HRAP Article

Seminario Internacional sobre Mtodos Naturales para el Tratamiento de Aguas Residuales
Universidad del Valle/Instituto Cinara Pea, M. R. and Mara, D. D. 68

HIGH-RATE ANAEROBIC POND CONCEPT FOR DOMESTIC WASTEWATER
TREATMENT: RESULTS FROM PILOT SCALE EXPERIENCE

Pea, M. R.* and Mara, D. D.**

* Universidad del Valle, Instituto Cinara. A.A 25157 Cali, Colombia. e-mail: miguelpe@univalle.edu.co
** University of Leeds, School of Civil Engineering. Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. e-mail: d.d.mara@leeds.ac.uk

ABSTRACT
The low coverage of domestic wastewater treatment in Latin America, especially in the Andean region countries, calls
for the development of low-cost, reliable and easy-to-operate wastewater treatment systems. Many bioreactors,
including waste stabilisation ponds (WSP), are customarily designed on the assumption that they are either completely
stirred tank reactors (CSTR) or plug flow (PF) reactors. This work shows the results of a study carried out on the
hydrodynamic improvement of conventional AP configurations at pilot-scale and the evaluation of process
performance under steady-state conditions in those units. The experiment was designed to study a horizontally baffled
AP (HBAP), an AP provided with a mixing pit (MPAP) and a conventional AP (CAP). The whole study was designed
as a factorial experiment with two factors (mixing device and hydraulic loading rate). COD
t
, COD
f
, TSS, and VSS
were determined in the liquid phase. TS and VS were determined in sludge samples. The MPAP performed better for
organic matter and helminth eggs removal compared to the HBAP and the CAP. The results show that improvements in
mixing features of conventional AP enhanced the organic matter removal mechanisms in these units. Higher organic
matter removal efficiencies were also achieved at HRT shorter than the minimum values currently recommended in the
literature for conventional AP. Nonetheless, further research at full-scale is needed in order to test the high-rate AP
concept under real operating conditions. In this way, O&M requirements will also be accurately determined.

KEYWORDS
Anaerobic treatment, domestic wastewater, high-rate anaerobic pond, pilot-scale.

INTRODUCTION
The low coverage of domestic wastewater treatment in Latin America, especially in the Andean
region countries, calls for the development of low-cost, reliable and easy-to-operate wastewater
treatment systems. Such solutions are particularly needed in small municipalities and rural
communities where the capital resources for construction of pollution control infrastructure are
limited. Likewise, the lack of skilled manpower and the relative long distances from these
communities to urban centres impose serious restrictions on the O&M requirements for any given
technology.

Different research groups in Brazil, Mexico, Peru, Chile and Colombia have been working on the
adaptation and development of improved wastewater treatment technologies. Anaerobic and natural
wastewater treatment systems are the main alternatives studied in the region. In this paper we report
the results of our work on the improvement of anaerobic pond performance for domestic wastewater
treatment. The Instituto Cinara at Universidad del Valle (Colombia) and the School of Civil
Engineering at Leeds University (UK) carried out the research jointly within a scientific
cooperation agreement.

Many bioreactors, including waste stabilisation ponds (WSP), are customarily designed on the
assumption that they are either completely stirred tank reactors (CSTR) or plug flow (PF) reactors.
Designers generally consider anaerobic ponds (AP) as CSTR. However, most full-scale reactors,
once constructed, generally behave different from their design assumptions in terms of
hydrodynamics. Ferrara and Harleman (1980), on the basis of results from experiments on WSP
hydraulics, concluded that a CSTR model was more appropriate for dynamic process modelling.

It is known that complex hydrodynamic phenomena occur at microscale levels in anaerobic reactors
(Pavlostathis and Giraldo-Gomez, 1991), and this is also true of AP. Different transport


mechanisms are involved during the transfer of substrate from the bulk liquid to the surface of
biosolids particles. Thus, the efficient mass transfer of soluble compounds in three phase (solid-
liquid-gas) reactors via diffusion and advection is important. However, in the case of wastewaters
with high solids contents, such as domestic wastewaters, it is necessary to consider gravity
sedimentation and interception as two additional transport mechanisms, which in turn are also
influenced by mixing (Pavlostathis and Giraldo-Gomez, 1991). Based on these considerations, it
seems feasible that mixing improvements in AP to enhance contact between substrate and biomass
will improve removal efficiency. Evidence for this was provided by Pea et al. (2000), who found
that the removal efficiencies of suspended and soluble organic matter increased with enhanced
mixing in a full-scale AP treating domestic wastewater. Similarly, mass transfer limitations leading
to low efficiencies could be minimised by improving reactor hydrodynamics at the macro level.

The work reported herein shows the results of a study carried out on the hydrodynamic
improvement of conventional AP configurations at pilot-scale and the evaluation of process
performance under steady-state conditions in these configurations. The concept of high-rate AP is
introduced based on the promising results obtained and the very distinct features of the modified
ponds.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
The research was carried out on two main parts: firstly, hydrodynamic studies, and secondly,
monitoring of process performance under steady-state conditions. Three pilot-scale AP were
constructed at the Research Station on Wastewater Treatment and Reuse at Ginebra, Valle del
Cauca, in southwest Colombia. The experiment was designed to study a horizontally baffled AP
(HBAP), an AP provided with a mixing pit (MPAP) and a conventional AP (CAP). These
arrangements are shown schematically in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Two best configurations evaluated

Dispersion studies. LiCl (99.9% analytical grade) was used in the dispersion studies. Li
+

concentrations were determined by atomic absorption spectrophotometry (Perkin Elmer model S100
PC, air-acetylene flame method at 670.80 nm) with a minimum detection limit of 0.01 mg/l. Li
+
has
been widely reported as a good tracer for water movement with the advantage of a very low solids
attachment rate (Pea et al., 2000). A pulse signal (one litre solution containing 261 g LiCl [42.47 g
Li
+
]) was applied to the influent stream of each AP, making sure that application points were
exactly the same in every run. Grab samples were taken at the AP outlets during a sampling period
equal to three times the theoretical (volume/flow) HRT. A total of 60 samples per AP effluent per
run were taken so as to obtain the RTD curves. A two-factor ANOVA and a multiple comparison
analysis procedure (Tukeys test) were performed on the data series to detect statistically significant
differences.
L/3 L/3 L/3
2L/5 | 3L/5
HBAP
MPAP
The whole study was designed as a factorial
experiment with two factors (mixing device and
hydraulic loading rate).

The mixing device factor (A) was evaluated at
three levels (treatments): horizontal baffling,
mixing pit and conventional configuration. The
hydraulic loading rate factor (B) was evaluated
at four levels (treatments): 1.0, 1.2, 1.5 and 2.0
l/s respectively.


Process performance. Composite 12-h samples were taken from raw sewage and AP effluents once
per week on the same day every week. Flow data were recorded hourly at each AP influent on the
sampling day. A V-notch weir was calibrated for each AP and three control valves allowed the
inflow rates to be adjusted. Negligible infiltration losses were expected since all APs were lined
with high-density polyethylene sheets (Geofort Inc.). Table 1 shows the experimental conditions for
this part of the study. COD
t
, COD
f
, TSS, and VSS were determined in the liquid phase. TS and VS
were determined in sludge samples. All of the analytical procedures were carried out according to
the Standard Methods (APHA, 1992).

Table 1. Experimental conditions for the evaluation of process performance
AP configuration Flow rates (l/s) HRT (h) Monitoring period (weeks)
HBAP 1.0 / 1.3 / 2.0 24.6 / 18.9 /12.3 18 (6 weeks per flow rate)
MPAP 1.1 / 1.5 / 2.3 26.0 / 19.3 /12.6 18 (6 weeks per flow rate)
AP 0.9 / 1.3 / 1.8 25.3 / 17.2 / 12.7 18 (6 weeks per flow rate)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figures 2 and 3 show a summary of the results obtained during the hydrodynamic study and process
performance evaluation stages.

Figure 2. RTD curves obtained during the hydrodynamic study

All three AP had some degree of short-circuiting, as the E
peak
values were always higher than the
maximum theoretical figure (E
max
= 1.0). The CAP registered the highest peak values, with a sharp
early peak for the last run (Q = 2.0 l/s). This early peak clearly indicates short-circuiting from inlet
to outlet as described by Levenspiel (1999). Pea et al. (2000) found a similar RTD curve in a
conventional full-scale AP treating domestic sewage, which had been badly designed with the inlet
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00
= t/HRTt (1.0 l/s)
E

(

)

=

C
/
C
o
HBAP MPAP AP CSTR
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00
= t/HRTt (1.2 l/s)
E

(

)

=

C
/
C
o
HBAP MPAP AP CSTR
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00
= t/HRTt (1.5 l/s)
E

(

)

=

C
/
C
o
HBAP MPAP AP CSTR
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00
= t/HRTt (2.0 l/s)
E

(

)

=

C
/
C
o
HBAP MPAP AP CSTR


and outlet being in adjacent (rather than diagonally opposite) corners. Figure 1 also shows a long
tail in the 2
nd
and 3
rd
runs (Q = 1.2 and 1.5 l/s) for the MPAP. However, this pond configuration
dramatically improved its response in the last run (Q = 2.0 l/s) where the RTD curve was very close
to the theoretical RTD for a tank in series model with two mixed reactors in the series (Bailey and
Ollis, 1986). This feature has been observed in high-rate anaerobic reactors (UASBs) by Bolle et al.
(1985) and more recently by Avella (2001).

Figure 3. Effluent concentrations and removal efficiencies of the main parameters

The best removal efficiencies were obtained in the MPAP followed by the HBAP. The removal
efficiencies in the CAP were always lower than those in the modified configurations. The MPAP
was able to remove in average 79% of total COD and 75% of filtered COD at a HRT of 12 h,
whereas the HBAP showed smaller removal efficiencies (67 and 51%) at a HRT of 18 h. The CAP
was not able to handle hydraulic loads that produced HRT < 24 h. This is in agreement with the
minimum HRT values recommended in the current literature for CAP under the environmental
conditions found at Ginebra (Mara et al., 1992). Removal efficiencies obtained in the modified AP
configurations compared well with efficiencies of high-rate anaerobic reactors (UASBs) currently
used in the region and reported elsewhere (van Haandel and Lettinga, 1994; Rodriguez et al., 2001).

Figure 3 shows that MPAP had always a growing removal efficiency for COD
f
compared to the
other two ponds. This is characteristic of biological removal mechanisms enhanced by better
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Weeks
C
O
D
t
-
e
f

(
m
g
/
l
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
HRT (h)
R
e
m
o
v
a
l

(
%
)
HBAPe MPAPe CAPe HBAPrem MPAPrem CAPrem
24 18 12
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Weeks
C
O
D
f
-
e
f

(
m
g
/
l
)
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
HRT (h)
R
e
m
o
v
a
l

(
%
)
HBAPf MPAPf CAPf HBAPrem MPAPrem CAPrem
18 12 24
40
90
140
190
240
290
340
390
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Weeks
T
S
S
-
e
f

(
m
g
/
l
)
-30
-10
10
30
50
70
90
HRT (h)
R
e
m
o
v
a
l

(
%
)
18 12 24
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Weeks
V
S
S
-
e
f

(
m
g
/
l
)
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
HRT (h)
R
e
m
o
v
a
l

(
%
)
18 12 24


contact between substrate and biomass as a result of good mixing in the reactor. Notice that the
removal of COD
f
in the HBAP and CAP was always lower and had a tendency to decrease with
rising hydraulic loading rates.

MPAP registered also the best removal efficiency of TSS despite increases in the hydraulic loading
rate values. Meanwhile, the effluent VSS concentration steadily increased in all of the ponds but the
MPAP remained with the lowest effluent VSS concentration. Consequently, the VSS removal
efficiency decreased gradually in all of the ponds as the hydraulic loading rate increased. This
behaviour suggests that there is still room to improve biomass retention in all of the ponds. Process
control parameters (i.e. pH, ORP, VFA, SO
4
2-
and alkalinity) showed normal variations for well-
functioning anaerobic reactors (data not shown here).

Figure 4 shows the behaviour of the biosolids contents in each pond. The numbers 1 and 2
correspond to the sampling points which were located at L/3 and 2L/3 on the inlet-outlet line.

Figure 4. Biosolids concentration and VS/TS ratio at two internal points in each pond

The values of the VS/TS ratio suggest the presence of undigested organic matter in the sludge from
the first compartment (point 1) although the inert material fraction seems also important.

0
20
40
60
80
100
120
3 6 7 9 12 14 16 18
Weeks in operation
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
/
l
)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
V
S
/
T
S

r
a
t
i
o
TS-1 VS-1 TS-2 VS-2 VS/TS (1) VS/TS (2) Serie7
HBAP
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
3 6 7 9 12 14 16 18
Weeks in operation
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
/
l
)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
V
S
/
T
S

r
a
t
i
o
MPAP
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
3 6 7 9 12 14 16 18
Weeks in operation
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
/
l
)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
V
S
/
T
S

R
a
t
i
o
AP
Details on biosolids sampling and
laboratory analysis are available in Pea
(2002).

The concentration of both TS and VS in the
HBAP was consistently higher in the
sludge samples from the first compartment
(point 1) compared with the samples from
the third compartment (point 2). The
relation VS/TS in the first compartment
was very stable with an average value of
0.48 whereas for the third compartment it
was more variable with an average value of
0.42.


TS and VS concentrations in the mixing pit of the MPAP were more variable. Part of this
variability, however, could be related to the sampling procedure since it was difficult sometimes to
keep the peristaltic pump intake hose fixed at the same point. The higher TS concentration found in
the samples from the settler may be related to the likely compaction of the sludge in this zone. The
ratio VS/TS in the mixing chamber was 0.50 on average. This value compares well with data from
the UASB reactor at Pedregal, Brazil (VS/TS = 0.55) and data reported on the start-up of the UASB
at Ginebra (VS/TS = 0.48). The VS/TS ratio in the settling compartment was 0.43 at the beginning
of the evaluation period but it increased to 0.48 during the second and third stages.

On the other hand, Figure 4 shows that concentrations of TS and VS at the sludge layer in the
conventional AP had a random pattern during the study. There was no clear trend for VS and TS
values at any of the two sampling points. The ratio VS/TS in the first third (point 1) of the AP was
more variable compared to the last third (point 2). The ratio in the former varied from 0.46 to 0.57,
which suggests an important contribution of fresh organic matter (VSS) to the ratio average value of
0.52. In contrast, this ratio was more constant in the sludge from the last third (0.44-0.50) of the AP.
This lower average value of 0.48 also suggests a more stable sludge towards the downstream end of
the AP. These results demonstrate the more unpredictable behaviour of the sludge layer in
conventional AP. Similar results to these were found by Warren (1998) working on the sludge
dynamics of a full-scale AP in Australia.

Figure 5 displays the average removal efficiencies of microbiological indicators at each pilot AP.

Figure 5. Average removals of FC, E. coli and helminth eggs in the pilot-scale AP

The removal of microbiological indicators was generally low in the pilot-scale APs as shown in
Figure 5. The removal of FC was slightly better in the MPAP compared to the other two AP. The
highest FC removals occurred during the second stage (HRT = 18 h) in all the ponds and they were
82.4, 90.5 and 89.1% for the HBAP, the MPAP and the CAP, respectively. These figures are in
agreement with data reported by Dixo et al. (1995) who studied the microbiological quality of an
UASB effluent post-treated in a facultative pond. The average FC removal in their UASB reactor
was 80%.

The removal of E. coli was higher in the CAP in all the stages. The maximum average removals
were 91, 81.4 and 65.9% for the CAP, the MPAP and the HBAP, respectively. The maximum
removals occurred in the first stage for the CAP and the MPAP and in the second stage for the
6
1
.
6
5
0
.
4
6
9
.
7
8
1
.
4
6
9
.
9
9
1
.
0
8
2
.
4
6
5
.
9
9
0
.
5
7
9
.
8
8
9
.
1
8
4
.
9
5
6
.
1
4
6
.
3
7
9
.
3
3
8
.
4
6
1
.
7
4
8
.
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
R
e
m
o
v
a
l

(
%
)
1 2 3
Stage
FC-hbap E.coli-hbap FC-mpap E.coli-mpap FC-ap E.coli-ap
60.0
64.0
53.0
44.0
51.0
45.0 45.0
67.0
37.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
R
e
m
o
v
a
l

(
%
)
1 2 3
Stage
eggs-hbap eggs-mpap eggs-ap


HBAP. These figures are similar to the average removal efficiency of around 80% for E. coli
reported by van Haandel and Lettinga (1994) in the UASB reactor at Pedregal, Brazil.

On the other hand, the average removal efficiency of helminth eggs was always better in the MPAP
compared to the other APs in all the stages. The highest average removal efficiencies of helminth
eggs were 67, 60 and 53% for the MPAP followed by the HBAP and then the CAP. The MPAP had
its best removal efficiency at stage 3 (HRT = 12 h), whereas HBAP and CAP yielded their best
efficiencies during stage 1 (HRT = 24 h). Dixo et al. (1995) found an average removal of helminth
eggs of 63% in a UASB reactor in northeast Brazil. Van Haandel and Lettinga (1994) reported an
average removal of 80% of the influent helminth eggs concentration in the UASB reactor at
Pedregal, Brazil.

The helminth eggs removal equation proposed by Ayres et al. (1992) for the design of WSP, was
applied to the experimental data. However, this equation underestimated the effluent concentration
of helminth eggs for all the APs with the exception of the MPAP operating at HRT = 12 h. In this
case, the predicted removal efficiency value was 68%, which is in agreement with the experimental
value of 67%. Anaerobic reactors are very efficient at removing organic matter whereas their
removal efficiency of pathogens is generally low. Probably with the exception of Vibrio cholerae
removed at in-pond Sulphide concentrations 3 mg/l (Oragui et al., 1993) and the removal by
settling of helminth eggs and the pathogenic protozoa Giardia spp. and Cryptosporidium spp.
(Grimason et al., 1993) in AP, there are very few other references in the literature regarding
pathogen removal in anaerobic ponds treating domestic wastewater. The results shown here are
supported by the ANOVA and Tukeys statistical tests run on the data sets. Detailed statistical
analyses of data can be found in Pea (2002).

The efficiencies found in the high-rate AP configurations for FC, E. coli and helminth eggs
conformed to removal values reported in the literature for anaerobic reactors. However, it seems
possible to improve these efficiencies if biomass retention is further enhanced in the high-rate AP.

The results reported herein show that improvements in the mixing features of conventional AP
enhance the organic matter removal mechanisms in these units. Improved organic matter removal
efficiencies were also achieved at HRT shorter than the minimum values currently recommended in
the literature for conventional anaerobic ponds. These results are promising in the sense that
important savings in land requirements along with higher removal efficiencies in the anaerobic
stage (i.e. high-rate anaerobic pond concept) will produce smaller WSP systems able to achieve
higher efficiencies without sacrificing simplicity and affordability for the users.

CONCLUSIONS
It is possible to improve the hydrodynamic features of classical AP configurations and their
concomitant degradation rates by introducing simple engineering modifications to current design
and construction practices. However, in so doing, simplicity and ease of O&M must not be
forgotten.

The high removal efficiencies of the modified AP compare well with data extensively reported in
the literature for high-rate systems (i.e. UASB, ABR). Improved mixing and contact leading to
enhanced mass transfer processes and better biomass retention are the mechanisms responsible for
improved process performance. These features support the high-rate AP concept.

The biosolids contents in the HBAP and the MPAP showed very similar features to those currently
seen in biosolids from high-rate anaerobic reactors. This support the development of a more active
biomass as a result of better contact and mass transfer processes from and to the bioflocs.


The tendency to biomass losses (i.e. increasing effluent VSS concentration) at HRT between 18-12
h in the pilot AP evaluated shows the need to improving biomass retention mechanisms within the
lagoons. This may be achieved via the provision of in-pond high-rate sedimentation devices or
denser attachment surfaces to retain more effectively biosolids particles.

Further research at full-scale is needed in order to test the high-rate AP concept under real operating
conditions. In this way, O&M requirements will also be accurately determined.

REFERENCES
Avella, G.P. (2001). Evaluation of the Hydrodynamic Behaviour of an UASB Reactor and its
Influence on Organic Matter Removal. M.Sc dissertation. Universidad del Valle, Instituto
Cinara, Cali, Colombia. (in Spanish).
Ayres, R.M.; Alabaster, G.P.; Mara, D.D. and Lee, D.L. (1992). A design equation for human
intestinal nematode egg removal in waste stabilization ponds. Wat. Res. 26(6), 863-865.
Bailey, J.E. and Ollis, D.F. (1986). Biochemical Engineering Fundamentals, 2
nd
ed. McGraw Hill,
New York. USA.
Bolle, W.L.; van Breugel, J.; van Eybergen, G.C.; Kossen, N.W.F. and Zoetemeyer, R.J. (1985).
Modelling the liquid flow in up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket reactors. Biotech. Bioeng.
XXVIII, 1615-1620.
Dixo, N.; Gambrill, M.; Catunda, P. and van Haandel, A. (1995). Removal of pathogenic organisms
from the effluent of an upflow anaerobic digester using waste stabilization ponds. Wat. Sci.
Tech. 31(12), 275-284.
Ferrara, R.A. and Harleman, D.R.F. (1980). Dynamic nutrient cycle model for waste stabilisation
ponds. Jou. Env. Eng. Div., Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 106, 37-47.
Grimason, A.M.; Smith, H.V.; Thitai, W.N.; Smith, P.G.; Jackson, M.H. and Girdwood, R.W.A.
(1993). Occurrence and removal of Cryptosporidium spp. oocysts and Giardia spp. cysts in
Kenyan waste stabilisation ponds. Wat. Sci. Tech. 27(3-4), 97-104.
Levenspiel, O. (1999). Chemical Reaction Engineering, 3
rd
ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
USA.
Mara, D.D.; Alabaster, G.P.; Pearson, H.W. and Mills, S.W. (1992). Waste Stabilisation Ponds: A
Design Manual for Eastern Africa. Lagoon Technology International. Leeds, England.
Oragui, J.I.; Arridge, H.; Mara, D.D.; Pearson, H.W. and Silva, S.A. (1993). Vibrio Cholerae 0I (EI
Tor) removal in waste stabilisation ponds in northeast Brazil. Wat. Res. 27(4), 727-728.
Pavlostathis, S.G. and Giraldo-Gomez, E. (1991). Kinetics of anaerobic treatment. Wat. Sci. Tech.
24(8), 35-59.
Pea, M.R.; Mara, D.D. and Sanchez, A. (2000). Dispersion studies in anaerobic ponds:
implications for design and operation. Wat. Sci. Tech. 42(10-11), 273-282.
Pea, M.R. (2002). Advanced primary treatment of domestic wastewater in tropical countries:
development of high-rate anaerobic ponds. Ph.D thesis. School of Civil Engineering,
University of Leeds. Leeds, England.
Rodrguez, J.A.; Pea, M.R. and Manzi, V. (2001). Application of an innovative methodology to
improve the starting-up of UASB reactors treating domestic sewage. Wat. Sci. Tech. 44(4),
295-303.
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (1992). American Public Health
Association. 18
th
Edition. Washington D.C, USA.
Van Haandel, A.C. and Lettinga, G. (1994). Anaerobic Sewage Treatment. A Practical Guide for
Regions with a Hot Climate. John Wiley & Sons. Chichester, U.K.
Warren, P. (1998). The Design and Control of Anaerobic Ponds with Specific Reference to Western
Treatment Plant. Ph.D thesis, School of Communications and Informatics, Faculty of
Engineering and Science, Victoria University of Technology. Melbourne. Australia.

HRAP Article

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

HRAP Article

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Seminario Internacional sobre Mtodos Naturales para el Tratamiento de Aguas Residuales

Universidad del Valle/Instituto Cinara Pea, M. R. and Mara, D. D. 68

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen