Skip to main content

A Cyanobacterial Sidestream Nutrient Removal Process and Its Life Cycle Implications

Abstract

This study proposes a novel integration of a municipal wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) with a cyanobacterial nutrient removal process for sidestream wastewater treatment. A life cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used to determine the effectiveness and environmental performances of the integrated system. The LCA is populated by models of wastewater process engineering, material balance, cyanobacterial growth, and kinetics of anaerobic digestion. The cyanobacteria growth model incorporates chlorophyll synthesis, nitrogen uptake, photosynthesis, centrate inhibition, and competition for nitrogen between cyanobacteria and nitrifiers. Modeling results are validated against experiments with Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 grown in sludge centrate. With a maximum specific growth rate of 1.09 day−1, the nitrogen removal rate of the proposed WWTF would be increased by 15% when compared to the baseline wastewater treatment facility with a biological nutrient removal process. Incorporating the cyanobacterial nutrient removal process as the sidestream wastewater treatment of a conventional activated sludge process reduces the total nitrogen concentrations discharged from the WWTF from 25.9 to 15.2 mg 1−1. Methane yield was found to be increased by 4% of the baseline value when cyanobacterial biomass was co-digested with the activated sludge. Life cycle energy use and greenhouse gas emissions were found to be reduced by 8% and 17%, respectively, relative to a baseline wastewater treatment facility. Overall, a cyanobacteria-based sidestream municipal wastewater treatment process could be an effective and environmentally sustainable biological nutrient removal process in the future addressing the water-energy-food nexus.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

References

  1. EPA, D.M., Onsite Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems. USEPA, , 1980

  2. Arita CQ, Peebles C, Bradley TH (2015) Scalability of combining microalgae-based biofuels with wastewater facilities: a review. Algal Res 9:160–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chisti Y (2007) Biodiesel from microalgae. Biotechnol Adv 25(3):294–306

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Robertson D et al (2011) A new dawn for industrial photosynthesis. Photosynth Res 107(3):269–277

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Quiroz-Arita C, Sheehan JJ, Bradley TH (2017) Life cycle net energy and greenhouse gas emissions of photosynthetic cyanobacterial biorefineries: challenges for industrial production of biofuels. Algal Res 26:445–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Quinn JC, Catton KB, Johnson S, Bradley TH (2013) Geographical assessment of microalgae biofuels potential incorporating resource availability. Bio Energy Res 6(2):591–600

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wigmosta MS, Coleman AM, Skaggs RJ, Huesemann MH, Lane LJ (2011) National microalgae biofuel production potential and resource demand. Water Resour Res 47(3)

  8. Arita CQ et al (2016) A geographical assessment of vegetation carbon stocks and greenhouse gas emissions on potential microalgae-based biofuel facilities in the United States. Bioresour Technol 221:270–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Batan L, Quinn J, Willson B, Bradley T (2010) Net energy and greenhouse gas emission evaluation of biodiesel derived from microalgae. Environ Sci Technol 44:7975–7980

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. EPA, Biological Nutrient Removal Processes and Costs (2007) United States environmental protection agency. DC, Washington, p 20460

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rittmann BE and McCarty PL (2012) Environmental biotechnology: principles and applications. Tata McGraw-Hill Education

  12. Metcalf and Eddy (2015) Wastewater engineering treatment and resource recovery. McGraw-Hill series in civil and environmental engineering, Boston: McGraw-Hill

  13. Dapena-Mora A, van Hulle SWH, Luis Campos J, Méndez R, Vanrolleghem PA, Jetten M (2004) Enrichment of Anammox biomass from municipal activated sludge: experimental and modelling results. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79(12):1421–1428

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sengupta S, Pandit A (2011) Selective removal of phosphorus from wastewater combined with its recovery as a solid-phase fertilizer. Water Res 45(11):3318–3330

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Forrest A et al (2008) Optimizing struvite production for phosphate recovery in WWTP. J Environ Eng 134(5):395–402

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang J, Burken JG, Zhang X(J), Surampalli R (2005) Engineered struvite precipitation: impacts of component-ion molar ratios and pH. J Environ Eng 131(10):1433–1440

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. You S et al (2003) Nitrification efficiency and nitrifying bacteria abundance in combined AS-RBC and A2O systems. Water Res 37(10):2281–2290

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nelson NO, Mikkelsen RL, Hesterberg DL (2003) Struvite precipitation in anaerobic swine lagoon liquid: effect of pH and Mg: P ratio and determination of rate constant. Bioresour Technol 89(3):229–236

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. EPA. States Nutrient Criteria Plans. 2014 02/17/2014 02/26/2014]; Available from: http://www2.epa.gov/nutrient-policy-data/states-nutrient-criteria-plans

  20. Craggs R et al (2011) Algal biofuels from wastewater treatment high rate algal ponds. Water Sci Technol 63(4):660–665

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Green FB, Bernstone LS, Lundquist TJ, Oswald WJ (1996) Advanced integrated wastewater pond systems for nitrogen removal. Water Sci Technol 33(7):207–217

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. García J, Green BF, Lundquist T, Mujeriego R, Hernández-Mariné M, Oswald WJ (2006) Long term diurnal variations in contaminant removal in high rate ponds treating urban wastewater. Bioresour Technol 97(14):1709–1715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Craggs RJ, Lundquist TJ, and Benemann JR (2013) Wastewater treatment and algal biofuel production, in Algae for biofuels and energy, Springer 153–163

  24. Park J, Craggs R, Shilton A (2011) Wastewater treatment high rate algal ponds for biofuel production. Bioresour Technol 102(1):35–42

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Llorens M, Saez J, Soler A (1993) Primary productivity in a deep sewage stabilization lagoon. Water Res 27(12):1779–1785

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Carberry J, Henshaw F (1989) Biokinetic parameters of a photosynthetic waste stabilization process. Water Sci Technol 21(6–7):647–658

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhou W, Li Y, Min M, Hu B, Chen P, Ruan R (2011) Local bioprospecting for high-lipid producing microalgal strains to be grown on concentrated municipal wastewater for biofuel production. Bioresour Technol 102(13):6909–6919

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Selvaratnam T, Henkanatte-Gedera SM, Muppaneni T, Nirmalakhandan N, Deng S, Lammers PJ (2016) Maximizing recovery of energy and nutrients from urban wastewaters. Energy 104:16–23

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dai G et al (2008) Differential sensitivity of five cyanobacterial strains to ammonium toxicity and its inhibitory mechanism on the photosynthesis of rice-field cyanobacterium Ge–Xian–Mi (Nostoc). Aquat Toxicol 89(2):113–121

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. DAI GZ, QIU BS, Forchhammer K (2014) Ammonium tolerance in the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. strain PCC 6803 and the role of the psbA multigene family. Plant Cell Environ 37(4):840–851

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Cai T, Ge X, Park SY, Li Y (2013) Comparison of Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 and Nannochloropsis salina for lipid production using artificial seawater and nutrients from anaerobic digestion effluent. Bioresour Technol 144:255–260

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Drath M, Kloft N, Batschauer A, Marin K, Novak J, Forchhammer K (2008) Ammonia triggers photodamage of photosystem II in the cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. strain PCC 6803. Plant Physiol 147(1):206–215

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Batan L et al (2010) Net energy and greenhouse gas emission evaluation of biodiesel derived from microalgae. Environ Sci Technol 44(20):6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Campbell PK, Beer T, Batten D (2011) Life cycle assessment of biodiesel production from microalgae in ponds. Bioresour Technol 102(1):50–56

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Collet P, Lardon L, Hélias A, Bricout S, Lombaert-Valot I, Perrier B, Lépine O, Steyer JP, Bernard O (2014) Biodiesel from microalgae – life cycle assessment and recommendations for potential improvements. Renew Energy 71(0):525–533

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Frank E et al (2013) Life cycle comparison of hydrothermal liquefaction and lipid extraction pathways to renewable diesel from algae. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 18(1):137–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Frank ED et al (2011) Life-cycle analysis of algal lipid fuels with the GREET model. Center for Transportation Research, Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN

    Google Scholar 

  38. Handler RM, Shonnard DR, Kalnes TN, Lupton FS (2014) Life cycle assessment of algal biofuels: influence of feedstock cultivation systems and conversion platforms. Algal Res 4(0):105–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ponnusamy S, Reddy HK, Muppaneni T, Downes CM, Deng S (2014) Life cycle assessment of biodiesel production from algal bio-crude oils extracted under subcritical water conditions. Bioresour Technol 170(0):454–461

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Quinn JC, Davis R (2015) The potentials and challenges of algae based biofuels: a review of the techno-economic, life cycle, and resource assessment modeling. Bioresour Technol 184:444–452

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Quinn JC, Smith TG, Downes CM, Quinn C (2014) Microalgae to biofuels lifecycle assessment-multiple pathway evaluation. Algal Res 4:116–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Vasudevan V, Stratton RW, Pearlson MN, Jersey GR, Beyene AG, Weissman JC, Rubino M, Hileman JI (2012) Environmental performance of algal biofuel technology options. Environ Sci Technol 46(4):2451–2459

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Fang LL, Valverde-Pérez B, Damgaard A, Plósz BG, Rygaard M (2016) Life cycle assessment as development and decision support tool for wastewater resource recovery technology. Water Res 88:538–549

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Luo D, Hu Z, Choi DG, Thomas VM, Realff MJ, Chance RR (2010) Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas emissions for an ethanol production process based on blue-green algae. Environ Sci Technol 44(22):8670–8677

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rebitzer G, Ekvall T, Frischknecht R, Hunkeler D, Norris G, Rydberg T, Schmidt WP, Suh S, Weidema BP, Pennington DW (2004) Life cycle assessment: part 1: framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environ Int 30(5):701–720

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, C.E., Regulation #85 (2012) Nutrients management control regulation 5 CCR 1002-85, in water quality control comission. CO, U.S

    Google Scholar 

  47. Colorado SO (2015) Colorado climate plan: state level policies and strategies to mitigate and adapt. CO, U.S

    Google Scholar 

  48. IPCC, (2006), Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, vol. 2, energy. National greenhouse gas inventories programme, IGES: Japan

  49. EnviroSim. BioWin. Retrieved from https://envirosim.com/products/biowin . 2017; Available from: https://envirosim.com/products/biowin

  50. thinkstep, GaBi, in sustainability software. 2018, Retrieved from https://www.thinkstep.com/software: Germany

  51. Lincoln H, Mueller J (2016) Analysis of nutrient removal at the drake water reclamation facility. Colorado State University. Libraries

  52. Speece RE (2008) Anaerobic biotechnology and odor/corrosion control for municipalities and industries. Archae Press

  53. Loewenthal R, Kornmüller U, Van Heerden E (1994) Modelling struvite precipitation in anaerobic treatment systems. Water Sci Technol 30(12):107–116

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Packer A, Li Y, Andersen T, Hu Q, Kuang Y, Sommerfeld M (2011) Growth and neutral lipid synthesis in green microalgae: a mathematical model. Bioresour Technol 102(1):111–117

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Formighieri C (2015) Solar-to-fuel Conversion in Algae and Cyanobacteria. Springer

  56. Kim HW, Vannela R, Zhou C, Harto C, Rittmann BE (2010) Photoautotrophic nutrient utilization and limitation during semi-continuous growth of Synechocystis sp. PCC6803. Biotechnol Bioeng 106(4):553–563

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Kim HW, Vannela R, Zhou C, Rittmann BE (2011) Nutrient acquisition and limitation for the photoautotrophic growth of Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 as a renewable biomass source. Biotechnol Bioeng 108(2):277–285

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Rittmann BE, McCarty PL (2001) Environmental biotechnology principles and applications. In: McCarty PL (ed) McGraw-Hill series in water resources and environmental engineering. McGraw-Hill, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  59. Luong J (1987) Generalization of Monod kinetics for analysis of growth data with substrate inhibition. Biotechnol Bioeng 29(2):242–248

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Quinn J, de Winter L, Bradley T (2011) Microalgae bulk growth model with application to industrial scale systems. Bioresour Technol 102(8):5083–5092

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Lawrence AW, McCarty PL (1969) Kinetics of methane fermentation in anaerobic treatment. J Water Pollut Control Fed 41:R1–R17

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Vavilin V et al (2008) Hydrolysis kinetics in anaerobic degradation of particulate organic material: an overview. Waste Manag 28(6):939–951

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  63. O'Rourke JT (1968) Kinetics of anaerobic treatment at reduced temperatures. Department of Civil Engineering 160:448

    Google Scholar 

  64. Markou G, Angelidaki I, Georgakakis D (2013) Carbohydrate-enriched cyanobacterial biomass as feedstock for bio-methane production through anaerobic digestion. Fuel 111:872–879

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Garcia-Heras J (2003) Reactor sizing, process kinetics and modelling of anaerobic digestion of complex wastes. Biomethanization of the organic fraction of municipal solid wastes. p. 31–43

  66. Masse L, Massé DI, Kennedy KJ, Chou SP (2002) Neutral fat hydrolysis and long-chain fatty acid oxidation during anaerobic digestion of slaughterhouse wastewater. Biotechnol Bioeng 79(1):43–52

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Shimizu T, Kudo K, Nasu Y (1993) Anaerobic waste-activated sludge digestion–a bioconversion mechanism and kinetic model. Biotechnol Bioeng 41(11):1082–1091

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Quinn JC, Hanif A, Sharvelle S, Bradley TH (2014) Microalgae to biofuels: life cycle impacts of methane production of anaerobically digested lipid extracted algae. Bioresour Technol 171:37–43

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Varel V, Chen T, Hashimoto A (1988) Thermophilic and mesophilic methane production from anaerobic degradation of the cyanobacterium Spirulina maxima. Resour Conserv Recycl 1(1):19–26

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Posten C, Walter C (2012) Microalgal biotechnology potential and production. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  71. Lebrero R, Toledo-Cervantes A, Muñoz R, del Nery V, Foresti E (2016) Biogas upgrading from vinasse digesters: a comparison between an anoxic biotrickling filter and an algal-bacterial photobioreactor. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 91(9):2488–2495

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge National Science Foundation grant number 1332404. This publication was also partially made possible by USEPA grant RD835570. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the grantee and do not necessarily represent the official views of the USEPA. Further, USEPA does not endorse the purchase of any commercial products or services mentioned in the publication. The authors also acknowledge Lincoln H. Mueller, Jr., Utilities Project Manager and the City of Fort Collins, CO for their support providing access to Drake Water Reclamation Facility (DWRF), space for the installation of the experimental work of this research, and operational plant and laboratory data concerning the wastewater processes.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos Quiroz-Arita.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 607 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Quiroz-Arita, C., Sheehan, J.J., Baral, N.R. et al. A Cyanobacterial Sidestream Nutrient Removal Process and Its Life Cycle Implications. Bioenerg. Res. 12, 217–228 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-019-9963-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-019-9963-2

Keywords

  • Sidestream wastewater treatment
  • Biological nutrient removal
  • Centrate
  • Cyanobacteria
  • Life cycle assessment