Project Dissertation submitted to the Civil Engineering program of Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS in partial fulfillment of the requirement for. The title of this project is Biological removal of wastewater from fertilizers using biological treatment. The main objective of this project is to determine the effectiveness of this treatment using activated sludge to remove BOD, COD and TSS contained in the fertilizer wastewater from PETRONAS Fertilizer Kedah (PFK).
Typical values for COD are 500-1000 mg/L at the plant inlet and below 75 mg/L at the plant outlet. As elsewhere, BOD in PFK is a measure of the oxygen used by microorganisms to break down organic waste. For example, the amount of nutrient components in fertilizer wastewater, which are ammonia, nitrate and phosphorus, which are still high in our wastewater treatment plant.
So, in conclusion, in PFK, COD are the parameters used to show the efficiency of the plant. Knowing these values in the input and effluent of the plants makes it easy to judge the efficiency of the plant.
To investigate the removal of organic from fertilizer wastewater using Semi- Anaerobic with Aerobic System and Aerobic System
In Malaysia, there are some places only to process fertilizer using aerobic and aerobic-anaerobic treatment which is ASEAN Bintulu Fertilizer (ABF). So it is limited for me to refer to any source either local or abroad. The purpose of this study is that the results of the fertilizer waste water, and whether it meets the requirement or not.
To determine the removal efficiency of Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solid (TSS)
This runoff can cause eutrophication where excessive plant growth and decay and even further impacts include oxygen depletion and severe reductions in water quality. The purpose of the study is to measure the effect of aerobic treatment with anaerobic and aerobic treatment using sewage waste water from PFK. Since there is a lack of resources about this treatment for fertilizer, so this is a new data that will be developed and very useful.
In this project, Biological Removal of Fertilizer Wastewater through Biological Treatment, before the raw fertilizer flows in; must first acclimatize the sludge. Afterwards, the raw fertilizer (influent) is flowed into the aerobic reactor which contained 9 L of sludge. The effluent was collected in the sink and the test of that effluent was done.
LITERATURE VIEW
Operating costs are characteristically much greater than for anaerobic digestion due to the energy costs required to supply oxygen to the process. Because of the need for oxygen transfer, naturally aerobic lagoons are designed on the basis of surface area rather than volume, are biologically lightly loaded, ie. the added organic matter per volume unit lagoon per time unit is very low. Extended Aeration is a modification of the activated sludge process, which ensures aerobic sludge digestion in the aeration system.
Of secondary importance is the ability of the aerator to mix or distribute the 02 throughout the lagoon. Sludge particles produced by the growth of microorganisms in aerated tanks as part of the activated sludge process to treat wastewater. If the first group of bacteria, the organic acid formers, grow and multiply faster than the methane formers, the pH of the lagoon may drop.
It occurs in three basic stages as a result of the activity of a variety of microorganisms. In an aerobic system, most of the energy in the starting material is released as heat by their oxidation to carbon dioxide and water.
METHODLOGY
Read all chemistry kit instructions and become familiar with the test procedure before go into the field. It is recommended that volunteers practice chemical
The species of bacteria found in aerobic set 1 and set 2 are filamentous, Aspidisca (FIGURE 4.11). The nucleus is located in the center of the cell and is suspended by threads of cytoplasm from the periphery of the cell. The values of TCOD and SCOD in aerobic training 1 (FIGURE 4.1 and 4.2) are much higher compared to aerobic training 2 because the MLSS of aerobic training 1 is doubled than the MLSS of aerobic training 2 (FIGURE 4.5).
So the next step is needed to ensure that the reading for aerobic training 1 and 2 is an average of 2500. After aerobic training 1 and 2 the COD value becomes higher compared to the influent COD because the effluent consists of higher TSS because the biomass was waste from the reactor of aerobic set 1 and set 2. For the effluent of aerobic set 1 and set 2, the results are higher and higher, because the biomass is not washed, it remained in the reactor and did not flow into the sedimentation part.
As covered in the aerobic phase, the TCOD of the effluent in train 2 was very high due to the high solids content in the effluent from train 2. While the sludge retention time (SRT) is the time during which the mass of solid biomass in the system remains before it is wasted. When comparing the influent to aerobic train 2, Ho should be acceptable as t stat < 2.14, and there is no significant difference between TCOD for influent and aerobic T2 effluent.
The value of TCOD and SCOD for aerobic train 1 is not very different; this may be due to the sludge being spread with the waste water. To claim that the sludge was dispersed in the wastewater, the sample of wastewater was taken before and after filtration, then the sample is observed using a microscope. The same applies when comparing Influent with Anaerobic Train 1 and comparing Anaerobic Train 1 Effluent with Aerobic Train 1 Effluent.
In an anaerobic reactor, the BOD is higher possibly due to the algae growing in the reactor compared to the aerobic one in set 1. If there is a large amount of organic waste in the water, there will also be bacteria working to break down the organic waste. Comparing the effluent of aerobic set 1 with the effluent of aerobic set 2, there is no significant difference between them as t Stat < 2.3 and Ho is acceptable.
The same is true when comparing Influent with Aerobic Train 2 Effluent, but the difference between t Stat and t Critical two tails is not that much different. The comparison between Influent with Anaerobic Train 1 and comparison of Anaerobic Train 1 Effluent with Aerobic Train 1 Effluent also Ho are acceptable since t Stat.
APPENDICES
PARAMETER LIMITS OF EFFLUENT OF STANDARDS A AND B
Since -2.14 < t stat < 2.14, therefore accepting Ho, there is no significant difference between TCOD for Influent and Aerobic Tl effluent.
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCE FOR TSS
