| Literature DB >> 28383064 |
Da Sun1,2, Kun Zhang1, Chuanren Duan1, Wei Wu1, Daiyong Deng3, Donghong Yu1,4, M Babar Shahzad5, Dake Xu5, Ju Tang6, Li Luo1, Jia Chen1, Jinxuan Wang1, Yidan Chen1, Xiang Xie1, Guixue Wang1.
Abstract
A biofilter with fungus was developed for efficient degradation of benzene, which can overcome the potential risk of leakage commonly found in such services. Results indicated that the optimum parameter values were temperature 40 °C, pH 6, and 500 mg L-1 of the initial benzene concentration. Besides, the empty bed residence time and inlet load range of biofilter were set to 20 s and 21.23-169.84 g m-3 h-1 respectively. Under these conditions, this biofilter can obtain the maximum removal efficiency of more than 90%, the eliminating capacity could be up to 151.67 g m-3 h-1. Furthermore, scanning electron microscopy was used to investigate three filler materials for packing fungus biofilm. This is the first study introducing an Aspergillus strain for benzene removal and these results highlight that the development of this biofilter has the potential scaling-up application as gas-processing of industrial wastes.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28383064 PMCID: PMC5382587 DOI: 10.1038/srep46059
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Schematic diagram of biofilter for benzene removal.
Media formulations used in this study.
| Nutrient | K2HPO4 | KH2PO4 | 1NaNO3 | MgSO4 · 7H2O | FeSO4 · 7H2O |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (mg L−1) | 627 | 191 | 500 | 48 | 7.6 |
The options of running parameters of biofilter.
| Run time (d) | Inlet concentration of benzene (mg m−3) | Benzene load of biofilter (gm−3 h−1) | Gas flow rate (m3 h−1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1–30 | 1000 | 42.46 | 2.4 |
| 31–60 | 2000 | 84.92 | 2.4 |
| 61–90 | 3000 | 127.42 | 2.4 |
Figure 2The comparison of benzene removal efficiency with different parameters in 8 d.
Figure 3RE of biofilters with different fillers in three periods: low load (a), intermediate load (b) and high load operation (c).
Figure 4SEM images of biofilm on packing filler: (a) CCAC, (b) BC, (c) BW.
Figure 5Effect of inlet load and EBRT on benzene removal.
Figure 6Quantitative variance of HD-5 in the filler materials at the three load periods vs. time.
Performance of biofilters for the removal of benzene as a sole-substrate, as reported in selected previous biofiltration studies, and compared to this study.
| Bioreactor/filter media | Inlet concentration (g m−3) | Loading rate (g m−3 h−1) | Removal efficiency (%) | Elimination Capacity (g m−3 h−1) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biofilter/sugarcane bagasse–glass bead mixture | 0.01–0.05 | 6.12 | 43 | 3.8 | |
| Biofilter/sugarcane bagasse | 0.4 | 12 | 53 | 6.4 | |
| Biofilter/peat | 0.4 | 31 | 84 | 26 | |
| Biofilter/granular activated carbon mixture | 0.7 | 21 | 96 | 20.1 | |
| Trickling biofilter/fibrous bed | 0.37–1.7 | 2.6–25.6 | >90 | 11.5 | |
| Trickling biofilter/coal particles | 0.47 | 64 | 90 | 57.6 | |
| Biofilter/CCAC with HD-5 | 2 | 169.84 | >90 | 151.67 | This study |