Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 88, Issue 6, pp 1253–1260 | Cite as

Membrane bioreactors and their uses in wastewater treatments



With the current need for more efficient and reliable processes for municipal and industrial wastewaters treatment, membrane bioreactor (MBR) technology has received considerable attention. After just a couple of decades of existence, MBR can now be considered as an established wastewater treatment system, competing directly with conventional processes like activated sludge treatment plant. However, MBR processes still suffer from major drawbacks, including high operational costs due to the use of anti-fouling strategies applied to the system to maintain sustainable filtration conditions. Moreover, this specific use of membranes has not reached full maturity yet, as MBR suppliers and users still lack experience regarding the long-term performances of the system. Still, major improvements of the MBR design and operation have been witnessed over the recent years, making MBR an option of choice for wastewater treatment and reuse. This mini-review reports recent developments and current research trends in the field.


Membrane bioreactor Wastewater Recycling Fouling Aerobic Anaerobic 


  1. Bracklow U, Drews A, Gnirss R, Klamm S, Lesjean B, Stuber J, Barjenbruch M, Kraume M (2010) Influence of sludge loadings and types of substrates on nutrients removal in MBRs. Desalination 250(2):734–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chang W-K, Hu AY-J, Horng R-Y, Tzou W-Y (2007) Membrane bioreactor with nonwoven fabrics as solid-liquid separation media for wastewater treatment. Desalination 202(1–3):122–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cui ZF, Chang S, Fane AG (2003) The use of gas bubbling to enhance membrane processes. J Membr Sci 221(1–2):1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Drews A (2010) Membrane fouling in membrane bioreactors-characterisation, contradictions, cause and cures. J Membr Sci. doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2010.06.046 Google Scholar
  5. Drews A, Kraume M (2005) Process improvement by application of membrane bioreactors. Chem Eng Res Des 83(3):276–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Drews A, Vocks M, Bracklow U, Iversen V, Kraume M (2008) Does fouling in MBRs depend on SMP? Desalination 231(1–3):141–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fenu A, Roels J, Wambecq T, De Gussem K, Thoeye C, De Gueldre G, Van De Steene B (2010) Energy audit of a full scale MBR system. Desalination. doi:10.1016/j.desal.2010.05.057 Google Scholar
  8. Gunder B, Krauth K (1998) Replacement of secondary clarification by membrane separation—results with plate and hollow fibre modules. Water Sci Technol 38(4–5):383–393Google Scholar
  9. Hirani ZM, Decarolis JF, Adham SS, Jacangelo JG (2010) Peak flux performance and microbial removal by selected membrane bioreactor systems. Water Res 44(8):2431–2440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Huang Z, Ong SL, Ng HY (2010) Submerged anaerobic membrane bioreactor for low-strength wastewater treatment: effect of HRT and SRT on treatment performance and membrane fouling. Water Res. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2010.08.035 Google Scholar
  11. Judd S (2002) Submerged membrane bioreactors: flat plate or hollow fibre? Filtr Sep 39(5):30–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Judd S (2006) The MBR book: principles and applications of membrane bioreactors in water and wastewater treatment. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Kraume M, Drews A (2010) Membrane bioreactors in waste water treatment—status and trends. Chem Eng Technol 33(8):1251–1259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Le-Clech P, Alvarez-Vazquez H, Jefferson B, Judd S (2003a) Fluid hydrodynamics in submerged and sidestream membrane bioreactors. Water Sci Technol 48(3):113–119Google Scholar
  15. Le-Clech P, Jefferson B, Chang IS, Judd SJ (2003b) Critical flux determination by the flux-step method in a submerged membrane bioreactor. J Membr Sci 227(1–2):81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Le-Clech P, Fane A, Leslie G, Childress A (2005) MBR focus: the operators' perspective. Filtr Sep 42(5):20–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Le-Clech P, Chen V, Fane TAG (2006) Fouling in membrane bioreactors used in wastewater treatment. J Membr Sci 284(1–2):17–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Le-Minh N, Khan SJ, Drewes JE, Stuetz RM (2010) Fate of antibiotics during municipal water recycling treatment processes. Water Res doi:10.1016/j.watres.2010.06.020 Google Scholar
  19. Lesjean B, Huisjes EH (2008) Survey of the European MBR market: trends and perspectives. Desalination 231(1–3):71–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lin HJ, Xie K, Mahendran B, Bagley DM, Leung KT, Liss SN, Liao BQ (2009) Sludge properties and their effects on membrane fouling in submerged anaerobic membrane bioreactors (SAnMBRs). Water Res 43(15):3827–3837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lyko S, Wintgens T, Al-Halbouni D, Baumgarten S, Tacke D, Drensla K, Janot A, Dott W, Pinnekamp J, Melin T (2008) Long-term monitoring of a full-scale municipal membrane bioreactor—characterisation of foulants and operational performance. J Membr Sci 317(1–2):78–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marselina Y, Le-Clech P, Stuetz RM, Chen V (2008) Towards fouling monitoring and visualisation in membrane bioreactors. In: Guell C, Ferrando M, Lopez F (eds) Monitoring and visualizing membrane-based processes. Wiley, WeinheimGoogle Scholar
  23. Meng F, Chae S-R, Drews A, Kraume M, Shin H-S, Yang F (2009) Recent advances in membrane bioreactors (MBRs): membrane fouling and membrane material. Water Res 43(6):1489–1512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ng CA, Sun D, Zhang J, Chua HC, Bing W, Tay S, Fane A (2005) Strategies to improve the sustainable operation of membrane bioreactors. Proceedings of the International Desalination Association Conference, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  25. Ning Koh C, Wintgens T, Melin T, Pronk F (2008) Microfiltration with silicon nitride microsieves and high frequency backpulsing. Desalination 224(1–3):88–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Prieske H, Drews A, Kraume M (2008) Prediction of the circulation velocity in a membrane bioreactor. Desalination 231(1–3):219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Puspitasari V, Granville A, Le-Clech P, Chen V (2010) Cleaning and ageing effect of sodium hypochlorite on polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) membrane. Sep Purif Technol 72(3):301–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tadkaew N, Sivakumar M, Khan SJ, Mcdonald JA, Nghiem LD (2010) Effect of mixed liquor pH on the removal of trace organic contaminants in a membrane bioreactor. Bioresour Technol 101(5):1494–1500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yang W, Cicek N, Ilg J (2006) State-of-the-art of membrane bioreactors: worldwide research and commercial applications in North America. J Membr Sci 270(1–2):201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhang B, Yamamoto K, Ohgaki S, Kamiko N (1997) Floc size distribution and bacterial activities in membrane separation activated sludge processes for small-scale wastewater treatment/reclamation. Water Sci Technol 35(6):37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhang J, Chua HC, Zhou J, Fane AG (2006) Factors affecting the membrane performance in submerged membrane bioreactors. J Membr Sci 284(1–2):54–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UNESCO Centre for Membrane Science and Technology, School of Chemical EngineeringThe University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations