Chapter 1

Wastewater Treatment: An Overview

Grégorio Crini and Eric Lichtfouse

Contents
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Water Pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.1 Contamination and Contaminants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.2 Different Types of Effluents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3 Wastewater Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3.1 General Scheme of Wastewater Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3.2 Technologies Available for Contaminant Removal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Abstract During the last 30 years, environmental issues, especially concerning the
chemical and biological contamination of water, have become a major concern for
both society and public authorities, but more importantly, for the whole industrial
world. Any activities whether domestic or agricultural but also industrial produce
wastewaters or effluents containing undesirable contaminants which can also be
toxic. In this context, a constant effort must be made to protect water resources. In
general, conventional wastewater treatment consists of a combination of physical,
chemical, and biological processes and operations to remove insoluble particles and
soluble contaminants from effluents. This chapter briefly discusses the different
types of effluents, gives a general scheme of wastewater treatment, and describes
the advantages and disadvantages of technologies available.

G. Crini (*)
Laboratoire Chrono-environnement, UMR 6249, UFR Sciences et Techniques, Université
Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Besançon, France
e-mail: [email protected]
E. Lichtfouse
CEREGE, Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS, IRD, INRA, Coll France, Aix-en-Provence, France
e-mail: [email protected]

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 1

G. Crini, E. Lichtfouse (eds.), Green Adsorbents for Pollutant Removal,
Environmental Chemistry for a Sustainable World 18,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92111-2_1
2 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

Abbreviations

AC Activated carbons
AOP Advanced oxidation processes
AOX Adsorbable organic halogen
BAS Biological activated sludge
BOD Biochemical oxygen demand
CAA Commercial activated alumina
CAC Commercial activated carbons
COD Chemical oxygen demand
CW Constructed wetlands
CWAO Catalytic wet air oxidation
D Dialysis
DPS Dangerous priority substances
E Electrolysis
EC Electro-coagulation
ED Electrodialysis
EED Electroelectro-dialysis
EF Electro-flocculation
ELM Emulsion liquid membranes
ICP Inductively coupled plasma
MF Microfiltration
MVP Membrane pervaporation
NF Nanofiltration
PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
PCB Polychlorobiphenyls
PS Priority substances
RS Reverse osmosis
SLM Supported liquid membranes
SS Suspended solids
TOC Total organic carbon
TOD Total oxygen demand
UF Ultrafiltration
VOC Volatile organic compounds
WAO Non catalytic wet air oxidation
WFD Water Framework Directive

1.1 Introduction

Actually, water pollution by chemicals has become a major source of concern and
a priority for both society and public authorities, but more importantly, for the
whole industrial world (Sonune and Ghate 2004; Crini 2005; Cox et al. 2007;
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 3

Sharma 2015; Rathoure and Dhatwalia 2016). What is water pollution? Water
pollution can be defined in many ways. Pollution of water occurs when one or
more substances that will modify the water in negative fashion are discharged in
it. These substances can cause problems for people, animals and their habitats
and also for the environment. There are various classifications of water pollution
(Morin-Crini and Crini 2017). The two chief sources can be seen as point and
non-point. The first refers to the pollutants that belong to a single source such as
emissions from industries into the water, and the second on the other hand means
pollutants emitted from multiple sources.
The causes of water pollution are multiple: industrial wastes, mining activities,
sewage and waste water, pesticides and chemical fertilizers, energy use, radioactive
waste, urban development, etc. The very fact that water is used means that it will
become polluted: any activities whether domestic or agricultural but also industrial
produce effluent containing undesirable pollutants which can also be toxic. In this
context, a constant effort must be made to protect water resources (Khalaf 2016;
Rathoure and Dhatwalia 2016; Morin-Crini and Crini 2017).
The legislation covering liquid industrial effluent is becoming stricter, especially
in the more developed countries, and imposes the treatment of any wastewater before
it is released into the environment. Since the end of the 1970s, in Europe, the
directives are increasingly severe and zero rejection is being sought by 2020.
Currently, the European policy on water results from the Water Framework Direc-
tive (WFD) of 2000 which establishes guidelines for the protection of surface water,
underground water, and coastal water in Europe (Morin-Crini and Crini 2017).
The WFD also classified chemicals into two main lists of priority substances. The
first, the “Black List”, involves dangerous priority substances (DPS) considered to
be persistent, highly toxic or to lead to bioaccumulation. The second list, the “Grey
List”, gathers priority substances (PS) presenting a significant risk for the environ-
ment. The selection of these substances can either be based on individual substances
of families of substances (e.g. metals, chlorobenzenes, alkylphenols, etc.) or on the
basis of the industrial sector (e.g. agro-food industry, chemicals industry, metal-
finishing sector, etc.). Currently, Europe is now asking industrials to innovate to
reduce and/or eliminate the release of DPS and PS chemicals in their wastewaters.
Moreover, recycling wastewater is starting to receive active attention from
industry in the context of sustainable development (e.g. protection of the environ-
ment, developing concepts of “green chemistry”, use of renewable resources),
improved water management (recycling of waste water) and also health concerns
(Kentish and Stevens 2001; Cox et al. 2007; Sharma and Sanghi 2012; Khalaf 2016;
Rathoure and Dhatwalia 2016; Morin-Crini and Crini 2017). Thus, for the industrial
world, the treatment of effluents has become a priority.
During the past three decades, several physical, chemical and biological technol-
ogies have been reported such as flotation, precipitation, oxidation, solvent extrac-
tion, evaporation, carbon adsorption, ion-exchange, membrane filtration,
electrochemistry, biodegradation, and phytoremediation (Berefield et al. 1982; Liu
and Liptak 2000; Henze 2001; Harvey et al. 2002; Chen 2004; Forgacs et al. 2004;
Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Crini and Badot 2007; Cox et al. 2007; Hai et al. 2007;
4 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

Barakat 2011; Rathoure and Dhatwalia 2016; Morin-Crini and Crini 2017). Which is
the best method? There is no direct answer to this question because each treatment
has its own advantages and constraints not only in terms of cost but also in terms of
efficiency, feasibility, and environmental impact. In general, elimination of pollut-
ants is done by both physical, chemical and biological means. At the present time,
there is no single method capable of adequate treatment, mainly due to the complex
nature of industrial effluents. In practice, a combination of different methods is often
used to achieve the desired water quality in the most economical way.
After a brief discussion on the main contaminants/pollutants and the different
types of effluents, this chapter proposes a general scheme of wastewater treatment
and presents the advantages and disadvantages of different individual
techniques used.

1.2 Water Pollution

1.2.1 Contamination and Contaminants

Contamination/Pollution arises from all sectors of human activity (i.e. domestic,

industrial and agricultural), and is not only due to natural (petroleum, minerals, etc.)
and anthropogenic causes (e.g. sewage treatment sludge or persistent organic pol-
lutants produced by the incineration of waste) but also, and especially, to synthetic
substances produced by chemical industries (e.g. dyes, fertilizers, pesticides, and so
on). The terms contamination/pollution and contaminant/pollutant are often used in
relation to subjects like environment, food and medicine (Amiard 2011; Rathoure
and Dhatwalia 2016). Both contaminant and pollutant refer to undesirable or
unwanted substances. Pollutant refers to a harmful substance but contaminant is
not necessarily harmful since contamination refers simply to the presence of a
chemical substance where it should not be. This means that all pollutants are
contaminants, but not all contaminants are pollutants. In this chapter, both these
terms were used.
A chemical pollutant is a substance toxic for flora and fauna, and for humanity,
and present at concentrations such that, in nature, it has repercussions on the
environment and on health in general. Pollutants can be categorized according to
the sources they are derived from, such as water pollutants, soil pollutants, air
pollutants or noise pollutants (Crini and Badot 2007). Examples of pollutants
known to the public and found in waters are numerous and various. The list includes
nitrates, phosphates, detergents, pesticides and other crop sprays, chlorinated sol-
vents but also metals (e.g. lead, mercury, chromium, cadmium, arsenic), dyes,
organics (benzene, bisphenol A. . .), mineral derivatives (especially arsenic and
cyanides) and microorganisms (e.g. bacteria, virus). Others are less well known
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 5

but are considered to be high on the list of dangerous substances: volatile organic
compounds (VOC), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), polychlorobiphenyls
(PCB), bromine-containing flame-retardants, phthalates, and many more (Liu and
Liptak 2000; Sonune and Ghate 2004; Sharma and Sanghi 2012).
One way of measuring the quality of water is to take samples of this water and
measure the concentrations of different substances that it contains, using analytical
techniques such as, for instance, inductively coupled plasma (ICP) for metals, and/or
determine chemical indicators or global parameters (Morin-Crini and Crini 2017).
Typically, water quality is determined by comparing the physical and chemical
characteristics of a sample with water quality guidelines or standards based on
scientifically assessed acceptable levels of toxicity to either humans or aquatic
organisms. Biological indicators using living organism such as fish can be also
used. From the wastewater treatment point of view, it is also important to list the
exact chemical composition of the effluents to be treated (Liu and Liptak 2000;
Lacorte et al. 2003; Pokhrel and Viraraghavan 2004; Sharma 2015; Druart et al.
2016). Indeed, before any actions can be taken to reduce and/or eliminate any
chemicals, it is necessary to identify all the dissolved substances in the effluents
qualitatively and quantitatively using. However, a real effluent can be also a
non-uniform mixture, colored and/or smelly, contain suspended solids (SS), immis-
cible liquids (e.g. oils, fats, hydrocarbons), soluble and/or biodegradable molecules,
substances that can give waters redox potential, acidity, or pathogenicity problems
(Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Crini and Badot 2010; Sharma and Sanghi 2012; Sharma
2015; Morin-Crini and Crini 2017). In this case, wastewater quality can then be
defined by physical, chemical and biological characteristics or general parameters
(Cooper 1993; Liu and Liptak 2000; Crini and Badot 2007). Physical parameters
include color, temperature, solids, turbidity, odor, oil and grease. Solids can be
further classified into suspended and dissolved substances as well as organic and
inorganic fractions. Chemical parameters associated with the organic content of
industrial wastewater include the chemical oxygen demand (COD), biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD), total organic carbon (TOC), and total oxygen demand
(TOD). Inorganic chemical parameters include salinity, pH (acidity, alkalinity),
metals, chlorides, sulfates, nitrogen, phosphorus, etc. Bacteriological parameters
include coliforms, fecal coliforms, specific pathogens, and viruses. Recent books
can be consulted on these topics (Sharma and Sanghi 2012; Sharma 2015; Khalaf
2016; Rathoure and Dhatwalia 2016; Morin-Crini and Crini 2017).
Recently, Druart et al. (2016) investigated the chemical composition of discharge
waters from a metal-finishing industry sampled over a three-month period. All these
samples respected the regulatory standards. Twenty-on water parameters and
164 substances were monitored, among them organic and metallic compounds.
The results indicated, that, on average, 52 substances were found with a high
variability, both qualitative and quantitative. Inorganics such as calcium, sodium
and chloride were present at concentrations close to g/L and metals higher than
mg/L. Organics were detected at trace levels (ng/L of μg/L).
6 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

1.2.2 Different Types of Effluents

There are various sources of water contamination (e.g. households, industry, mines,
infiltration) but one of the greatest remains its large scale use by industry
(Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Hai et al. 2007). Four categories of water are generally
distinguished: (1) rainwater (runoff from impermeable surfaces), (2) domestic waste-
water, (3) agricultural water and (4) industrial wastewaters (Crini and Badot 2007).
The last group can be subdivided into cooling water, washing effluent (of variable
composition), and manufacturing or process water (biodegradable and/or potentially
toxic). In general, process waters (i.e. wastewaters or effluents) pose the greatest
problems. Wastewaters differ significantly from drinking water sources (usually
rivers, lakes, or reservoirs) in one important way: the contaminant levels in most
drinking water sources are quite low as compared with contaminant levels in
wastewaters derived from industrial-type activities (Cooney 1999). However, their
toxicity depends, of course, on their composition, which in turn depends on their
industrial origin.
It can be noted that some effluents such as from surface treatment or coke-
production plants are serious polluters whereas the effluent from other sectors such
as the agro-food industry (including dairies, sugar mills and fruit and vegetable
processing units) may be heavily loaded but the substances it contains are easily
biodegradable and even recyclable. Pollution issues have a strong impact on the
population. Colored effluent, for instance from pulp and paper mills or from textile
mills, has a strong visual impact due to its color and is perceived by the public as an
indication of the presence of dangerous pollution – however toxic the coloring
actually is (Lacorte et al. 2003; Pokhrel and Viraraghavan 2004; Forgacs et al.
2004; Rana et al. 2004; Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Crini 2005; Hai et al. 2007;
Wojnárovits and Takács 2008). Colored effluent can lead to nature protection
associations or other stakeholders in the water bodies suing the parties responsible.
In addition, it is known that paper-mill wastewater contains nutrient elements that
can lead to eutrophication and thus to a heavy organic load for the aquatic environ-
ment due to the proliferation of algae at the expense of other aquatic species (Lacorte
et al. 2003; Rana et al. 2004). Effluent with high levels of heavy metals from surface
treatment industries is also a serious source of toxicity for aquatic ecosystems, again
creating worries for the population (Rana et al. 2004; Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Morin-
Crini and Crini 2017).
The industrial sectors of agro-food, textiles, pulp industry and surface-treatment
industries are today considered to be the four largest consumers of water and the
most polluting, in spite of the considerable effort made to clean up the processes over
the last 30 years. These activities are all energy- and water-consuming as well as
highly chemically polluting. The problems encountered during wastewater treatment
are generally very complex as the effluent contains pollutants of various types
depending on its origin. So, there are different types of effluent to treat, each with
its own characteristics requiring specific treatment processes.
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 7

1.3 Wastewater Treatment

1.3.1 General Scheme of Wastewater Treatment

When water is polluted and decontamination becomes necessary, the best purifica-
tion approach should be chosen to reach the decontamination objectives
(as established by legislation). A purification process generally consists of five
successive steps as described in Fig. 1.1: (1) preliminary treatment or
pre-treatment (physical and mechanical); (2) primary treatment (physicochemical
and chemical); (3) secondary treatment or purification (chemical & biological);
(4) tertiary or final treatment (physical and chemical); and (5) treatment of the sludge
formed (supervised tipping, recycling or incineration). In general, the first two steps
are gathered under the notion of pre-treatment or preliminary step, depending on the
situation (Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Crini and Badot 2007, 2010).
Pre-treatment consists of eliminating the (floating) solid particles and all suspended
substances from the effluent. This pre-treatment stage, which can be carried out using
mechanical or physical means is indispensable, before envisaging secondary treatment
because particulate pollution (e.g. SS, colloids, fats, etc.) will hinder later treatment,
make it less efficient or damage the decontamination equipment. Primary chemical
treatment such as oxidation for cyanide destruction and Cr(VI) reduction, pH adjust-
ment, pre-reduction of a high organic load may also be required. For instance effluent
from paper mills contains abundant SS such as fibres, fillers and other solids (Pokhrel
and Viraraghavan 2004; Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Sharma 2015). Effluents from textile
mills have a very variable pH although it is often alkaline, containing a high organic

Fig. 1.1 Overview of the main processes for the decontamination of contaminated industrial
wastewaters
8 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

load. It is therefore indispensable to pre-treat these effluents before considering second-

ary treatment. However, these treatments alone are, in many cases, incapable of meeting
the legislation requirements.
Before its discharge into the environment or its reuse, the pre-treated effluent
must undergo secondary purification treatment using the most appropriate of the
biological, physical or chemical techniques available to remove the chemical pollu-
tion. In certain cases, a final or tertiary treatment (step 4 in Fig. 1.1) can also be
required to remove the remaining pollutants or the molecules produced during the
secondary purification (e.g. the removal of salts produced by the mineralization of
organic matter). However, the use of tertiary treatment in Europe is limited, though it
may be necessary in the future if new restrictions are applied. The main tertiary
treatments employed to date at a few industrial sites are adsorption using activated
carbons (AC), ion-exchange, membrane filtration (ultrafiltration, reverse osmosis),
advanced oxidation, and constructed wetlands (CW). In Europe, most of the CW are
applied for domestic sewage and municipal wastewater treatment. However, the
diversity of CW configurations makes them versatile for implementation to treat
industrial effluents (e.g. tannery wastewater, pulp and paper post-treated effluents).

1.3.2 Technologies Available for Contaminant Removal

In general, conventional wastewater treatment consists of a combination of physical,

chemical, and biological processes and operations to remove solids including col-
loids, organic matter, nutrients, soluble contaminants (metals, organics. . .) etc. from
effluents. A multitude of techniques classified in conventional methods, established
recovery processes and emerging removal methods can be used (Fig. 1.2). Table 1.1
lists the advantages and disadvantages of different individual techniques (Berefield
et al. 1982; Henze 2001; Sonune and Ghate 2004; Chen 2004; Pokhrel and

Fig. 1.2 Classification of technologies available for pollutant removal and examples of techniques
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 9

Table 1.1 Advantages and disadvantages of the main conventional methods used for the treatment
of polluted industrial wastewater
Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
Chemical Uptake of the Technological simple Chemical consumption
precipitation pollutants and (simple equipment) (lime, oxidants, H2S. . .)
separation of the Integrated physicochemi- Physicochemical moni-
products formed cal process toring of the effluent (pH)
Both economically advan- Ineffective in removal of
tageous and efficient the metal ions at low
concentration
Adapted to high pollutant Requires an oxidation
loads step if the metals are
complexed
Very efficient for metals High sludge production,
and fluoride elimination handling and disposal
Not metal selective problems (management,
Significant reduction of treatment, cost)
the COD
Coagulation/ Uptake of the Process simplicity Requires adjunction of
flocculation pollutants and non-reusable chemicals
separation of the (coagulants, flocculants,
products formed aid-chemicals)
Integrated physicochemi- Physicochemical moni-
cal process toring of the effluent (pH)
A large range of chemicals Increased sludge volume
is available commercially generation (management,
treatment, cost)
Inexpensive capital cost Low removal of arsenic
Very efficient for SS and
colloidal particles
Good sludge settling and
dewatering characteristics
Significant reduction of
the COD and BOD
Interesting reduction of
TOX and AOX (pulp and
paper industry)
Bacterial inactivation
capability
Rapid and efficient for
insoluble contaminants
(pigments. . .) removal
Flotation Separation Integrated physicochemi- High initial capital cost
process cal process
Froth flotation Different types of collec- Energy costs
tors (non-ionic or ionic)
Efficient for small particles Maintenance and opera-
removal and can remove tion costs no negligible
(continued)
10 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
low density particles
which would require long
settling periods
Useful for primary Chemicals required
clarification (to control the relative
hydrophobicities between
the particles and to main-
tain proper froth
characteristics)
Metal selective Selectivity is
Low retention time pH-dependent
Used as an efficient ter-
tiary treatment in the pulp
and paper industry
Mechanisms: true flota-
tion, entrainment, and
aggregation
Chemical Use of an oxi- Integrated physicochemi- Chemicals required
oxidation dant (e.g. O3, cal process
Simple Cl2, ClO2, H2O2, Simple, rapid and efficient Production, transport and
oxidation KMnO4) process management of the oxi-
Ozone dants (other than ozone)
Hypochlorite Generation of ozone Pre-treatment
treatment on-site (no storage- indispensable
Hydrogen associated dangers)
peroxide Quality of the outflow Efficiency strongly
(effective destruction of influenced by the type of
the pollutants, efficient oxidant
reduction of color)
Good elimination of color Short half-life (ozone)
and odor (ozone)
Efficient treatment for A few dyes are more
cyanide and sulfide resistant to treatment and
removal necessitate high ozone
doses
Initiates and accelerates Formation of (unknown)
azo-bond cleavage (hypo- intermediates
chlorite treatment)
Increases biodegradability No diminution of COD
of product values or limited effect
(ozone)
High throughput No effect on salinity
(ozone)
No sludge production Release of volatile com-
pounds and aromatic
(continued)
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 11

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
amines (hypochlorite
treatment)
Possibility of water recycle No effect on the COD
Disinfection (bacteria, Generates sludge
viruses)
Biological Use of biological The application of micro- Necessary to create an
methods (pure or mixed) organisms for the biodeg- optimally favorable
Bioreactors cultures radation of organic environment
Biological contaminants is simple,
activated sludge economically attractive
(BAS) and well accepted by the
public
Microbiologi-
cal treatments
Enzymatic
decomposition
Lagoon Large number of species Requires management
used in mixed cultures and maintenance of the
(consortiums) or pure cul- microorganisms and/or
tures (white-rot fungus) physicochemical
pretreatment (inefficient
on non-degradable com-
pounds or when toxic
compounds are present)
White-rot fungi produce a Slow process (problems
wide variety of extracellu- of kinetics)
lar enzymes with high
biodegradability capacity
Efficiently eliminates bio- Low biodegradability of
degradable organic matter, certain molecules (dyes)
NH3, NH4+, iron
Attenuates color well Poor decolorization
(BAS)
High removal of BOD and Possible sludge bulking
SS (BAS) and foaming (BAS)
Decisive role of microbio- Generation of biological
logical processes in the sludge and uncontrolled
future technologies used degradation products
for the removal of emer- The composition of mixed
gent contaminants from cultures may change dur-
waters ing the decomposition
process
Complexity of the micro-
biological mechanisms
Necessity to have a good
knowledge of the enzy-
matic processes
(continued)
12 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
governing the decompo-
sition of the substances
Adsorption/ Non-destructive Technological simple Relatively high invest-
filtration process (simple equipment) and ment (CAC)
adaptable to many treat-
ment formats
CAC Use of a solid Large range of commercial Cost of materials (CAC,
CAA material products CAA)
Sand Wide variety of target Non-destructive
Mixed contaminants (adsorption) processes
materials
Silica gel Highly effective process Non-selective methods
(adsorption) with fast
kinetics
Excellent quality of the Performance depends on
treated effluent the type of materials
(CAC)
Global elimination (CAC) Requirement for several
but possibly selective types of adsorbent
depending on adsorbent
Excellent ability to sepa- Chemical derivatization
rate a large range of pol- to improve their adsorp-
lutants, in particular tion capacity
refractory molecules (CAC
is the most effective
material)
CAC: efficient for COD Rapid saturation and
removal; highly efficient clogging of the reactors
treatment when coupled to (regeneration costly)
coagulation to reduce both
SS, COD and color
Sand: efficient for turbidity Not efficient with certain
and SS removal types of dyestuffs and
some metals (CAC)
Alumina: efficient for Elimination of the adsor-
fluoride removal bent (requires incinera-
tion, regeneration, or
replacement of the
material)
Regeneration is expensive
and results in loss of
material (CAC)
Economically non-viable
for certain industries
(continued)
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 13

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
(pulp and paper,
textile. . .)
Ion-exchange Non-destructive Large range of commercial Economic constraints
Chelating process products available from (initial cost of the selec-
resins several manufacturers tive resin, maintenance
Selective costs, regeneration time-
resins consuming. . .)
Macroporous Technological simple Large volume requires
resins (simple equipment) large columns
Polymeric
adsorbents
Polymer-based Well established and tested Rapid saturation and
hybrid procedures; easy control clogging of the reactors
adsorbents and maintenance
Easy to use with other Saturation of the cationic
techniques exchanger before the
(e.g. precipitation and fil- anionic resin (precipita-
tration in an integrated tion of metals and
wastewater process) blocking of reactor)
Can be applied to different Beads easily fouled by
flow regimes (continuous, particulates and organic
batch) matter (organics, oils);
requires a physicochemi-
cal pretreatment (e.g. sand
filtration or carbon
adsorption) to remove
these contaminants
High regeneration with Matrix degrades with time
possibility of external and with certain waste
regeneration of resin materials (radioactive,
strong oxidants. . .)
Rapid and efficient process Performance sensitive to
pH of effluent
Produce a high-quality Conventional resins not
treated effluent selective
Concentrates all types of Selective resins have lim-
pollutants, particularly ited commercial use
minerals
Relatively inexpensive and Not effective for certain
efficient for metal removal; target pollutants (disperse
clean-up to ppb levels dyes, drugs. . .)
(to ppt levels for selective
resins)
Can be selective for certain
metals (with suitable
resins)
(continued)
14 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
Interesting and efficient Elimination of the resin
technology for the recov-
ery of valuable metals
Incineration Destruction by Simple process Initial investment costs
Thermal combustion Useful for concentrated Transport and storage of
oxidation effluents or sludges the effluents
Catalytic Highly efficient High running costs
oxidation
Photocatalytic Eliminates all types of Formation of dioxins and
destruction organics others pollutants
(metals. . .)
Production of energy Local communities
always have opposed the
presence of incinerating
plant in the locality
Electrochemistry Electrolysis (E) Efficient technology for High initial cost of the
the recovery/recycling of equipment
Electrodeposition valuable metals (E)
Electro-coagu-
lation (EC)
Electro-floccu- Adaptation to different Cost of the maintenance
lation (EF) pollutant loads and differ- (sacrificial anodes. . .)
Electro- ent flow rates (E)
flotation

Electrooxidation
Electrochemi-
cal oxidation
Electrochemi- More effective and rapid Requires addition of
cal reduction organic matter separation chemicals (coagulants,
Cementation than in traditional coagu- flocculants, salts)
Indirect lation (EC)
electro-oxidation Efficient elimination of SS, Anode passivation and
with strong oils, greases, color and sludge deposition on the
oxidants metals (EC, EF) electrodes that can inhibit
Photo-assisted the electrolytic process in
electrochemical continuous operation
methods EC: pH control is not nec- Requires post-treatment
essary; generation of to remove high concen-
coagulants in situ; eco- trations of iron and alu-
nomically feasible and minum ions
very effective in removing
suspended solids,
dissolved metals, tannins
and dyes (effluents from
textile, catering, petro-
leum, municipal sewage,
(continued)
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 15

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
oil-water emulsion,
dye-stuff, clay
suspension. . .)
EF: Widely used in the EF: Separation efficiency
miming industries depends strongly on bub-
ble sizes
Effective in treatment of Filtration process for flocs
drinking water supplies for
small or medium sized
communities (EC)
Interesting method for the Formation of sludge (fil-
recovery of gold and silver tering problems)
from rinse baths (E)
Very effective treatment Cost of sludge treatment
for the reduction, coagula- (electro-coagulation)
tion and separation of
copper (EC)
Increases biodegradabil-
ity (E)
Cementation: Efficient for
copper removal
Membrane Non-destructive Large range of commercial Investment costs are often
filtration separation membrane available from too high for small and
Microfiltration several manufacturers; medium industries
(MF) large number of applica-
Ultrafiltration tions and module
(UF) configurations
Nanofiltration Semi-permeable Small space requirement High energy requirements
(NF) barrier
Reverse osmo-
sis (RO)
Dialysis (D)
Electrodialysis
(ED)
Electroelectro-
dialysis (EED)
Emulsion liq-
uid membranes
(ELM)
Supported liq- Simple, rapid and efficient, The design of membrane
uid membranes even at high filtration systems can dif-
(SLM) concentrations fer significantly
Produces a high-quality High maintenance and
treated effluent operation costs
No chemicals required
(continued)
16 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
Rapid membrane clogging
(fouling with high
concentrations)
Low solid waste Low throughput
generation
Eliminates all types of Limited flow rates
dyes, salts and mineral
derivatives
Efficient elimination of Not interesting at low
particles, SS and micro- solute feed concentrations
organisms (MF, UF, NF,
RO), volatile and
non-volatile organics (NF,
RO), dissolved inorganic
matter (ED, EED), and
phenols, cyanide and zinc
(ELM)
Possible to be metal The choice of the mem-
selective brane is determined by the
specific application (hard-
ness reduction, particulate
or TOC removal, potable
water production. . .)
A wide range of real Specific processes
applications: clarification
or sterile filtration (MF),
separation of polymers
(UF), multivalents ions
(NF), salts from polymer
solutions (D) and
non-ionic solutes (ED),
desalination and produc-
tion of pure water (RO)
Well-known separation Elimination of the
mechanisms: Size- concentrate
exclusion (NF, UF, MF),
solubility/diffusivity (RO,
pervaporation), charge
(electrodialysis)
Evaporation Concentration Several types of evapora- Expensive costs for high
technique tors exist on the market volumes of wastewater
(energy consumption,
volume of the concentrate
and costs of disposal)
Thermal process Versatile technique (the Investment costs are often
number of cells can be too high for small and
medium industries
(continued)
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 17

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
adapted to the required
evaporation capacity)
Membrane Separation The energy-costs are well- High pollution load in the
pervaporation process known for the different concentrates
(MPV) configurations
Efficient processes Crystallization due to the
concentration of the
wastewater and corrosion
of the heating elements in
the evaporator due to the
chemical aggressiveness
of the concentrated
effluent
Interesting for the produc- Problem with the evapo-
tion of water for rinsing ration of effluents
operations (recycling of containing free cyanide
distillates), the concentra-
tion of rinsing effluents for
re-introduction into the
process and for the purifi-
cation of treatment baths
(to maintain their nominal
concentration)
Also interesting for the Requires the installation
separation of phenol by of a cleaning circuit
steam distillation (to prevent atmospheric
pollution)
MPV: a quite recent tech- Potential contamination
nology applied to the of the distillate preventing
removal of organics from reuse (due to the presence
water of some VOC or hydro-
carbons in the effluent)
Liquid-liquid Separation A well-known established High investment
(solvent) technology separation technology for (equipment)
extraction wastewater recycling
Membrane- Solvent Principally used for large- Uneconomic when con-
based solvent extraction scale operations where the taminant concentrations
extraction load of contaminants are are low (< 0.5 g/L)
high
Extraction/stripping opera- Use of large volumes of
tions easy to perform organic extractants
Simple control and moni- Use of potential toxic
toring of process solvents
Economically viable when Not interesting at low
both solute concentrations solute feed concentrations
and wastewater flowrates
are high
(continued)
18 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
Relatively low operating Hydrodynamic constraints
costs (flooding, entrainment)
Recyclability of Entrainment of phases
extractants giving poor effluent
quality
Selectivity of the Possible cross-
exchangers for metals effi- contamination of the
cient for metal removal aqueous stream
(cations, anions, ion pairs)
Efficient for the separation Emulsification of phase
of phenol with poor separation
A good alternative to clas- Fire risk from use of
sical lime precipitation for organic solvents and
phosphoric acid VOC emissions
recuperation
Advanced oxida- Emerging In situ production of reac- Laboratory scale
tion processes processes tive radicals
(AOP)
Photolysis Destructive Little or no consumption Economically non-viable
Heterogeneous techniques of chemicals for small and medium
and homoge- industries
neous
photocatalytic
reactions
Non catalytic
wet air oxidation
(WAO)
Catalytic wet
air oxidation
(CWAO)
Supercritical Mineralization of the Technical constraints
water gasification pollutants
No production of sludge Formation of by-products
Rapid degradation Low throughput
Efficient for recalcitrant High-pressure and
molecules (dyes, drugs. . .) energy-intensive condi-
tions (WAO)
Very good abatement of pH-dependence
COD and TOC (in particular for WAO)
WAO: technology suitable WAO: completed miner-
for effluent too dilute for alization not achieved
incineration and too toxic
and/or concentrated for
biological treatment
Destruction of phenol in
water solution: WAO,
CWAO
(continued)
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 19

Table 1.1 (continued)

Main
Process characteristic(s) Advantages Disadvantages
Insoluble organic matter
is converted to simpler
soluble compounds with-
out emissions of danger-
ous substances (WAO)

Viraraghavan 2004; Parsons 2004; Forgacs et al. 2004; Anjaneyulu et al. 2005;
Chuah et al. 2005; Crini 2005, 2006; Bratby 2006; Crini and Badot 2007, 2010;
Cox et al. 2007; Mohan and Pittman 2007; Hai et al. 2007; Wojnárovits and
Takács 2008; Barakat 2011; Sharma and Sanghi 2012; Rathoure and Dhatwalia
2016; Morin-Crini and Crini 2017).
Selection of the method to be used will thus depend on the wastewater charac-
teristics (Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Crini 2005; Crini and Badot 2007; Cox et al. 2007).
Each treatment has its own constraints not only in terms of cost, but also in terms of
feasibility, efficiency, practicability, reliability, environmental impact, sludge pro-
duction, operation difficulty, pre-treatment requirements and the formation of poten-
tially toxic byproducts. However, among the various treatment processes currently
cited for wastewater treatment, only a few are commonly employed by the industrial
sector for technological and economic reasons. In general, removal of pollutants
from effluents is done by physicochemical and/or biological means, with research
concentrating on cheaper effective combinations of systems or new alternatives.

1.4 Conclusion

The development of cheaper, effective and novel methods of decontamination is

currently an active field of research, as shown by the numerous publications
appearing each year. Preserving the environment, and in particular the problem of
water pollution, has become a major preoccupation for everyone – the public,
industry, scientists and researchers as well as decision-makers on a national,
European, or international level. The public demand for pollutant-free waste dis-
charge to receiving waters has made decontamination of industrial wastewaters a top
priority. However, this is a difficult and challenging task (Sonune and Ghate 2004;
Anjaneyulu et al. 2005; Barakat 2011; Sharma and Sanghi 2012). It is also difficult
to define a universal method that could be used for the elimination of all pollutants
from wastewaters. This chapter described the advantages and disadvantages of
technologies available. A multitude of techniques classified in conventional
methods, established recovery processes and emerging removal methods can be
used. However, among the numerous and various treatment processes currently
cited for wastewater treatment, only a few are commonly used by the industrial
20 G. Crini and E. Lichtfouse

sector for economic and technological reasons. Adsorption onto activated carbons is
nevertheless often cited as the procedure of choice to remove many different types of
pollutants because it gives the best results in terms of efficiency and technical
feasibility at the industrial scale.

References

Amiard JC (2011) Les risques chimiques environnementaux. Editions TEC & DOC Lavoisier,
Paris, 782 p (in French)
Anjaneyulu Y, Sreedhara Chary N, Samuel Suman Raj D (2005) Decolourization of industrial
effluents – available methods and emerging technologies – a review. Rev Environ Sci
Biotechnol 4:245–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-005-1246-z
Barakat MA (2011) New trends in removing heavy metals from industrial wastewater. Arab J Chem
4:361–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2010.07.019
Berefield LD, Judkins JF, Weand BL (1982) Process chemistry for water and wastewater treatment.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 510 p
Bratby J (2006) Coagulation and flocculation in water and wastewater treatment. IWA Publishing,
London, p 407
Chen G (2004) Electrochemical technologies in wastewater treatment. Sep Purif Technol 38:11–41.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2003.10.006
Chuah TG, Jumasiah A, Azni I, Katayon S, Choong SYT (2005) Rice husk as a potentially low-cost
biosorbent for heavy metal and dye removal: an overview. Desalination 175:305–316. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.10.014
Cooney DO (1999) Adsorption design for wastewater treatment. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton,
208 p
Cooper P (1993) Removing colour from dye house waste waters – a critical review of technology
available. J Soc Dyers Colour 109:97–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-4408.1993.tb01536.
x
Cox M, Négré P, Yurramendi L (2007) Industrial liquid effluents. INASMET Tecnalia, San
Sebastian, p 283
Crini G (2005) Recent developments in polysaccharide-based materials used as adsorbents in
wastewater treatment. Prog Polym Sci 30:38–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2004.
11.002
Crini G (2006) Non-conventional low-cost adsorbents for dye removal. Bioresour Technol
97:1061–1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2005.05.001
Crini G, Badot PM (2007) Traitement et épuration des eaux industrielles polluées. PUFC,
Besançon, 353 p (in French)
Crini G, Badot PM (eds) (2010) Sorption processes and pollution. PUFC, Besançon, 489 p
Druart C, Morin-Crini N, Euvrard E, Crini G (2016) Chemical and ecotoxicological monitoring of
discharge water from a metal-finishing factory. Environ Process 3:59–72. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s40710-016-0125.7
Forgacs E, Cserhati T, Oros G (2004) Removal of synthetic dyes from wastewaters: a review.
Environ Int 30:953–971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2004.02.001
Hai FI, Yamamoto K, Fukushi K (2007) Hybrid treatment systems for dye wastewater. Crit Rev
Environ Sci Technol 37:315–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643380601174723
Harvey PJ, Campanella BF, Castro PM, Harms H, Lichtfouse E, Schäffner AR, Smrcek S, Werck-
Reichhart D (2002) Phytoremediation of polyaromatic hydrocarbons, anilines and phenols.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 9:29–47
Henze M (ed) (2001) Wastewater treatment – biological and chemical processes. Springer,
Berlin/New York
1 Wastewater Treatment: An Overview 21

Kentish SE, Stevens GW (2001) Innovations in separations technology for the recycling and re-use
of liquid waste streams. Chem Eng J 84:149–159
Khalaf MN (2016) Green polymers and environmental pollution control. CRC Press; Apple
Academic Press, Inc, Oakville, 436 p
Lacorte S, Latorre A, Barcelo D, Rigol A, Malqvist A, Welander T (2003) Organic compounds in
paper-mill process waters and effluents. Trends Anal Chem 22:725–737
Liu DHF, Liptak BG (eds) (2000) Wastewater treatment. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Mohan D, Pittman CU (2007) Arsenic removal from waste/wastewater using adsorbents – a critical
review. J Hazard Mater 142:1–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.01.006
Morin-Crini N, Crini G (eds) (2017) Eaux industrielles contaminées. PUFC, Besançon, 513 p
(in French)
Parsons S (ed) (2004) Advanced oxidation process for water and wastewater treatment. Editions
IWA Publishing, London
Pokhrel D, Viraraghavan T (2004) Treatment of pulp and paper mill wastewater – a review. Sci
Total Technol 333:37–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.05.017
Rana T, Gupta S, Kumar D, Sharma S, Rana M, Rathore VS, Pereira BMJ (2004) Toxic effects of
pulp and paper-mill effluents on male reproductive organs and some systemic parameters in rats.
Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 18:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2004.04.005
Rathoure AK, Dhatwalia VK (2016) Toxicity and waste management using bioremediation. IGI
Global, Hershey, 421 p
Sharma SK (2015) Green chemistry for dyes removal from wastewater. Scrivener Publishing LLC
Wiley, Beverley, 496 p
Sharma SK, Sanghi R (2012) Advances in water treatment and pollution prevention. Springer,
Dordrecht, 457 p
Sonune A, Ghate R (2004) Developments in wastewater treatment methods. Desalination
167:55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.06.113
Wojnárovits L, Takács E (2008) Irradiation treatment of azo dye containing wastewater: an
overview. Rad Phys Chem 77:225–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2007.05.003