Revisiting Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment of Wastewater: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) is a process that uses coagulant and/or flocculant chemicals to remove suspended solids, organic carbon, and nutrients from wastewater. Although it is not a new technology, it has received much attention in recent years due to its increased treatment capacity and related benefits compared to the conventional primary treatment process. CEPT involves both physical and chemical processes. Alum and iron salts are the commonly used coagulants in CEPT. Several types of anionic, cationic, and uncharged polymers are used as flocculants, where poly aluminum chloride (PACL) and polyacrylamide (PAM) are the widely used ones. Some of the coagulants and flocculants used may have inhibitory and/or toxicity effects on downstream treatment and recovery processes. There has been an increasing amount of work on the treatment of wastewaters from various sources using CEPT. These wastewaters can range from municipal/domestic wastewater, combined sewer overflow, landfill leachate, cattle manure digestate to wastewaters from textile industry, pulp and paper mill, slaughterhouse, milk processing plant, tannery and others. In recent cases, CEPT is employed to enhance carbon redirection for recovery and substantially reduce the organic load to secondary treatment processes. CEPTs can remove between 43.1–95.6% of COD, 70.0–99.5% suspended solids, and 40.0–99.3% of phosphate depending on the characteristics of wastewater treated and type of coagulants and/or flocculants used. This article reviews the application, chemicals used so far, removal efficiencies, challenges, and environmental impacts of CEPT.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".