posted on 2016-08-11, 08:50authored byJohn G. Murnane, R.B. Brennan, Mark G. Healy, O. Fenton
Land application of dairy soiled water (DSW) is expensive relative to its nutrient replacement value. The
use of aerobic filters is an effective alternative method of treatment and potentially allows the final
effluent to be reused on the farm. Knowledge gaps exist concerning the optimal design and operation of
filters for the treatment of DSW. To address this, 18 laboratory-scale filters, with depths of either 0.6 m or
1 m, were intermittently loaded with DSW over periods of up to 220 days to evaluate the impacts of
depth (0.6 m versus 1 m), organic loading rates (OLRs) (50 versus 155 g COD m 2 d 1), and media type
(woodchip versus sand) on organic, nutrient and suspended solids (SS) removals. The study found that
media depth was important in contaminant removal in woodchip filters. Reductions of 78% chemical
oxygen demand (COD), 95% SS, 85% total nitrogen (TN), 82% ammonium-nitrogen (NH4eN), 50% total
phosphorus (TP), and 54% dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) were measured in 1 m deep woodchip
filters, which was greater than the reductions in 0.6 m deep woodchip filters. Woodchip filters also
performed optimally when loaded at a high OLR (155 g COD m 2 d 1), although the removal mechanism
was primarily physical (i.e. straining) as opposed to biological. When operated at the same OLR and when
of the same depth, the sand filters had better COD removals (96%) than woodchip (74%), but there was no
significant difference between them in the removal of SS and NH4eN. However, the likelihood of clogging
makes sand filters less desirable than woodchip filters. Using the optimal designs of both configurations,
the filter area required per cow for a woodchip filter is more than four times less than for a sand filter.
Therefore, this study found that woodchip filters are more economically and environmentally effective in
the treatment of DSW than sand filters, and optimal performance may be achieved using woodchip filters
with a depth of at least 1 m, operated at an OLR of 155 g COD m 2 d 1.
History
Publication
Water Research;103, pp. 408-415
Publisher
Elsevier
Note
peer-reviewed
Rights
This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Water Research. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Water Research, 103, pp. 408-415, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.07.067