A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N T

T h e S i l e s i a n U n i v e r s i t y o f Te c h n o l o g y N o. 3 / 2 0 2 1

doi: 10.21307/ACEE-2021-025

IMPLEMENTATION TO INDUSTRY AND MUNICIPAL SECTOR

THE COMPACT TRICKLE BED BIOREACTORS TECHNOLOGY
TO ODOR AND VOCS REMOVAL

Anita PARZENTNA-GABOR a*, Krzysztof BARBUSIŃSKI b, Damian KASPERCZYK c

a MSc; Ekoinwentyka Ltd., Ruda Śląska, Poland
Department of Water and Wastewater Engineering, PhD School, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
*E-mail address: sekretariat@ekoinwentyka.pl
b Prof. DSc Eng.; Department of Water and Wastewater Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland

c PhD Eng.; Ekoinwentyka Ltd., Ruda Śląska, Poland

Received: 2.08.2021; Revised: 30.08.2021; Accepted: 30.08.2021

Abstract
Biotrickling filters are one of the most effective methods of air bio-purification, this bioremediation process if of high effi-
ciency in pollution reduction. It is an eco-friendly process and economically viable. The technology of biotrickling filters
includes Compact Trickle Bed Bioreactors (CTBB), which are currently used in an increasingly wide range. The aim of this
work will be an objective assessment of the implementation potential of the CTBB technology to various industries, includ-
ing the municipal sector. The paper briefly discusses the characteristics and operating parameters of biotrickling filters, a
review of their applications as an effective method of VOC and odor removal including sources of their emissions, as well
as the characteristics of CTBB and implementation possibilities to various industries. It was concluded that CTBB are
promising solution for the future, as it combines the high degradation efficiency of a wide range of pollutants with cost-effec-
tiveness and ecology. According to the analyzed data and results, this technology can be successfully used to remove VOCs
and odors from various industries.

K e y w o r d s : Biodegradation; Bioreactor; CTBB; Odor, VOC.

1. INTRODUCTION companies), chemical industry (e.g. production of sol-

The rapid development of industry in the recent
decades, and their consequential effect to the degra-
dation of the environment, has led to the intensifica-
tion of the progress of innovative technologies to limit
their negative impact. The quality of the air we
breathe with is one of the most important aspects in
our everyday life. Air pollution affects not only the
health of our respiratory system, but also our nervous
system and mental health [1, 2]. Volatile organic com-
pounds (VOCs) such as benzene, toluene, acetone,
xylene, butyl acetate, vinyl acetate and styrene are
emitted as a result of different production processes in
many industries: paint industry (including automotive
vents, fertilizers), production of varnishes, glues,
paints, mining industry, petrochemical industry. The
emission of odors are also extremely burdensome,
including some VOCs, e.g. thiols, sulfides, disulfides,
but also bioaerosols contain microorganisms present
in wastewater, inorganic compounds such as ammonia
and ammonium compounds, hydrogen sulfide emitted
by municipal sector (wastewater treatment plants,
waste management plants) food processing plants
(sugar factories, breweries) agriculture and animal
husbandry farms and slaughterhouses of poultry, cat-
tle and pigs [3]. The emission of bioaerosols is dan-
gerous due to the presence of pathogenic microorgan-
isms present in the mentioned industries. These

3/2021 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENT 89

 A . P a r z e n t n a - G a b o r, K . B a r b u s i ń s k i , D . K a s p e r c z y k
microorganisms can be transported over long dis-
tances with the wind, which makes it particularly
harmful for close neighborhoods.
Overview of each sector’s contribution to total emis-
sions for NMVOCs in the European Union (28 coun-
tries) for 2018 can be found in Fig. 1. The manufac-
turing and extractive industries were the largest con-
tributor to NMVOC with the agriculture sector fol-
lowing as the second largest contributor [4]. The
harmfulness of VOCs and odors are due to their tox-
icities and their high reactivity within the air, which
can result in the formation of even more harmful
products of complex transformations, as is the case
with ozone, which is formed in the atmosphere by
chemical reactions caused by solar radiation with the
participation of VOC and NOx [5]. The World Health
Organization (WHO) divides VOCs into very volatile
organic compounds with a boiling point below
50–100°C (e.g., propane, butane), volatile organic
compounds with a boiling point between 50–100°C
and 240–260°C (e.g. formaldehyde, acetone, ethanol,
toluene), and semi-volatile organic compounds with a
boiling point between 240–260°C and 380–400°C (e.g.
pesticides, phthalates). The lower the boiling point of
such a compound (higher volatility) the more likely it
is to be emitted from surfaces into the air. VOCs and
Figure 1.
Contribution to EU-28 area emissions from the main source sectors in 2018 of non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs)
(Source: Air quality in Europe – 2020 report; EEA Report, No 09/2020 [4])
90 ARCHITECTURE
odors are carcinogenic and can cause diseases of the
nervous, immune, and respiratory systems [6]. Due to
the negative impact of VOCs and odors, it is impor-
tant to manage air quality in a sustainable way, which
includes, limiting air pollution, effective and ecologi-
cal methods of purification and deodorization as well
as effective systems of air quality control and moni-
toring. Due to the continuous development of indus-
try and economy, methods of cleaning polluted air
are an extremely important tool, which can be divid-
ed into four main groups: combustion, adsorption,
absorption and biological methods [7]. The use of an
appropriate air purification technology is condi-
tioned by several factors: the type and concentration
of pollutants, and the intensity of emissions.
Increasing emphasis on sustainable development will
further stimulate the use of biological methods of air
purification, due to their high efficiency in biodegra-
dation of pollutants, environmental friendliness and
economic viability. The development of biotechnolo-
gy has resulted in significant advances in biological
air purification methods. Initially based mainly on the
technology of basic biofilters, it has evolved over time
to maximize the efficiency to various configurations
and hybrids of several technologies. One of such
hybrids include the Compact Trickle Bed Bioreactors
CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENT 3/2021
 IMPLEMENTATION TO INDUSTRY AND MUNICIPAL SECTOR THE COMPACT TRICKLE BED BIOREACTORS TECHNOLOGY ...
(CTBB), which belongs to the biotrickling filters
group [8]. In recent years, this technology has been
widely developed and implemented in various indus-
tries and is worth taking a closer look at.
Development of a technology capable and suitable
for implementation in various industries that are
sources of different groups of pollutants, both organ-
ic and inorganic, would be extremely valuable. There
are many technologies with high efficiencies in
removing pollutants from the air, however each has
their limitations: the economics of the technology
(e.g. catalytic combustion), the size of the plant
(e.g. biofiltration), secondary waste utilization
(e.g. adsorption, biofiltration), the degradation effi-
ciency of the pollutants, and the ability to treat pollu-
tants from different sources and different chemical
compositions. A solution is being sought that is
adaptable to different industries. This work, there-
fore, aims to analyze the capability and deployment
potential of Compact Trickle Bed Bioreactors to treat
air with pollutants of dissimilar origin, VOCs and
odors (including H2S) from different industries with
different characteristics of plant performance and gas
emissions.
2. BIOTRICKLING FILTERS
Biotrickling filters in simplification, are a combina-
tion of biofilter and bioscrubber technologies. These
are apparatuses filled with a solid, inert packing
material (e.g. polypropylene rings, ceramic rings,
activated carbon or glass beads) inoculated with
microorganisms capable of metabolizing pollutants.
The gaseous pollutants introduced into the apparatus
are absorbed into the circulating liquid phase, which
is a solution of mineral salts, necessary for the prop-
er functioning of microorganisms, that populate the
biofilm formed on the bioreactor bed [9]. The
biotrickling filters technology is characterized by high
stability of the processes taking place within the reac-
tor and the ability to control them.
2.1. Characteristics and parameters of biotrickling
filters
Biological methods of air purification utilize the nat-
ural metabolic activities o microorganisms to decom-
pose pollutants by using them as a carbon source. In
industrial practice, biological methods of pollutant
degradation are carried out in 3 types of devices:
biofilters, bioscrubbers and biotrickling filters, also
known as Trickle Bed Bioreactors. These technolo-
gies are based on the following processes: absorption
3/2021 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING
e
of gaseous pollutants into the liquid phase, their
E N V I R O N M E N T
assimilation and degradation by microorganisms.
However, they differ in the location of the inoculated
microorganisms and the type of filling and mobile
phases [10].
In biotrickling filters, the contaminated gas entering
the reactor, flows co-currently or counter currently to
the liquid phase, then absorption of the gaseous pol-
lutants into the liquid phase take place. Therefore, it
is important to control the process in terms of the
degree of dissolution of the pollutants introduced
into the apparatus [11]. The constantly recirculated
liquid flows in a thin film on the surface of the bed
with microorganisms, providing them with the nutri-
ents necessary for proper development. The pollu-
tants absorbed into the liquid phase diffuse into the
biofilm formed on the filling, where the metabolic
activity of microorganisms eliminate the pollutants
for example to carbon dioxide and water in the case
of VOC degradation. Absorption and regeneration
of pollutants takes place in one device, which is an
indisputable advantage [12]. In addition, the entire
process, running at a moderate temperature of
25–30°C and atmospheric pressure, does not gener-
ate additional operating costs (Table 1).
Table 1.
Advantages and disadvantages of biotrickling filters technol-
ogy [2, 10, 13, 14]
Biotrickling filters
Advantages Disadvantages
Effective removal of pollu- Risk of bed blockage by
tants excessively growing biomass –
increase in a pressure drop in
gas phase due to clogging of
the bed and the need to
remove inhibitors formed as
secondary process products
Process conditions: 25-30°C, Low efficiency in removing
atmospheric pressure compounds insoluble in
water
Low operating costs – no Inability to use this technolo-
need for bed replacement gy for non-biodegradable
and disposal, low energy con- compounds
sumption
Very good process control
ability
Ecological purity – no sec-
ondary pollutants
No risk of explosion
ENVIRONMENT 91
 A . P a r z e n t n a - G a b o r, K . B a r b u s i ń s k i , D . K a s p e r c z y k
Excessive growth of biomass in biotrickling filters, in
addition to the risk of clogging the bed and an
increase in the flow resistance of the liquid phase
through the bed, may cause the accumulation of
intermediate decomposition products of pollutants in
the circulating liquid over a longer period [15]. If this
product is a toxic substance, it may inhibit microor-
ganisms and adversely affect the bio-purification
process, so it will require an additional degree of
solution purification. However, there are several
methods of counteracting this. When the biofilm
growth on the surface of the bed is too high, it is
advisable to increase the flow rate of the liquid phase,
which will separate the excess biomass with a large
liquid stream. A good solution is also the use of tem-
porary or periodic backwashing. This will increase
the specific surface area of the biofilm attached to the
packing material [16]. It’s also possible to temporari-
ly limit and reduce the dosage of mineral salts as well
as to introduce protozoa into the system, that feed on
biofilm-forming bacteria [17]. Removal of the excess
accumulated biomass is necessary to obtain long-
term and stable operation of higher loaded biotrick-
ling filters.
The optimal and effective implementation of the
biodegradation process in the biotrickling filter
depends on several factors [10, 13]:
• the appropriate concentration of oxygen supplied
to the microorganisms
• selection of process parameters: the flow rate of
the liquid and gas phase, maintaining the optimal
pH for the microorganisms used, temperature and
concentration of mineral salts determining the
appropriate environment for their development
• controlling the presence of compounds inhibiting
the growth of biomass, supplied with polluted air
or formed as secondary products of the process
• the appropriate degree of gas wetting and the sol-
ubility of VOCs and odors in the liquid phase
• selection of the packing material, both in terms of
the microorganisms used and the type of contami-
nation.
In order to control the work of biotrickling filters and
evaluate their effectiveness, 4 main parameters are
used [8, 18, 19]:
• Removal efficiency (RE) [%] expresses the per-
centage ratio of the difference in pollutant con-
centrations in the bioreactor inlet and outlet gases
to the pollutant concentration in the inlet gases
92 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING
(1)
• Mass Loading Rate (MS) [g/(m3 h)] expresses the
ratio of concentration in inlet gas to residence
time τg [h]
(2)
(3)
Vr – bioreactor volume [m3],
Vg – gas phase flow [m3/h],
CgIN – substance concentration at the inlet to biore-
actor [g/m3],
τg – residence time [h].
• Elimination capacity (EC) [g/(m3h)] expresses
the ratio of the concentration difference in inlet
and outlet gases of the bioreactor to the residence
time of the gas phase in the bioreactor - it deter-
mines the amount of pollutants that are decom-
posed in a unit of time and the volume of the fil-
ter material.
(4)
• Efficiency of the biotrickling filter – presents the
dependence of removal efficiency (RE) on the
bioreactor load with pollutant load (MS). For low
MS values, RE usually reaches 100%, but as MS
increases, it is often the case that the biotrickling
filter is not able to completely remove the contam-
ination. The load value at which the ratio of EC to
MS changes linearly is defined by the critical load
(MSe). For MS > MSe, despite the increase in the
MS load value, the EC is essentially constant. In
the case of very high MS loads, the EC reaches its
maximum ECmax value.
2.2. Biotrickling filters in the removal of VOCs
The review of the current state of knowledge shows
that the biotrickling filters technology can be used for
bio-purification of air from various emission sources. It
is possible with the appropriate selection of parameters
such as the type and adaptation of microorganisms
appropriately selected for the degradation of the
selected type of contamination, or the type of packing
materials [20]. The correct selection of microorganisms
ENVIRONMENT 3/2021
 IMPLEMENTATION TO INDUSTRY AND MUNICIPAL SECTOR THE COMPACT TRICKLE BED BIOREACTORS TECHNOLOGY ...
for specific pollutants determines the maintenance of
certain conditions inside the apparatus, i.e. pH, tem-
perature, composition of the mineral salt solution.
Zhou et al. 2016 [21] tested the removal efficiency of
chlorobenzene in biotrickling filters using Ralstonia
picketti strain, the obtained results of chlorobenzene
air biopurification efficiency are in the range of 88-
90%. Cheng et al. 2017 [22] conducted a study to eval-
uate the potential of a consortium of Ralstonia picketti
and Trichoderma viride to enhance the biodegradation
of monochlorobenzene. The results of this study
showed an increased degradation rate for the used
consortia of microorganisms compared to the degrada-
tion rate of monochlorobenzene for each strain indi-
vidually, suggesting that the fungal-bacterial consor-
tium can be effectively used to completely biodegrade
this pollutant. The study of Lebrero et al. 2012 [23]
confirmed the high potential of biotrickling filter to
treat moderately hydrophobic VOCs and sulfur com-
pounds reaching more than 95% removal efficiency for
methyl mercaptan, toluene, alpha-pinene, while for
hexane the removal efficiency was 70%. High micro-
bial diversity was also observed during long-term oper-
ation of the biotrickling filter, with the main phyla
being Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Nitrospira,
Chloroflexi and Gemmatimonadertes. Tu et al. 2015 [24]
conducted experiments to apply saponins to enhance
the removal of hexane in a biotrickling filter. The
results showed that the addition of saponins to the
biotrickling filter increased the hexane removal effi-
ciency of 91.3% while the sample without saponins
achieved an efficiency of 62.8%. As the concentration
of hexane increased, the efficiency decreased as well as
the gas empty bed contact time. Moreover, it was
found that saponins could also decreased the biomass
accumulation rate within the packing material. The
recently published results of Rybarczyk et al. 2021 [25]
on the removal of cyclohexane and ethanol from air in
biotrickling filters prove that not only bacteria are
capable of efficient degradation, but also, Candida
albicans and Candida subhashii fungal strains indicated
their good ability to utilize cyclohexane and ethanol as
a carbon source and achieve 95–99% biodegradation
efficiency of these compounds. Moreover, it was found
that the presence of ethanol increases the efficiency of
removing cyclohexane from the air. Wan et al. 2011
[26] investigated the removal efficiency of trimethy-
lamine from waste gas in a biotrickling filter whose fill
was ceramic particles and inoculated with microorgan-
isms. The study showed 100% removal efficiency for an
empty bed retention time greater than 110 s and an
inlet trimethylamine concentration of 0.3 mg/l but
halving the retention time to 55 s reduced the efficien-
3/2021 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING
e
cy to 64.7%. In contrast, 100% degradation efficiency
E N V I R O N M E N T
was maintained at a retention time of 83 s and a
trimethylamine concentration in the inlet gas
<0.2 mg/l.
2.3. Biotrickling filters in the removal of odors
In addition to effectively treating VOCs, there are
many scientific papers describing the possibilities of
using biotrickling filters to bio-purify the air from
pollutants emitted by municipal sector, commonly
known under the general term of odors. Particular
troublesome and harmful representatives of this
group of compounds include ammonia (NH3) and
hydrogen sulphide (H2S), due to e.g. a very low detec-
tion threshold (mainly in the case of H2S) but mainly
to their toxic effects and very negative impact on
humans. In most wastewater treatment plants, these
compounds have the highest concentrations of odor
compounds in the emitted gases [27, 28]. There is a
lot of work on maximizing biotrickling filters perfor-
mance by selecting the right packing material. This is
a key design parameter that can determine the prop-
er performance of the system, and also its cost-effec-
tiveness. The type, composition, structure and shape
of the filling used determine the ability and stability
of the development of microorganisms and the for-
mation of a biofilm on its surface [29]. The packing
material used must also meet other requirements,
such as: the appropriate weight properly adapted to
the size of the installation, or the material from which
it was made - resistant to biofilm (including products
of microbial metabolism), chemical compounds
(organic and inorganic, including: dissolved in the
liquid phase contaminants, buffer solutions regulat-
ing pH), temperature. In addition, the surface of the
packing material, which is inoculated with microor-
ganisms, is also important, the larger the mass trans-
fer surface, the more effective the bio-cleaning
process [20]. The research shows the possibility of
using a wide range of packing material, both organic
and inorganic – compost, wood chips, activated car-
bon, perlite, lava rock, glass balls, polyurethane foam,
ceramic shapes, polypropylene rings.
The following Table 2 shows the results of recent
biotrickling filter performance studies using different
packing material.
ENVIRONMENT 93
 A . P a r z e n t n a - G a b o r, K . B a r b u s i ń s k i , D . K a s p e r c z y k

Table 2.
A review of recent work on the effectiveness of biodegradation in relation to packing material [29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37]

References Pollution Packing material Degradation Effectiveness/ Conclusions

Hernandez et al. 2013 Ethylmercaptan, NH3 Poplar wood chips and Both biotrickling filters achieved complete NH3
[30] and H2S polyurethane foam removal, and more than 90% degradation of H2S, eth-
ylmercaptan reported lower performance in biotrick-
ling filters packed with polyurethane foam.
Polyurethane foam requires a longer time for the
immobilization of microorganisms, poplar wood shows
greater resistance in terms of NH3 elimination, the
durability of poplar wood is 2 years and much more
profitable compared to polyurethane foam.
Sun et al. 2019 [31] H2S from municipal Polypropylene rings The average H2S removal efficiency was 91.8%
wastewater treatment
plant
Chen et al. 2019 [32] H2S from sewage lift Bamboo charcoal The average H2S removal efficiency was 99%
station
Huan et al. 2020 [33] NH3 and H2S Polyhedral spheres The average H2S removal efficiency was 98.25% and
NH3 was 88.55%
Liu et al. 2020 [34] removal of odors Polyurethane, Odor (mainly H2S and NH3) removal efficiency was
(mainly H2S and NH3), Volcanic rock, 98,5%
from the sludge dewa- modified activated
tering room in waste- carbon fiber
water treatment plant.

Ying et al. 2020 [35]
Chen et al. 2016 [36]
H2S and NH3 Porcelain Raschig rings The average H2S and NH3 removal efficiency was over
and ceramsite 99%
H2S Activated carbon- The average H2S removal efficiency was greater than
loaded polyurethane 96%
(upper layer) and with In addition, the biotrickling filter was able to withstand
modified organism-sus- periods of contaminated starvation (1.5 days and 7
pended fillers (lower days) with several hours of recovery time
layer)

Lebrero et al. 2021 [29] H2S, methylmercaptan
Tu et al. 2019 [37]
Conventional plastic The use of new fillings in the biotrickling filter has
and toluene packing material and increased the efficiency and buffer capacity compared
new clay-based materi- to plastic rings. Similar conclusions apply to biofilters,
als (Saint Gobain) almost complete reduction of H2S and toluene and
80% methylmercaptan removals were investigated.
Clay-based packing materials (Saint Gobain) were
found to have high buffer capacity, high water retention
and good gas-liquid mass transfer
Mixed sulfur Plastic balls in the Improvement in sulfur removal efficiency and a higher
compounds upper layer bed pH using the new packing combination compared
and with lava rocks to a lava rocks only packing.
in the bottom layer

The cited works confirmed that using combined
packing materials effectively improved conditions for
the growth of microorganisms and, as a result, to
improve the efficiency of pollution degradation.
3. COMPACT TRICKLE BED BIOREAC-
TOR – AS AN EXAMPLE OF A
BIOTRICKLING FILTER
An example of a biotrickling filter is the Compact
Trickle Bed Bioreactors, which have been tested to
remove VOCs and odors (including H2S). CTBB
reactors are derived from biotrckling filters.
However, they are different in full automation of
operation, compactness of their construction,

94 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENT 3/2021

 IMPLEMENTATION TO INDUSTRY AND MUNICIPAL SECTOR THE COMPACT TRICKLE BED BIOREACTORS TECHNOLOGY ...
e

E N V I R O N M E N T
Figure 2.
Model of Compact Trickle Bed Bioreactor (own study based on Kasperczyk et al. 2019 [39])

absence of side leachate, which are their undoubted
advantages. In CTBB reactors, important factors for
the course of the air biopurification process, similar-
ly as in biotrickling filters, are the selection of care-
fully selected group of microorganisms for a specific
group of pollutants and providing appropriate condi-
tions for the growth and development of these organ-
isms, such as: pH, temperature, composition of the
solution with nutrients (mineral salts). In addition, it
is very important to determine the optimum condi-
tions for the entire process, adjusted to the concen-
tration of contaminants in the inlet gases and the gas
flow rate – liquid phase flow, gas phase flow and type
of packing material [38]. The Compact Trickle Bed
Bioreactors have been investigated so far by
Kasperczyk [13, 18, 39, 40, 41, 42] for the removal of
VOCs and odors – including styrene, ethanol,
dimethyl sulfide, vinyl acetate, benzene, acetone,
dimethyl disulfide, xylene, H2S – from a variety of
sources, studies have been conducted in both labora-
tory and industrial settings. Fig. 2 shows a CTBB
model, illustrating the downward co-current flow of
the gas and liquid phases in a thin film through a bed
made of polyurethane rings, inoculated with cocul-
ture of microorganisms, which use VOCs and odors
as the only carbon source.
Kasperczyk et al. 2014 [40] examined the use of
Compact Trickle Bed Bioreactor to the biodegrada-
tion of H2S and VOC mixture present in the air in a
copper-ore mine at a depth of 1000 m underground.
The efficiency of H2S removal was at the level of
80–99% – when the concentration of H2S was below
38 ppm, when an increase in concentration to
40–60 ppm was recorded, the efficiency of H2S
removal decreased to 60–80%. The VOC removal
efficiency was 90–100%. The publication of
Kasperczyk and Urbaniec 2015 [13] presented the
results of laboratory tests preceding the implementa-
tion of CTBB in a copper ore mine. The biodegrada-
tion of a 4-component VOC mixture consisting of
acetone, benzene, styrene and vinyl acetate and an
8-component mixture of impurities in which xylene,
H2S, dimethyl disulfide and dimethyl sulfide were
added to the previous 4-component mixture was
investigated. Over 80% of pollutant removal efficien-
cy was achieved at a specific pollutant load up to
40 g/m3h, except for benzene, which caused biomass
poisoning at a specific load above 5 g/m3h. Bąk et al.
2017 [41] also examined the potential of CTBB in the
biodegradation of gaseous streams containing
styrene, dimethyl sulfide and ethanol mixture. The
average process efficiency for the 3-component VOC

3/2021 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENT 95

 A . P a r z e n t n a - G a b o r, K . B a r b u s i ń s k i , D . K a s p e r c z y k
Figure 3.
Efficiency of biopurification of air from H2S (Figure source: Kasperczyk et al. 2019 [39])
mixture was above 95% in the lower concentration
ranges, 80% in the middle concentration ranges and
above 55% in the highest concentration ranges of the
pollutant (the concentration ranges were: ethanol
0.045–0.178 g/m3; dimethyl sulfide 0.027–0.061 g/m3,
styrene 0.236–1.993 g/m3). Moreover, almost 100%
efficiency of ethanol biodegradation was observed in
the whole tested range of mass load. The possibility
of using CTBB for the treatment of VOCs generated
in the PKN Orlen SA wastewater treatment plant was
also analyzed, the results of which were described by
Kamiński and Koziczyński 2017 [43]. The study
obtained 85-99% biodegradation of VOCs, whose
concentrations were in the range of – 0.06–1.75 g/m3
and 65-88% for the range 1.7–2.5 g/m3. The reduction
of NH3 in the entire concentration range of
0.6–5.5 mg/m3 was above 99%, and the reduction of
H2S in the concentration range of 0.1–137 mg/m3 was
also above 99%. One of the latest published studies
by Kasperczyk et al. 2019 [39] confirms the use of
CTBB to remove VOC and H2S emitted by a munic-
ipal wastewater treatment plant. The research on the
96 ARCHITECTURE
efficiency of ventilation air purification contaminated
with H2S and VOC was conducted for 60 days, during
which fluctuations in the air flow intensity from 2 to
30 m3/h were recorded. The minimum and maximum
concentrations of H2S were 2 ppm and 660 ppm, but
most of the time they remained in the range of
50–440 ppm, as shown in Fig. 3.
For H2S concentration of approximately 200 ppm,
the removal efficiency was above 97%. A several-
hour increase in the concentration of H2S to
600 ppmv caused poisoning of the bioreactor, the sta-
ble operation of which was achieved within 3 hours
from the moment of restoring the original concentra-
tion of H2S. The efficiency of H2S and VOC removal
for pollutant loads up to 20 g/m3h was over 95%.
The subject of the latest publication by Kasperczyk et
al. 2021 [42] was the implementation of the CTBB
developed from a pilot scale to a full industrial scale,
to the automotive painting industry. Figure 4 shows
the results of industrial research conducted at CTBB
on a pilot scale. At 170-180 ppm VOC concentrations
in the CTBB inlet ventilation air, the outlet concen-
CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENT 3/2021
 IMPLEMENTATION TO INDUSTRY AND MUNICIPAL SECTOR THE COMPACT TRICKLE BED BIOREACTORS TECHNOLOGY ...
e

E N V I R O N M E N T
Figure 4.
Efficiency of biopurification of air from VOC in pilot scale CTBB. (Figure source: Kasperczyk et al. 2021 [42])

Figure 5.
Efficiency of biopurification of air from VOC in full scale CTBB. (Figure source: Kasperczyk et al. 2021 [42])

tration did not exceed 20 ppm, which gives a conver-
sion rate of 85–90%. The line indicating the upper
limit of the VOC concentration in the CTBB exhaust
gases, as per the relevant environmental permit, is
also marked in Fig. 4. The limit was set at 50 ppm,
while the VOC concentration in the clean gases was
a maximum of 20 ppm – well below the specified
limit.
Fig. 5 shows the VOC concentration results at the inlet
and outlet of CTBB tests in full scale. The graph shows
significant variations in the VOC concentration at the
inlet to CTBB occurring in the range of
100–1800 ppm, indicating the high flexibility of the
CTBB installation. Despite significant increases in
concentrations (1700–1800 ppm), the VOC biodegra-
dation efficiency remains at the level of 85–90%, while
the average VOC bio-purification efficiency in the
period in question is 95–99%. The results showed that
the VOC biodegradation coefficient for concentra-
tions in CTBB inlet gases 200 ppm is in the range of
85–99%, while the paint shop ventilation air flow rate
is 1–10 m3/h. The VOC biodegradation index of

3/2021 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENT 97

 A . P a r z e n t n a - G a b o r, K . B a r b u s i ń s k i , D . K a s p e r c z y k
Figure 6.
Compact Trickle Bed Bioreactor implemented on a full scale to remove VOC emitted from paint industry (Ekoinwentyka Ltd)
85–99% was also obtained with a gas flow rate of up to
6000 m3/h using a full-size CTBB adapted to the auto-
motive painting conditions (Fig. 6).
The results of the cited publication prove the possi-
bility of efficient upscaling of the CTBB technology
to degrade high concentrations of VOC in a wide
range of polluted air flow rates.
According to the research carried out so far and the
implementation of CTBB in copper ore mines, waste-
water treatment plants and the varnish industry, it
can be concluded that the tested technology has a
very large implementation potential in a wide range
of various industries, both for the degradation of
VOCs and odors, including inorganic H2S and NH3.
The main advantages of using the CTBB technology
are:
• High efficiency of degradation of VOCs and odors
• No secondary contamination
• No need to replace the packing material and uti-
lize hazardous pollutants
• Operation of the technology at 25°C and atmospher-
ic pressure, resulting in lower energy consumption
98 ARCHITECTURE
• The compactness of the CTBB (Figure 4) enables
its adaptation to various conditions in industrial
factories, which greatly increases the implementa-
tion potential of this technology.
4. NEXT RESEARCH CHALLENGES
In the future and further development plans for the
CTBB technology, it will be important to research
new groups of pollutants emitted by burdensome and
so far unknown sources of VOC and odors, such as:
animal farms – poultry farms, pigs or fur animal
farms, fish processing, food industry – sugar factories,
distilling, brewing and wood industry – producers of
plywood, furniture boards, laminated boards. This
will allow to check the efficiency of the CTBB tech-
nology and the implementation potential in order to
enter new implementation directions. Like any inno-
vative topic, it is associated with challenges and diffi-
culties that may arise during the research. It will be
necessary to select: a special group of microorgan-
isms capable of degrading new types of pollutants,
nutrient composition, pH, temperature, and the for-
mation of secondary products of the pollutant
CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENT 3/2021
 IMPLEMENTATION TO INDUSTRY AND MUNICIPAL SECTOR THE COMPACT TRICKLE BED BIOREACTORS TECHNOLOGY ...
biodegradation process. Research into the selection
of materials and the type of filling used will also be
important in order to avoid negative consequences
such as corrosion of used materials. There is a solid
basis for further research and broadening the spec-
trum of new industries where CTBB technology
could be applied. This technology has great research,
development and implementation potential, due to
the fact that is ecological, fully controlled and eco-
nomically attractive.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research was co-financed by the Ministry of
Education and Science of Poland under grant No
DWD/3/7/2019 of 05.03.2020.
REFERENCES
[1] Michalak A., Krzeszowiak J., Pawlas K. (2014). Czy
ekspozycja na nieprzyjemne zapachy (odory) szkodzi
zdrowiu człowieka? (Does exposure to unpleasant
odors harm human health?) Medycyna Środowiskowa,
17(4), 76–81.
[2] Barbusiński K., Parzentna-Gabor A., Kasperczyk D.
(2021). Removal of odors (mainly H2S and NH3)
using biological treatment methods, Clean
Technologies, 3, 138–155.
DOI:10.3390/cleantechnol3010009
[3] Bąk J., Barbusiński K., Thomas M. (2021). Review of
methods for assessing the impact of WWTPs on the
natural environment, Clean Technologies, 3, 98–122.
DOI:10.3390/cleantechnol3010007
[4] Air quality in Europe – 2020 report; EEA Report, No
09/2020
[5] Guidelines for Air Quality, WHO, Geneva, 2000.
[6] Jia H., Gao S., Duan Y., Fu Q., Che X., Xu H., Wang
Z., Cheng J. (2021). Investigation of health risk
assessment and odor pollution of volatile organic
compounds from industrial activities in the Yangtze
River Delta region, China, Ecotoxicology and
Environmental Safety, 208.
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.111474
[7] Rybarczyk P., Szulczyński B., Gębicki J., Hupka J.
(2019). Treatment of malodorous air in biotrickling
filters: A review. Biochemical Engineering Journal,
141, 146–162. DOI:10.1016/j.bej.2018.10.014
[8] Damian Kasperczyk (2019). Zastosowanie bioreak-
torów trójfazowych do degradacji lotnych związków
organicznych i substancji odorogennych (Application
of trickle-bed bioreactors for the degradation of
volatile organic compounds and odorogenic sub-
stances) PhD thesis Silesian University of
Technology, Poland, Gliwice.
3/2021 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING
e
[9] Rene E.R., Montes M., Veiga M.C., Kennes C.
E N V I R O N M E N T
(2012). Novel Bioreactors for Waste Gas Treatment.
Environmental Chemistry for a Sustainable World:
Volume 2: Remediation of Air and Water Pollution,
121–164. DOI:10.1007/978-94-007-2439-6_3
[10] Barbusiński K., Kalemba K., Kasperczyk D.,
Urbaniec K., Kozik V. (2017). Biological methods for
odor treatment – A review. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 152, 223–241.
DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.093
[11] Wysocka I., Gębicki J., Namieśnik J. (2019).
Technologies for deodorization of malodorous gases,
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26,
9409-9434. DOI:10.1007/s11356-019-04195-1
[12] Ren B., Zhao Y., Lyczko N., Nzihou A. (2019).
Current status and outlook of odor removal tech-
nologies in wastewater treatment plant. Waste and
Biomass Valorization, 10, 1443–1458.
DOI:10.1007/s12649-018-0384-9
[13] Kasperczyk, D., Urbaniec, K. (2015). Application of a
compact trickle-bed bioreactor to the biodegradation
of pollutants from the ventilation air in a copper-ore
mine. Journal of Cleaner Production, 87, 971–976.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.009
[14] Gospodarek M., Rybarczyk P., Szulczyński B.,
Gębicki J. (2019). Comparative Evaluation of
Selected Biological Methods for the Removal of
Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Odorous VOCs from
Air. Processes, 7, 187–209, 10.3390/pr7040187
[15] Alonso, C., Zhu, X., Suidan, M.T., Kim, B.R., Kim,
B.J. (2001). Mathematical model of biofiltration of
VOCs: effect of nitrate concentration and backwash-
ing. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 127,
655–664.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2001)127:7(655)
[16] Smith, F.L., Sorial, G.A., Suidan, M.T., Breen, A.W.,
Biswas, P., Brenner, R.C. (1996). Development of two
biomass control strategies for extended, stable opera-
tion of highly efficient biofilters with high toluene
loadings. Environmental Science and Technology, 30,
1744–1751. DOI:10.1021/es950743y
[17] Cox H.H.J, Deshusses M.A. (1998). Biological waste
air treatment in biotrickling filters. Current Opinion in
Biotechnology, 9(3), 256–262, DOI: 10.1016/S0958-
1669(98)80056-6
[18] Kasperczyk D., Bartelmus G., Gąszczak A. (2012).
Removal of styrene from dilute gaseous waste
streams using trickle-bed bioreactor: kinetics, mass
transfer and modeling of biodegradation process,
Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology, 87,
758-763. DOI:10.1002/jctb.3733
[19] Hekmat D., Vortmeyer D. (1994). Modelling of
biodegradation processes in trickle-bed bioreactors,
Chemical Engineering Science, 49, 4327–4345.
DOI:10.1016/S0009-2509(05)80025-9
ENVIRONMENT 99
 A . P a r z e n t n a - G a b o r, K . B a r b u s i ń s k i , D . K a s p e r c z y k
[20] Wu H., Yan H., Quan Y., Zhao Huazhang, Jiang N.,
Yin C. (2018). Recent progress and perspectives in
biotrickling filters for VOCs and odorous gases treat-
ment, Journal of Environmental Management, 222,
409–419. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.06.001
[21] Zhou Q., Zhang L., Chen J., Xu B., Chu G., Chen J.
(2016). Performance and microbial analysis of two
different inocula for the removal of chlorobenzene in
biotrickling filters. Chemical Engineering Journal, 284,
174–181. DOI:10.1016/j.cej.2015.08.130
[22] Cheng Z., Li C., Kennes C., Ye J., Chen D., Zhang S.,
Chen J., Yu J.(2017). Improved biodegradation
potential of chlorobenzene by a mixed fungal-bacter-
ial consortium. International Biodeterioration and
Biodegradation, 123, 276–285.
DOI:10.1016/j.ibiod.2017.07.008
[23] Lebrero R., Estrada J.M., Munoz R., Quijano G.
(2012). Toluene mass transfer characterization in a
biotrickling filter, Biochemical Engineering Journal,
60, 44–49. DOI:10.1016/j.bej.2011.09.017.
[24] Tu Y., Yang C., Cheng Y., Zeng G., Lu L., Wang L.
(2015). Effect of saponins on n-hexane removal in
biotrickling filters, Bioresource Technology, 175,
231–238. DOI:10.1016/j.biortech.2014.10.039.
[25] Rybarczyk P., Marycz M., Szulczyński B., Brillowska-
Dąbrowska A., Rybarczyk A., Gębicki J. (2021).
Removal of cyclohexane and ethanol from air in
biotrickling filters inoculated with Candida albicans
and Candida subhashii, Archives of environmental
Protection, 1, 26-34. DOI:10.24425/aep.2021.136445.
[26] Wan S., Li G., Zu L., An T. (2011). Purification of
waste gas containing high concentration trimethy-
lamine in biotrickling filter inoculated with B350
mixed microorganisms, Bioresource Technology, 102,
6757-6760. DOI:10.1016/j.biortech.2011.03.059
[27] Alinezhad E., Haghighi M., Rahmani F., Keshizadeh
H., Abdi M., Naddafi K. (2019). Technical and eco-
nomic investigation of chemical scrubber and biofil-
tration in removal of H2S and NH3 from wastewater
treatment plant. Journal of Environmental
Management, 241, 32–43. DOI:
10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.003
[28] Liang J., Cheng G., Feng H. (2016). Engineering
practices of dezodorization for odor in urban sewage
treatment plant in China. Advances in Economics,
Business and Management Research, 30, 86–91, DOI:
10.2991/iconfem-16.2016.15
[29] Lebrero, R., Rodríguez, E., Collantes, M., De Juan,
C., Norden, G., Rosenbom, K., Muñoz, R. (2021).
Comparative Performance Evaluation of Commercial
Packing Materials for Malodorant Abatement in
Biofiltration, Applied Sciences, 11, 2966.
DOI:10.3390/app11072966
100 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING
[30] Hernández J., Lafuente J., Prado Ó.J., Gabriel D.
(2013). Startup and longterm performance of
biotrickling filters packed with polyurethane foam
and poplar wood chips treating a mixture of ethyl-
mercaptan, H2S, and NH3, Journal of the Air & Waste
Management Association, 63, 462–471, DOI:
10.1080/10962247.2013.763305
[31] Sun SH., Jia TP., Chen KQ., Peng YZ., Zhang L.
(2019). Removal of hydrogen sulfide produced in a
municipal WWTP using a biotrickling filter with
polypropylene rings as the packing material and
microbial community analysis. Huan Jing KeXue,
40(10), 4585–4593, DOI: 10.13227/j.hjkx.201903010
[32] Chen Y., Xie L., Cai W., Wu J. (2019). Pilot – scale
study using biotrickling filter to remove H2S from
sewage lift station: Experiment and CFD simulation.
Biochemical Engineering Journal, 144, 177–184. DOI:
10.1016/j.bej.2019.02.003
[33] Huan Ch., Fang J., Tong X., Zeng Y., Liu Y., Jiang X.,
Ji G., Xu L., Lyu Q., Yan Z. (2020). Simultaneous
elimination of H2S and NH3 in a biotrickling filter
packed with polyhedral spheres and best efficiency in
compost deodorization. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 124708,
DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124708
[34] Liu J., Kang X., Liu X., Yue P., Sun J., Lu C. (2020).
Simultaneous removal of bioaerosols, odors and
volatile organic compounds from a wastewater treat-
ment plant by a full-scale integrated reactor. Process
Safety and Environmental Protection, 144, 2–14. DOI:
10.1016/j.psep.2020.07.003
[35] Ying S., Kong X., Cai Z., Man Z., Xin Y., Liu D.
(2020). Interactions and microbial variations in a
biotrickling filter treating low concentrations of
hydrogen sulfide and ammonia. Chemosphere, 255,
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126931
[36] Chen Y., Wang X., He S., Zhu S., Shen S. (2016). The
performance of a two-layer biotrickling filter filled
with new mixed packing materials for the removal of
H2S from air, Journal of Environmental Management,
165, 11–16. DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.09.008
[37] Tu X., Xu. M., Li J., Li E., Feng R., Zhao G., Huang
S., Guo J. (2019). Enhancement of using combined
packing materials on the removal of mixed sulfur
compounds in a biotrickling filter and analysis of
microbial communities, BMC Biotechnology, 19,
DOI:10.1186/s12896-019-0540-8
[38] Vikrant K., Kim K., Szulejko J., Pandey S.K., Singh
R.S., Giri B.S., Brown R.J.C., Lee S.-h. (2017). Bio-
filters for the Treatment of VOCs and Odors –
A review, Asian Journal of Atmospheric Environment,
11, 139–152.DOI: 10.5572/ajae.2017.11.3.139
ENVIRONMENT 3/2021
 IMPLEMENTATION TO INDUSTRY AND MUNICIPAL SECTOR THE COMPACT TRICKLE BED BIOREACTORS TECHNOLOGY ...
e
[39] Kasperczyk D., Urbaniec K, Barbusiński K., Rene.

E N V I R O N M E N T
E.R., Colmenares-Quintero R.F. (2019). Application
of a compact trickle-bed bioreactor for the removal of
odor and volatile organic compounds emitted from a
wastewater treatment plant. Journal of Environmental
Management, 236, 413–419,
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.01.106
[40] Kasperczyk D., Urbaniec K, Barbusinski K. (2014).
Removal of Pollutants from the Air in a Copper-Ore
Mine Using a Compact Trickle-Bed Bioreactor.
Chemical Engineering Transaction, 39, 1309–1314,
DOI: 10.3303/CET1439219
[41] Bąk A., Kozik V., Dybal P., Sulowicz S., Kasperczyk
D., Kus S., Barbusinski K. (2017). Abatement robust-
ness of volatile organic compounds using compact
trickle-bed bioreactor: Biotreatment of styrene,
ethanol and dimethyl sulfide mixture in contaminated
airstream, International Biodeterioration &
Biodegradation, 119, 316–328.
DOI:10.1016/j.ibiod.2016.10.039
[42] Kasperczyk D., Urbaniec K., Barbusiński K., Rene
E.R., Colmenares-Quintero R.F. (2021).
Development and adaptation of the technology of air
biotreatment in trickle-bed bioreactor to the automo-
tive painting industry. Journal of Cleaner Production,
309. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127440
[43] Kamiński A., Koziczyński P. (2017). Analiza możli-
wości zastosowania bioreaktora strużkowego do
oczyszczania lotnych związków organicznych powsta-
jących na terenie oczyszczalni ścieków PKN Orlen
S.A. (Analysis of the possibility of using a trickle-bed
bioreactor for purification of volatile organic com-
pounds generated in the PKN Orlen S.A. wastewater
treatment plant), Inżynieria Ekologiczna, 18, 176–183.
DOI: 10.12912/23920629/75657

3/2021 ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENT 101