Membrane Bioreactors: Design, Operation, and Maintenance

Population explosion, urbanization, and industrialization are the responsible factors for the huge wastewater generation. Globally, around 380 billion m 3 of wastewater is generated annually and in India, about 35% of the population lives in the urban area and generates around 72 million litres per day. Out of the total generated wastewater, only 28% is treated and the rest is discharged untreated which results in the deterioration of the freshwater resources and also impacts different components of the environment. Wastewater treatment is vital for the protection of the environment and human health, and therefore United Nations emphasized it under sustainable development goals (SDGs). The treated water can be a useful resource if used for secondary applications and offers resource and financial savings. Membrane bioreactor (MBR) is a reliable, robust, and flexible technology in the area of wastewater treatment, and through its application, SDGs can be achieved. In MBR technology, hyphenation of activated sludge process and membrane filtration is practiced for the treatment of organic-laden wastewater. MBR technology has frequently been used to treat industrial and municipal wastewater, where a small footprint, stringent discharge standards, or water reuse is essential. The MBR technology outcompetes with conventional wastewater treatment approach but still has some drawbacks such as fouling of membranes which surges operational costs. The drawbacks can be overcome through MBR designing and membrane selections. In this study, we cover the different MBR designs, membrane types, and operations for wastewater treatment. The recent development in the research area of MBR is reported in this chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic €32.70 /Month

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

eBook EUR 136.95 Price includes VAT (France)

Hardcover Book EUR 168.79 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Abbreviations

Molecular weight cut-off

Membrane surface area

Hydraulic retention time

Sustainable development goals

Total suspended solid

Biological oxygen demand

Chemical oxygen demands

World Health Organization

References

  1. Silva JA (2023) Wastewater treatment and reuse for sustainable water resources management: a systematic literature review. Sustainability 15(14):10940 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  2. Dutta D, Arya S, Kumar S (2021) Industrial wastewater treatment: current trends, bottlenecks, and best practices. Chemosphere 285:131245 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  3. Muralikrishna IV, Manickam V (2017) Industrial wastewater treatment technologies, recycling, and reuse. Environ Manag 295–336 Google Scholar
  4. Shakil MSZ, Mostafa MG (2023) Characterization of paper mill effluent and its impacts on the environment. J Chem Environ 109–122 Google Scholar
  5. Kumar D, Sharma C (2022) Paper industry wastewater treatment by electrocoagulation and aspect of sludge management. J Clean Prod 360:131970 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  6. Kumar D, Gaurav VK, Sharma C (2018) Ecofriendly remediation of pulp and paper industry wastewater by electrocoagulation and its application in agriculture. Am J Plant Sci 9(12):2462 Google Scholar
  7. Devi NL, Yadav IC, Shihua QI, Singh S, Belagali SL (2011) Physicochemical characteristics of paper industry effluents—a case study of South India Paper Mill (SIPM). Environ Monit Assess 177:23–33 Google Scholar
  8. Sandoval MA, Coreño O, García V, Salazar-González R (2024) Enhancing industrial swine slaughterhouse wastewater treatment: optimization of electrocoagulation technique and operating mode. J Environ Manage 349:119556 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  9. Mkilima T, Meiramkulova K, Kydyrbekova A, Bazarbayeva T, Gulnur D, Aknur Z, Shegenbayev A, Nurbolat D, Oshanova G, Gulzhakhan K (2023) Biofilm-enhanced natural zeolite material in purification performance for slaughterhouse wastewater. Water 15(19):3501 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  10. Ng M, Dalhatou S, Wilson J, Kamdem BP, Temitope MB, Paumo HK, Djelal H, Assadi AA, Nguyen-Tri P, Kane A (2022) Characterization of slaughterhouse wastewater and development of treatment techniques: a review. Processes 10(7):1300 Google Scholar
  11. Bethi CMS, Narayan B, Martin A, Kudre TG (2020) Recovery, physicochemical and functional characteristics of proteins from different meat processing wastewater streams. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:25119–25131 Google Scholar
  12. Morker H, Saini B, Dey A (2023) Role of membrane technology in food industry effluent treatment. Mater Today Proc 77:314–321 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  13. Shroti GK, Tomer P, Hazra S (2023) Valorization of wastewater from the beverage industry for polyhydroxyalkanoate production with its improved applicability to agricultural use. Water Air Soil Pollut 234(4):269 Google Scholar
  14. Nweke EN, Okechukwu VU, Omokpariola DO, Umeh TC, Oze NR (2022) Pollution evaluation of industrial effluents from consolidated breweries: a case study from Benue State, Nigeria. In: River Basin management-under a changing climate. IntechOpen Google Scholar
  15. Abrha BH, Chen Y (2017) Analysis of physico-chemical characteristics of effluents from beverage industry in Ethiopia. J Geosci Environ Protect 5(6):172–182 Google Scholar
  16. WHO (2023) World Health Organization report-drinking water. Access on: 06 Jan 2024 online link https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/drinking-water#:~:text=Key%20facts,water%20source%20contaminated%20with%20faeces
  17. Dubey M, Vellanki BP, Kazmi AA (2023) Removal of emerging contaminants in conventional and advanced biological wastewater treatment plants in India-a comparison of treatment technologies. Environ Res 218:115012 Google Scholar
  18. Singh S, Panwar N, Kumar SS, Singh R, Anand G, Kumar A, Malyan SK (2023) Aromatic oils from medicinal plants and their role in nanoparticles synthesis, characterization, and applications. In: Secondary metabolites from medicinal plants. CRC Press, pp 305–314 Google Scholar
  19. Malyan SK, Yadav S, Sonkar V, Goyal VC, Singh O, Singh R (2021) Mechanistic understanding of the pollutant removal and transformation processes in the constructed wetland system. Water Environ Res 93(10):1882–1909 Google Scholar
  20. Kumar J, Joshi H, Malyan SK (2021) Removal of copper, nickel, and zinc ions from an aqueous solution through electrochemical and nanofiltration membrane processes. Appl Sci 12(1):280 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Asif MB, Zhang Z (2021) Ceramic membrane technology for water and wastewater treatment: a critical review of performance, full-scale applications, membrane fouling and prospects. Chem Eng J 418:129481 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  22. Rahman TU, Roy H, Islam MR, Tahmid M, Fariha A, Mazumder A, Tasnim N et al (2023) The advancement in membrane bioreactor (MBR) technology toward sustainable industrial wastewater management. Membranes 13(2):181 Google Scholar
  23. Qiu M, Chen X, Fan Y, Xing W (2017) 1.11 ceramic membranes. In: Drioli E, Giorno L, Fontananova E (eds) Comprehensive membrane science and engineering, 2nd edn, pp 270–297 Google Scholar
  24. Mutamim NSA, Noor ZZ, Hassan MAA, Olsson G (2012) Application of membrane bioreactor technology in treating high strength industrial wastewater: a performance review. Desalination 305:1–11 Google Scholar
  25. Ciora RJ, Liu PKT (2003) Ceramic membranes for environmental related applications. Fluid Part Sep J 15(1):51–60 Google Scholar
  26. Hofs B, Ogier J, Vries D, Beerendonk EF, Cornelissen ER (2011) Comparison of ceramic and polymeric membrane permeability and fouling using surface water. Sep Purif Technol 79(3):365–374 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  27. Luján-Facundo MJ, Mendoza-Roca JA, Bes-Piá A, Zuriaga-Agustí E, Mestre S, Palacios M-D (2023) Low-cost ceramic membranes manufacture using INKJET technology for active layer deposition and validation on membrane bioreactors. Process Saf Environ Protect Google Scholar
  28. Hubadillah SK, Jamalludin MR, Othman MHD, Iwamoto Y (2022) Recent progress on low-cost ceramic membrane for water and wastewater treatment. Ceram Int 48(17):24157–24191 Google Scholar
  29. Al-Asheh S, Bagheri M, Aidan A (2021) Membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment: a review. Case Stud Chem Environ Eng 4:100109 Google Scholar
  30. Singh R (2015) Introduction to membrane Technology. In: Membrane technology and engineering for water purification: application, systems design and operation. Elsevier, ISBN. 978-0-444-63362-0, pp 1–80 Google Scholar
  31. Zhang Z, Fan K, Liu Y, Xia S (2023) A review on polyester and polyester-amide thin film composite nanofiltration membranes: synthesis, characteristics and applications. Sci Total Environ 858:159922 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  32. Mohammad AW, Teow YH, Ang WL, Chung YT, Oatley-Radcliffe DL, Hilal N (2015) Nanofiltration membranes review: recent advances and future prospects. Desalination 356:226–254 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  33. Maheshwari K, Agarwal M, Ghosh A (2023) Investigating the tolerance of nano-filtration for the treatment of wastewater. Indian Chem Eng 65(2):213–220 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  34. Adak MK, Kumar K, Das A, Dhak D (2023) Nano-filtration application in the textile industry for wastewater treatment. In: Nanofiltration membrane for water purification. Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, pp 69–82 Google Scholar
  35. Keskin B, Korkut S, Ormancı-Acar T, Turken T, Tas CE, Menceloglu YZ, Koyuncu I et al (2023) Pilot scale nanofiltration membrane fabrication containing ionic co-monomers and halloysite nanotubes for textile dye filtration. Water Sci Technol 87(6):1529–1541 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  36. Sun Z, Zhu X, Tan F, Zhou W, Zhang Y, Luo X, Cheng X et al (2023) Poly (vinyl alcohol)-based highly permeable TFC nanofiltration membranes for selective dye/salt separation. Desalination 553:116479 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  37. Rajbongshi A, Gogoi SB (2023) Microfiltration, ultrafiltration and nanofiltration as a post-treatment of biological treatment process with references to oil field produced water of Moran oilfield of Assam. Petrol Res Google Scholar
  38. Mallakpour S, Azadi E (2022) Nanofiltration membranes for food and pharmaceutical industries. Emergent Mater 5(5):1329–1343 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  39. Yadav D, Karki S, Ingole PG (2022) Nanofiltration (NF) membrane processing in the food industry. Food Eng Rev 14(4):579–595 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Iaquinta M, Stoller M, Merli C (2009) Optimization of a nanofiltration membrane process for tomato industry wastewater effluent treatment. Desalination 245(1–3):314–320 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  41. Gogoi M, Goswami R, Hazarika S (2023) Membrane-based treatment of wastewater generated in pharmaceutical and textile industries for a sustainable environment. In: Advanced materials from recycled waste. Elsevier, pp 87–109 Google Scholar
  42. Gulamhussein MA, Saini B, Dey A (2023) Removal of pharmaceutical contaminants through membrane bioreactor. Mater Today Proc 77:260–268 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  43. Saravanan R, Sathish T, Sharma K, Rao AV, Sathyamurthy R, Panchal H, Zahra MMA (2023) Sustainable wastewater treatment by RO and hybrid organic polyamide membrane nanofiltration system for clean environment. Chemosphere 139336 Google Scholar
  44. Boricha AG, Murthy ZVP (2009) Preparation, characterization and performance of nanofiltration membranes for the treatment of electroplating industry effluent. Sep Purif Technol 65(3):282–289 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  45. Sterlitech, Online source. Access on 31 Dec 2023. https://www.sterlitech.com/nanofiltration-nf-membrane.html
  46. Pura Aqua, Online source. Access on 31 Dec 2023. https://pureaqua.com/nanofiltration-nf-systems/
  47. Hussain CM, Paulraj MS, Nuzhat S (2021) Source reduction and waste minimization. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824320-6.00002-2ArticleGoogle Scholar
  48. Khan A, Ali J, Jamil SUU, Zahra N, Tayaba TB, Iqbal MJ, Waseem H (2022) Removal of micropollutants. In: Environmental micropollutants. Elsevier, pp 443–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-90555-8.00012-X
  49. Xing C-H, Tardieu E, Qian Y, Wen X-H (2000) Ultrafiltration membrane bioreactor for urban wastewater reclamation. J Membr Sci 177(1–2):73–82 Google Scholar
  50. Zhang X, Chen Y, Konsowa AH, Zhu X, Crittenden JC (2009) Evaluation of an innovative polyvinyl chloride (PVC) ultrafiltration membrane for wastewater treatment. Sep Purif Technol 70(1):71–78 Google Scholar
  51. Benkhaya S, Lgaz H, Tang H, Altaee A, Haida S, Vatanpour V, Xiao Y (2023) Investigating the effects of polypropylene-TiO2 loading on the performance of polysulfone/polyetherimide ultrafiltration membranes for azo dye removal: experimental and molecular dynamics simulation. J Water Process Eng 56:104317 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  52. Gryta M, Woźniak P (2024) Application of polypropylene microfiltration membranes for separation of wastewater from car wash. Sep Purif Technol 331:125707 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  53. Niavarani Z, Breite D, Yasir M, Sedlarik V, Prager A, Schönherr N, Abel B, Gläser R, Schulze A (2024) Removal of endocrine disrupting chemicals from water through urethane functionalization of microfiltration membranes via electron beam irradiation. Front Environ Sci Eng 18(4):45 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  54. Hakami MW, Alkhudhiri A, Al-Batty S, Zacharof M-P, Maddy J, Hilal N (2020) Ceramic microfiltration membranes in wastewater treatment: filtration behavior, fouling and prevention. Membranes 10(9):248 Google Scholar
  55. Daels N, De Vrieze S, Sampers I, Decostere B, Westbroek P, Dumoulin A, Dejans P, De Clerck K, Van Hulle SWH (2011) Potential of a functionalised nanofibre microfiltration membrane as an antibacterial water filter. Desalination 275(1–3):285–290 Google Scholar
  56. AlSawaftah N, Abuwatfa W, Darwish N, Husseini G (2021) A comprehensive review on membrane fouling: mathematical modelling, prediction, diagnosis, and mitigation. Water 13(9):1327 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  57. Xiao K, Liang S, Wang X, Chen C, Huang X (2019) Current state and challenges of full-scale membrane bioreactor applications: a critical review. Biores Technol 271:473–481 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  58. Tan YK, Lau WJ, Nawi NSM, Roslan R, Ng PS (2024) Assessing membrane performance for landfill leachate treatment in accordance with local regulatory requirements. J Membr Sci Res 10(1) Google Scholar
  59. Al Bazedi G, Abdallah H, Ali SS, Shalaby M, Sabry RM, Ali HM, Gadallah H (2024) Economic evaluation for anoxic biological system integrated with external membrane for pharmaceutical wastewater treatment. Appl Water Sci 14(1):10 Google Scholar
  60. Yang X, López-Grimau V, Vilaseca M, Crespi M (2020) Treatment of textile wastewater by CAS, MBR, and MBBR: a comparative study from technical, economic, and environmental perspectives. Water 12(5):1306 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  61. Couto CF, Moravia WG, Amaral MCS (2017) Integration of microfiltration and nanofiltration to promote textile effluent reuse. Clean Technol Environ Policy 19:2057–2073 Google Scholar
  62. Friha I, Bradai M, Johnson D, Hilal N, Loukil S, Amor FB, Feki F, Han J, Isoda H, Sayadi S (2015) Treatment of textile wastewater by submerged membrane bioreactor: in vitro bioassays for the assessment of stress response elicited by raw and reclaimed wastewater. J Environ Manag 160:184–192 Google Scholar
  63. Katsou E, Malamis S, Loizidou M (2011) Performance of a membrane bioreactor used for the treatment of wastewater contaminated with heavy metals. Biores Technol 102(6):4325–4332 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  64. Yigit NO, Uzal N, Koseoglu H, Harman I, Yukseler H, Yetis U, Civelekoglu G, Kitis M (2009) Treatment of a denim producing textile industry wastewater using pilot-scale membrane bioreactor. Desalination 240(1–3):143–150 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  65. Viero AF, de Melo TM, Torres APR, Ferreira NR, Sant’Anna GL Jr, Borges CP, Santiago VMJ (2008) The effects of long-term feeding of high organic loading in a submerged membrane bioreactor treating oil refinery wastewater. J Membr Sci 319(1–2):223–230 Google Scholar
  66. Yuniarto A, Ujang Z, Noor ZZ (2008) Performance of bio-fouling reducers in aerobic submerged membrane bioreactor for palm oil mill effluent treatment. J Teknol 2008(49):555–566 Google Scholar
  67. Brik M, Schoeberl P, Chamam B, Braun R, Fuchs W (2006) Advanced treatment of textile wastewater towards reuse using a membrane bioreactor. Process Biochem 41(8):1751–1757 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  68. Acharya C, Nakhla G, Bassi A (2006) Operational optimization and mass balances in a two-stage MBR treating high strength pet food wastewater. J Environ Eng 132(7):810–817 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  69. Badani Z, Ait-Amar H, Si-Salah A, Brik M, Fuchs W (2005) Treatment of textile waste water by membrane bioreactor and reuse. Desalination 185(1–3):411–417 ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  70. Le-Clech P, Chen P, Fane TAG (2006) Fouling in membrane bioreactors used in wastewater treatment. J Membr Sci 284(1–2):17–53 Google Scholar

Acknowledgements

All the authors are grateful to the heads of their respective institutes for providing all the necessary facilities.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Hydrology Division, National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, 247667, India Sandeep Singh, Rajesh Singh, Vinay Kumar Tyagi & Kaptan Singh
  2. Technical Cell, National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, 247667, India Shweta Yadav & Jyoti Singh
  3. Axa Parenteral Limited, Roorkee, 247667, India Sujata Kashyap
  4. Department of Civil Engineering, Madan Mohan Malaviya University of Technology, Gorakhpur, 273010, India Kaptan Singh
  5. Department of Environmental Studies, Dyal Singh Evening College, University of Delhi, New Delhi, 110003, India Sandeep K. Malyan
  1. Sandeep Singh