1

DSD International Conference

Hong Kong, 12.‐14.11.2014

Compact wastewater treatment

with MBBR

Hallvard Ødegaard
Prof. em. Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
CEO Scandinavian Environmental Technology (SET) AS

hallvard.odegaard@ntnu.no

SET AS
2

The principle of the moving bed biofilm reactor

(MBBR) technology

Aerobic reactor Anoxic reactor

SET AS
3

The Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) in practice

SET AS
4

The components of the MBBR treatment system

THE MAJOR COMPONENTS

a) Tank
b) Media
c) Aeration System
d) Sieve Assemblies
e) Blowers
f) Mixers

Carrier filling fraction (%)

(bulk volume occupied by media
in empty reactor):

Possible filling fraction: 0 – 70 %

Normal filling fraction: 50 – 65 %

SET AS
5

The MBBR reactor

Rectangular/Circular open concrete reactors Rectangular covered concrete reactors

Circular Steel Reactors (Bolted or Welded) Circular fiber glass reactors

SET AS
6

The (MBBR) carriers

• 500 m2/m3 bulk • 500 m2/m3 bulk • 800 m2/m3 bulk • 1200 m2/m3 bulk
• 9.1 x 7.2 mm • 25 x 10 mm • 25 x 3.5 mm • 48 x 2.2 mm
diameter/depth diameter/depth diameter/depth diameter/depth

K1 K3 K5 BiofilmChip M Z‐MBBR

Courtesy AnoxKaldnes

• 650 m2/m3 bulk • 650 m2/m3 bulk

• 13 x 13 mm • 18.5 x 14.5 x 7.3 mm
diameter/depth length/width/depth

ABC BWT S
Courtesy Aqwise Courtesy Biowater Technology Courtesy Qingdao Spring

SET AS
7

Carriers from the MBBR-based

SANI pilot at Shatin
8

Aeration /oxygen transfer

16,00
16
14
14,00

12
12,00

• Oxygen transfer is enhanced by the

3. m
10
10,00

presence of carriers

/Nm
O22/Nm 3m
8
8,00

g gO
6
6,00

• The higher the filling fraction, the better 4

4,00

SOTR 2
2,00

0
0,00
Renvatten, grov K3, 30% grov K3, 50% grov
Clean K3 K3
• Influence dependent on carrier design. water 30 % 50 %

Suppliers should provide SOTR data Christensson, 2013

9

The sieve assembly

SET AS

The mixers in anoxic reactors

SET AS
10

The principal moving bed reactor processes

The basic MBBR

processes

The high‐rate MBBR

processes

The IFAS
processes

SET AS
11

Flow diagrams for moving bed biofilm reactor

(MBBR) processes for various applications
BOD-removal BOD- and P-removal
Pure MBBR-processes Pure MBBR-processes
Coag.
a) c)

Coag.

b) d)

BOD- and NH4-N-removal BOD- and N/P-removal

Pure MBBR-processes Pure MBBR- processes
(Coag.).
e) h)

Coag. COD Coag

.
f) i)

COD

g) j)

IFAS-processes IFAS-processes
k) m)

l) n)

SET AS
12

Aerobic COD‐removal rates (Ødegaard et al, 2004)

50 140
45

(CODin-SCODout ) [g/m2*d]
120
Filtered COD removal rate

Obtainable removal rate

40
35 100
[g SCOD/m2*d]

30 80
25
20 60
15 40
10
5
20
K1 K2 100% K1 K2 100%
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 50 100 150 200
2
Filtered COD loading rate [g SCOD/m *d] Total COD loading rate [g COD/m2*d]

Soluble COD removal rate vs soluble COD Obtainable COD removal rate vs total COD
loading rate loading rate

”Obtainable" COD removal rate : (CODinfluent‐SCODeffluent)*Q/A

Demonstrates removal rate of tot. COD if all particles > 1 µm were removed
SET AS
13

High rate MBBR systems

The high‐rate MBBR‐coagulation process
Coagulant
Fe+polymer
Secondary treatment
+ 90 % P-removal
Air could be met at a:

total HRT ~ 1 hr

The high‐rate MBBR ‐ AS process

MBBR

Frequently used in
industrial plants
e.g. pulp and paper

SET AS
14

Factors determining the nitrification rate in

MBBR’s (Hem, Rusten and Ødegaard, 1994)
1. The load of organic matter Temperature dependency:
2. The oxygen concentration kT2 = kT1∙θ(T2‐T1) , θ = 1,06‐1,08
3. The ammonium concentration

2.7 1.4
15 ºC 15 oC

Nitrification rate, g NH4-N/m /d

2.4 DO = 6 mg/L
1.2 2

2
Nitrification rate, g NH4-N/m /d

2 /d 0.4 g BOD 5/m /d

/m
2

2.1
OD
5
B
. 0g 1.0
1.8 0 DO = 4 mg/L
d=
loa
1.5 nic 1.0 0.8
rga
O 2.0
1.2 0.6 DO = 2 mg/L
3.0
0.9
4.0 0.4
0.6
5.0
0.2
0.3 6.0

0.0 0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Oxygen concentration, mg O2/L Ammonium concentration, mg NH4-N/L

SET AS
15

Influence of oxygen on nitrification rate ‐

practical experiences

SET AS
16

Nitrification process design

Organic matter removal prior to nitrification:

rBOD = 3,9 g BOD5/m2d (10 oC) (kT = 1.06(T-10))

Nitrification rate (when NH4-N is the limiting substrate)

rN = k . (Sn)n
rN = nitrification rate (g NH4-N/m2.d)
SN = NH4-N concentration in the reactor
n = reaction rate order - n is normally set at 0,7
k = reactor rate constant – 0,4 – 0,6 (varies with the organic load, i.e pre-treatment)

NH4-N is only rate limiting at low NH4-concentrations (ca 1-2 mg NH4-N/l).

At higher concentrations, SN will be determined by the bulk liquid DO concentration and

Sn should be replaced by Sn,transition

Sn,transition = (DO-0,5) / 3,2

SET AS
17

Nitrification rates in full‐scale plants

2.0
Lillehammer WWTP
1.8
Removal rate, g NH4-N/m2/d

R4
1.6 10oC
R4 + R5
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4 1.17 g NH4-N/m2d
0.2 Temp. 11 º C

0.0
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2
2
Ammonium load, g NH4-N/m /d

Intensive study at Lillehammer WWTP

• Very high max rates (1,4 g NH4/m2.d) Nitrification performance at Givaudan WWTP
• Complete nitrification at < 1,2 g NH4/m2.d Switzerland (Tschui, personal comm.)
(Rusten and Ødegaard, 2007)

Challenge: Alkalinity limitation. Recommendation > 1,5 meq./l residual alkalinity

SET AS
18

N‐removal
Choice of process is primarily dependent on availability of internal
carbon source for denitrification and treatment efficiency requirement:
Pre-denitrification
1. If carbon source is abundant and
treatment efficiency needed is < 75 %,
pre‐DN is preferable
Combined denitrification
C
2. If carbon source is limited and
treatment efficiency required is
> 75 %, combined‐DN is preferable
Post-denitrification
C

3. If, in addition to 2., space is very

limited, post‐DN may be preferable

SET AS
19

Denitrification
rDN = k * [SCOD/(SCOD+KS,COD)]* [SNO3/(SNO3+KS,NO3)]

Pre‐denitrification Post‐denitrification

C/N
(g BSCOD/g N)

R= r/(r+1)

There is a limit to treatment efficiency in No carbon limitation as long as:

conventional pre‐DN caused by the • g CODadded/ g NO3‐Nequiv. is > 3,5
oxygen recycle • NO3‐N may be the limiting factor at low NO3‐N
Rusten, Hem and Ødegaard, 1995 Rusten, Hem and Ødegaard, 1995

SET
20

The combined pre‐ and post‐DN MBBR process

Nitrification rate
Low recirculation of oxygen controlled through O2 Carbon

DN‐rate controlled
Recirculation of NO3‐N by carbon addition

• Aerated when larger nitrification volume Not aerated nitrification

is needed (winter). O2 consumption only ‐
• Not aerated in summer – more pre‐DN in order to reduce the
volume – higher recycle in summer amount of recycled O2
SET AS
21

DN‐rates with external carbon sources

(practical results from combined‐DN plant)

5
Denitrification rate, g NO3-N/m2/d

Ethanol
Methanol
4 Monopropylene glycol

0
3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17
Temperature, °C

Rusten et al, 1996

SET AS
22

Four Norwegian combined DN‐plants

a) NO3 recycle Carbon Secondary sed.
Chem.
Primary sed.

Flocc.
AN AN AN/ AE AE AE AN AN AE
AE
Lillehammer WWTP

b) NO3 recycle Carbon

Chem. DAF
Primary sed.

Flocc.
AN AN/ AE AE AE AN AE
AE
Nordre Follo and Gardermoen WWTP

c) NO3 recycle Carbon

Chem. Secondarysed.
Primary sed.

AN AE AE AE AN AE RA2 WWTP

SET AS
23

MBBR design/operating values and performances

Parameter Lille- Nordre Garder- NRA
hammer Follo moen
Average flow (m3/h) 1200 750 920 2300
Max flow (m3/h) 1900 1125 1300 7200
Temperature (oC) 3-14 6-14 4-14 7-14
MBBR
Total volume (m3) 3840 3710 5790 19370
Carrier fill fraction (%) 65,0 66,2 58.5 42,7
Average(max) HRT (hrs) 3,2 (2,0) 4,9 (3,3) 6,3 (4,5) 8,4 (2,7)
Carbon source Ethanol Methanol Glycol Methanol
g CODadded/g TNequiv (now glycol) (now glycol)
3.3 2.2 2.4 -
Efficiency, 2005
Average out conc. Out Rem Out Rem Out Rem Out Rem
and treatment efficiency mg/l % mg/l % mg/l % mg/l %
BOD5 2,2 99 2,8 98 3,2 98 4,0 95
COD 35 93 39 91 25 96 27 93
Tot N 2,9 92 9,7 73 7,0 87 5,0 83
Tot P 0.12 98 0.20 96 0.18 98 0.05 99

SET AS
24
MBBR biomass separation alternatives
MBBR - settling

MBBR – Coag./settling
(also Actiflo)

MBBR - flotation

MBBR – media filtration

MBBR – microscreening
(i.e. Disc filtration)

MBBR – Membrane filtration

SET AS
25

Anaerobic ammonium oxidation (Anammox):

NH4+ + NO2- -> N2 + 2H20

Advantages
• No carbon source needed
• Less air needed (than in N/DN):
~1,8 g O2/g N (60 % less)
• Very low sludge production
~ 0,11 g SS/g NH4-N
• Less CO2 - production/
less alkalinity consumption
Disadvantages
• Some nitrate is formed:
i.e max N-removal ca 80 %
• Nitrite has to be generated
• Slow growth rate - long start-up
• Necessary to have a long SRT
(Biofilm or granules favorable)

Primarily used for N‐removal in sludge water treatment

SET AS
26

Anammox with MBBR (Christensson et al, 2013)

MBBR IFAS

Flocs (1-3 g/L) Nitritation

AOB
+ ‐
NH4 NO2
Liquid + Liquid
NH4 N2
N2 O2 < 0.5
Nitritation O2 = 0.5-1.5 mg/L
‐
AOB NO2 mg/L
Anammox
Anammox
Aerobic
Biofilm Biofilm
Anoxic Media Anoxic
Media

AOB in biofilm = NO2- limitation AOB in flocs = less NO2- limitation

SET AS
27

ANITA™ Mox – Sjölunda WWTP, Malmö (Sweden)

• 4 x 50m3 MBBR
• Capacity = 200 kgN/d
• 800‐1200 mgN‐NH4/L
• 1st ANITA™ Mox reference
• Flexibility for fullscale testing

 BioFarm concept = Providing seeded carriers for

Seeded carriers rapid start‐up of future full‐scale ANITATM Mox units
SET AS
28

Full‐scale test results 3,5

MBBR Tran-
sition
IFAS

NH4 load & removal (kgN/m3.d)

ANITA™Mox , 3

Sjölunda WWTP 2,5

(Christensson et al, 2013) 2

1,5

1 NH4‐load
0,5 NH4‐removal
• High removal rates and good
0
N‐removal with MBBR 90

%NH4 and %TN removal

80
• Very high removal rate with 70
IFAS ‐ up to 3 kg NH4‐N/m3.d 60 %TN‐removal
50
• K5 – filling fraction 50 % %NH4‐removal
(7.5 g NH4‐N/m2.d) • DOMBBR = 1.0 ‐ 1.3 mg/l
40
• DOIFAS = 0.2 ‐ 1.0 mg/l %NO3‐prod : NH4‐rem
30 • MLSSMBBR = 20–400 mg/l
• Energy consumption : 20 • MLSSIFAS = 1800 – 4600 mg/l
1.2 kWh/kg NH4‐N removed 10
0
930 950 970 990 1010 1030 1050 1070 1090 1110 1130 1150
Days
SET AS
29

Removal of pharmaceuticals
(Falås, 2013)

Comparison between activated sludge and

carrier‐based processes
30

Removal og pharmaceuticals in the biomass

from an IFAS plant (Bad Ragaz WWTP, CH)
Where does the removal take place?

Carbamazepine Atenolol
1.2 1.2

1 1

0.8

C/Cinitial
0.8

C/Cinitial
0.6 0.6
Anoxic sludge
0.4 Oxic sludge 0.4
Carriers 0.2
0.2

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (h) Time (h)
Diclofenac Mefenamic acid
1.2 1.2

1 1

0.8 0.8
C/Cinitial

C/Cinitial
0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (h)
Time (h)

(Falås et al, 2014)

31

Conclusions
1. The MBBR is a well‐proven, robust and very compact technology
(Now altogether > 800 plants in > 50 countries – 50/50 industrial/municipal).

2. The MBBR is used in pure biofilm processes as well as in hybrid processes (IFAS)

3. The combined pre‐ and post denitrification MBBR process is especially suitable
for low C/N waters and offers great flexibility in operation

4. The MBBR is very efficient in the upgrading of activated sludge plants:

a. as ”roughing” reactor before AS in order to reduce organic matter loading
b. in an IFAS‐process in order to achieve: nitrification, N‐removal and or P‐removal

5. The MBBR‐based processes are especially suitable for developing special

cultures – for instance for:
a. N‐removal by anammox processes
b. Organic micropollutants removal

SET AS
32

Thanks
a lot
for listening
The Pulpit, Lysefjord, Norway
33

Upgrading AS‐plants by the use of MBBR

Three options for nitrification

Pure MBBR BAS HYBAS

IFAS
MBBR MBBR Activated sludge Activated sludge + MBBR

SET AS
34

Design SRT vs temp for full scale IFAS

systems (installed bySRTANOXKALDNES)
Vs Temperature

14
13 ATV Design Curve
12
11 Crestted Butte (3.2 days at 7.5C) Nitrifier Growth Rate
10
Taos (5.2 days at 8C)
9
Georgetown (5.0 days at 9C)
8 Cheyenne (4.5 days at 9C)
SRT, d

7 New Castle (4.1 days at 10C)

6 Broomfield Greensboro (5.25 days at 14C)
5 (4.7 days at 13C)

4 Lubbock (3.8 days at 15C)

Oxford
3 (3.9 days at 11C) Fields Point & Flagstaff (3.3 days at 14C)
2 Springettsbury Yucaipa (2.3 days at 18C)
(2.4 days at 10C)
1
Fairplay (2.5 days at 5C) James River
0 (2.7 days at 14C)
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Mamaroneck Temperature, C
(1.8 days at 13C)
SET AS