Table 11.
Combination of membrane processes with disinfection processes for wastewater reuse applications.
| Process | Feed for Disinfection | Performance of Disinfection | Applications | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MBR + Chlorination | Secondary effluent of municipal WWTP | Chlorination helps to inactive bacteria and residual viruses from MBR. Compared to the MBR permeate, effluent after chlorination stands out at: complete removal on thermo-tolerant coliforms, E. coli, Enterococci, F-RNA specific bacteriophages and bacteriophages infecting Bacteroides fragilis; Increasing removal efficiency on total coliforms, Fecal coliforms and Somatic coliphages for which LRV are 1, 0.6 and 1.5, respectively, compared to MBR permeate. |
urban (e.g., street cleaning, vehicle washing) and agricultural reuse. | [125] |
| MBR + UV | Raw Sewage | UV disinfection is proposed to provide an extra barrier for removal of pathogens, ensuring high-quality effluent standards. The hybrid process showed a high removal efficiency (90%) on most trace organic chemical contaminants. |
Agriculture reuse | [240] |
| Membrane filtered process + sequential chlorination | Tertiary effluent of municipal WWTP | Sequential chlorination is beneficial to optimize free chlorine (virus and N-nitrosodimethylamine control) and chloramine disinfection (trihalomethane, haloacetic acid and coliform control). The increase of chlorine residual and the contact time also increased the formation of unregulated halogenated DBP classes. |
Direct potable reuse | [215] |
| MBR + sequential UV/chlorine | Tertiary effluent of municipal WWTP | Sequential UV/chlorine processes with a suitable dose of disinfectants decreased microorganism concentrations below detection limits, including heterotrophic plate count, total bacteria count and total coliforms. The disadvantage is the byproducts produced by disinfection (60.2 ug·L−1 Trihalomethanes). |
Reclaimed water | [241] |
| Ozonation + MF | Secondary effluent from municipal WWTP | Ozone helps to improve removal efficiency on color, COD, TN and turbidity in wastewater and lower fouling potential on MF, but with less impact on TP removal. Feed water quality:pH: 7.2 ± 0.61; COD: 35.0 ± 8.15 mg·L−1 Turbidity: 1.53 ± 1.82 NTU; SS: 7.1 ± 5.9 mg·L−1; UV254: 0.095 ± 0.021 cm−1; DOC: 6.29 ± 1.53 mg·L−1; Color: 30 ± 4 CU; T–P: 2.98 ± 1.68 mg·L−1; T–N: 11.1 ± 3.4 mg·L−1 Permeate: pH: 7.6; COD: 14–25 mg·L−1; Turbidity: 0.61–0.87 NTU; Color: 2–3 CU; TP: 2.67–2.84 mg·L−1; TN: 6.2–7.9 mg·L−1 |
Wastewater reuse proposed by South Korean Ministry of Environment | [242] |
| Ozone + biologic activated carbon (BAC) + MF +UF | Secondary effluent from municipal WWTP | The combined O3/BAC/MF/RO train was effective for eliminating N-nitrosamines and the total toxicity-weighted byproduct precursor concentrations | Potable reuse | [243] |
| Sedimentation + UV/peracetic acid (PAA) /ozone (O3) |
Secondary effluent from municipal WWTP in Italy | All three disinfectants can provide qualified effluent for irrigation, according to WHO, with enough contact time and quantity. Through comparison, UV physical disinfection showed extremely fastest kinetics with contact time <20 sec. | Irrigation proposed by WHO guidelines | [220] |