Loading…
Feasibility of ammonium sulfate recovery from wastewater sludges: Hydrothermal liquefaction pathway vs. anaerobic digestion pathway
This study evaluated two pathways to recover the nitrogen-content of wastewater sludges as ammonium sulfate (AmS) for use as fertilizer. The first pathway entails sludge stabilization by hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting aqueous product by gas permeable m...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of environmental management 2023-12, Vol.347, p.119075-119075, Article 119075 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-4bde9862e5b7c4b7a09a7286a20e0036cd40d69d5ae91481b37c25b528514cf43 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-4bde9862e5b7c4b7a09a7286a20e0036cd40d69d5ae91481b37c25b528514cf43 |
container_end_page | 119075 |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 119075 |
container_title | Journal of environmental management |
container_volume | 347 |
creator | Abeyratne, W.M.L.K. Bayat, H. Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P. Zhang, Y. Brewer, C.E. Nirmalakhandan, N. |
description | This study evaluated two pathways to recover the nitrogen-content of wastewater sludges as ammonium sulfate (AmS) for use as fertilizer. The first pathway entails sludge stabilization by hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting aqueous product by gas permeable membrane (GPM) separation. The second one entails stabilization of the sludges by anaerobic digestion (AD) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting centrate by GPM separation. A bench-scale GPM reactor is shown to be capable of recovering >90% of N in the feed. Recoveries of NH3–N in the HTL-pathway ranged 96–100% in 5.5–7.5 h at mass removal rates of 0.2–0.3 g N/day, yielding 3.3–6.0 g AmS/L of feed. Recoveries of 98% were noted in the AD-pathway in 4 h at mass removal rates of 0.06–0.97 g N/day and a yield of 1.7–2.1 g AmS/L of feed. Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometer analysis confirmed that both pathways yielded AmS meeting the US EPA and European region guidelines for land application. The GPM reactor enabled higher nitrogen-recoveries in the HTL-pathway than those reported for current practice of AD followed by ammonia stripping, ion exchange, reverse osmosis, and/or struvite precipitation (96–100% vs. 50–90%). A process model for the GPM reactor is validated using performance data on three different feedstocks.
•Evaluated gas permeable membranes (GPMs) for N-recovery from wastewater sludge.•GPMs enabled ∼98% N-recovery from anaerobically digested wastewater sludge.•GPMs enabled ∼100% N-recovery from hydrothermally liquified wastewater sludge.•Nitrogen recovered as ammonium sulfate met US EPA standards for land application.•Model predictions of N-removal by GPM agreed well with measured values (r2 > 0.86). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119075 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2870987589</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0301479723018637</els_id><sourcerecordid>2870987589</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-4bde9862e5b7c4b7a09a7286a20e0036cd40d69d5ae91481b37c25b528514cf43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE9P3DAQxS1UJLbAR0DykUuC7cRxzKWqUPkjIXFpz9bEnoBXSby1nV3lzBcnaDn01tNIM-89zfsRcsVZyRlvbrblFqf9CFMpmKhKzjVT8oRsONOyaJuKfSMbVjFe1EqrM_I9pS1jrBJcbcj7PULynR98XmjoKYxjmPw80jQPPWSkEW3YY1xoH8NID5AyHtZ9pGmY3SumW_q4uBjyG8YRBjr4vzP2YLMPE91BfjvAQveppDABxtB5S51fbf_eL8hpD0PCy695Tv7c__p991g8vzw83f18LmxVi1zUnUPdNgJlp2zdKWAalGgbEAzXOo11NXONdhJQ87rlXaWskJ0UreS17evqnFwfc3cxrF-mbEafLA4DTBjmZESrmG6VbPUqlUepjSGliL3ZRT9CXAxn5hO62Zov6OYTujlCX30_jj5ce-w9RpOsx8mi8yvIbFzw_0n4ACg5kRQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2870987589</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Feasibility of ammonium sulfate recovery from wastewater sludges: Hydrothermal liquefaction pathway vs. anaerobic digestion pathway</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Abeyratne, W.M.L.K. ; Bayat, H. ; Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P. ; Zhang, Y. ; Brewer, C.E. ; Nirmalakhandan, N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Abeyratne, W.M.L.K. ; Bayat, H. ; Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P. ; Zhang, Y. ; Brewer, C.E. ; Nirmalakhandan, N.</creatorcontrib><description>This study evaluated two pathways to recover the nitrogen-content of wastewater sludges as ammonium sulfate (AmS) for use as fertilizer. The first pathway entails sludge stabilization by hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting aqueous product by gas permeable membrane (GPM) separation. The second one entails stabilization of the sludges by anaerobic digestion (AD) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting centrate by GPM separation. A bench-scale GPM reactor is shown to be capable of recovering >90% of N in the feed. Recoveries of NH3–N in the HTL-pathway ranged 96–100% in 5.5–7.5 h at mass removal rates of 0.2–0.3 g N/day, yielding 3.3–6.0 g AmS/L of feed. Recoveries of 98% were noted in the AD-pathway in 4 h at mass removal rates of 0.06–0.97 g N/day and a yield of 1.7–2.1 g AmS/L of feed. Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometer analysis confirmed that both pathways yielded AmS meeting the US EPA and European region guidelines for land application. The GPM reactor enabled higher nitrogen-recoveries in the HTL-pathway than those reported for current practice of AD followed by ammonia stripping, ion exchange, reverse osmosis, and/or struvite precipitation (96–100% vs. 50–90%). A process model for the GPM reactor is validated using performance data on three different feedstocks.
•Evaluated gas permeable membranes (GPMs) for N-recovery from wastewater sludge.•GPMs enabled ∼98% N-recovery from anaerobically digested wastewater sludge.•GPMs enabled ∼100% N-recovery from hydrothermally liquified wastewater sludge.•Nitrogen recovered as ammonium sulfate met US EPA standards for land application.•Model predictions of N-removal by GPM agreed well with measured values (r2 > 0.86).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0301-4797</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8630</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119075</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Ammonium sulfate ; Gas permeable membrane separation ; Hydrothermal liquefaction ; Nitrogen recovery ; sludge stabilization ; Waste valorization</subject><ispartof>Journal of environmental management, 2023-12, Vol.347, p.119075-119075, Article 119075</ispartof><rights>2023 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-4bde9862e5b7c4b7a09a7286a20e0036cd40d69d5ae91481b37c25b528514cf43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-4bde9862e5b7c4b7a09a7286a20e0036cd40d69d5ae91481b37c25b528514cf43</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1536-1672 ; 0000-0001-9191-0816</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Abeyratne, W.M.L.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bayat, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brewer, C.E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nirmalakhandan, N.</creatorcontrib><title>Feasibility of ammonium sulfate recovery from wastewater sludges: Hydrothermal liquefaction pathway vs. anaerobic digestion pathway</title><title>Journal of environmental management</title><description>This study evaluated two pathways to recover the nitrogen-content of wastewater sludges as ammonium sulfate (AmS) for use as fertilizer. The first pathway entails sludge stabilization by hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting aqueous product by gas permeable membrane (GPM) separation. The second one entails stabilization of the sludges by anaerobic digestion (AD) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting centrate by GPM separation. A bench-scale GPM reactor is shown to be capable of recovering >90% of N in the feed. Recoveries of NH3–N in the HTL-pathway ranged 96–100% in 5.5–7.5 h at mass removal rates of 0.2–0.3 g N/day, yielding 3.3–6.0 g AmS/L of feed. Recoveries of 98% were noted in the AD-pathway in 4 h at mass removal rates of 0.06–0.97 g N/day and a yield of 1.7–2.1 g AmS/L of feed. Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometer analysis confirmed that both pathways yielded AmS meeting the US EPA and European region guidelines for land application. The GPM reactor enabled higher nitrogen-recoveries in the HTL-pathway than those reported for current practice of AD followed by ammonia stripping, ion exchange, reverse osmosis, and/or struvite precipitation (96–100% vs. 50–90%). A process model for the GPM reactor is validated using performance data on three different feedstocks.
•Evaluated gas permeable membranes (GPMs) for N-recovery from wastewater sludge.•GPMs enabled ∼98% N-recovery from anaerobically digested wastewater sludge.•GPMs enabled ∼100% N-recovery from hydrothermally liquified wastewater sludge.•Nitrogen recovered as ammonium sulfate met US EPA standards for land application.•Model predictions of N-removal by GPM agreed well with measured values (r2 > 0.86).</description><subject>Ammonium sulfate</subject><subject>Gas permeable membrane separation</subject><subject>Hydrothermal liquefaction</subject><subject>Nitrogen recovery</subject><subject>sludge stabilization</subject><subject>Waste valorization</subject><issn>0301-4797</issn><issn>1095-8630</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE9P3DAQxS1UJLbAR0DykUuC7cRxzKWqUPkjIXFpz9bEnoBXSby1nV3lzBcnaDn01tNIM-89zfsRcsVZyRlvbrblFqf9CFMpmKhKzjVT8oRsONOyaJuKfSMbVjFe1EqrM_I9pS1jrBJcbcj7PULynR98XmjoKYxjmPw80jQPPWSkEW3YY1xoH8NID5AyHtZ9pGmY3SumW_q4uBjyG8YRBjr4vzP2YLMPE91BfjvAQveppDABxtB5S51fbf_eL8hpD0PCy695Tv7c__p991g8vzw83f18LmxVi1zUnUPdNgJlp2zdKWAalGgbEAzXOo11NXONdhJQ87rlXaWskJ0UreS17evqnFwfc3cxrF-mbEafLA4DTBjmZESrmG6VbPUqlUepjSGliL3ZRT9CXAxn5hO62Zov6OYTujlCX30_jj5ce-w9RpOsx8mi8yvIbFzw_0n4ACg5kRQ</recordid><startdate>20231201</startdate><enddate>20231201</enddate><creator>Abeyratne, W.M.L.K.</creator><creator>Bayat, H.</creator><creator>Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P.</creator><creator>Zhang, Y.</creator><creator>Brewer, C.E.</creator><creator>Nirmalakhandan, N.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1536-1672</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9191-0816</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231201</creationdate><title>Feasibility of ammonium sulfate recovery from wastewater sludges: Hydrothermal liquefaction pathway vs. anaerobic digestion pathway</title><author>Abeyratne, W.M.L.K. ; Bayat, H. ; Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P. ; Zhang, Y. ; Brewer, C.E. ; Nirmalakhandan, N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-4bde9862e5b7c4b7a09a7286a20e0036cd40d69d5ae91481b37c25b528514cf43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Ammonium sulfate</topic><topic>Gas permeable membrane separation</topic><topic>Hydrothermal liquefaction</topic><topic>Nitrogen recovery</topic><topic>sludge stabilization</topic><topic>Waste valorization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Abeyratne, W.M.L.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bayat, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brewer, C.E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nirmalakhandan, N.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of environmental management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Abeyratne, W.M.L.K.</au><au>Bayat, H.</au><au>Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P.</au><au>Zhang, Y.</au><au>Brewer, C.E.</au><au>Nirmalakhandan, N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Feasibility of ammonium sulfate recovery from wastewater sludges: Hydrothermal liquefaction pathway vs. anaerobic digestion pathway</atitle><jtitle>Journal of environmental management</jtitle><date>2023-12-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>347</volume><spage>119075</spage><epage>119075</epage><pages>119075-119075</pages><artnum>119075</artnum><issn>0301-4797</issn><eissn>1095-8630</eissn><abstract>This study evaluated two pathways to recover the nitrogen-content of wastewater sludges as ammonium sulfate (AmS) for use as fertilizer. The first pathway entails sludge stabilization by hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting aqueous product by gas permeable membrane (GPM) separation. The second one entails stabilization of the sludges by anaerobic digestion (AD) followed by recovery of AmS from the resulting centrate by GPM separation. A bench-scale GPM reactor is shown to be capable of recovering >90% of N in the feed. Recoveries of NH3–N in the HTL-pathway ranged 96–100% in 5.5–7.5 h at mass removal rates of 0.2–0.3 g N/day, yielding 3.3–6.0 g AmS/L of feed. Recoveries of 98% were noted in the AD-pathway in 4 h at mass removal rates of 0.06–0.97 g N/day and a yield of 1.7–2.1 g AmS/L of feed. Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometer analysis confirmed that both pathways yielded AmS meeting the US EPA and European region guidelines for land application. The GPM reactor enabled higher nitrogen-recoveries in the HTL-pathway than those reported for current practice of AD followed by ammonia stripping, ion exchange, reverse osmosis, and/or struvite precipitation (96–100% vs. 50–90%). A process model for the GPM reactor is validated using performance data on three different feedstocks.
•Evaluated gas permeable membranes (GPMs) for N-recovery from wastewater sludge.•GPMs enabled ∼98% N-recovery from anaerobically digested wastewater sludge.•GPMs enabled ∼100% N-recovery from hydrothermally liquified wastewater sludge.•Nitrogen recovered as ammonium sulfate met US EPA standards for land application.•Model predictions of N-removal by GPM agreed well with measured values (r2 > 0.86).</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119075</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1536-1672</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9191-0816</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0301-4797 |
ispartof | Journal of environmental management, 2023-12, Vol.347, p.119075-119075, Article 119075 |
issn | 0301-4797 1095-8630 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2870987589 |
source | ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Ammonium sulfate Gas permeable membrane separation Hydrothermal liquefaction Nitrogen recovery sludge stabilization Waste valorization |
title | Feasibility of ammonium sulfate recovery from wastewater sludges: Hydrothermal liquefaction pathway vs. anaerobic digestion pathway |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T09%3A22%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Feasibility%20of%20ammonium%20sulfate%20recovery%20from%20wastewater%20sludges:%20Hydrothermal%20liquefaction%20pathway%20vs.%20anaerobic%20digestion%20pathway&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20environmental%20management&rft.au=Abeyratne,%20W.M.L.K.&rft.date=2023-12-01&rft.volume=347&rft.spage=119075&rft.epage=119075&rft.pages=119075-119075&rft.artnum=119075&rft.issn=0301-4797&rft.eissn=1095-8630&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119075&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2870987589%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-4bde9862e5b7c4b7a09a7286a20e0036cd40d69d5ae91481b37c25b528514cf43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2870987589&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |