A review of membrane bioreactors and aerobic/anoxic membrane bioreactor could be

utilized for treating

their potential application in the treatment
manure and wastewater from livestock
of agricultural wastewater
operations to levels suitable for
N. Cicek
direct reuse or safe discharge to surface water
Biosystems Engineering, University of bodies. Wastewater
Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T
generated from industries such as
5V6.
slaughterhouses, meat, dairy, egg,
Cicek, N. 2003. A review of membrane
and potato processing and liquor production
bioreactors and their
could potentially be
potential application in the treatment of
treated with MBRs resulting in compact
agricultural wastewater.
systems producing high
Canadian Biosystems Engineering/Le génie
quality reusable water. Also effective removal
des biosystèmes au
of nitrates, herbicides,
Canada 45: 6.37-6.49. Membrane Bioreactors
pesticides, and endocrine disrupting
(MBRs) can be broadly
compounds may be achieved by
defined as systems integrating biological
MBRs. Keywords: membrane filtration,
degradation of waste
wastewater, manure, food
products with membrane filtration. They have
processing, endocrine disruptors.
proven quite effective
Les bioréacteurs à membrane (BRM) peuvent
in removing organic and inorganic
être décrits comme
contaminants as well as biological
étant des systèmes qui combinent des
entities from wastewater. Advantages of the
processus de dégradation
MBR include good
biologique et de filtration par membrane. Ils
control of biological activity, high quality
ont été utilisés
effluent free of bacteria and
efficacement dans l’enlèvement de
pathogens, smaller plant size, and higher
contaminants de nature organiques,
organic loading rates. Current
inorganiques et biologiques présents dans les
applications include water recycling in
eaux usées. Les BRM ont
buildings, wastewater treatment
comme avantage d’assurer un bon contrôle
for small communities, industrial wastewater
de l’activité biologique, de
treatment, and landfill
produire un effluent de haute qualité
leachate treatment. This paper summarizes
débarrassé de bactéries et
the potential applications
pathogènes, d’être adaptés aux petites usines
of the MBR technology for the treatment of
ainsi que de pouvoir
wastewater from
traiter des eaux usées fortement chargées en
agricultural sources. Anaerobic digestion
matières organiques. Les
coupled with an
utilisations courantes incluent le recyclage de consumption, agricultural application, or
l’eau dans des bâtiments, industrial use.

le traitement des eaux usées pour les petites Problems in Walkerton, Ontario (O’Connor
communautés, le 2002) and North

traitement industriel des eaux usées de même Battleford, Saskatchewan, (Laing 2003) as well
que le traitement des as numerous

eaux de lixiviat des dépotoirs. Cet article traite boil water advisories issued across Canada
des utilisations (Perchard 2001)

potentielles de la technologie des BRM pour have brought water quality and wastewater
le traitment des eaux treatment to the

usées d’origine agricole. La digestion forefront of public consciousness. Canadians

anaérobique combinée à un desire not only

bioréacteur à membrane aérobique/anoxique water that is low in organic or mineral

pourrait être utilisée pour contaminants, but also

le traitement du lisier et des eaux usées des free of biological entities such as bacteria,
fermes d’élevage rendant pathogens, and

ainsi l’effluent réutilisable ou acceptable pour viruses. Therefore, treatment processes that
une décharge directe are reliable, costefficient,

dans les cours d’eau. Les eaux usées produites and effective in removing a wide range of
par les industries de pollutants

transformation de la viande, du lait, des oeufs are required. One very promising technology
et des pommes de terre, involves the

les abattoirs et les usines de production utilization of membrane bioreactors (MBRs).

d’alcool pourraient
MBRs can be broadly defined as systems
potentiellement être traitées avec des integrating
systèmes BRM compacts
biological degradation of waste products with
produisant une eau de haute qualité et membrane
réutilisable. De plus les BRM
filtration (Cicek et al. 1998b). They have
peuvent enlever les nitrates, herbicides, proven quite effective
pesticides ainsi que les
in removing both organic and inorganic
composés affectant l’activité endocrine. Mots contaminants as well as
clés: membrane filtrante,
biological entities from wastewater.
eaux usées, lisier, transformation alimentaire, Advantages of the MBR
inhibiteur endocrinien
include better control of biological activity,
INTRODUCTION effluent that is free

The demand for clean water is vast, whether of bacteria and pathogens, smaller plant size,
it be for human and higher organic
loading rates (Cicek et al. 1998a). Not only New configurations of bioreactors which
have there been would be

numerous successful pilot scale studies, some 6 . 3 8 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU

full scale units are CANADA CICEK

in use in various parts of the world. Current such systems. This paper introduces the MBR
applications include technology,

water recycling in buildings (Kimura 1991; summarizes the types and configurations of
Yokomizo 1994), current MBR

municipal wastewater treatment for small applications, and discusses its potential
communities (Buisson utilization in a number

et al. 1998; Cote et al. 1997; Fan et al. 1996; of areas related to agricultural wastewater
Irwin 1990; treatment.

Trouve et al. 1994), industrial wastewater BACKGROUND

treatment (Berube and
The membrane bioreactor technology
Hall 2001; Dufresne et al. 1998; Fan et al.
Biological treatment technologies have been
1998, 2000; Hogetsu
utilized in
et al. 1992; Knoblock et al. 1994; Krauth and
wastewater reclamation for over a century.
Staab 1993;
Out of the many
Minami 1994; Scholzy and Fuchs 2000; Sutton
different processes employed, the activated
et al. 1983), and
sludge system has
landfill leachate treatment (Manem 1996;
proven to be the most popular
Wehrle 1997, 1998).
(Tchobanoglous et al. 2003). The
Several promising areas of MBR application
implementation of membranes within the
remain
treatment sequence of
unexplored and require detailed experimental
a water pollution control facility was initially
evaluation. These
limited to tertiary
could include treatment of wastes generated
treatment and polishing. Ultra-filtration,
from agricultural
micro-filtration, or
sources and livestock operations, wastewater
reverse osmosis units were utilized in areas
originating from
where discharge
food processing industries, removal of
requirement were very stringent or direct
herbicides, pesticides,
reuse of the effluent
and endocrine disrupting substances from
was desired (Tchobanoglous et al. 2003). High
wastewater and water
capital and
streams, and biological nitrate removal
operational costs as well as inadequate
(Fonseca et al. 2000;
knowledge on membrane
Mansell and Schroeder 1998; Nah et al. 2000;
Urbain 1996).
application in waste treatment were bacteria and viruses results in a sterile
predominant factors in effluent, eliminating

limiting the domain of this technology. extensive disinfection and the corresponding
However, with the hazards related to

emergence of less expensive and more disinfection by-products (Cicek et al. 1998a).
effective membrane Since suspended

modules and the implementation of ever- solids are not lost in the clarification step,
tightening water total separation and

discharge standards, membrane systems control of the solid retention time (SRT) and
regained interest. hydraulic retention

Membrane modules have evolved from being time (HRT) are possible enabling optimum
utilized solely control of the

in tertiary wastewater treatment to being microbial population and flexibility in

integrated into operation. The absence

secondary wastewater treatment. These of a clarifier, which also acts as a natural

systems are now most selector for settling

commonly referred to as membrane organisms, enables sensitive, slow-growing

bioreactors (MBRs). species (nitrifying

Figure 1 summarizes the evolution of bacteria, bacteria capable of degrading

membrane use in complex compounds) to

wastewater treatment and demonstrates the develop and persist in the system even under
basic differences in short SRTs (Cicek

the treatment trails. et al. 2001).

There are several advantages associated with The membrane not only retains all biomass
the MBR but also prevents

which make it a valuable alternative over the escape of exocellular enzymes and soluble
other treatment oxidants creating

techniques. First of all, the retention of all a more active biological mixture capable of
suspended matter and degrading a wider

most soluble compounds within the range of carbon sources (Cicek et al. 1999c).
bioreactor leads to excellent MBRs eliminate

effluent quality capable of meeting stringent process difficulties and problems associated
discharge with settling, which

requirements and opening the door to direct is usually the most troublesome part of
water reuse wastewater treatment.

(Chiemchaisri et al. 1992). The possibility of The potential for operating the MBR at very
retaining all high solid retention
times without having the obstacle of settling, solids and most soluble organic matter,
allows high waste-activated-sludge

biomass concentrations in the bioreactor. may exhibit poor filterability and settleability
Consequently, higher properties (Cicek

systems than conventional processes et al. 1999c). Additionally, when operated at

significantly reducing high SRTs,

plant footprint making it desirable for water inorganic compounds accumulating in the
recycling bioreactor can reach

applications. High molecular weight soluble concentration levels that can be harmful to
compounds, which the microbial

are not readily biodegradable in conventional population or membrane structure (Cicek et

systems, are al. 1999a).

retained in the MBR (Cicek et al. 2002). Thus, System configurations

their residence
Membrane bioreactors are composed of two
time is prolonged and the possibility of primary parts,
oxidation is improved.
the biological unit responsible for the
The system is also able to handle fluctuations biodegradation of the
in nutrient
waste compounds and the membrane module
concentrations due to extensive biological for the physical
acclimation and
separation of the treated water from mixed
retention of decaying biomass (Cicek et al. liquor. MBR systems
1999b).
can be classified into two major groups
The disadvantages associated with the MBR according to their
are mainly cost
configuration. The first group, commonly
related. High capital costs due to expensive known as the
membrane units and
integrated MBR, involves outer skin
high energy costs due to the need for a membranes that are
pressure gradient have
internal to the bioreactor (Fig. 2). The driving
characterized the system. Concentration force across the
polarization and other
membrane is achieved by pressurizing the
membrane fouling problems can lead to bioreactor or creating
frequent cleaning of the
negative pressure on the permeate side
membranes, which stop operation and (Buisson et al. 1998;
require clean water and
Cote et al. 1997; Rosenberger et al. 2002).
chemicals. Another drawback can be Cleaning of the
problematic wasteactivated-
membrane is achieved through frequent
sludge disposal. Since the MBR retains all permeate back-pulsing
suspended
and occasional chemical backwashing. A used for MBR applications (Visvanathan et al.
diffuser is usually 2000). These

placed directly beneath the membrane include tubular, plate and frame, rotary disk,
module to facilitate hollow fiber,

scouring of the filtration surface. Aeration and organic (polyethylene, polyethersulfone,

mixing are also polysulfone,

achieved by the same unit. Anoxic or Volume 45 2003 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS

anaerobic compartments ENGINEERING 6.39

can be incorporated to enable simultaneous clarifier

biological nutrient
Raw
removal (Cote et al. 1998).
wastewater
The second configuration is the recirculated
Sludge digestion
(external)
Final
MBR, which involves the recirculation of the
mixed liquor effluent
through a membrane module that is outside sludge
the bioreactor. Both
clarifier
inner-skin and outer-skin membranes can be
used in this filter Sludge

application. The driving force is the pressure dewatering /

created by high disposal (a)
cross-flow velocity along the membrane Raw
surface (Cicek et al.
wastewater
1998b; Urbain et al. 1998). A schematic of the
recirculated Sludge digestion

MBR is presented in Fig. 3. The emergence of Primary

less expensive clarifier
and more resilient polymeric membranes Final
along with lower
effluent
pressure requirements and higher permeate
fluxes have Activated

accelerated the worldwide commercial use of sludge

submerged MBRs
Secondary
(Adham et al. 2001).
clarifier
Several types and configurations of
Pretreatment
membranes have been
Membrane
filtration trans-membrane pressure ranges from 20 to
500 kPa for inner
Sludge
skin membranes and from -10 to -80 kPa for
dewatering /
outer skin
disposal (b)
membranes (Manem 1996).The membrane
Raw used in MBR

wastewater 6 . 4 0 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU

CANADA CICEK
Final
Pump
effluent
Pressure
Activated
gauge
sludge
Process
Pretreatment
control
Membrane
Mixing + Aeration
filtration
O2 / Air
Sludge
Wastewater
dewatering /
Pressure
disposal (c)
gauge
Fig. 1. Flowcharts for (a) conventional
wastewater treatment; (b) conventional Membrane unit
treatment including tertiary membrane
Treated
filtration; and (c) membrane bioreactors.
water
polyolefin, etc.), metallic, and inorganic
Fig. 3. Schematic of recirculated (external)
(ceramic) microfiltration
MBR.
and ultra-filtration membranes. The pore size
Process
of
control
membranes used ranged from 0.01 to 0.4 μm.
The fluxes gauge

obtained ranged from 0.05 to 10 m/d (m3m-2 Mixing + Aeration

d-1), strongly
+ Membrane scouring
depending on the configuration and
O2 / Air
membrane material. Typical
Wastewater
values for inner skin membranes are reported
as 0.5-2.0 m/d and gauge
for outer skin membranes as 0.2-0.6 m/d at Treated
20 oC. The applied
Water
Pump Plate and frame

Membrane unit external

Pump Full-scale

Fig. 2. Schematic of integrated (submerged) Average ~ 125 m3/d

MBR.
Effluent COD
systems must satisfy various criteria. For a
< 5 mg/L
review on the
Japan Manem 1996
selection of membrane material and
configuration and on the Polymeric
impact of various operating parameters, a Ultrafiltration
number of research
Hollow fiber
articles and books can be accessed (Brindle
and Stephenson submerged

1996; Manem 1996; Stephenson et al. 2000; Pilot-scale

Van de Roest et al. < 1.5 m3/d
2002; Visvanathan et al. 2000). Effluent COD
Applications in municipal wastewater < 10 mg/L
treatment
Japan Chiemchaisri et al.
MBR systems were initially used for municipal
wastewater 1993

treatment, primarily in the area of water Polymeric

reuse and recycling. Ultrafiltration
Compactness, production of reusable water, Tubular
and trouble-free
external
operation made the MBR an ideal process for
recycling Pilot-scale

municipal wastewater in water and space 360-840 m3/d

limited environments.
Effluent TC
Volume 45 2003 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS
< 12 mg/L
ENGINEERING 6.41
The Netherlands Muller et al. 1995
Membrane type Configuration Size of
operation Treatment success Country of Ceramic

application Ulftrafiltration

Reference Tubular

Ceramic external

Ulftrafiltration Pilot-scale
2.4-4.8 m3/d Polymeric

COD removal Microfiltration

> 94% Hollow fiber

France Fan et al. 1996 submerged

Ceramic Pilot-scale

Ulftrafiltration 1.4-3.8 m3/d

Tubular Effluent BOD5

external < 3 mg/L

Bench-scale USA Adham and Trussell

0.16 m3/d 2001

COD removal Polymeric

> 98% Ultrafiltration

USA Cicek et al. 1998a Hollow fiber

Polymeric submerged

Ultrafiltration Pilot-scale

Hollow fiber 6-9 m3/d

submerged COD removal

Pilot-scale > 95%

2.6-5.0 m3/d Germany Rosenberger et al.

COD removal 2002

> 96.5% Polymeric

Canada/France Cote et al. 1998 Ultrafiltration

Polymeric Hollow fiber

Ultrafiltration submerged

Cartridge-disc Pilot-scale

external 46-74 m3/d

Pilot-scale COD removal

48 m3/d > 93%

Effluent COD The Netherlands Van de Roest 2002

< 5 mg/L Polymeric

Korea Ahn et al. 1999 Ultrafiltration

Plate and frame the development of less expensive submerged
membranes made
submerged
MBRs a real alternative for high flow, large
Pilot-scale
scale municipal
48-72 m3/d
wastewater applications. Over 1,000 MBRs
COD removal are currently in

> 91% operation around the world with

approximately 66% in Japan,
The Netherlands Van de Roest 2002
and the remainder largely in Europe and
Polymeric North America. Out of
Ultrafiltration these installations, about 55% use submerged
Hollow fiber membranes while

submerged the rest have external membrane modules

(Van de Roest et al.
Full-scale
2002). Table 1 summarizes MBR applications
750 m3/d in municipal
Effluent BOD5 wastewater treatment with respect to type
< 1 mg/L and configuration of

USA Garcia and Kanj the membrane, size of operation (bench,

pilot, or full-scale),
2002
treatment success, country of application, and
Polymeric their respective
Ultrafiltration reference.
Hollow fiber Applications in industrial wastewater
treatment
submerged
High organic loadings and very specific and
Full-scale
difficult to treat
9000 m3/d
compounds are two major characteristics of
COD removal industrial waste
> 95% streams that render alternative treatment
techniques such as the
USA Lorenz et al. 2002
MBR desirable. Since, traditionally
Legislation in several parts of Japan,
wastewater with high COD
encouraging water reuse
content was treated under anaerobic
in large buildings, stimulated the
conditions, initial attempts
development and application
of MBR applications for industrial wastewater
of alternative technologies (Kimura 1991). By
were in the field
the mid 1990s,
of anaerobic treatment. Table 2 and Table 3 Size of operation Treatment success Country
present overviews of

of MBR applications in the industrial application

wastewater treatment area.
Reference
Table 3 focuses on food industry wastewater
Wool scouring
alone.
Anaerobic
Applications in fields of landfill leachate,
sludge digestion, Ultrafiltration
and human excrement external
In addition to municipal and industrial Pilot-scale
wastewater treatment,
~ 10 m3/d
MBRs have been utilized in a number of other
areas. One such TOD removal

area is the treatment of landfill leachates. > 89%

Landfill leachates Japan Hogetsu et al.
usually contain high concentrations of organic 1992
and inorganic
Various sources
compounds. Conventionally, the treatment of
leachates involves Aerobic

a physical, biological, or membrane filtration Ultrafiltration

process (or a combination external
of them). MBR systems have been successfully Pilot-scale
utilized
0.2-24.6 m3/d
with an additional treatment step for
inorganics and heavy metal COD removal

removal, such as reverse osmosis (RO). > 97%

Several industrial scale
Germany Krauth and Staab
plants, combining a MBR and a reverse
1993
osmosis system, are
Pulp mill
presently operated (Manem 1996; Wehrle
1997, 1998). Anaerobic

6 . 4 2 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU Ultrafiltration

CANADA CICEK
external
Source wastewater
Pilot-scale
Operation type
~ 10 m3/d
Membrane
TOC removal
configuration
> 85% Aerobic

Japan Minami 1994 Ultrafiltration

Automotive industry (paint external

line) Aerobic Full-scale COD removal

Ultrafiltration > 98%

external France Manem 1996

Full-scale Pulp and paper

113 m3/d Aerobic

COD removal Microfiltration

> 94% external

USA Knoblock et al. Bench-scale

1994 0.05-0.09 m3/d

Metal transforming COD removal

Aerobic 68-82%

Ultrafiltration Canada Dufresne et al.

external 1998

Pilot-scale Electrical components

0.2 m3/d Aerobic

COD removal Ultrafiltration

> 90% external

Canada Zaloum et al. 1994 Full-scale

Tannery wastewater 10 m3/d

Aerobic COD removal

Ultrafiltration > 97%

external Germany Wehrle 1999

Full-scale Fuel and lubricants

500-600 m3/d Aerobic

COD removal Ultrafiltration

> 93% external

Germany Wehrle 1994b Bench-scale

Cosmetic industry 0.02-0.04 m3/d

TOC removal Since the HRT and the SRT are identical in
these systems, the
> 95%
capacity is limited and long solid retention
Austria Scholzy and Fuchs
times are required
2000
for effective solids destruction. Pillay et al.
Kraft pulp mill (1994) showed that

Anerobic a microfiltration unit enhances the

performance of the digester
Ultrafiltration
by decoupling the HRT and the SRT and,
external thereby, allowing
Bench-scale higher volumetric throughput. Table 4
0.003 m3/d summarizes MBR

TOC removal applications in these three areas in categories

of the source of
> 93%
wastewater, type, and configuration of the
Canada Berube and Hall membrane, size of
2001 operation (bench, pilot, or full-scale),
The MBR system was also used in the treatment success, country
treatment of human of application, and respective reference.
excreta in domestic wastewater. These POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS IN AGRICULTURAL
applications, also known
WASTE TREATMENT
as night soil treatment systems, were typified
by the high A self-sustaining waste treatment system for
intensive
strength of the waste and the need for on-site
treatment. The livestock operations

MBR system replaced a rather complex set of Canada's livestock industry is experiencing
treatment systems rapid growth with

which incorporated denitrification, an increasing number of large-scale

coagulation, filtration, and confinement livestock

activated carbon treatment (Magara and Itoh operations. In Manitoba, the hog population
1991; Manem has doubled in the

1996). Another application of the MBR is in past five years (ARDI 2000) and Ontario has
the area of sludge over 3.4 million

treatment. Conventionally, sludge hogs with an increasing number of large-scale,

stabilization in wastewater intensive farms

treatment plants is achieved by a single pass, (Miller 2000). The growing concern is the
anaerobic digester. environmental impact
of waste generated in these facilities in the and the majority of nutrients and metals
form of manure, remain in the effluent

wastewater, unpleasant odors, ammonia, and of anaerobic digesters, a submerged MBR

methane. New system that facilitates

large scale farming facilities require large crop nutrient and organics removal may be
areas for nutrient utilized. Nitrogen is

application and in some regions nutrients in usually the key nutrient in livestock waste
livestock waste management and a

exceed available cropland capacity to receive Volume 45 2003 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS

them in ENGINEERING 6.43

agronomic rates (Miller 2000). The public is Table 4. MBR applications in the treatment
becoming of landfill leachate, sludge, and human
excrement.
increasingly concerned with the livestock
industries potential Source wastewater

impact on water and air quality, which will Operation type

ultimately increase
Membrane
pressure for stricter government regulations.
configuration
Intensive livestock operations commonly
Size of operation Treatment success Country
combine solid and
of
liquid waste in a manure slurry form and have
application
extensive
Reference
ventilation systems for heat, moisture, and air
quality control. If Landfill leachate
a completely self-sustaining system is desired, Aerobic
the technology
Ultrafiltration
selected would have to effectively ameliorate
both waste external

streams, produce reusable water, eliminate Full-scale

unpleasant odors, 50 m3/d
and be easily upgradeable. A submerged not available France Manem 1996
aerobic membrane
Landfill leachate
bioreactor may be used as the centerpiece of
such a treatment Aerobic

process complimented by an anaerobic Ultrafiltration

digester or anaerobic external
lagoon as a pre-treatment step. Since one Full-scale
third of the organics
264 m3/d
COD removal Pilot-scale

> 80% 0.13 m3/d

Germany Wehrle 1997 not available South Africa Pillay et al. 1994

Landfill leachate Source wastewater

Aerobic Operation type

Ultrafiltration Membrane

external configuration

Full-scale Size of operation Treatment success Country

of
250 m3/d
application
COD removal
Reference
> 90%
Dairy whey
Germany Wehrle 1998
Anaerobic
Human excrement
Ultrafiltration
Aerobic
external
Ultrafiltration
Pilot-scale
external
0.46 m3/d
Pilot-scale BOD removal
COD removal
> 99%
> 94%
Japan Magara and Itoh
USA Sutton et al. 1983
1991
Maize/egg processing
Human excrement
Anaerobic
Aerobic
Ultrafiltration
Ultrafiltration
external
external
Full-scale
Full-scale BOD removal
500 m3/d
> 99%
COD removal
France Manem 1996
> 97%
Sludge digestion
South Africa Ross et al. 1992
Anaerobic
Brewery effluent
Microfiltration
Anaerobic
external
Ultrafiltration 600 m3/d

external Effluent TSS

Pilot-scale < 9 mg/L

~ 10 m3/d USA Cantor et al. 1999

TOC removal Dairy products

> 97% Aerobic

South Africa Strohwald and Ross Ultrafiltration

1992 external

Liquor production Full-scale

Anaerobic 2000 m3/d

Ultrafiltration COD removal

external > 98%

Pilot-scale Ireland Wehrle 2000

~ 1.25 m3/d Fermentation

COD removal Aerobic

> 98% Ultrafiltration

Japan Nagano et al. 1992 external

Rendering plant Bench-scale

Aerobic ~ 0.01 m3/d

Ultrafiltration TOD removal

external > 94%

Full-scale Japan Lu et al. 2000

102 m3/d treatment process incorporating nitrification

and denitrification
COD removal
is essential. Either intermittent aeration or an
> 95%
anoxic department
Germany Wehrle 1994a
within the bioreactor can be employed for
Food ingredients total nitrogen

Aerobic removal (Cheng and Liu 2001). Metal salts can

also be added to
Microfiltration
reduce phosphorus content in the final
submerged effluent. MBRs are
Full-scale
capable of producing effluent free of 6 . 4 4 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU
suspended solids, bacteria, CANADA CICEK

and pathogens allowing direct reuse of the modern livestock operations are equipped
product water in the with blowers and

livestock facility. Water reuse in parts of the ventilation systems, booster fans could be
Canadian Prairies added to increase

with limited high quality water (e.g. Alberta, outflow pressure. This concept was explored
Saskatchewan), in past research

could stimulate development in the livestock efforts when biofilter beds (compost and
production wood chips) were

industry. This would also relieve expansion tested for odour removal (Mann et al. 2002).
pressures currently The outlet gas

focused in areas of abundant fresh water (e.g. stream could be introduced into an aerobic
Manitoba). submerged MBR

Aerobic activated sludge reactors have been which would facilitate aeration, agitation, and
used on a membrane

limited scale as bio-scrubbers for the scouring while significantly reducing the
treatment of odorous air release of odorous

(Bowker 2000). Despite numerous positive gases.

reports from fullscale
The ultimate goal would be to design a
applications in North America, little data are process that would
available on
reduce the dependency of intensive livestock
the actual performance of these systems with producers on crop
wide ranging
land, remove unpleasant odours from
concerns on reduction of settling efficiency intensive livestock
due to changes in
operations, reuse water on-site, and thereby
filamentous organisms and bacterial flocs substantially reduce
(Burgess et al. 2001).
water use and reduce potential
These concerns are alleviated in MBRs where environmental risks associated
gravitational
to the incorrect storage, handling, and
settling of the microbial solution is replaced application of manure.
by physical
Food processing wastewater
filtration. Also, the diffusion and
The food industry in Canada is the second
bioconversion of odorous
largest contributor of
gases are a function of contact time, bubble
economic activity and employment. From an
size, and reactor
environmental
configuration (Burgess et al. 2001).
Submerged MBRs
perspective, the majority of food processing temperature, high organic strength, and
facilities are difficult to filter waste

characterized by very high water consumption streams. High pressure requirements and
and high organic capital investment

strength wastewater generation (Parsons costs resulted in the lack of large scale
2001). Major implementation of many

waterborne pollutant loadings are such systems. Only Cantor et al.(1999)

biological/chemical oxygen investigated submerged

demand, total suspended solids, fats-oils- hollow fiber microfiltration units which
greases, and nutrients. proved quite effective

Most facilities employ on-site primary and led to the installation of a full-scale
treatment prior to internal MBR system

sending their wastewater to municipal which was capable of treating 600 m3/d of
wastewater treatment process wastewater.

plants. Large volumes of high strength The emergence of submerged MBRs that
wastewater both increase utilize fairly

the cost of disposal for food processing economical polymer-based membranes and
facilities and present require less energy

difficult challenges for the municipal than external MBRs has revolutionized
wastewater treatment plant municipal wastewater

operators. treatment and has tremendous potential in

larger scale, high
Since MBRs are capable of treating high
strength volume throughput facilities across the globe.
The potential of
wastewater, attempts were made to evaluate
their effectiveness reusing the MBR product water on-site for
washing or transport
with food processing effluents. Table 3
presents information on purposes offers many cost benefits such as
reduced fresh water
these applications in terms of wastewater
type, system requirements, lower sewer costs, and
possibility for direct
characteristics, size, and treatment success.
As shown in Table discharge to surface waters.

3 all but one application utilized various Depending on the wastewater characteristics
configurations of and effluent

external membrane units. At the times of requirements, both aerobic and anaerobic
these applications, submerged MBRs

external membranes were thought to be could be employed. Industries such as

more suitable for high slaughterhouses,
fermentation plants, meat, dairy, egg, and substance having the ability to disrupt the
potato processing synthesis, secretion,

would be required on a case by case basis. transport, binding, action or elimination of

The fouling and flux hormones in an

behavior of submerged membranes when organism, or its progeny, that is responsible

exposed to specific for the maintenance

waste streams would require detailed of homeostasis, reproduction, development,

evaluation. However, and behavior of an

intrinsic characteristics of the MBR technology organism.” These substances range from
such as the natural estrogens such

ability to treat high strength, greatly as 17-B-estradiaol, synthetic estrogens such as

fluctuating wastewater, ethynylestradiol

resilience in the face of shock loads and toxic (active compound in birth control pills),
chemicals, and industrial chemicals

production of superior quality effluent would such as alkylphenol etoxylates and

justify polychlorinated biphenyls

consideration of the process in food (PCBs), several organochlorine pesticides and

processing facilities. herbicides such

Endocrine disrupting substances (EDS), as DDT, Atrazine, and Vinclozolin, and

pesticides, and complex mixtures such

herbicides as municipal wastewater effluents,

agricultural runoff, and pulp
The most recent study by the U.S. Geological
Survey has and paper mill effluents (Hewitt and Servos
2001). Despite the
identified 95 organic water contaminants in
139 streams across wide ranging opinion on the impact of EDS on
human beings
30 states in the USA (Kolpin et al. 2002).
Among the most and overall ecology, the adverse effects on
aquatic species such
frequently detected compounds were
steroids, hormones, as fish is well established. For instance, male
fish living just
synthetic detergents, and insecticides, which
all possess downstream of municipal wastewater effluent
discharge
endocrine (hormone) disruptive qualities. The
Canadian locations experience feminization through the
development of
Environmental Protection Act in 1999
(Department of Justice of egg proteins only found in females, reduced
male hormone
Canada 1999) defined a hormone disrupting
substance as “a levels, and smaller gonad size (Desbrow et al.
1998).
EDS research in Canada, particularly studies times of 4-14 hours estrogens and
on fish in the alkylphenols cannot be

Great Lakes, has been essential in bringing completely eliminated (Johnson and Sumpter
this issue to the 2001).

forefront. Among the major sites and sectors Volume 45 2003 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS
identified for ENGINEERING 6.45

potential endocrine disruption in the contributions to endocrine disruption. A study

Canadian aquatic conducted to

ecosystem were municipal effluents, intensive evaluate 17-b-estradiol runoff after poultry
livestock litter application to

production areas, and agricultural activities pasture revealed that this practice can
involving pesticides substantially contribute to

and herbicides (McMaster 2001). Surveys of hormone runoff and that 17-b-estardiol
municipal persists in litter for at

wastewater treatment facilities in several least 7 days under field conditions (Nichols et
North American, al. 1997).

South American, and European cities showed However, in laboratory microcosm studies
the presence of conducted by

estrogens in final effluents (Baronti et al. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, estrogenic
2000; Belfroid et al. compounds as

1999; Ternes et al. 1999). The high variation in well as 4-nonylphenols were rapidly removed
the observed in agricultural

data suggests that particular treatment soils under typical conditions (Colucci et al.
sequences and 2001; Colucci and

operational conditions within the plant Topp 2001; Topp and Starratt 2000).
significantly impact the Nevertheless, manure and

extent of EDS release into the receiving water sewage solids application to agricultural lands
body. Very few can act as a

studies have been conducted to correlate source for EDS if adequate pre-treatment is
degree of complexity not provided or

and type of specific practices within proper land application methods are not used.
treatment facilities to
It has been demonstrated that biodegradation
biodegradation efficiency of EDSs (Planas et kinetics of
al. 2002; Ternes
estrogenic substances such as 17-b-estardiol
et al. 1999). The field data in European and
activated sludge
enthynylestradiol are greatly increased when
treatment plants suggest that at common higher than
hydraulic retention
naturally detected concentrations are other commercial herbicides. It proved highly
available. Since estrogens effective and

bind readily to organic matter, their sorption resulted in superior removal efficiencies
is directly related compared to other

to total organic carbon content present. MBRs biological treatment (Buenrostro-Zagal et al.
could provide a 2000). In another

suitable environment for EDS biodegradation study, an external membrane bioreactor was
due to high employed for high

organic content in the mixed liquor and the performance phenol degradation. Phenol
retention of all degradation rates of up

particular and colloidal matter. In addition to to 120 kg m-3 d-1 were achieved with this
accumulating the system while allowing

target compound behind the membrane, the for improved control via independent
MBR exposes it to adjustment of hydraulic

high concentrations of biomass and allows for and solid retention times. No toxic effects of
extensive bioacclimation. high phenol

The possibility of maintaining high solid concentration were observed (Leonard et al.
retention 1998).

times in MBRs leads to a diverse microbial In a drinking water treatment application, a

culture which French company

includes slow growing organisms capable of developed an industrial scale MBR system
breaking down coupling biological

complex organic compounds (Cicek et al. denitrification and powdered activated

1999c). There is carbon (PAC) adsorption

potential for intensifying the biological of pesticides. Organic ultrafiltration

breakdown of estrogenic membranes, consisting of

substances in membrane bioreactors. The double skin hollow fibers, were used and a
same principles hold plant of 400 m3/d

true for other EDS such as pesticides, capacity was operated. PAC was continuously
herbicides, and toxic added to the

chemicals. For example, a selective extractive reactor resulting in effluent concentrations of

membrane triazine

bioreactor was utilized in a bench scale study compounds (atrazine, simazine, etc.) below
on the treatment detection limit and

of wastewater containing 2,4- complete nitrate removal through

Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid denitrification (Manem 1996).

(2,4-D), a chemical used as a herbicide or for In a separate study, immersed membrane

preparation of filtration combined
with PAC addition proved very effective in main treatment requirements for drinking
removing natural water. Nitrate is the

organic matter and synthetic organic most common groundwater contaminant in

chemicals from river water North America and

in Normandie, France (Lebeau et al. 1998). world-wide (Kapoor and Viraraghavan 1997).
This system Nitrate is a stable

responded well to feed water quality and highly soluble nitrogen species, easily
variations and was transported and

determined to be suitable for upgrading accumulated in groundwater systems. These

existing clarifiers or properties, coupled

sand filters. with increased anthropogenic discharges of

nitrogen containing
with endocrine disrupting substances
including pesticides and compounds from point and non-point
sources, have resulted in
herbicides. The utilization of MBRs in
municipal wastewater elevated nitrate concentrations in ground and
surface waters.
treatment plants will ensure enhanced
retention and Non-point sources may have a larger impact
on groundwater
biodegradation of natural and synthetic
hormones. Industries and are associated with agricultural and
livestock practices and
involved in the production or processing of
steroids, synthetic residential septic tank effluents (Bouchard et
al. 1992; Kapoor
detergents, agricultural pharmaceuticals,
herbicides, pesticides, and Viraraghavan 1997).

and fungicides should consider membrane Nitrates can be removed either biologically or
processes for by

wastewater treatment and water reuse. physicochemical treatment techniques such

Hybrid processes that as reverse osmosis,

integrate membrane filtration and activated ion exchange, and electrodialysis. Natural
carbon adsorption organic matter can be

present extremely effective alternatives for treated biologically or through activated

eliminating toxicity carbon adsorption.

and carcinogenic potency in groundwater and Biological removal of nitrates and organic
drinking water matter is receiving

sources. more attention due to the complete

conversion of nitrate into
Nitrate removal in drinking water
nitrogen gas and relative ease of operation
Denitrification and removal of natural organic
(Falk 2002).
matter are two
Conventional physico-chemical treatment (Fonseca et al. 2000; Mansell and Schroeder
methods only 1998; Velizarov et

concentrate nitrate into solutions which still al. 2000). Up to 99% nitrate removal, despite
require disposal. In unusually high

typical biological dentitrification processes, nitrate loadings and low hydraulic retention
however, post times, were

treatment processes such as sand filtration, reported in these studies. Further

activated carbon investigation and optimization

adsorption, and disinfection are required to on larger scale systems are required to
remove biological determine the

entities and excess organic matter and color. economical feasibility of such processes.
The number of
6 . 4 6 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU
post-treatment processes can be significantly CANADA CICEK
reduced by using
The membrane bioreactor technology has
a MBR for biological denitrification. All great potential in wide
biological entities as
ranging applications including municipal and
well as some dissolved organic matter will be industrial
retained in the
wastewater treatment, groundwater and
bioreactor while long denitrifying culture drinking water
retention times and
abatement, solid waste digestion, and odor
short hydraulic retention times can be control. The
maintained (Nuhoglu et
technical feasibility of this process has been
al. 2002). demonstrated

MBRs have been investigated on an through a number of pilot and bench scale
experimental scale for research studies. Full

heterotrophic denitrification of groundwater scale systems are operational in various parts

and drinking water of the world and

using two significantly different substantial growth in the number and size of
configurations. One installations is

configuration employed the membrane as a anticipated for the near future. The MBR
cell recycle tool in process is already

an external MBR set-up (Barreiros et al. 1998; considered as a viable alternative for many
Delanghe et al. waste treatment

1994), whereas the other configuration used challenges and with water quality issues firmly
the membrane as a placed into the

semi-permeable ion exchange barrier for forefront of public debate, ever tightening
nitrate transfer discharge standards
and increasing water shortages will further land for waste application.
accelerate the
The presence of substances such as natural
development of this technology. and synthetic

Agricultural activities and related industries hormones, industrial chemicals, pesticides,

constitute a herbicides, and

potential source of pollution to the pharmaceuticals in ground and surface water

environment. Waste from bodies necessitates

intensive livestock operations and wastewater stricter control of point and non-point
generated by the sources. Research studies

food processing industry are two streams indicate that certain configurations of MBRs
characterized by high would retain,

organic and nutrient strength. Multiple concentrate, and consequently break down
treatment processes are many of these

normally required to ameliorate the waste to compounds without requiring sophisticated

levels acceptable tertiary treatment

for on-site reuse or direct discharge to surface processes. The retention of all microbial
water. MBRs entities and biological

offer a proven alternative due to their ability catalysts within the bioreactor allows for
to handle high extensive biomass

organic loadings and wide fluctuations in flow acclimation and enhanced reaction kinetics.
and strength. Consequently,

Activated sludge scrubbing may also be able much improvement and attention toward
to be incorporated membrane assisted

into these systems for odor control and air hybrid processes for removing priority
pollution contaminants from

management. High quality effluent produced effluents and drinking water sources is
by the MBR expected in the near

would provide pathogen and bacteria control future. As well, the positive barrier against
and assist the biological entities

facility in complying with strict environmental provides a high quality product which is
regulations. It essential for potable

would also allow extensive process water use. The possibility of combining the
optimization through removal of organic

internal water recycle and significantly reduce matter, nutrients, toxic chemicals, and
dependence to biological organisms in

municipal waste treatment facilities or to the one treatment system is certain to fuel future
availability of crop research and
development in this emerging field. Belfroid, A.C., A. Van der Horst, A.D. Vethaak,
A.J. Schafer,
REFERENCES
G.B.J. Rijs, J. Wegener and W.P. Cofino. 1999.
Adham, S. and R.S. Trussell. 2001. Membrane
Analysis
Bioreactors:
and occurrence of estrogenic hormones and
Feasibility and Use in Water Reclamation. San
their
Diego, CA:
glucuronides in surface water and waste
Water Environment Research Foundation.
water in The
Adham, S., P. Gagliardo, L. Boulos, J.
Netherlands. Science of the Total Environment
Oppenheimer and R.
225(1-2):
Trussell. 2001. Feasibility of the membrane
101-108.
bioreactor
Berube, P.R. and E.R. Hall. 2001. Fate and
process for water reclamation. Water Science
removal kinetics of
and
contaminants contained in evaporator
Technology 43(10): 203-209.
condensate during
membrane-bioreactor system. Desalination
treatment for reuse using a high-temperature
124(1-3): 279-
membrane
286.
bioreactor. Journal of Pulp and Paper Science
ARDI. 2000. Manure Management. Winnipeg, 27(2): 41-45.
MB: Manitoba
Bouchard, D.C., M.K. Williams and R.Y.
Agriculture and Food, Agri-Food Research and Surampalli. 1992.

Development Initiative. Nitrate contamination of groundwater:

Sources and potential
Baronti, C., R. Curini, G. D'Ascenzo, A. Di
Corcia, A. Gentili health effects. Journal American Water Works
Association
and R. Samperi. 2000. Monitoring natural and
synthetic 84(9): 85-90.

estrogens at activated sludge sewage Bowker, R.P.G. 2000. Biological odour control
treatment plants and in by diffusion

a receiving river water. Environmental Science into activated sludge basins. Water Science
& and Technology

Technology 34(24): 5059-5066. 41(6): 127-132.

Barreiros, A.M., C.M. Rodrigues, J.P.S.G. Brindle, K. and T. Stephenson. 1996. The
Crespo and M.A.M. application of

Reis. 1998. Membrane bioreactor for drinking membrane biological reactors for the
water treatment of

denitrification. Bioprocess Engineering 18(4): wastewater. Biotechnology and

297-302. Bioengineering 49(6): 601-
610. Volume 45 2003 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS
ENGINEERING 6.47
Buenrostro-Zagal, J.F., A. Ramirez-Oliva, S.
Caffarel-Mendez, membarne separation bioreactor for domestic
wastwater
B. Schettino-Bermudez and H.M. Poggi-
Varaldo. 2000. treatment. Water Science and Technology
25(10): 231-240.
Treatment of a 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic
acid (2,4-D) Chiemchaisri, C., K. Yamamoto and S.
Vigneswaran. 1993.
contamined wastewater in a membrane
bioreactor. Water Houshold membrane bioreactor in domestic
wastewater
Science and Technology 42(5-6): 185-192.
treatment. Water Science and Technology
Buisson, H., P. Cote, M. Praderie and H.
27(1): 171-178.
Paillard. 1998. The use
Cicek, N., J.P. Franco, M.T. Suidan and V.
of immersed membranes for upgrading
Urbain. 1998a.
wastewater treatment
Using a membrane bioreactor to reclaim
plants. Water Science and Technology 37(9):
wastewater.
89-95.
Journal American Water Works Association
Burgess, J.E., S.A. Parsons and R.M. Stuetz.
90(11): 105-
2001.
113.
Developments in odour control and waste gas
treatment Cicek, N., H. Winnen, M.T. Suidan, B.E. Wrenn,
V. Urbain and
biotechnology: A review. Biotechnology
Advances 19(1): J. Manem. 1998b. Effectiveness of the
membrane bioreactor
35-63.
in the biodegradation of high molecular
Cantor, J., P.M. Sutton, R. Steinheber and M.
weight compounds.
Myronyk. 1999.
Water Research 32(5): 1553-1563.
Membrane filtration: An internal membrane
bioreactor helps Cicek, N., D. Dionysiou, M.T. Suidan, P.
Ginestet and J.M.
solve treatment plant's operational problems.
Industrial Audic. 1999a. Performance deterioration and
structural
Wastewater 7(2): 18-22.
changes of a ceramic membrane bioreactor
Cheng, J. and B. Liu. 2001.
due to inorganic
Nitrification/denitrification in
abrasion. Journal of Membrane Science
intermittant aeration process for swine
163(1): 19-28.
wastewater
Cicek, N., J.P. Franco, M.T. Suidan and V.
treatment. Journal of Environmental
Urbain. 1999b.
Engineering-ASCE

127(8): 705-711.
Effect of phosphorus on operation and Colucci, M.S., H. Bork and E. Topp. 2001.
characteristics of Persistence of

MBR. Journal of Environmental Engineering- estrogenic hormones in agricultural soils: I.

ASCE 125(8): 17b-estradiol

738-746. and estrone. Journal of Environmental Quality

30: 2070-
Cicek, N., J.P. Franco, M.T. Suidan, V. Urbain
and J. Manem. 2076.

1999c. Characterization and comparison of a Cote, P., H. Buisson, C. Pound and G. Arakaki.
membrane 1997. Immersed

bioreactor and a conventional activated- membrane activated sludge for the reuse of
sludge system in the municipal

treatment of wastewater containing high- wastewater. Desalination 113(2-3): 189-196.

molecular-weight
Cote, P., H. Buisson and M. Praderie. 1998.
compounds. Water Environment Research Immersed
71(1): 64-70.
membranes activated sludge process applied
Cicek, N., J. Macomber, J. Davel, M.T. Suidan, to the treatment
J. Audic and P.
of municipal wastewater. Water Science and
Genestet. 2001. Effect of solids retention time Technology
on the
38(4-5): 437-442.
performance and biological characteristics of
Delanghe, B., F. Nakamura, H. Myoga, Y.
a membrane
Magara and E.
bioreactor. Water Science and Technology
Guibal. 1994. Drinking water denitrification in
43(11): 43-50.
a membrane
Cicek, N., M.T. Suidan, P. Ginestet and J.M.
bioreactor. Water Science and Technology
Audic. 2002.
30(6): 157-160.
Impact of soluble organic compounds on
Department of Justice of Canada. 1999.
permeate flux in an
Canadian
aerobic membrane bioreactor. Environmental
E n v i r o n me n t a l P r o t e c t ion ACT,
Technology
1999.
24: 249-256.
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-15.31/.
Colucci, M.S. and E. Topp. 2001. Persistence of (2003/10/06).
estrogenic
STW effluent. 1. Chemical fractionation and in
hormones in agricultural soils: II. 17a- vitro
ethynylestradiol.
biological screening. Environmental Science &
Journal of Environmental Quality 30: 2077- Technology
2080.
32(11): 1549-1558.
Dufresne, R., H.C. Lavallee, R.E. Lebrun and Fonseca, A.D., J.G. Crespo, J.S. Almeida and
S.N. Lo. 1998. M.A. Reis. 2000.

Comparison of performance between Drinking water denitrification using a novel

membrane bioreactor ion-exchange

and activated sludge system for the treatment membrane bioreactor. Environmental Science
of pulping & Technology

process wastewaters. TAPPI Journal 81(4): 34(8): 1557-1562.

131-135.
Garcia, G.E. and J. Kanj. 2002. Two years of
Falk, M.W. 2002. Hydrogenotrophic membrane
denitrification using a
bioreactor plant operation experience at the
dead-end hollow fiber membrane bioreactor. Viejas Tribe
Unpublished
Reservation. Paper presented at WEFTEC
M.Sc. thesis. Amherst, MA: University of 2002, Chicago.
Massachusetts,
IL. Alexandria, VA: Water Environment
Department of Civil and Environmental Federation.
Engineering.
Hewitt, M. and M. Servos. 2001. An overview
Fan, X.J., V. Urbain, Y. Qian and J. Manem. of substances
1996. Nitrification
present in Canadian aquatic environments
and mass balance with a membrane associated with
bioreactor for municipal
endocrine disruption. Water Quality Research
wastewater treatment. Water Science and Journal of
Technology 34(1-
Canada 36(2): 191-213.
2): 129-136.
Hogetsu, A., T. Ishikawa, M. Yoshikawa, T.
Fan, Y.B., J.S. Wang and Z.C. Jiang. 1998. Test Tanabe, S. Yudate
of membrane
and J. Sawada. 1992. High rate anaerobic
bioreactor for wastewater treatment of a digestion of wool
petrochemical
scouring wastewater in a digester combined
complex. Journal of Environmental Sciences with membrane
10(3): 269-
filter. Water Science and Technology 25(7):
275. 341-350.

Fan, Y.B., J.S. Wang, Z.C. Jiang, M.X. Chen, K. Irwin, J. 1990. On-site wastewater
Xu and Z.P. reclamation and recycling.

Jia. 2000. Treatment of a dyeing wastewater Water Environment and Technology 2(11): 90-
from a woolen 91.

mill using an a/o membrane bioreactor. Johnson, A.C. and J.P. Sumpter. 2001.
Journal of Removal of endocrinedisrupting

Environmental Sciences 12(3): 344-348.

chemicals in activated sludge treatment Lebeau, T., C. Lelievre, H. Buisson, D. Cleret,
works. L.W. Van de

Environmental Science & Technology 35(24): Venter and P. Cote. 1998. Immersed
4697-4703. membrane filtration for

Kapoor, A. and T. Viraraghavan. 1997. Nitrate the production of drinking water:

removal from Combination with PAC for

drinking water - Review. Journal of NOM and SOCs removal. Desalination 117(1-
Environmental 3): 219-231.

Engineering-ASCE 123(4): 371-380. Leonard, D., M. Mercier-Bonin, N.D. Lindley

and C. Lafforgue.
Kimura, S. 1991. Japan's aqua renaissance '90
project. Water 1998. Novel membrane bioreactor with
gas/liquid two-phase
Science and Technology 23(7-9): 1573-1582.
flow for high-performance degradation of
Knoblock, M.D., P.M. Sutton, P.N. Mishra, K.
phenol.
Gupta and A.
Biotechnology Progress 14(5): 680-688.
Janson. 1994. Membrane biological reactor
system for Lorenz, W., T. Cunningham and J.P. Penny.
2002. Phosphorus
treatment of oily wastewaters. Water
Environment Research removal in a membrane bioreactor system: A
full-scale
66(2): 133-139.
wastewater demonstration study. Paper
6 . 4 8 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU
presented at
CANADA CICEK
WEFTEC 2002, Chicago. IL. Alexandria, VA:
Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other
Water
organic wastewater
Environment Federation.
contaminants in US streams, 1999-2000: A
national Lu, S.G., T. Imai, M. Ukita, M. Sekine, M.
Fukagawa and H.
reconnaissance. Environmental Science &
Technology Nakanishi. 2000. The performance of
fermentation
36(6): 1202-1211.
wastewater treatment in ultrafiltration
Krauth, K.H. and K.F. Staab. 1993. Pressurized
membrane bioreactor
bioreactor with
by continuous and intermittent aeration
membrane filtration for wastewater
processes. Water
treatment. Water
Science and Technology 42(3-4): 323-329.
Research 27(3): 405-411.
Magara, Y. and M. Itoh. 1991. The effect of
Laing, R. 2003. North Battleford Water
operational factors
Inquiry.
on solid/liquid separation by ultra-membrane
http://www.northbattlefordwaterinquiry.ca.
filtration in a
(2003/10/06)
biological denitrification system for collected treatment on wastewater from kraft pulp mill.
human excreta Desalination

treatment plants. Water Science and 98: 273-283.

Technology 23(7-9):
Muller, E.B., A.H. Stouthamer, H.W. Verseveld
1583-1590. and D.H.

Manem, J.A.S. 1996. Membrane bioreactors. Eikelboom. 1995. Aerobic domestic waste
In Water water treatment

Treatment Membrane Processes, ed. J. in a pilot plant with complete sludge retention
Mallevialle, P.E. by cross-flow

Odendaal and M.R. Wiesner, 17.1-17.31. New filtration. Water Research 29(4): 1179-1189.
York, NY:
solids by membrane bioreactor system. Water
McGraw Hill. Science and

Mann, D.D., J.C. DeBruyn and Q. Zhang. 2002. Technology 26(3-4): 887-895.
Design and
Nah, Y.M., K.H. Ahn and I.T. Yeom. 2000.
evaluation of an open biofilter for treatment Nitrogen removal
of odour from
in household wastewater treatment using an
swine barns during sub-zero ambient intermittently
temperatures.
aerated membrane bioreactor. Environmental
Canadian Biosystems Engineering 44(6): 21- Technology
26.
21(1): 107-114.
Mansell, B.O. and E.D. Schroeder. 1998.
Nichols, D.J., T.C. Daniel, P.A. Moore Jr., D.R.
Biological
Edwards and
denitrification in a continuous flow membrane
D.H. Pote. 1997. Runoff of estrogen hormone
reactor.
17b-estradial
Water Science and Technology 38(1): 9-14.
from poultry litter applied to pasture. Journal
McMaster, M.E. 2001. A review of the of
evidence for endocrine
Environmental Quality 26: 1002-1006.
disruption in Canadian aquatic ecosystems.
Nuhoglu, A., T. Pekdemir, E. Yildiz, B. Keskinler
Water Quality
and G. Akay.
Research Journal of Canada 36(2): 215-231.
2002. Drinking water denitrification by a
Miller, G. 2000. 1999-2000 Annual Report of membrane bioreactor.
the
Water Research 36(5): 1155-1166.
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario.
O’Connor, D. 2002. Report of the Walkerton
Toronto, ON:
Inquiry.
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario.
http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/en
Minami, K. 1994. A trial of high performance glish/about/p
anaerobic
ubs/walkerton/part1/. (2003/10/06) waste water. Water Research 36(2): 413-420.

Parsons, R.V. 2001. Making dollars and sense Ross, W.R., J.P. Barnard, N.K.H. Strohwald, C.J.
of waste and Grobler and

wastewater in the food processing industry. J. Sanetra. 1992. Practical application of the
Managing ADUF process

Water and Wastewater in the Food Processing to the full-scale treatment of maize-
Industry processing effluent.

Seminar. Winnipeg, MB: Manitoba Hydro. Water Science and Technology 25(10): 27-39.

Perchard, G. 2001. Examination of drinking Scholzy, W. and W. Fuchs. 2000. Treatment of

water quality in oil

Canada: A regulatory perspective. St. John's, contaminated wastewater in a membrane

NF: Marine bioreactor. Water

Institute, Memorial University of Research 34(14): 3621-3629.

Newfoundland.
Stephenson, T., K. Brindle, S. Judd and B.
Pillay, V.L., B. Townsend and C.A. Buckley. Jefferson. 2000.
1994. Improving
Membrane Bioreactors for Wastewater
the performance of anaerobic digesters at Treatment. London,
wastewater
UK: IWA Publishing.
treatment works: The coupled cross-flow
Strohwald, N.K.H. and W.R. Ross. 1992.
microfiltration/digester process. Water Application of the
Science and
ADUF process to brewery effluent on a
Technology 30(12): 329-337. laboratory scale.

Planas, C., J.M. Guadayol, M. Droguet, A. Water Science and Technology 25(10): 95-105.
Escalas, J. Rivera
Sutton, P.M., A. Li, R.R. Evans and S.R.
and J. Caixach. 2002. Degradation of Korchin. 1983. Dorr-
polyethoxylated
Oliver's fixed-film, suspended growth
nonylphenols in a sewage treatment plant. anarobic systems for
Quantitative
industrial wastewater treatment and energy
analysis by isotopic dilution-HRGC/MS. Water recovery. In
Research
Proceedings of 37th Industrial Waste
36(4): 982-988. Conference, 667-675.

Rosenberger, S., U. Kruger, R. Witzig, W. Purdue, IN: Purdue University.

Manz, U. Szewzyk
Volume 45 2003 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS
and M. Kraume. 2002. Performance of a ENGINEERING 6.49
bioreactor with
Boston, MA: McGraw Hill Inc.
submerged membranes for aerobic treatment
of municipal
Ternes, T.A., M. Stumpf, J. Mueller, K. 2002. Membrane Bioreactors for Municipal
Haberer, R.D. Wilken Wastewater

and M. Servos. 1999. Behavior and occurrence Treatment. STOWA Report. London, UK: IWA
of estrogens Publishing.

in municipal sewage treatment plants - I. Velizarov, S., C.M. Rodrigues, M.A. Reis and
Investigations in J.G. Crespo.

Germany, Canada and Brazil. Science of the 2000. Mechanism of charged pollutants
Total removal in an ion

Environment 225(1-2): 81-90. exchange membrane bioreactor: Drinking

water
Topp, E. and A. Starratt. 2000. Rapid
mineralization of the denitrification. Biotechnology and
Bioengineering 71(4):
endocrine-disrupting chemical 4-nonylphenol
in soil. 245-254.

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and

19(2): 313-318. Technology

Trouve, E., V. Urbain and J. Manem. 1994. 30(1): 1-48.

Treatment of
Wehrle. 1994a. MBR Case Study:
municipal wastewater by a membrane Zweckverband TBA.
bioreactor: Results of
http://www.wehrle-
a semi-industrial pilot-scale study. Water env.co.uk/pdf/Zweckverband%20.pdf.
Science and
(2003/05/21)
Technology 30(4): 151-157.
Wehrle. 1994b. MBR Case Study: Bayern-
Urbain, V., R. Benoit and J. Manem. 1996. Leder GmbH.
Membrane
http://www.wehrle-
bioreactor: A new treatment tool. Journal env.co.uk/pdf/Bayern%20Leder.pdf.
American Water
(2003/05/21)
Works Association 88(5): 75-86.
Wehrle. 1997. MBR Case Study: EAL-
Urbain, V., B. Mobarry, V. de Silva, D.A. Stahl, Scheinberg Treatment
B.E. Rittmann
Plant. http://www.wehrle-
and J. Manem. 1998. Integration of env.co.uk/pdf/EAL%20.pdf.
performance, molecular
(2003/05/21)
biology and modeling to describe the
Wehrle. 1998. MBR Case Study: Trienekens
activated sludge
GmbH.
process. Water Science and Technology 37(4-
http://www.wehrle-
5): 223-229.
env.co.uk/pdf/Trienekens%20.pdf.
Van de Roest, H.F., D.P. Lawrence and A.G.N.
(2003/05/21)
Van Bentem.
Wehrle. 1999. MBR Case Study: Robert Bosch
AG.

http://www.wehrle-
env.co.uk/pdf/Robert%20Bosch%20.pdf.

(2003/05/21)

Wehrle. 2000. MBR Case Study: Dairygold

Cooperative.

http://www.wehrle-
env.co.uk/pdf/Dairygold.pdf.

(2003/05/21)

Yokomizo, T. 1994. Ultrafiltration membrane

technology for

regeneration of building wastewater for

reuse. Desalination

98: 319-326.

Zaloum, R., S. Lessard, D. Mourato and J.

Carriere. 1994.

Membrane bioreactor treatment of oily

wastewater from a

metal transformation mill. Water Science and

Technology

30(9): 21-27.

All in-text references underlined in blue are

linked to publications on ResearchGate,
letting you access and read them immediately