetland, stabilization pond, activated sludge, sewage treatment, organic materials,

Abstract :

Background and Objective: Consumption of dissolved oxygen by organic substances in water resources result in undesirable environment for living organisms. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of natural wastewater treatment systems and activated sludge for municipal wastewater treatment.Methods: This one year-cross-sectional study was conducted on wastewater treatment plants in Kermanshah province. During the study, sampling of raw sewage and effluent of treatment plant was carried out and the efficiency of treatment plant was evaluated by measuring TSS, BOD5 and COD. All the sampling and testing procedures were adopted from the standard method.Findings: The results showed that the annual average of BOD5 in effluent for Wetland, stabilization pond, extended aeration and conventional activated sludge was 55, 25, 21 and 23 mg/l respectively. Also the annual average was 143, 43, 40 and 40 mg/lfor COD, and 47, 101, 40 and 33 mg/l for TSS, respectively. For COD removal the conventional activated sludge (86.97%) and Wetland (61.6%) were the most efficient and least efficient systems. For BOD5 removal the stabilization pond (85.18%) and Wetland (72.01%) were the most efficient and least efficient systems. The BOD5 / COD ratio in influent were respectively 0.56, 0.62, 0.59 and 0.55 in these systems.Discussion and Conclusion: In all of the mentioned wastewater treatment systems, the effluent parameters comply with the Iran environmental protection agency standards and it can be reused or discharged to water bodies. Also it can be concluded that, for above-mentioned parameters the removal efficiency of natural systems was more than activated sludge.

References:

        1.        Antoniadis A, Takavakoglou V, Zalidis G, Poulios I. Development and the evaluation of an alternative method for municipal wastewater treatment using homogeneous photocatalysis and constructed wetlands. Catalysis Today.2007; 124: 260-265.

        2.        Amin M.M, Hashemi H, Ebrahimi A, Bina B, Movahhedian Attar H, Jaberi A, Saffari H, Mousavian Z. Using Combined Processes of Filtration and Ultraviolet Irradiation for Effluent Disinfection of Isfahan North Wastewater Treatment Plant in Pilot Scale. Journal of water & wastewater.2010;2: 71-77 (in Persian).

        3.        Pirsaheb M, Khamutian R, Dargahi A. Efficiency of Activated Sludge Process (Extended Aeration) in Removal of Linear Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate (LAS) from Municipal Wastewater - Case Study: Wastewater Treatment of Paveh City. j.health. 2013; 4 (3) :249-259. (in Persian)

        4.        Wilderer PA, Schreff D. Decentralized and Centralized Wastewater Management: a Challenge forTechnology Developers.Water Science and Technology. 2000; 41(1): 1-8.

        5.        Bakir HA. Sustainable Wastewater Management for Small Communities in the Middle East and North Africa. Journal of Environmental Management.2001; 61: 319-328.

        6.        WHO expertees Committee. Waste stabilization pond WHO Tech Ser. 1987, 10: 9-64.

        7.        Odegard H. Design and operation of small wastewater treatment plant. 3^rd Iawq International Specialist conference (abstract). Condon, 1994: 161-182.

        8.        MehdiAhmadi, Masoud Tajrishi ,Ahmad Abrishamch. Technical and Economic Comparison of Conventional Wastewater Treatment Systems in the Sugar Industries in Iran, Journal of Water and Wastewater.1384,53, pp: 54-61. (in Persian)

        9.        Ashtiani A A, Rajaei S M, Faraz A. Disposal and filtration of wastewater in hospitals of Markazi Province in 2009. Arak Medical University Journal (AMUJ) Autumn 2010; 13(3): 100-108. (in Persian)

       10.      Droste, RL. Theory and Practice of Water And Wastewater Treatment. 1^sted. New York: John Wiley: 1997: 248-253

       11.      Metcalf I. Wastewater Engineering; Treatment and Reuse: McGraw-Hill; 2003

       12.      Sherwood C. Natural system for wastewater treatment. Alexandria WHO press, 1995: 94-125

       13.      Sharafi K, Pirsaheb M, Khosravi T, Dargahi A, Moradi M  & Savadpour M.T. Fluctuation of organic substances, solids, protozoan cysts, and parasite egg at different units of a wastewater integrated stabilization pond (full scale treatment plant): a case study, Iran. Desalination And Water Treat. 2015, 57: 4913-4919.

       14.      Almasi A, Pirsaheb M, Dargahi A. The Efficiency of Anaerobic Wastewater Stabilization  Pond in Removing Phenol from  Kermanshah  Oil Refinery Wastewater. ijhe. 2012; 5 (1) :41-50. (in Persian)

       15.      Derayat J, Almasi A, Sharafi K, Meskini H, Dargahi A. The Efficiency Comparison of Conventional Activated Sludge and Stabilization Pond Systems in Removal of Cysts and Parasitic Eggs (A case Study: Kermanshah and Gilangharb Wastewater Treatment Plants). ijhe. 2011; 4 (2) :181-188. (in Persian)

       16.      Nemerow NL. Industrial Water Pollution Organics, Characteristic and Treatment. New York: VanNostrand Reinhold, 1997, 402-410.

       17.      Eckenfelder WW. Industrial Water Pollution Control. New York. McGraw- Hill, 1989, 2td ed: 189-193

       18.      Almasi A, Dargahi A,  Hoseini MM, Janjani H, Mohammadi M, Tabandeh L. Efficiency of a constructed wetland in controlling organic pollutants, nitrogen, and heavy metals from sewage. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences 2016;9(4):2924-8.

       19.      Kadlec R H, Kinight R L,Treatement wetlands by CRC,1996,press LLC.

       20.      Classer LS, Greenberg AE, Eaton AD. Standard method for the examination of water and wastewater. 21st ed. Washington DC: the American Water Works Association 2005; 589-691.

       21.      Environmental Protection Organization of Iran, 2005, Environmental Criteria and Standards, Tehran: Publications of the Environmental Protection Organization of Iran. Pp. 28-19. (in Persian)

       22.      Tchobanoglous G. Burton F. Stensel D. Wastewater Engineering; treatment, disposal, reuse, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2003.

       23.      Zazouli M, Ghahramani E, GhorbanianAlahAbad M, Nikouie A, Hashemi M. Survey of Activated Sludge Process Performance in Treatment of Agghala Industrial TownWastewater in  Golestan Province in 2007. ijhe. 2010; 3 (1):59-66. (in Persian)

       24.      Matteus FA. Water management and conservation in and climates. Technomic publishing, USA, Chapter 5 and 7, 2000.

       25.      Rahmani Sani Abolfazl, 2000, Comparison of wastewater treatment of tropical regions by stabilization ponds and artificial wetlands according to technical and economic indicators. Master's thesis, Babol Engineering Faculty of Engineering. Mazandaran University. (in Persian)

       26.      Dargahi A, Pirsaheb M, Savadpoor MT, Alighadri M, Farookhi M. Effect of retention time and temperature on the efficiency stabilization ponds in treatment of petroleum wastewater.  Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2014; 16(2): 13-24. (in Persian)

       27.      Salari H, Hassani A, Borghei M, Yazdanbakhsh AR, Rezaei H. Investigation of Performance Wetland In Removal N and P In Wastewater Treatment (Case Study:MoradTapeh). Journal Water & Wastewater. 2012; 23(3): 40-47. (in Persian)