Water, Air, & Soil Pollution

, 229:341 | Cite as

Chemical Removal of Phosphorus from Swine Effluent: the Impact of Previous Effluent Treatment Technologies on Process Efficiency

  • Lidimara Suzin
  • Fabiane Goldschmidt Antes
  • Gizelle Cristina Bedendo
  • Marcelo Bortoli
  • Airton Kunz


Chemical phosphorus removal with hydrated lime was evaluated on effluents from different biological treatment processes applied to swine manure. The objective of this study was to establish the most suitable process for this kind of wastewater treatment. Effluents a UASB reactor, a nitrification reactor (NR), a modified Lutzak–Ettinger (MLE) reactor and a deammonification (DMX) reactor were evaluated. A comprehensive study was developed at laboratory scale to evaluate the effect of possible interferences, including alkalinity, total organic carbon, and ammonia, on phosphorus precipitation. The highest soluble phosphorus (Psol) removal efficiency and the lowest Ca:P molar ratio were obtained for the NR effluent (92% and 2.0, respectively). The good performance of the NR effluent could be attributed to the low level of ammoniacal nitrogen and alkalinity and to the presence of a relatively high concentration of calcium. Highly promising results were also obtained in field experiments, where a phosphorus removal unit was installed as the last step in a swine manure treatment system, and precipitation was applied to effluent from the NR. In this case, efficiencies of Psol removal higher than 90% were obtained. The produced sludge was rich in phosphorus and could be used as, for example, fertilizer. The results obtained in this work showed the importance of applying an efficient treatment system to swine manure for reduction of ammoniacal nitrogen, alkalinity, and carbon before chemical removal of phosphorus by precipitation with hydrated lime.


Phosphorus removal Chemical process Hydrated lime Interferences 



Special thanks to Mr. Carmo Holdefer for his help on the work in phosphorus removal unit.

Funding Information

This study is financially supported by the CAPES, CNPq, and Eletrosul.


  1. Adera, S., Drizo, A., Twohig, E., Jagannathan, K., & Benoit, G. (2018). Improving performance of treatment wetlands: Evaluation of supplemental aeration, varying flow direction, and phosphorus removing filters. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 229(100), 1–15. Scholar
  2. Amaral, A. C., Kunz, A., Steinmetz, R. L. R., Scussiato, L. A., Tápparo, D. C., & Gaspareto, T. C. (2016). Influence of solid-liquid separation strategy on biogas yield from a stratified swine production system. Journal of Environmental Management, 168, 229–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Public Health Association. (2012). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. (E. W. Rice & L. Bridgewater, Eds.) (22nd ed.). American Public Health Association.Google Scholar
  4. Bauer, P. J., Szogi, A. A., & Vanotti, M. B. (2007). Agronomic effectiveness of calcium phosphate recovered from liquid swine manure. Agronomy Journal, 99, 1352–1356. Scholar
  5. Bolzonella, D., Fatone, F., Gottardo, M., & Frison, N. (2017). Nutrients recovery from anaerobic digestate of agro-waste: Techno-economic assessment of full scale applications. Journal of Environmental Management, 216, 111–119. Scholar
  6. Cao, X., & Harris, W. (2008). Carbonate and magnesium interactive effect on calcium phosphate precipitation. Environmental Science and Technology, 42(2), 436–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chini, A., Kunz, A., Viancelli, A., Scussiato, L. A., Dias, J. R., & Jacinto, I. C. (2016). Recirculation and aeration effects on deammonification activity. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 227(2).
  8. De Prá, M. C., Kunz, A., Bortoli, M., Perondi, T., & Chini, A. (2012). Simultaneous removal of TOC and TSS in swine wastewater using the partial nitritation process. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 87(12), 1641–1647. Scholar
  9. Estado de Santa Catarina. (2009). LEI No 14.675 Código Estadual do Meio Ambiente.Google Scholar
  10. Fernandes, G. W., Kunz, A., Steinmetz, R. L. R., Szogi, A., Vanotti, M., Flores, É. M. d. M., & Dressler, V. L. (2012). Chemical phosphorus removal: A clean strategy for piggery wastewater management in Brazil. Environmental Technology, 3314(14), 1677–1683. Scholar
  11. Karunanithi, R., Szogi, A. A., Bolan, N., Naidu, R., Loganathan, P., Hunt, P. G., et al. (2015). Phosphorus recovery and reuse from waste streams. Advances in Agronomy, 131, 173–250. Scholar
  12. Kunz, A., Miele, M., & Steinmetz, R. L. R. (2009). Advanced swine manure treatment and utilization in Brazil. Bioresource Technology, 100(22), 5485–5489. Scholar
  13. Laridi, R., Auclair, J.-C., Benmoussa, H., & Benmoussa, A. H. (2017). Laboratory and pilot-scale phosphate and ammonium removal by controlled struvite precipitation following coagulation and flocculation of swine wastewater. Environmental Technology, 26, 525–536. Scholar
  14. Larsdotter, K., La, J., Jansen, C., & Dalhammar, G. (2017). Biologically mediated phosphorus precipitation in wastewater treatment with microalgae biologically mediated phosphorus precipitation in wastewater treatment with microalgae. Environmental Technology, 28, 953–960. Scholar
  15. Li, R. h., & Li, X. y. (2017). Recovery of phosphorus and volatile fatty acids from wastewater and food waste with an iron-flocculation sequencing batch reactor and acidogenic co-fermentation. Bioresource Technology, 245(September), 615–624. Scholar
  16. Liu, G., & Wang, J. (2017). Enhanced removal of total nitrogen and total phosphorus by applying intermittent aeration to the modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE) process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 166, 163–171. Scholar
  17. Loehr, R. C., T. B. S. Prakasam, E. G. Srinath, and Y. D. Y (1973). Nutriet removal from animal wastes.pdf.Google Scholar
  18. Melia, P. M., Cundy, A. B., Sohi, S. P., Hooda, P. S., & Busquets, R. (2017). Trends in the recovery of phosphorus in bioavailable forms from wastewater. Chemosphere, 186, 381–395. Scholar
  19. Ngatia, L. W., Hsieh, Y. P., Nemours, D., Fu, R., & Taylor, R. W. (2017). Potential phosphorus eutrophication mitigation strategy: Biochar carbon composition, thermal stability and pH influence phosphorus sorption. Chemosphere, 180, 201–211. Scholar
  20. Palhares, J. C. P. (2011). Pegada hídrica dos suínos abatidos nos estados da região centro-sul do Brasil. Acta Scientiarum - Animal. Sciences, 33(3), 309–314. Scholar
  21. Peng, L., Dai, H., Wu, Y., Peng, Y., & Lu, X. (2018). A comprehensive review of phosphorus recovery from wastewater by crystallization processes. Chemosphere, 197, 768–781. Scholar
  22. Penn, C., Chagas, I., Klimeski, A., & Lyngsie, G. (2017). A review of phosphorus removal structures: How to assess and compare their performance. Water (Switzerland), 583(9), 1–22. Scholar
  23. Sarmento, A. P., Borges, A. C., & Matos, A. T. (2012). Evaluation of vertical-flow constructed wetlands for swine wastewater treatment. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 223, 1065–1071. Scholar
  24. Shepherd, J. G., Joseph, S., Sohi, S. P., & Heal, K. V. (2017). Biochar and enhanced phosphate capture: Mapping mechanisms to functional properties. Chemosphere, 179, 57–74. Scholar
  25. Sperlich, A., Warschke, D., Wegmann, C., Ernst, M., & Jekel, M. (2010). Treatment of membrane concentrates: Phosphate removal and reduction of scaling potential. Water Science and Technology, 61(2), 301–306. Scholar
  26. Szogi, A. A., & Vanotti, M. B. (2009). Removal of phosphorus from livestock effluents. Journal of Environmental Quality, 38(2), 576–586. Scholar
  27. Toor, G. S., Hunger, S., Peak, J. D., Sims, J. T., & Sparks, D. L. (2006). Advances in the characterization of phosphorus in organic wastes: Environmental and agronomic applications. Advances in Agronomy, 89(5), 1–72. Scholar
  28. Vanotti, M. B., Szogi, A. A., & Hunt, P. G. (2003). E s p s w. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 46(6), 1665–1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Viancelli, A., Kunz, A., Fongaro, G., Kich, J. D., Barardi, C. R. M., & Suzin, L. (2015). Pathogen inactivation and the chemical removal of phosphorus from swine wastewater. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 226, 1–9. Scholar
  30. Wang, J., Tong, X., & Wang, S. (2018). Zirconium-modified activated sludge as a low-cost adsorbent for phosphate removal in aqueous solution. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 229(47), 1–10. Scholar
  31. Weißbach, M., Criddle, C. S., Drewes, J. E., & Koch, K. (2017). A proposed nomenclature for biological processes that remove nitrogen. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology, 3(1), 10–17. Scholar
  32. Withers, P. J. A., Rodrigues, M., Soltangheisi, A., De Carvalho, T. S., Guilherme, L. R. G., Benites, V. D. M., et al. (2018). Transitions to sustainable management of phosphorus in Brazilian agriculture. Scientific Reports, 8(2537), 1–13. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lidimara Suzin
    • 1
  • Fabiane Goldschmidt Antes
    • 2
  • Gizelle Cristina Bedendo
    • 2
  • Marcelo Bortoli
    • 3
  • Airton Kunz
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.PGEAGRI/CCET-UNIOESTEUniversidade Estadual do Oeste do ParanáCascavelBrazil
  2. 2.Embrapa Suínos e AvesConcórdiaBrazil
  3. 3.Universidade Tecnológica Federal do ParanáFrancisco BeltrãoBrazil

Personalised recommendations