Desalination 322 (2013) 176181

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Desalination
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

A novel wastewater treatment and biomass cultivation system combining photosynthetic bacteria and membrane bioreactor technology
Haifeng Lu a, Guangming Zhang b,, Xiao Dai c, Lance Schideman d, Yuanhui Zhang d, Baoming Li a, Hui Wang e
a

College of Water Resource and Civil Engineering, China Agriculture University, Beijing 100083, China School of Environment and Natural Resources, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine 92617, USA d Agricultural Engineering Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 332 N AESB, MC-644 1304 W, Pennsylvania Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801, USA e School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China
b c

H I G H L I G H T S A novel PSB-MBR system is constructed for pollutants removal and biomass recovery. This system was very effective in pollutants reduction, COD was removed by 99.3%. MBR solved the problem of PSB collection, and 99.5% of biomass was collected. PSB produced low EPS, which reduced membrane fouling. The backwash cycle lasted 48h, which prolonged the service life of membrane.

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
A new system combining photosynthetic bacteria (PSB) treatment with membrane bioreactor (MBR) separation, PSB-MBR, was constructed in this work to treat wastewater and cultivate biomass. PSB were used to remove pollutants and membrane was used to separate biomass from the efuent. The optimal light and oxygen condition for PSB treatment section was natural lightmicro aerobic, and the optimal ratio of food to microbe (F/M) was 2.0. The optimal membrane operation pressure and ow rate for membrane separation was 0.1/0.2 MPa and 27.5 L/h, respectively. Under the optimal conditions, COD removal reached 99.3% and the biomass recovery efciency was 99.5%. The backwash cycle of PSB-MBR system lasted for 48 h, while the backwash cycle for conventional MBR systems is usually 0.53.0 h. The prolonged backwash interval means simple operation, little backwash water consumption, and long service life of membrane. That could be caused by the low extracellular polymeric substance contain of PSB (911 mg/g-VSS). 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 8 December 2012 Received in revised form 4 May 2013 Accepted 4 May 2013 Available online 20 June 2013 Keywords: PSB-MBR Pollutants removal Biomass recovery efciency Membrane fouling EPS

1. Introduction Conventional technologies for high organic load wastewater treatment include hydrolysis-contact oxidation technology, sequencing batch reactor activated sludge process (SBR), cyclic activated sludge technology (CAST), and up-ow anaerobic sludge bed/blanket (UASB) [1]. These conventional methods have long retention times and generate large amounts of residual sludge. The residual sludge is difcult to dispose and often causes serious secondary pollution issues [1]. In comparison to these traditional wastewater treatment technologies, photosynthetic bacteria (PSB) wastewater treatment processes have some unique advantages for degrading organic pollutants in various high-pollutant-load wastewaters. Beginning in the 1960s, scientists have studied the application of PSB in treating olive mill wastewater [2,3], soybean wastewater [4,5], diary
Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 13520956445; fax: +86 10 62511645. E-mail address: zgm200@126.com (G. Zhang). 0011-9164/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2013.05.007

wastewater [6], soy sauce wastewater [7], poultry slaughterhouse wastewater [8], shrimp farms wastewater [9], and palm oil mill efuent [10]. Results showed high efciency in the removal of COD, phosphate, nitrate and hydrogen sulde. Secondly, PSB can be used as fertilizer and sh feed [1113]. Thus, sludge disposal costs and secondary pollution are avoided. In addition, PSB biomass is a good source of other value-added products such as single cell protein, biopolymers, carotene, and other pigments that are used in nutritional supplements, cosmetics, medicine, and animal feed [11], which further enhances economic returns. Finally, there is an increasing interest in PSB and algae as a bio-energy feedstock, which provides another market outlet with long-term trends of increasing environmental and economic value [12]. But PSB are difcult to be collected from wastewater because of their small size and resistance to occulation [1417]. The typical diameter of PSB is 0.53.0 m [16,17], and each PSB cell as a single individual disperses in water, so PSB cannot form ocs like activated sludge. Their resistance to occulation leads to poor settling efciency and poor biomass

H. Lu et al. / Desalination 322 (2013) 176181

177

recovery efciency in traditional PSB wastewater treatment systems. This tremendously limits the collection and utilization of PSB. The traditional method for PSB collection is coagulation. But the collected PSB biomass becomes unsuitable for utilization because the coagulant pollutes the biomass. Ultra-ltration membrane separation is well known for its excellent retention of particles of micron size range [18]. Therefore, ultra-ltration membrane was introduced into the PSB wastewater treatment system to separate PSB effectively and to further purify the efuent. Thus, a novel PSB-MBR was constructed for simultaneous treatment of wastewater and recovery of biomass. The efciencies of the PSB-MBR system on COD removal and biomass collection were examined; the operating conditions of PSB wastewater treatment and membrane separation were optimized; the membrane fouling of the PSB-MBR system was also investigated. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Bacteria and cultivation A strain of PSB (Rhodobacter Sphaeroides, strain number was 1.2174) was obtained from the China General Microbiological Culture Collection Center and used in this work. Stock cultures were maintained by the shaking culture method with RCVBN medium [5]. 2.2. Membrane setup and membrane A hollow-ber ultra-ltration membrane module was used (LU8-4A, Litree Company, China). The membrane was the cross-ow type. The membrane was made of hydrophilized polyvinyl chloride, and the module had an effective membrane surface area of 0.16 m2. The molecular weight cutoff as specied by the manufacturer was 100,000 Dalton, and the nominal pore size was 0.01 m. The internal and external diameter of the hollow lament bers was 1.00 mm and 1.66 mm, respectively. The manufacturer's specied operating pressure range was 0.10.2 MPa, and the maximum ux was 200 L/(m2 h). A schematic diagram of PSB-MBR and the detailed operation processing as supporting information are attached in the e-component. 2.3. Wastewater In this work, brewery wastewater was used. Brewery wastewater is a high-strength wastewater rich in nutrients and free of toxic chemicals, as such, it is an ideal candidate for resource recovery. Besides, with an estimated production of 3 billion m3 each year in China, it imposes a significant environmental burden [19]. Articial brewery wastewater was made by diluting beer. The initial COD, total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) of the wastewater was 800010,000 mg/L, 1.0 mg/L and 2.6 mg/L, respectively. A C/N/P ratio of around 100:5:1 is normally needed for the growth of microbe in conventional wastewater treatment [1]. However, in brewery wastewater, the C/N/P ratio is unsuitable, so 250 mg/L ammonium chloride and 50 mg/L mono potassium phosphate were added to provide nitrogen and phosphate source for microbe. The pH value of wastewater was adjusted to 7.0 by 2.0 mol/L sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solution. 2.4. PSB wastewater treatment experimental setup Bioreactors (1000 ml Erlenmeyer ask) were sterilized at 121 C for 20 min before being lled with 600 ml articial brewery wastewater. The initial PSB concentration was 260 mg/L dry weight. Magnetic stirrers were used to mix bacteria and wastewater uniformly. The inoculated bacteria grew in the bioreactors exponentially. Three different lightoxygen conditions were selected as follows: Lightanaerobic condition. Two 60-watt incandescent lamps were used to keep the light intensity at 2000 lux by adjusting the distance between bioreactor and the lamps. The distance ranged from 5 to 8 cm.

After saturating the liquid and headspace with high purity nitrogen, the bioreactor was sealed with a gas tight membrane to maintain anaerobic conditions. Natural lightmicro aerobic condition. During day time, natural light was used as light resource, and the light intensity varied between 500 and 1000 lux, and the sunlight lasted 14 h in a day. During the night time, there was no light. The micro aerobic condition was maintained between 0.5 to 1.0 mg/L of dissolved oxygen (DO) by aeration. The DO concentration was monitored and controlled with an on-line oxygen meter and gas ow meter. Darkaerobic condition. In order to prevent light transmission, the bioreactors were covered by four layers of black cloth. The aerobic condition was maintained at approximately 2.0 mg/L of DO by controlling aeration using a gas ow meter and on-line oxygen meter. The ratio of F/M was investigated for its effect of pollutants removal and biomass production. Four F/M ratios, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 10.0 mg L 1-COD/mg L 1-biomass were tested under the natural lightmicro aerobic condition. COD and biomass were measured every 24 h. Each experiment was conducted in triplicate or more times and the reported data were the average values. 2.5. MBR separation section experiment Optimal operation pressure experiment. Four groups of membrane operation pressure were set. They are 0.02, 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2 MPa. The ux was used as the item to investigate the optimal operation pressure. Optimal ow rate experiment. Three groups of ow rate, 7.5, 15.0, and 27.5 L/h were set. The ux was also used as the item to investigate the optimal ow rate. 2.6. Analysis methods COD, total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP) and biomass were tested by APHA standard methods [20]. Supernatant from the bioreactors was sampled for COD, TN and TP analysis during PSB treatment. These samples were centrifuged at 9000 rpm for 10 min to provide supernatant without biomass. The efuent COD from MBR system was also measured. pH, DO and light intensity were monitored regularly using PSH-3 pH meter (Shanghai Precision and Scientic Instrument Company, China), a YSI-DO200 DO meter (YSI Corporation, USA) and a LI-250A light meter (LI-COR Inc., Canada), respectively. Extracellular polymeric substance (EPS) was tested by high speed centrifugation method [2123]. The carbohydrates were tested by the phenol-sulfuric acid method [22]. The protein was measured using the Lowry method [24]. The nucleic acids were measured by UV-visible spectrometry method [23]. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Optimal lightoxygen condition for PSB wastewater treatment Lightoxygen condition is the most important parameter in PSB wastewater treatment and three lightoxygen conditions were normally used: lightanaerobic, darkaerobic, and natural lightmicro aerobic. COD removal during PSB treatment under these three conditions was shown in Fig. 1(a). COD removal showed increase trend with time under lightanaerobic, natural lightmicro aerobic and darkaerobic condition respectively. COD removal was higher under darkaerobic condition and natural lightmicro aerobic condition than that under light anaerobic condition. After 168 h' treatment, COD removal reached 93.5% for the darkaerobic condition, 92.5% for the natural lightmicro aerobic condition, and 71.2% for the lightanaerobic condition. Kaewsuk's study also showed that in MSBR with mixed cultures PSB for dairy wastewater treatment, COD removal could reach to 93% [6]. Besides, Ponsano's study for poultry slaughterhouse wastewater treatment showed that

178

H. Lu et al. / Desalination 322 (2013) 176181

COD removal could reach to 91% [8]. In these two previous studies, the initial COD were both around 20004000 mg/L [6,8], while in this work, the initial COD was around 10,000 mg/L, which was much higher than the previous studies. That meant PSB can afford very high organic load. Fig. 1(b) showed the changes of biomass. The trend of biomass production was very similar with that of COD removal. At 168 h, the biomass was 1525, 1650 and 1775 mg/L under the lightanaerobic, natural lightmicro aerobic, darkaerobic condition, respectively. Higher pollutant removal and biomass production were obtained under natural lightmicro aerobic condition and darkaerobic condition than those under lightanaerobic condition. COD removal was similar under natural lightmicro aerobic and darkaerobic condition, and so was the biomass production. However, darkaerobic condition required more aeration (DO >2.0 mg/L) than natural lightmicro aerobic condition (DO = 0.51.0 mg/L) and was more energy intensive. Therefore, considering the pollutant removal, biomass production, and energy consumption, natural lightmicro aerobic condition was a better choice for PSB wastewater treatment. Light and oxygen are the most important parameters for PSB growth, and oxygen played a more important role than light in pollutants removal and biomass production. Our previous work also conrmed that results [25]. For pollutants removal, under oxygen conditions, PSB carry out oxidative phosphorylation, in which pollutants are synthesized as cell composition and to be degraded into CO2. This means that pollutants are sufciently utilized with high mineralization degree. While under light anaerobic condition, pollutants are synthesized as cell components and

are degraded into small fermentation products existing in wastewater. The reminding fermentation products cannot be mineralized completely, so there is no emancipation of carbon into the atmosphere. Therefore, pollutants removal is lower under lightanaerobic condition than that under aerobic condition [16,17,25]. For biomass production, under darkaerobic condition, cell components are mainly synthesized through gluconeogenesis pathway and the reverse of tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle. Under lightanaerobic condition, cell components are mainly synthesized through Calvin cycle and the biological nitrogen xation pathway [17,25]. Therefore, the biomass synthesis pathways under different lightoxygen conditions are quite different. More pollutants consume, more biomass are synthesized. Hence, higher biomass production was got under oxygen conditions than that under lightanaerobic condition. 3.2. Optimal F/M ratio for PSB wastewater treatment F/M is the ratio of food to microbe. It is one of the most important factors in biological wastewater treatment systems. Optimizing F/M ratio could lead to high pollutant removal and high biomass conversion. COD removal and biomass production in PSB wastewater treatment with different F/M ratios were investigated and the results were summarized in Fig. 2. As expected, it can be seen from Fig. 2(a) that for all F/M groups, COD removal increased fast during the rst 72 h, and then slowed down and stayed at stable levels. After 120 h' treatment, COD removals reached 92.7%, 94.5%, 91.0% and 60.7% corresponding to F/M ratio of 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 and 10.0, respectively. It can be seen from Fig. 2(b) that the PSB biomass increased quickly for the rst 24 h, and then stayed at steady rate. Fig. 2(b) also showed that the largest increases in biomass was 1419 mg/L at 96 h with F/M ratio of 2.0, and the next was 1091 mg/L at 48 h with F/M ratio of 10.0. So the optimal F/M ratio was 2.0. As a general rule in conventional activated sludge wastewater treatment processing, suitable F/M ratio is usually controlled at 0.51.5 [1]. In this experiment, the optimal F/M ratio was 1.0 or 2.0, which was similar with that of the conventional activated sludge wastewater treatment processing. 3.3. Membrane separation for biomass recovery and efuent purication After PSB treatment, the efuent and PSB biomass were separated by the ultra-ltration membrane. After membrane separation, biomass was retained in the membrane reactor and then recovered via backwash. The biomass recovery efciency was measured by the ratio of biomass recovered to total inow biomass. Besides, membrane can further purify the wastewater, so the efuent COD after membrane separation was also investigated. The recommended operation pressures of the membrane were 0.1 and 0.2 MPa, so the biomass recovery efciency and the nal COD concentration in the efuent were measured under these two pressures. It can be seen from Fig. 3 that with the recommended operation pressure of 0.1/0.2 MPa, the biomass recovery efciency reached 99.5%. It meant that membrane was very effective in collecting PSB biomass. Besides, COD of the efuent was lower than 100 mg/L, which met the national discharge standard of China [26]. For brewery wastewater treatment, the main structures of conventional treatment system are usually consisted by four parts: anaerobic reactor, aerobic reactor, secondly sedimentation tank and reux system to realize sludge reuxing. The whole process is long and typical anaerobic treatment reactors such as UASB are complicate for operation and management. After that, partial activated sludge is reuxed by pumping, which needs lots of energy. The other part of sludge as residual sludge must be disposed, which generates high disposal cost and second pollution. Comparing with the traditional methods, PSB-MBR has some advantages. PSB-MBR just needs one reactor to realize wastewater treatment

Fig. 1. COD removal and biomass production under lightanaerobic, natural lightmicro aerobic and darkaerobic condition in PSB wastewater treatment stage, respectively, initial COD concentration was 9269.5 mg/L. (a) COD removal. (b) Biomass production.

H. Lu et al. / Desalination 322 (2013) 176181

179

3.4. Optimization of operation conditions for membrane separation The above data showed that membrane was feasible in biomass recovery and pollutants removal, and then the membrane operation conditions were optimized by controlling the membrane operation pressure and the ow rate. Four groups of pressure 0.02, 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2 MPa were investigated. The initial ow rate was 15 L/h. Results showed that for 0.1 and 0.2 MPa groups, the ux kept above 10.0 L/(m2 h) (5% of the maximum design ux) for a long time while for the other two pressures, the ux dropped below 10.0 L/(m2 h) after 24 h. So the optimal membrane operation pressure should be 0.1 or 0.2 MPa, just as the manufacturer's recommendation. With the operation pressure of 0.1 MPa, optimal ow rate was investigated. Three ow rate, 7.5 L/h, 15.0 L/h and 27.5 L/h were compared (Fig. 4). Results showed that for 7.5 L/h group with the initial ux of 17.0 L/(m2 h), the ux dropped to 10.0 L/(m2 h) after 1 h' operation. For ow rates of 15.0 and 27.5 L/h groups, the initial uxes was 18.1 and 36.9 L/(m2 h) respectively. For these two groups, after 72 h' operation, the ux could keep above 10.0 L/(m2 h). Especially for 27.5 L/h group, after 48 h' operation, the ux could keep above 30.0 L/(m2 h) with stable efuent. It meant that higher ow rate was benet to keep higher ux. Besides, higher quantity of bacteria could be separated in per unit time under higher ow rate. So the ow rate was recommended as 27.5 L/h. 3.5. Membrane fouling The bottleneck for MBR is the membrane fouling which leads to the decrease of ux. Backwash is needed to reex the ux and the backwash cycle (the period between two backwashes) is usually 0.53.0 h in conventional MBR systems [18]. However, Fig. 4 shows that the membrane backwash cycle of the PSB-MBR could be much longer. Under the optimal inow rate of 27.5 L/h, the ux dropped down quickly in the rst 1 h and reached 36.3 L/(m2 h) at 1.0 h. After that, the ux kept above 30.0 L/(m2 h) for 47 h. Then, after 48 h' operation, there was a sudden drop of ux. So the backwash cycle in PSB-MBR system can be selected as 48 h. The backwash cycle time of PSB-MBR system can be lasted for 48 h, which indicated a very important nding. The backwash cycle of the conventional MBR system usually was 0.53.0 h, while in PSB-MBR system, the backwash cycle could last nearly 50 h, which greatly simplied the operation, saved the consumption of backwash water, and would prolong the service life of the membrane. The prolonged backwash cycle time might be caused by the unique characteristics of PSB. Many studies showed that the membrane fouling in conventional MBR system was mainly caused by extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) [23,24]. In conventional MBR system, activated

Fig. 2. COD removal and biomass production with different F/M ratios in PSB treatment stage, natural lightmicro aerobic condition, respectively. (a) COD removal, F/M ratios were 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 10.0, respectively. (b) Biomass production, F/M ratios were 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 10.0, respectively.

and biomass recovery. So the system is much more compact than the conventional brewery wastewater treatment process. The operation and management of the system is also simpler. Thirdly, biomass produced in PSB-MBR system are innocuous and they can be used as raw material in agriculture or sh farming, which avoids second pollution and saves the disposal cost generated by the treatment of residual activated sludge in traditional wastewater treatment.

Fig. 3. Biomass recovery efciency and nal efuent COD in PSB-MBR system.

Fig. 4. Flux changes under different ow rate, 0.1 MPa.

180

H. Lu et al. / Desalination 322 (2013) 176181

sludge is the main micro body for wastewater purication, and it produces high concentration of EPS, which are mainly composed by macromolecule substances and can block the membrane pore. EPS concentration in the activated sludge is normally 120400 mg/g-VSS [24,27,28]. However, measurement of EPS in this system showed that the EPS concentration of PSB was only 911 mg/g-VSS, which was much lower than that of activated sludge. The low EPS concentration of PSB contributes to lighter membrane fouling than the conventional MBR system, so PSB-MBR system can run longer than the conventional MBR system, and then the backwash cycle time of PSB-MBR system may be longer than the traditional MBR system. Nowadays, MBR is widely used in the world and it develops very fast. However, the membrane fouling is the limitation factor. Backwash is usually used to reduce the membrane fouling. However, frequent backwash consumes energy and clean water, and also shorts the membrane service life. In PSB-MBR system, the backwash cycle prolonged to nearly 50 h, which was beyond the backwash cycle time of conventional MBR system. Therefore, the combination system of PSB and membrane separation might have better membrane fouling control than the conventional MBR system. The backwash pressure was 0.2 MPa and the backwash time lasted 5 min. After 5 min' backwash, the efuent turbidity was below 0.3 NTU and 5.0 L backwash water was consumed. After 10 separation cycles, backwash only recovered 72.7% of ux, therefore a chemical cleaning was needed. The membrane was soaked into 1.0% NaOH solution for 1 h and 93.0% of ux was recovered after the chemical cleaning (Fig. 5).

Acknowledgements Authors thank the nancial supports from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51278489), Chinese Universities Scientic Fund (2013XJ020), the Recruitment Program of Global Experts (10110001) and the Program of International S & T Cooperation (Chinese MOST, No. 2010DFA92090).

Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2013.05.007.

References
[1] C.P. Jr Grady, G.T. Daigger, H.C. Lim, Biological wastewater treatment, Revised and Expanded, Simplied Chinese Edition Copyright 1999 by Marcel Dekker Inc, 2nd ed., Chemical Industry Press, Beijing, 2003. 610 , (6372, 194219). [2] E. Erolu, U. Gndz, M. Yce, I. Erolu, Photosynthetic bacterial growth and productivity under continuous illumination or diurnal cycles with olive mill wastewater as feedstock, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 35 (11) (2010) 52935300. [3] E. Ero lu, I. Ero lu, U. Gndz, M. Yce, Effect of clay pretreatment on photofermentative hydrogen production from olive mill wastewater, Bioresour. Technol. 99 (15) (2008) 67996808. [4] J. He, G. Zhang, H. Lu, Treatment of soybean wastewater by a wild strain Rhodobacter sphaeroides and to produce protein under natural conditions, Front. Environ. Sci. Engr. China 4 (3) (2010) 334339. [5] H. Lu, G. Zhang, X. Dai, C. He, Photosynthetic bacteria treatment of synthetic soybean wastewater: direct degradation of macromolecules, Bioresour. Technol. 101 (19) (2010) 76727674. [6] J. Kaewsuk, W. Thorasampan, M. Thanuttamavong, G.T. Seo, Kinetic development and evaluation of membrane sequencing batch reactor (MSBR) with mixed cultures photosynthetic bacteria for dairy wastewater treatment, J. Environ. Manage. 91 (5) (2010) 11611168. [7] K. Anam, M.S. Habibi, T.U. Harwati, D. Susilaningsih, Photofermentative hydrogen production using Rhodobium marinum from bagasse and soy sauce wastewater, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37 (20) (2012) 1543615442. [8] E.H.G. Ponsano, C.Z. Paulino, M.F. Pinto, Phototrophic growth of Rubrivivax gelatinosus in poultry slaughterhouse wastewater, Bioresour. Technol. 99 (9) (2008) 38363842. [9] W. Luo, X.Y. Deng, W.T. Zeng, D.H. Zheng, Treatment of wastewater from shrimp farms using a combination of sh, photosynthetic bacteria, and vegetation, Desalination Water Treat. 47 (13) (2012) 221227. [10] M. Suwansaard, W. Choorit, J.H. Zeilstra-Ryalls, P. Prasertsan, Isolation of anoxygenic photosynthetic bacteria from Songkhla Lake for use in a two-staged biohydrogen production process from palm oil mill efuent, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 34 (17) (2009) 75237529. [11] R. Muoz, B. Guieysse, Algalbacterial processes for the treatment of hazardous contaminants: a review, Water Res. 40 (15) (2006) 27992815. [12] G. Sabourin-Provost, P.C. Hallenbeck, High yield conversion of a crude glycerol fraction from biodiesel production to hydrogen by photofermentation, Bioresour. Technol. 100 (14) (2009) 35133517. [13] K. Sasaki, M. Watanabe, Y. Suda, A. Ishizuka, N. Noparatnaraporn, Applications of photosynthetic bacteria for medical elds, J. Biosci. Bioeng. 100 (5) (2005) 481488. [14] E.I. Madukasi, C.H. He, G.M. Zhang, Isolation and application of a wild strain photosynthetic bacterium to environmental waste management, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 8 (3) (2011) 513522. [15] J.T. Beatty Govindjee, H. Gest, J.F. Allen, Discoveries in photosynthesis, Springer Publisher, Dordrecht, 2005. 63105. [16] J.F. Imhoff, H.G. Trper, Purple nonsulfur bacteria, in: J.T. Staley (Ed.), Bergey's manual of systematic bacteriology, The Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, 1989, pp. 16581682. [17] M.T. Madigan, J.M. Martinko, J. Parker, Brock Biology of Microorganisms, 11th edn Simplied Chinese edition copyright 2006 by Pearson Education North Asia Limited and Science Press, Beijing, 2009. 155178 , (180189, 485490). [18] S. Judd, The MBR Book: Principles and Applications of Membrane Bioreactors in Water and Wastewater Treatment, 2nd edn Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2011. 5557. [19] M.Y. Wang, Innovation and practice of brewage wastewater treatment technology, Ind. Water Treat. 23 (1) (2003) 1619. [20] APHA, AWWA, WEF, Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21th ed. United Book Press, USA, 2005. 103133 , (146160, 214223, 910916). [21] A. Eldyasti, G. Nakhla, J. Zhu, Development of a calibration protocol and identication of the most sensitive parameters for the particulate biolm models used in biological wastewater treatment, Bioresour. Technol. 111 (2012) 111121. [22] A.S. Gong, C.A. Lanzl, D.M. Cwiertny, S.L. Walker, Lack of inuence of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) level on hydroxyl radical mediated disinfection of Escherichia coil, Environ. Sci. Technol. 46 (1) (2012) 241249. [23] G.P. Sheng, H.Q. Yu, X.Y. Li, Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) of microbial aggregates in biological wastewater treatment systems: A review, Biotechnol. Adv. 28 (6) (2010) 882894.

4. Conclusions PSB-MBR as a new system for wastewater treatment and resource recovery was constructed. PSB section was used for wastewater treatment, and MBR section was mainly used for biomass recovery. Under natural lightmicro aerobic condition with F/M ratio of 2.0, and membrane operation pressure 0.1/0.2 MPa with ow rate of 27.5 L/h, COD concentration can meet the specied value in the National Integrated Wastewater Discharge Standard of China, and the biomass recovery efciency nally reached to 99.5%. PSB-MBR system can realize pollutants removal and biomass recovery effectively and simultaneously. The biomass production can be directly used as raw materials in agricultural or sh farming industry, which avoids the second pollution and reduces the disposal cost. Besides, in this system, PSB do not form ocs and the EPS is very low. These unique characteristics make lower membrane fouling of PSB-MBR system than that of the traditional MBR system, which prolongs membrane backwash cycle to 48 h and further prolongs the service life of membrane.

Fig. 5. Changes of ux before and after different membrane cleaning method, 0.2 MPa.

H. Lu et al. / Desalination 322 (2013) 176181 [24] B. Frolund, R. Palmgren, K. Keiding, P.H. Nielsen, Extraction of extracellular polymers from activated sludge using a cation exchange resin, Water Res. 30 (1996) 17491758. [25] H. Lu, G. Zhang, T. Wan, Y. Lu, In uences of light and oxygen conditions on photosynthetic bacteria macromolecule degradation: different metabolic pathways, Bioresour. Technol. 102 (20) (2011) 9503 9508. [26] GB 89781996, National standard of the People's Republic of China-Integrated wastewater discharge standard, National Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) State Technology Supervision Bureau, Beijing, 1996. 5.

181

[27] A. Tiraferri, M. Elimelech, Direct quantication of negatively charged functional groups on membrane surfaces, J. Memb. Sci. 389 (2012) 499508. [28] L.L. Wei, K. Wang, Q.L. Zhao, J.Q. Jiang, X.J. Kong, D.J. Lee, Fractional, biodegradable and spectral characteristics of extracted and fractioned sludge extracellular polymeric substances, Water Res. 46 (14) (2012) 43874396.