1 |Page
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND WATER ENGINEERING
PROJECT AND RESEARCH METHODS
ECW 3209
COURSE CONVENOR: MRS ELLEN MANGORE
NAMES
STUDENT NUMBER
CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI
N02124632L
PROJECT TOPIC :
OPTIMAL DESIGN OF ANAEROBIC MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR
(AnMBR) AND ION EXCHANGE (IE) UNITS FOR REUSABLE
WASTEWATER AT VARUN BEVERAGES
(A CASE STUDY).
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
2 |Page
CONTENTS
Contents ....................................................................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 4
1.0 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 4
1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................................................................................. 5
1.2 JUSTIFICATION ............................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................ 6
1.3.1 MAIN OBJECTIVE ......................................................................................................................... 6
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................. 6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................................................... 7
2.0 GENERAL ......................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 WATER USE AND RE-USE FROM THE BEVERAGES INDUSTRY ............................................. 8
2.2 WASTEWATER GENERATION ACROSS COMMERCIAL SECTORS .......................................... 9
2.3 POTENTIAL REUSE SECTORS AND THE LEGISLLATIVE REQUIREMNET ........................... 10
2.4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS ................................................................................... 11
2.4.0 AEROBIC METHODS .............................................................................................................. 11
2.4.1 ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS ........................................................................... 11
2.4.2 OXIDATION DITCH ................................................................................................. 12
2.4.3 TRICKLING FILTERS .............................................................................................. 13
2.4.4 AEROBIC LAGOONS ............................................................................................... 13
2.4.5 ANAEROBIC METHODS ......................................................................................................... 14
2.4.6 ANAEROBIC LAGOONS ......................................................................................... 14
2.4.7 ANAEROBIC FILTERS ............................................................................................. 14
2.4.8 EGSB AND UASB REACTORS ................................................................................ 15
2.4.4 ION EXCHANGE ...................................................................................................................... 18
3. DATA AND METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 20
3.1 STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................................. 20
3.2 OBJECTIVE 1 .................................................................................................................................. 20
3.2.1 SAMPLING ............................................................................................................................... 20
3.2.2 ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES ....................................................................................................... 21
3.2.3 ANALYTICAL METHODS ...................................................................................................... 21
3.3 OBJECTIVE 2 .................................................................................................................................. 22
3.4 OBJECTIVE 3 .................................................................................................................................. 22
3.5 OBJECTIVE 4 .................................................................................................................................. 22
3.6 PROJECT WORK PLAN ................................................................................................................. 23
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
3 |Page
3.7 BUDGET .......................................................................................................................................... 23
references ................................................................................................................................................... 24
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Wastewater discharge into rivers .................................................................................................. 7
Figure 2 Wastewater generation ............................................................................................................... 10
Figure 3 Activated sludge ......................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 4
Oxidation ditch ......................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 5 Trickling filter ............................................................................................................................ 13
Figure 6
Aerobic lagoons ........................................................................................................................ 14
Figure 7 Anaerobic filters ......................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 8 (a)UASB reactors
(b) EGSB
reactors
..................................................................... 16
Figure 9 AnMBR ....................................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 10 ion exchange............................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 11 Varun beverages ....................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 12 project work plan ...................................................................................................................... 23
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
4 |Page
INTRODUCTION
1.0 BACKGROUND
In common with many other food industries, modern beverages produce large quantities of wastewater,
which contains high concentrations of organic compounds, nitrogen, and phosphorous. Globally, the
beverage industry is regarded as one of the largest sources of industrial fluid waste. In European countries, a
3
typical beverages company generates approximately 700m daily of industrial effluent and this wastewater
poses a risk in conventional activated sludge systems (Vergine et al., 2017). According to (Barbera and
Gurnari, 2018; Mateus et al., 2021) the volume generated (about 6-14 million tons per year and 7 – 10L of
wastewater per litter of beverage drink), wastewater from beverage processing industries is hazardous to the
environment due to its high organic content.
Various attempts have been made as an alternative to the available treatment technologies for treating
beverages wastewater in small-scale and medium-scale industries. However, most of the treatment
technologies made were deemed economically non-viable for most of the dairy processing plants due to high
capital costs (The Coca-Cola Company, 2021). In the present day, there is a significant increase in high-rate
anaerobic treatment for beverage industrial effluent mainly because of treating wastewater with high organic
concentration. Anaerobic digestion which is made up of Extended Granular Sludge Blanket (EGSB) or Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor (UASB) are becoming more widely used and regarded as one of the
most attractive options available for the treatment of beverage industrial effluent. Statistics show that more
There are less EGSB reactors than UASB reactors and are being operated globally (Water and Digest,
2021)).In some cases the Anaerobic reactor is designed in conjunction with membrane filtration forming the
well-known Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor (AnMBR). The AnMBR in the anaerobic digestion reactor
consists of three distinct zones: the sludge bed, the sludge blanket, the settling zone and a membrane in the
membrane filtration zone. Generally, the treatment in the AnMBR reactor is based on the slow upward
through these zones, the first two zones consist of biologically active sludge and the filtration of the
anaerobically treated wastewater
On the other hand, special attention is required for the removal of nutrients such as nitrogen and
phosphorous in treated wastewater. Globally, there is a wide range of treatment technologies responsible for
the uptake of nutrients, and these processes require high investments and operational and maintenance costs.
Amongst a wide range of commercial techniques, the ion exchange process comprises of the interchange of
ions between a solution and an insoluble solid, i.e., polymeric or mineral ion exchangers such as ion
exchange resins (functionalized porous or gel polymer), natural or synthetic zeolites, montmorillonite, clay,
etc. In a wastewater treatment system undesirable ions in the water supply are replaced with more acceptable
ions. Water decontamination consists of removal of ionic pollutants such as phosphate, nitrate, ammonia,
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
5 |Page
which appear in various types industrial wastewaters or heavy metals discharged in effluent from
electroplating plants, metal finishing operations, as well as a number of mining and electronics industries
(Pinter et al., 2001; Da˛browski et al., 2004;Spiro, 2009).Although other physicochemical methods of water
purification such as chemical reactions, electro-flotation, reverse osmosis and adsorption may be under
given conditions more effective than ion exchange (Flores and Abased, 1999), the latter process is
considered attractive because of the relative simplicity of application (Blanchard et al., 1984) and in many
cases is proven to be economic and effective technique to remove ions from wastewaters, particularly from
diluted solutions (Pin tar et al., 2001;Valverde et al., 2006
1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT
The wastewater treatment plant at Varun Beverages is currently producing treated water that falls short of
being suitable for neither potable nor non potable reuses, posing a criticalchallenge. Simultaneously,
Zimbabwe is grappling with water shortages, offering an opportunity to utilize treated wastewater as a
valuable resource. To reduce the pollution load on the municipal water supply, it is essential to enhance the
treatment process. Furthermore, the wastewater from the food and beverages industry contains elevated
levels of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), pathogens, and various other substances, compounding the
need for an effective solution to render it environmentally safe and fit for alternative use.
1.2 JUSTIFICATION
The existing wastewater treatment plant at Varun Beverages which is designed to treat effluent limited for
recycling. This issue is a pressing concern as it signifies an inefficiency in the treatment process that directly
affects the environmental sustainability and usability of the treated water. Since the rising water demand in
Zimbabwe underscores the broader regional context and the urgent need for alternative water sources.
Treating and utilizing wastewater becomes a viable solution to alleviate water scarcity issues and contributes
to sustainable water resource management.Moreover treating wastewater effectively not only ensures that
the environment is protected from harmful pollutants but also alleviates the burden on municipal water
treatment facilities. This is particularly important for maintaining the quality of available freshwater
resources. The attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals depends critically on wastewater treatment.
For instance, goal 14 aspires for submerged life, goal 6 aims for clean water and sanitation, and goal 3 aims
for a world without hunger.
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
6 |Page
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
1.3.1 MAIN OBJECTIVE
To design a wastewater treatment plant that integrates anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) and ion
exchange (IE) units for wastewater treatment in the context of Varun beverages.
1.3.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
1. To investigate specific wastewater characteristics and treatment requirements unique to
Varun
Beverages.
2. To develop a detailed design and configuration for the lab-scale physical model, ensuring the integration
of anaerobic membrane bioreactors and ion exchange units to
address the identified wastewater
treatment needs
3. To construct and assemble the lab-scale physical model based on the design configuration, while
monitoring and documenting associated costs
4. To evaluate the performance of the integrated system through a series of controlled
experiments,
focusing on key water quality parameters, treatment efficiency, and energy Consumption, and assess the
cost-effectiveness of the system.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The project seeks to answer the following questions:
a
What are the key wastewater parameters that need to be monitored in the treatment plant
b
What are the optimal design parameters for the treatment?
c
What is the maximum amount of wastewater that the treatment plant can effectively treat per hour?
d
How are the treatment plant's costs and environmental effects impacted by the volume of
wastewater it treats?
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
7 |Page
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 GENERAL
The notion that water is an endless, renewable resource is a thing of the past. Water 4.0 (Sedlak, 2019) by
David Sedlek claims that as a result of the unequal distribution of fresh water, places that are vulnerable to
drought are drying up, receiving less rainfall overall, and many of the water landscapes are disappearing.
Furthermore, every year, almost a million people lose their lives as a direct or indirect result of water
scarcity; these deaths are particularly common in developing, underdeveloped, and transitional nations
(Water.org, 2021). Currently, 884 million people lack even basic access to securely managed drinking water
services, out of the almost 2.2 billion people on the planet that require this kind of water (CDC, 2021). A
growing number of people are dying as a result of crimes involving the supply of water since some of the
most significant capital cities in the world, including New Delhi in India, are presently unable to meet the
demands of their citizens for water (Singh, 2018).Reusing water is crucial to overcoming current issues and
supporting economic growth in light of the world's expanding population and rising water demands for
irrigation and agricultural production (Vergine et al., 2017).
Figure 1 Wastewater discharge into rivers
To safeguard the water quality of natural reservoirs, wastewater discharge laws are also getting harsher. In
order to achieve sustainable water utilization practices and the implementation of cost-effective technologies
for wastewater treatment, improvements are still required in all industrial sectors. The urgency of moving
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
8 |Page
towards wastewater reuse schemes is apparent (Kirby et al., 2003; Water.org, 2021).The beverage industry
has multifarious industrial processes that generate liquid waste varying in composition and quantity at
various stages. The effluent disposal rules, which stipulate that wastewater must meet specific discharge
requirements prior to release, have made the disposal of beverage liquid waste effluent a worrisome issue.
Dissolved sugars, proteins, lipids, and potentially additive residues can all be found in beverage effluents.
According to Cruz et al. (2005), total suspended solids (TSS), total dissolved solids, chemical oxygen
demand (COD), which is typically approximately 1.5 times the biological oxygen demand (BOD) level, and
biological oxygen demand (BOD), which varies from 1 to 3 kilograms per metric ton (kg/t), are the
important characteristics for dairy wastewater. For every 1 m3 of processed product, the majority of
beverage factories use between 1 and 6 m3 of water during production. The amount of water used in the
beverage sector varies greatly depending on the kind of products and process needs. Anaerobic filters and
activated sludge processes are two common biological techniques used to treat dairy wastewater. While
anaerobic biological procedures necessitate supplementary techniques, biological processes are energyintensive. In terms of effectiveness, economy, and energy needs, anaerobic treatment techniques are superior
to aerobic therapy procedures in a number of ways.
2.1 WATER USE AND RE-USE FROM THE BEVERAGES INDUSTRY
One of the biggest global consumers of drinking water is the food processing industry. The amount of water
used in the manufacturing of food and drink varies according on the kind of product and its specifications,
the industrial unit's size, cleaning procedures, and equipment employed (FAO, 2021). Consequently, the
various food processing facilities, the cleaning and washing processes, and the creation of by-products—that
is, both solid and liquid wastes—are the sources of wastewater originating from the food industry (Barbera
and Gurnari, 2018; Mateus et al., 2021). The creation of technologically advanced processes that use less
water, the use of spray nozzles to reduce uncontrolled water, leaks, and water pressure, and the recycling
and reuse of water within the food sector are the three main strategies to reduce water consumption. The
selection of potential water sources for reuse is aided by an assessment of water properties and utilization at
different process steps in a food plant (Fendler, 2013). Because of the ongoing economic uptrend and the
following treatment of water prior to its release into aquatic environments, the reuse of water, whether direct
or indirect, is important.
According to Valta et al. (2015), the most important variables that affect water reuse are its volume,
chemical characteristics and concentration, the employment of appropriate treatment techniques, process
economics, and local discharge laws and guidelines. In addition to encouraging the reuse of treated water
and avoiding the needless consumption of higher quality water, a strategic approach to water reuse also
considers the potential for recovering different resources from wastewater (Pagella et al., 2000). The
potential to reuse wastewater for various food industry processes and operations will be improved by the
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
9 |Page
treatment technology's efficiency (Sethu and Viramuthu, 2008). However, because of unfavorable opinions
regarding the qualities of reused water and possible contamination risks, food processing companies are
extremely sensitive to this concept (Menses et al., 2017). One major obstacle to the adoption of water reuse
practices in the food industry is the ongoing concern about lowering hygiene standards (European
Commission, 2021a). Additionally, in order to guarantee that the final products' quality and safety are not
compromised by health risks that are difficult to fully evaluate, current regulations mandate the use of
potable water or an equivalent in food contact applications.
2.2 WASTEWATER GENERATION ACROSS COMMERCIAL SECTORS
The amount of water used in the food and beverage industry is influenced by a number of factors, including
the number of finished products, the plant's capacity, the kind of manufacturing processes, the process
equipment used, and the cleaning procedures. The nominal percentage of water used by the various food
industry sectors is displayed in Figure 1. Facilities for reusing water can be built for direct or indirect reuse.
More often than not, the direct reuse of treated wastewater is put to use for non-drinking uses like cooling,
washing, gardening, and park irrigation. In this instance, the more lenient legislation encourages small- and
medium-sized factories to directly reuse their wastewater. For instance, the Annapurna mega kitchen in
Dharmasthala, India generates 3000–5000 L of starchy water on the first day from washing and cooking
rice, and this water has a high concentration of BOD. As a result, starch wastewater is fed to the Annapurna
cows as an addition to their diet, increasing their daily milk production to 3500 L (National
GeographicChann, 2017).
However, the direct use of wastewater as a primary source in the food industry necessitates a thorough
comprehension of the intricate procedures involved in manufacturing processes. Assuring product safety and
quality, however, is the biggest obstacle to treating wastewater to potable standards (Meneses et al., 2017;
Casani et al., 2005). Commercial businesses, however, are demonstrating a strong desire to reuse
wastewater. Reusing wastewater benefits businesses not only in terms of legislation but also in terms of their
reputation for corporate social responsibility (Barbera and Gurnari, 2018). Out of the 804 billion liters of
wastewater produced in their industrial facilities, companies like Coca-Cola reuse about 173 billion liters of
water (The Coca-Cola Company, 2021). The values of pH (6.5–8.0), total suspended solids (TSS) = < 50 mg
L1, total nitrogen (TN) = < 5 mg L1, total phosphorus (TP) = < 2 mg L, and 5-day biological oxygen
demand (BOD5) = < 50 mg L 1 closely align with reuse water regulations (Table 1). Coca-Cola uses its
refilled water for manufacturing, maintenance, and operations. This Coca-Cola initiative has also helped
close the water loop and promoted positive interactive competition, setting the standard for other large
industrial giants like P&G and Heineken. For example, as part of the "Every Drop" campaign, Heineken
recently promised to treat or reuse all of its brewery wastewater by the year 2030 (Water and Digest, 2021).
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
10 | P a g e
Conversely, indirect water reuse involves reusing treated wastewater in nearby treatment facilities before
releasing it back into the natural water cycle (a lake, river, or groundwater aquifer). Later on, the industries
use this water that has been drawn from these natural sources (Deloitte, 2015). To meet the precise water
quality standards (such as the Codex Alimentarius framework) for use in the food industry, this water may
need to be retreated (Barbera and Gurnari, 2018; Deloitte, 2015). However, depending on operational and
legal requirements, a variety of technical and social factors govern the direct and indirect reuse of food
wastewater (EPA, 2021).
Figure 2 Wastewater generation
2.3 POTENTIAL REUSE SECTORS AND THE LEGISLLATIVE REQUIREMNET
Preferred uses are not recommended by the European Union guidelines because this will depend on the
needs of individual catchments and the feasibility of supplying treated wastewater to different potential users
(Deloitte, 2015). The following categories have been established for the reuse of wastewater based on the
guidelines: (i) Supporting environmental objectives and providing access to water for prospective uses like
regenerating aquatic habitats or creating new marine ecosystems, expanding streams, and recovering
aquifers (ii) Application in horticulture and agriculture, such as irrigation of crops (both food and non-food),
pastures, and orchards, or aquaculture, such as the cultivation of algae; (iv) Municipal and landscape use,
such as public park drainage, leisure and sports facilities, private parks, roadsides, street sweeping, fire
safety systems, car washing, toilet flushing, and dust control; and (iii) industrial use, such as cooling water,
plant water, aggregate washing, concrete making, compaction of the soil, and dust control. When treated
wastewater is used for agricultural purposes, it is further divided into classes according to quality. Table 2
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
11 | P a g e
lists the requirements for water reuse in agriculture across several nations. Additionally, the EU has
established stringent regulations for these suggested reuse strategies (Allende et al., 2017).
For example, the EU has separated the water quality criteria into four groups for the reuse of wastewater in
the agriculture sector. Category A: Any food crops, both raw and cooked, whose edible part comes into
direct contact with recycled water Dietary plants classified as B and C are those that are eaten raw, where
the edible portion is ground and not in direct contact with reclaimed water, as well as processed or non-food
plants, such as those that are fed to animals that produce milk or meat. Industrial, energy, and seed crops fall
under category D. Furthermore, new regulations for the repurposing of wastewater for farming have been
proposed by the EU. The European Commission (2021b) states that the decree is scheduled to take effect in
June 2023. The principal objective of the decree is to establish a uniform framework of laws, oversight
obligations, risk mitigation strategies, and transparency guidelines encompassing all EU member states
(European Commission, 2021b).The operation of the treatment technology and the legal requirements must
coexist. The treatment technology to be used varies based on the strict standards and the initial level of
contaminants present in wastewater, just as the legislative protocol varies for each type of reuse method..
2.4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS
To lessen high-strength pollution, different treatment techniques are used before beverage wastewater is
released. A range of physical, chemical, and biological processes are used in the treatment of beverage
effluent. Because physio-chemical treatment processes involve high chemical costs and poor COD
removability, biological processes are generally preferred. Anaerobic treatment is the most widely used of
the available biological treatment techniques because it can effectively address the different organic loads
and temperature swings that are encountered.
2.4.0 AEROBIC METHODS
2.4.1 ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS
Because of the activated sludge process, organic matter in beverages wastewater degrades aerobically.
According to reports, treating dairy effluent with this method reduces BOD by 87-89%. A maximum COD
of 61.5% was attained by the activated sludge process at a daily F/M ratio of 0.039. The system's high
capital costs, ongoing supervision requirements, low performance at low temperatures, and high BOD and
COD reduction make it unsuitable for industrial wastewater treatment. Allende et al (2014)
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
12 | P a g e
Figure 3 Activated sludge
2.4.2 OXIDATION DITCH
The oxidation ditch is another type of activated sludge process used to treat dairy effluent. In India, treating
wastewater with an oxidation ditch reduced the BOD content by 910 to 30 mg/L. However, due to the
microbial activity cessation, the operation did not perform well at low temperatures. Allende et al (2014)
said.
Figure 4 Oxidation ditch
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
13 | P a g e
2.4.3 TRICKLING FILTERS
The effluent flowed over the microbial growth attached to the mixed medium, which consisted of a bed of
rocks, slag, plastic filter, or high molecular weight synthetic resin, in trickling filters used to treat
wastewater. According to Elangovan (2014), the levels of BOD and COD were lowered from 300 to 10 ppm
and 150 to 11 ppm, respectively.
Figure 5 Trickling filter
2.4.4 AEROBIC LAGOONS
Aerobic lagoons are used in many nations to treat wastewater and store effluents for use in spray irrigation
later in the year. Aerobic lagoons were utilized in Czechoslovakia to fully treat wastewater, eliminating 95%
of the BOD. Due to the requirement to maintain a temperature between 35 and 37 degrees Celsius and the
large amount of land needed for the operation, this process was reportedly not cost-effective (Elangovan,
2014).
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
14 | P a g e
Figure 6
Aerobic lagoons
2.4.5 ANAEROBIC METHODS
2.4.6 ANAEROBIC LAGOONS
Anaerobic digestion of this kind is the oldest and needs a lot of space along with minimal operating and
capital costs. A BOD reduction of about 90% can be achieved with a 7-day retention period and an organic
loading rate of 4.48 kg BOD/m3/d (Elangovan, 2014).
2.4.7 ANAEROBIC FILTERS
Dairy effluents are treated in an anaerobic filter using both stone media filters and Poly Vinyl Chloride
(PVC) filters. COD loadings ranging from 0.8 to 3.6 kg BOD/m3/d are employed, with COD removal
efficiencies ranging from 91% to 82% reported. The high capital cost of PVC filter plastic media is a
disadvantage (Elangovan, 2014).
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
15 | P a g e
Figure 7 Anaerobic filters
2.4.8 EGSB AND UASB REACTORS
UASB reactors are becoming more widely used for the treatment of dairy effluents because of their low
costs of operation and maintenance. It has been demonstrated that 12–18 hours of HRT can reduce BOD by
85–90% and COD by 75–80%. It has been reported that methane production is reduced by 0.25 to 0.31
m3/kg COD when biogas contains 75 to 89 percent methane. Vasundhara Dairy in Gujarat, India, has
effectively implemented the UASB process, which saves about 50% of the energy required compared to the
traditional method. The UASB system's ability to generate about 830 m3 of biogas from 1000 m3/d of
wastewater with a COD of 2000 kg/d is another benefit (Elangovan, 2014).
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
16 | P a g e
Figure 8 (a)UASB reactors
(b) EGSB
reactors
2.4.9 ANAEROBIC MEMEBRANE BIOREACTOR (AnMBR)
An MBR, also known as an anaerobic membrane bioreactor, is a wastewater treatment technology. It is a
method of biomass retention using membrane filtration. A membrane bioreactor (MBR) in an anaerobic
setting is how AnMBR operates. Carbon dioxide and methane are produced from organic materials by
anaerobic bacteria (also known as thermophiles or mesophylls) and Achaea. Membranes filter and separate
the sewage, separating the sludge and effluent. Afterwards, the biogas produced can be burned to produce
heat or electricity. It is also capable of being upgraded (purified) into household-quality renewable natural
gas. Because methane combustion can produce more energy than is needed to maintain the process, AnMBR
is regarded as a sustainable alternative for sewage treatment.
AnMBR technology follows escalating effluent standards by going through two stages to guarantee
maximum solid-liquid separation. Wastewater first enters the anaerobic bioreactor unit, where the organic
load undergoes anaerobic digestion to produce biogas. The leftover liquid, which still contains trace amounts
of solids, is then fed into the membrane unit, which removes the last of the smaller solid particles from the
wastewater that has been anaerobically treated. This wastewater, also referred to as effluent, can now be
recycled straight away or given additional treatment via reverse osmosis. After that, the leftover solid
particles are cycled back to the anaerobic bioreactor unit so they can continue producing biogas. In total, this
procedure extracts 99% of the organic matter present in wastewater and yields 70% pure biogas.
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
17 | P a g e
The AnMBRs are divided into classes, one of which is called Cross flow/External AnMBR. This variant gets
its name from keeping the membrane unit separate from the main reactor unit. The wastewater undergoes
the anaerobic process in this setup. Once this process is finished, the leftover mixed liquor enters the
external membrane unit while being highly pressurized. Cross flow filtration is used to separate the permeate
and retentate, effluent and organic load, respectively, while maintaining the same pressure. In the end, the
two settle on different sides of the membrane filtering apparatus. The organic load cycles back to the main
reactor unit from this point, where it can undergo the anaerobic process to produce more biogas. The
effluent is then released. Submerged AnMBR, the second variation, incorporates the membrane unit straight
into the bioreactor unit. In contrast to the other two configurations, this one allows the raw influent to enter
the membrane unit directly, bypassing the anaerobic process. The permeate and retentate are separated in the
membrane unit by a low negative pressure. While the retentate undergoes the anaerobic process to become
biogas, the permeate, also referred to as the effluent, exits the system. Outside Submerged the third
variation, known as AnMBR, combines the features of the first two variations by maintaining the external
membrane unit while submerging it in an external chamber. First comes the anaerobic process, which is
followed by the membrane unit's filtration stage. Here, wastewater is pumped into an externally submerged
chamber, where it is filtered to separate it into two categories: retentate (organic load) and permeate
(effluent). This version uses low negative pressure to separate the permeate and retentate, just like the
submerged AnMBR. After this, the organic load recirculates back into the bioreactor unit to produce biogas,
and the effluent exits the system.
There are numerous factors that influence the industrial use of the three AnMBR variants. Because it
requires less negative pressure, the submerged AnMBR variant is the most economical, for instance.
Furthermore, the filtration process can be carried out without the need to pump the liquid into an external
chamber. Because of these two features, the submerged AnMBR requires less energy to operate than the
external AnMBR variants. It also costs less to operate. Operational Advantages: The external AnMBR and
external submerged AnMBR versions offer the greatest operability. These variants function for extended
periods of time because there is less membrane fouling in them. Furthermore, compared to the submerged
AnMBR, the two units are much easier to clean because they are separated. When dimensions are
considered The submerged AnMBR variant is the most compact of the three, keeping all of its operations
within a single unit, despite the fact that the AnMBR's relatively compact size is one of its main advantages
overall. The submerged AnMBR is the most commonly used variant in the industry because, although it has
some operability disadvantages, companies find its size and cost to be desirable.
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
18 | P a g e
Figure 9 AnMBR
2.4.4 ION EXCHANGE
To remove dissolved ions and impurities from water, an ion exchange water treatment system is a specialized
technology used in wastewater treatment. This system works by using ion exchange resins to draw out unwanted
ions from wastewater and replace them with desired ions, thereby purifying the water before it is released into
the environment. Water treatment systems that utilize ion exchange technology are crucial for treating
wastewater, enhancing water quality, and fulfilling a range of commercial and residential requirements. Salts that
have dissolved in water and separated into charged ions are present in all natural waters, albeit in varying
amounts. Ions with a positive charge are known as cations, while those with a negative charge are known as
anions. Ionic impurities have the potential to significantly impact a boiler or process system's dependability and
operational efficiency. The accumulation of scale or deposits created by these impurities can cause overheating,
which can result in catastrophic tube failures, expensive production losses, and unplanned downtime.
The water supply cannot be used as boiler feed water until hardness ions like calcium and magnesium are
eliminated. Nearly total ion removal is necessary for many process systems as well as high-pressure boiler feed
water systems. This includes silica and carbon dioxide. Water’s dissolved ions can be effectively removed with
the use of ion exchange systems. Ion exchangers transfer one ion to another, hold it for a short while, and then
release it into a solution that is regenerant. Unwanted ions in the water supply are swapped out for more
acceptable ions using an ion exchange system. For instance, sodium ions are used in place of the scale-forming
calcium and magnesium ions in sodium zeolite softeners.
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
19 | P a g e
Gans, a German chemist, created the first ion exchange water softeners in 1905 using synthetic aluminosilicate
materials called zeolites. Today, the term "zeolite softener" is often used to describe any cation exchange process,
even though aluminosilicate materials are no longer commonly used. Greensand, a naturally occurring material,
quickly took the place of the artificial zeolite exchange material. Greensand was more suitable for use in
industrial settings due to its higher physical stability, even though its exchange capacity was lower than that of
the synthetic material. The quantity of exchangeable ions that a unit quantity of resin can extract from a solution
is known as its capacity. As calcium carbonate, it is commonly expressed in kilogram grains per cubic foot.
Because of its many advantages, the ion exchange water treatment system is a widely used technology in many
different applications, including wastewater treatment. It does, however, have some restrictions that must be
taken into account in particular situations. These are the benefits and drawbacks of the ion exchange mechanism.
The benefits of ion exchange in water treatment include the effective removal of impurities and dissolved ions,
which improves water quality. It can be tailored for particular ion removal requirements, making it highly
effective in targeted applications. It is versatile and applicable to a wide range of water treatment scenarios. Ion
exchange's limitations in the treatment of water include Ion exchange resins have a limited capacity and lifespan,
so they must be periodically replaced. high operating costs, especially when treating highly contaminated water
or in large-scale applications. Possibility of environmentally harmful disposal of regenerant chemicals used in the
process. Ion exchange is still a useful and adaptable technique for treating water overall, but its benefits and
drawbacks must be carefully considered before using it in different situations.
Figure 10 ion exchange
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
20 | P a g e
3. DATA AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 STUDY AREA
The proposed area for the project is Varun beverages also known as sPepsi Zimbabwe which is located
along Simon Mazorodze road , Harare, Zimbabwe, Pepsi Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd is one the largest food
processing industries that deals with food and beverages and over the past year, the entity has produced
substantial amounts of fluid waste which is discharged to the municipal. In addition to wastewater
production, the volume of liquid waste generated during processing at Pepsi Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd is
significant.
Figure 11 Varun beverages
3.2 OBJECTIVE 1
3.2.1 SAMPLING
Standard procedures for the examination of water and wastewater, APHA, 21st Edition, 2005, 1060 B, 1-39
for chemical analysis, will be followed when conducting the sampling. Samples of raw wastewater will be
taken from the industrial facility. The wastewater from technology is a blend of effluent from different
processing units. Weekly estimates of the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of wastewater
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
21 | P a g e
will be used to determine the parameters of wastewater quality. The wastewater will be gathered in a
specially made water sampler and brought to the laboratory for sample analysis. The sampler is going to be
thoroughly cleaned with hydrochloric acid, rinsed with distilled water twice or three times, cleaned with tape
water to remove any remaining acid, and then filled with the sample, leaving only a tiny space at the top for
air. Samples of sufficient volume must be collected in suitable containers; samples must be collected with at
least 2 to 3 cm of space left in the sampler for effective shaking; samples must be stored in an ice box until
they reach the laboratory; and samples must be properly labeled with the date, time, and unique
identification number immediately following sampling. These are just a few of the precautions taken during
sample collection and storage.
3.2.2 ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES
The quality of wastewater from industry will be evaluated by analyzing a number of physicochemical
factors. Standard procedures, such as the 21st edition of APHA's Standard Procedures for Examination of
Water and Wastewater, will be used to analyze the samples (APHA, 1999). Color, temperature, turbidity,
pH, chemical oxygen demand, chlorides, nitrogen, and phosphorus are examples of physico-chemical
parameters and will be examined in accordance with the APHA's 1999 Standard Procedures for Examination
of Water and Wastewater. Throughout the entire experimental process, the wastewater characteristics will be
ascertained in order to analyze the removal percentage and examine the UASB-HRAP hybrid reactor's
performance.
3.2.3 ANALYTICAL METHODS
Various parameters as mentioned in table 3.1 will be analyzed following the methodology sated in Standard
Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater. Interferences will be taken care of during analysis of
the various parameters as stated in the reference methods. Preservation criteria (APHA, 1999) will be
followed whenever necessary. Table 3.1 gives a summary of analytical methods and equipment that is going
to be used in this study.
Table 3.1: Analytical methods and techniques
Parameter(s)
Reference
Techniques
Color
APHA, 1999, 2020-B
Visual Comparison Method
Temperature
APHA, 1999, 2550-B
Thermometer
Total suspended solids
APHA, 1999, 2540-D
Filtration/ Gravimetric
Total dissolved solids
APHA, 1999, 2540-C
Filtration/Gravimetric
Turbidity
APHA,1999, 2130-B
Nephelometric
Chemical parameters
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
22 | P a g e
pH Value
APHA,1999, 4500-H B
Biological Oxygen Demand
APHA, 1999, 5210-B
Chemical Oxygen Demand
APHA, 1999, 5220-B
pH Meter
Dissolved Oxygen
Chloride (as Cl)
APHA,1999, 4500-Cl B
Titrimetric Method
Oil and Grease
APHA, 1999, 5520-B
Gravitation Method
Nitrates
Phosphorous
Sulphates
3.3 OBJECTIVE 2
Following sampling, the lab-scale physical model's design and configuration must be carefully thought out,
making sure that ion exchange units and anaerobic membrane bioreactors are integrated to meet the needs
for wastewater treatment that have been identified. The wastewater characteristics listed in Objective 1 are
used to determine the design parameters. Anaerobic membrane bioreactor design takes into account
variables like membrane type, reactor volume, and operating conditions.The type of ions present in the
wastewater that has been characterized informs the design of the ion exchange unit, along with flow rates
and regeneration procedures. An integration strategy is formulated to incorporate the ion exchange unit and
anaerobic membrane bioreactor into the lab-scale model.
3.4 OBJECTIVE 3
Based on the intended configuration, the lab scale model is built and put together while keeping track of and
recording related expenses. The next stage is to create the physical model at laboratory scale after creating a
detailed design. The next step is to acquire the required materials, which include ion exchange resins,
anaerobic membrane bioreactor components, and other equipment chosen in accordance with the design
specifications.
The lab-scale physical model is assembled, with the ion exchange unit and anaerobic
membrane bioreactor, in accordance with the intended configuration.
3.5 OBJECTIVE 4
Through a series of controlled experiments, the integrated system's performance is evaluated, with an
emphasis on important water quality parameters, treatment efficiency, energy consumption, and system costBY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
23 | P a g e
effectiveness. Key parameters such as pH, nutrient levels, contaminant concentrations, chemical oxygen
demand (COD), and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) are measured in the treated water samples. The
removal of organic matter, inactivation of pathogens, and decrease in contaminants are used to evaluate the
plant's performance.
3.6 PROJECT WORK PLAN
Figure 12 project work plan
3.7 BUDGET
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT ($)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Transport
Food
Stationery
Lab Scale Model
External Laboratory Fees
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
25.00
20.00
20.00
150.00
50.00
50.00
315
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
24 | P a g e
REFERENCES
Aziz, N.I.H.A., Hanafiah, M.M., Gheewala, S.H., 2019. A review on life cycle assessment
of biogas production: challenges and future perspectives in Malaysia. Biomass
Bioenergy 122, 361–374.
Barbera, M., Gurnari, G., 2018. Wastewater Treatment and Reuse in the Food Industry.
Springer Briefs Molecu. Sci.
CDC, 2021. Global wash fast facts. Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. Available
at. https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/global/wash_statistics.html.
Casani, S., Rouhany, M., Knøchel, S., 2005. A discussion paper on challenges and
limitations to water reuse and hygiene in the food industry. Water Res. 39 (6),
1134–1146.
Cecconet, D., Molognoni, D., Callegari, A., Capodaglio, A.G., 2018. Agro-food industry
wastewater treatment with microbial fuel cells: energetic recovery issues. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 43 (1), 500–511.
Chai, W.S., Tan, W.G., Munawaroh, H.S.H., Gupta, V.K., Ho, S.H., Show, P.L., 2021.
Multifaceted roles of microalgae in the application of wastewater biotreatment: a
review. Environ. Pollut. 269, 116236.
Choi, G., Kim, H., Lee, C., 2021. Long-term monitoring of a thermal hydrolysis-anaerobic
co-digestion plant treating high-strength organic wastes: process performance and
microbial community dynamics. Bioresour. Technol. 319, 124–138.
de la Presidencia, Ministerio, 2007. Real Decreto 1620/2007, de 7 de diciembre, por el
que se establece el r´egimen jurídico de la reutilizaci´on de las aguas depuradas.
Available at : https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2007-21092.
Dębowski, M., Zieli´nski, M., Kisielewska, M., Kazimierowicz, J., 2020. Evaluation of
anaerobic digestion of dairy wastewater in an innovative multi-section horizontal
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
25 | P a g e
flow reactor. Energies 13 (9), 2392.
Deloitte, LimnoTech, 2015. Quantifying replenish benefits in community water
partnership GETF. GETF. Available at: https://freshwater.issuelab.org/resources/
23508/23508.pdf.
Dos Santos Pereira, M., Borges, A.C., Heleno, F.F., Squillace, L.F.A., Faroni, L.R.D.A.,
2018. Treatment of synthetic milk industry wastewater using batch dissolved air
flotation. J. Clean. Prod. 189, 729–737.
European Commission, 2021a. Drinking water legislation – Environment. Available at.
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-drink/legislation_en.html.
European Commission, 2021b. Water Reuse Guidelines. Available at. https://ec.europa.
eu/environment/water/reuse.htm.
European Chemical Agency (ECHA), 2021. BPA. Available at. https://echa.europa.eu/.
FAO, 2021. The state of food and Agriculture 2020. Available at. http://www.fao.org
/state-of-food-agriculture/en.
Farag`o, M., Damgaard, A., Madsen, J.A., Andersen, J.K., Thornberg, D., Andersen, M.H.,
Rygaard, M., 2021. From wastewater treatment to water resource recovery:
environmental and economic impacts of full-scale implementation. Water Res. 204 Elangovan, C. (2014).
Performance evaluation of up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor process treating dairy
wastewater doctor of philosophy faculty of Civil Engineering anna university Chennai 600025.
http://hdl.handle.net/10603/27472
Jȩdrzejewska-Cicińska, M., & Krzemieniewski, M. (2010). Effect of corrosion of steel elements on the treatment
of
dairy
wastewater
in
a
UASB
reactor.
Environmental
Technology,
31(6),
585–589.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09593331003616821
Makni, H., Bettaieb, F., Dhaouadi, H., Henni, F. M., & Balhrouf, A. (2006). The anaerobic treatment of sewage
and granule formation in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor. Environmental Technology, 27(9), 1031–
1036. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593332708618715
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L
26 | P a g e
Manhokwe, S., Zvidzai, C., Mareesa, W., & Marume, P. (2018a). Wastewater treatment strategies of selected
Zimbabwean food industries. International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering,
10(4), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.5897/ijwree2015.0587
Manhokwe, S., Zvidzai, C., Mareesa, W., & Marume, P. (2018b). Wastewater treatment strategies of selected
Zimbabwean food industries. International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering,
10(4), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.5897/ijwree2015.0587
Naji, O. A. (2019). Characterization of dairy waste water and its effects on environment. In Salve et al. World
Journal of Pharmaceutical Research (Vol. 4). www.wjpr.net
Raghunath, B. V., Punnagaiarasi, A., Rajarajan, G., Irshad, A., Elango, A., & Mahesh kumar, G. (2016). Impact
of dairy effluent on environment—a review. In Environmental Science and Engineering (Subseries:
Environmental
Science)
(Issue
9783319272269,
pp.
239–249).
Springer
Berlin
Heidelberg.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27228-3_22
Shete, B. S., Shinkar, N. P., & Kamaltai Gawai, S. (2013). Dairy Industry Wastewater Sources, Characteristics &
its Effects on Environment. http://inpressco.com/category/ijcet
Suman, G., Nupur, M., Anuradha, S., & Pradeep, B. (2017). Assessment of toxicity in dairy waste: A Review.
IOSR Journal of Biotechnology and Biochemistry (IOSR-JBB, 3(5), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.9790/264X03050610
Sutherland, D. L., & Ralph, P. J. (2020). 15 years of research on wastewater treatment high rate algal ponds in
New Zealand: discoveries and future directions. In New Zealand Journal of Botany (Vol. 58, Issue 4, pp.
334–357). Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/0028825X.2020.1756860
UNESCO. (2021). SDG 6: Clean water and sanitation Science for the Sustainable Development Goals.
https://www.unesco.org/reports/science/2021/sites/default/files/medias/fichiers/2022/05/Factsheet%20USR2
1%20SDG%206.pdf
Walia, R., Kumar, P., & Mehrotra, I. (2012). Evaluation of polishing of the effluent from UASB reactor by
diffusers.
In
Int.
J.
Environment
and
Waste
Management
(Vol.
9,
Issue
2).
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327792480
World Water Assessment Programme (United Nations), UN-Water, & Unesco. (2021). The United Nations
World Water Development Report 2021. https://www.unesco.org/reports/wwdr/2021/en/download-report
BY CHISHAMBA MUNYARADZI N02124632L