Sludge Blanket Anaerobic membrane bioreactor (SB-AnMBR) Treatment of Prehydrolysis Liquor from the Dissolving Pulp Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Performance of innovative sludge-blanket anaerobic membrane bioreactors (SB-AnMBRs) was evaluated at mesophilic (35 o C for 400 days) followed by thermophilic (55 o C for 330 days) temperatures for the treatment of the pre-hydrolysis liquor (PHL) waste stream from a dissolving pulp production plant.PHL with an average total chemical oxygen demand (COD) of 100 g/L was generated from the steam hydrolysis of wood and mainly consisted of sugars (hemicelluloses), acetic acid, furfural and lignin.The bioreactors were fed with PHL at organic loading rates (OLR) ranging from 0.8 to 7.5 kg-COD/m 3 -d to study the performance with respect to the COD removal, methane (bio-energy) production, effluent characteristics, and membrane fouling.Average COD removal of 91% and specific methane yield of 0.36 m 3 /kg-COD removed /day were achieved during the pseudo-steady period of the continuous mesophilic operation at each loading rate.The effluent lignin concentration showed an increasing trend (0.2 g/l to 2.7 g/l) with an increase in the OLR.At thermophilic condition, the AnMBR exhibited accumulation of volatile fatty acid (VFAs), the presence of slow-degrading lignin in the effluent and lower COD removals (less than 60%) possibly due to the one-step increase in the temperature (from 35 to 55 o C) exerting temperature stress on biomass during the first sixty days of the operation.Subsequently, it was observed that the methane yield slowly increased to 0.38 m 3 /kg-COD removed /day.This phenomenon can be ascribed to the shift in the population increase of thermophilic anaerobic bacteria.There was no sugar and furfural found in the effluent of the SB-AnMBR at both temperatures during the stable period.This suggested good potential of using the AnMBRs for the treatment of PHL as well as production of bio-energy.Flat-sheet membranes were used in the SB-AnMBRs.Membranes did not show significant fouling based on monitoring of temporal variations in the trans-membrane pressure at a sustained flux of 0.1 m 3 /m 2 /d during the aprox.700 days of the continuous operation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".