14 Bioreactors

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    1/14

    14 Bioreactors

    REN H. KLEIJNTJENSGravenhage,The Netherlands

    KAREL CH.A.M.LUYBENDelft,The Netherlands

    1 Introduction 3301.1 Contaminated Solid Waste Streams (Soils, Sediments, and Sludges) 3301.2 Characteristics of the Contaminated Solids 331

    2 Bioreactors 3322.1 Reactor Configurations 3322.2 Diffusion of the Contaminants out of the Solid Particles 333

    3 Slurry Bioreactors 3343.1 Slurry Processing 3343.2 Batch Operation 3353.3 Full Scale Batch Processes 337

    3.3.1 The DMTBIODYN Process 3373.3.2 The FORTEC Process 3383.3.3 The OHM Process 3383.3.4 The Huber Process 338

    3.4 Sequential Batch Operation (Semi-Continuous) 338

    3.5 Continuous Operation 3384 Solid State Bioreactors 343

    4.1 Process Configuration 3434.2 Batch Operation: Composting 3434.3 (Semi-)Continuous Operation: the Rotating Drum Reactor 343

    5 Comparison of Bioreactors 3446 Conclusion and Outlook 344

    6.1 Conclusions 3446.2 Outlook 345

    7 References 346

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    2/14

    330 14 Bioreactors

    List of AbbreviationsBTEX benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xyleneCSTR continuous stirred tank reactorDITS reactor dual injected turbulent separation reactor

    FORTEC fast organic removal technologyISB interconnected suspension bioreactorNPP nitrogen, potassium, phosphatePAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbonsPCB polychlorinated biphenylsSDP slurry decontamination process

    1 Introduction

    1.1 Contaminated Solid WasteStreams (Soils, Sediments, andSludges)

    Waste recycling plays a key role in the de-

    velopment of a sustainable economy (SUZUKI,1992). The classical approach, remediationwithout the production of recycled materials,does not contribute to durable material flows.Moreover, the production of reusable materi-als is a necessity to make waste treatment anattractive economic solution. Recycling, how-ever, can not be done regardless of the effortand costs needed. The overall environmentalbenefits should be positive and fit within thelocal economic and legal framework.

    A practical way to qualify these benefits isfound in three issues:

    (1) the quality of the recycle products,(2) the amount of energy required per ton,(3) the costs per ton.

    Solid waste streams (contaminated soils, sedi-ments, and sludges) can be recycled.The solidshave to be transformed into usable productswhile the contaminants are removed or de-stroyed. In case the contaminants are organic(such as mineral oil, PAH, solvents, BTEX,

    PCB) the use of bioreactors can result in envi-ronmental benefits (RISER-ROBERTS, 1998). Inbioreactors populations of soil organisms de-grade the contaminants to yield carbon diox-ide, water, and harmless byproducts (SCHLE-GEL, 1986).

    A prerequisite for the implementation ofnew technologies such as bioprocessing is thedefinition of recycling and treatment targets.In The Netherlands legal targets for recycledmaterials were set in the Dutch building mate-rial decree (Building Material Act, 1995). De-pending on the content and the leaching of

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    3/14

    1 Introduction 331

    components, two different ways for using recy-cled materials in plants are defined:

    (1) category 1 products, needing no furtherisolation,

    (2) category 2 products, needing furtherisolation and monitoring.

    In the Dutch practice treatment processes areaimed at the production of category 1 recycleproducts. Although each country still has itsown standards, and standardization is far away(NORTHCLIFF et al., 1998), it is clear that prac-tical recycle standards accelerate the develop-ment needed to create sustainable technologies.

    1.2 Characteristics of theContaminated Solids

    In soils the solid matrix is frequently domi-nated by sand, while the water content may be~25%; levels of debris can be found depend-ing on the history of the site, but rarely exceed10%. River, harbor and canal sediments con-tain a majority of water (frequently `60 to70%) while the fine fraction (~63 m) domi-nates the solids. The latter holds if dredging

    takes place in the upper sediment layers. In-dustrial and municipal sludges are mostly veryhumid (`95% water) and have a large con-tent of organics (`60%) (INES, 1997). Indus-trial sludges mostly originate directly fromcorrosion and wear from installations or watertreatment units on the site.

    Disregarding the heterogeneous nature ofthe waste, the contaminant behavior is largelydetermined by the fines (WERTHER and WILI-CHOWSKI, 1990),This is due to the fact that sub-micron particles such as humicclay structuresand clay agglomerates have an extremely highadsorption capacity (BRADY, 1984). The solidwaste, therefore, basically contains a contam-inated fine fraction, a less contaminated sandgravel fraction, cleaner debris, and a contami-

    nated water phase.In Fig. 1 the drawn line shows a typical par-

    ticle size distribution for soils having a domi-nant fraction of fines (the step between 10 and20 m) and a dominant sand fraction (the stepbetween 150 and 250 m).

    The bars show the measured mineral oilconcentration as distributed over the fraction.For efficient processing of this waste only thefractions~150200 m should be treated.

    Fig. 1. Distribution of the contaminants over the solids fractions (in % of the totalamount of oil present) and particle size distribution (cumulative).

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    4/14

    In general it can be stated that in order todevelop an appropriate recycling technologythe particle features of the solids have tomatch the type of process operation. For bio-processing this implies the integration of theseparation technology and bioreactors in se-quence of operation in which the clean frac-tions are removed from the feed before enter-ing the reactor (KLEIJNTJENS et al., 1999).

    2 Bioreactors

    2.1 Reactor Configurations

    The aerated bioreactor for solids processingis a 3-phase (solidliquidgas) multiphase sys-tem. The solids phase contains the adsorbedcontaminants, the liquid phase (process water)provides the medium for microbial growth,aeration complicates the system. Nutrients andadapted bio-mass may be added to enhancebreakdown. Furthermore, process conditions(temperature, pH, O2 level, etc.) can be moni-tored and to some extent controlled.

    Regarding the bioreactor configuration

    there are two major topics:(1) physical state of the multiphase system:

    () bioreactors with a restricted solidshold-up: slurry reactors (typicalsolids hold up~40 wt%),

    () bioreactor with restricted humid-ity: solid state fermentation (solidscontent`50 wt%);

    (2) operation mode:() batch operation; no fresh material

    is introduced to the bioreactor dur-ing processing, the composition ofthe content changes continuously;

    () continuous operation (plug flow);fresh material is introduced andtreated material removed duringprocessing, the composition in thereactor remains unchanged withtime (LEVENSPIEL, 1972); in prac-tice semi-continuous operation isoften used (interval-wise feedingand removal giving small fluctua-tions in the reactor).

    Three basic reactor configurations exist:

    (1) slurry bioreactors(2) solid state fixed bed bioreactors(3) rotating drum dry solid bioreactors.

    Characteristic for all types of slurry bioreac-tors (Fig. 2) is the need of energy input to sus-tain a 3-phase system in which the solid parti-cles are suspended;the gravity forces acting onthe solids have to be compensated by the dragforces executed by the liquid motion (HINZE,

    1959). In a properly designed slurry system theenergy input is used to establish three phe-nomena:

    (1) suspension,(2) aeration,(3) mixing.

    332 14 Bioreactors

    Fig. 2. Common configura-

    tions of slurry bioreactors.

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    5/14

    2 Bioreactors 333

    A slurry bioreactor can only work properly ifthese three measures are balanced. For eachreactor configuration, the appropriate processconditions depend on parameters such as thereactor scale, particle size distribution, slurrydensity, slurry viscosity, oxygen demand of thebiomass, and the solids hold-up (KLEIJNTJENS,1991).

    For solid state fermentations there is no

    need to maintain a solidsliquid suspension; acompact moist solid phase determines thesystem. Both the fixed bed reactor as well asthe rotating drum bioreactor are suited for sol-id state fermentation (Fig. 3). In the fixed bedreactor the contaminated solids rest on adrained bottom as a stationary phase. Forcedaeration and the supply of water are mostlyapplied as a continuous phase (RISER-ROBERTS, 1998). Fixed bed reactors are mostlybatch operated. Although landfarming mightbe considered as a solid state batch treatmentunder fixed bed conditions (HARMSEN, 1991)this technique offers limited control options(in comparison to other solid state treatment)and, therefore, is not considered to be a bio-reactor within the present context.

    Continuous solid state processing is possiblein the rotating system. Here the solid phase (asa compact moist material) is screwed andpushed through the reactor. In line with slur-ry processing energy is required to maintainthe transport of the solids through the system.

    2.2 Diffusion of the Contaminantsout of the Solid Particles

    Regardless of the bioreactor type the pres-ence of sufficient water is crucial. Not only is awater activity around 100% a necessity for mi-crobial activity (VAN BALEN, 1991), biodegra-dation fully depends on the availability of thecomponents in the water phase. At microlevel

    diffusion of the adsorbed contaminants intothe bulk phase is the rate determining step(Fig. 4). Mathematical models focus on captur-ing of the different physical processes into sin-gle diffusion parameters (WU and GE-SCHWEND, 1988). The overall diffusion processdepends also on the flow conditions aroundthe particles (CRANK, 1975).

    An illustration of the importance of the flowaround the particles was given by KONING etal. (1998). Comparing the microbial break-

    down in a petroleum contaminated soil a con-version level of 80% was reached within about10 d in the slurry reactor while under fixed bedconditions some 150 d were required to reachthe same level. It was concluded that the en-hanced breakdown is based on an increasingbioavailability of the contaminant due to sus-pending of and the mechanical strain on thesoil material in the slurry reactors. In anotherslurry experiment it was proven that manipu-lation of reactor parameters such as the energyinput resulted in a faster breakdown (REY-NAARTS et al., 1990).

    Fig. 3a, b. Bioreactors for solid state processing,(a) fixed bed reactor, (b) rotat-ing drum reactor.

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    6/14

    The reactor type, scale, energy input, andaeration rate each have an impact on the diffu-sion. The better these parameters can behandled, the faster the breakdown proceeds.

    Having established proper diffusion condi-tions, the presence of adapted biomass, ca-pable of degrading the desorbed contami-

    nants, is essential. In almost all cases the use oforganisms which are already present in thewaste is the most practical source to findadapted biomass.

    Of the three different bioreactors, the slurrysystem offers the best features to substantiallyinfluence the diffusion rate. Intense multi-phase mixing allows for the exchange of de-sorbed contaminants, nutrients, and biomassthrough the medium. In addition, particle de-agglomeration has been measured (OOSTEN-BRINK

    et al., 1995) which results in smaller par-ticles and a faster diffusion rate (smaller parti-cles lead to shorter diffusion distances).

    For solid state processes in fixed bed reac-tors there are fewer factors to influence themicroenvironment of the pollution. Only airand liquid (nutrients) may be forced into thesystem while the solids are packed. At themicrolevel the rotating solids bioreactor holdsthe middle between fixed bed and a slurrysystem, deagglomeration of the moist massand phase exchange may take place.

    3 Slurry Bioreactors3.1 Slurry Processing

    A slurry bioreactor only functions with apretreated feedstock, therefore, the bioreactoris necessarily integrated with washingsepara-

    tion operations and a dewatering operation atthe end of the process (KLEIJNTJENS, 1991;ROBRA et al., 1998).

    A typical set-up of an integrated (slurry)bioprocess is depicted in Fig. 5. First, the feed-stock is screened using a wet vibrating screento remove the debris (typical size`26 mm).Second, sand fractions are removed by one ormore separation techniques such as sieves, hy-drocyclones, Humphrey spirals, flotation cells,jigs, and upflow columns; a typical separation

    diameter (the so-called cutpoint) for the de-picted hydrocyclone is 63 m (CULLINANE etal., 1990). In the cyclone the slurry flow is splitinto a sand fraction (particle size `63 m) atthe bottom and a fine fraction at the top(~63 m).

    The top flow of the cyclone, containing thecontaminated fines, is being fed to the bioreac-tor (depicted is a stirred tank, but any of thethree types from Fig. 2 might be chosen). Thefinal operation results in a dewatered productcontaining the fines and a flow of process wa-

    ter.

    334 14 Bioreactors

    Fig. 4. Diffusion of the conta-minants.

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    7/14

    3 Slurry Bioreactors 335

    3.2 Batch Operation

    A slurry bioreactor is often designed as astandard continuously stirred tank reactor(CSTR) having a mechanical stirrer, baffles,and a sparger at the bottom (Fig. 5). In thesystem a 3-phase suspension of contaminatedsolids, water and air is maintained. Batch deg-radation experiments in aerated stirred slurrybioreactors have been carried out frequently.

    Fig. 6a shows the experimental result of abatch experiment at a 4 L scale. Using a con-ventional stirred bioreactor with baffles (stir-rer speed 600 rpm, aeration rate 1.53 LminP1, temperature kept at 30C), adaptedbiomass and nutrients were added (ammoni-um, phosphate, and potassium) while the pHwas kept at 78. The soil was an oil contamin-ated sandy soil starting at an oil concentrationof 3,500 mg kgP1. Within 30 d the concentra-tion dropped to about 500 mg kgP1, while dur-ing the following period (up to day 56) no sig-nificant degradation was measured.

    Fig. 6b shows the batch degradation curvefor a heavily polluted harbor sediment asmeasured at the pilot scale (650 L) in an air ag-itated slurry reactor (the DITS reactor). TheDITS-reactor originally is the first reactor partin the Slurry Decontamination Process (seeFig. 7). For this experiment the DITS reactorwas deconnected and used as an individualbatch reactor. For mineral oil the batch pro-cess showed a decrease from 10,000 mg kgP1

    down to levels of 6,0007,000 mg kg

    P1

    .Other batch processes have been carried out(see also Sect. 3.3). Resuming these batch re-sults a typical batch curve might be con-structed (Fig. 8): a significant breakdown in thefirst few days is followed by slow down of theprocess in the second stage. In this stage only asmall percentage of the contaminant is degrad-ed over a relatively long period.

    The exact shape of the curve and the con-version level at which breakdown stops varywith the composition and age of the solids andtype of contaminant.

    Fig. 5. Typical set-up of a (slurry) bioprocess using a batch operated aerated stirred tank reactor (typicalsolids hold-up is 20 wt%).

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    8/14

    To understand the typical batch curve threemajor phenomena have to be considered:

    (1) In batch processing the biomass, grow-ing on a complex substrate, has toadapt continuously to different compo-nents, since the easy parts are degradedfirst (TESCHNER and WEHNER, 1985).

    This pattern leads inevitably to increas-

    ing difficulties for the microbial popu-lation present.The adaption rate of thepopulation to feed on the availablecontaminants is insufficient.

    (2) The contaminant desorption kineticsare of such an order that at lower con-centrations there is a limited drivingforce for the adsorbed contaminants

    to be released from the solids (DI TORO

    336 14 Bioreactors

    Fig. 6. (a) Batch curve (4 L); soil, (b) batch curve (650 L); sediment.

    Fig. 7. Slurry decontamination process (SDP), dual injected turbulent separation reactor (DITS), inter-connected suspension bioreactor cascade (ISB-cascade).

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    9/14

    3 Slurry Bioreactors 337

    and HORZEMPA, 1982). Since microbialbreakdown only proceeds, if the con-

    taminant is dissolved in the waterphase, this type of kinetics does not al-low for the easy breakdown at lowerconcentrations.

    (3) During batch processing inhibiting sideproducts of the microbial breakdownmay increasingly be released into themedium; in addition, the physical condi-tions of the solids may change (e.g., at-trition) which may lead to unfavorablemicrobial circumstances.An example

    might be the drop in pH due to humifi-cation processes which can join thecontaminant breakdown.

    3.3 Full Scale Batch Processes

    3.3.1 The DMTBIODYN Process

    A full scale batch process has been realizedwith the DMT-BIODYN process (SINDER etal., 1999). The process consists of a fluidizedbed slurry reactor in which the fined grainedcontaminated soils are treated. For aerationthe slurry circulation loop is being treated inan external bubble column (Fig. 9).The reactorconfiguration allows a high solids loading upto 50 wt%. The DMT-BIODYN process hasbeen designed by the Deutsche Montan Tech-nologie GmbH to treat PAH polluted sites atformer coal facilities in the Federal Republic

    of Germany (NITSCHKE, 1994).

    At pilot scale (a 1.2 m3 reactor) varioustechnological parameters were investigated

    and the hydraulic feed system at the bottomoptimized. Experiments show that the PAH inthe tests rapidly degraded without a noticeablelag phase; the measured oxygen consumptionrate correlated to the PAH degradation rate.For this specific soil (starting concentrationsabout 250 mg kgP1) after 6 d the target levelswere reached. Comparison of the pilot resultswith results at laboratory scale and a respirom-eter showed that the degradation for this testsoil in each of these systems was similar. For

    another PAH contamination (starting valuesat 1,100 mg kgP1) the target levels could notbe reached (treatment time was 30 d). It wasconcluded that for this specific soil adsorp-tion of the PAH to the organic matrix results ina reduced bioavailability. For this latter con-taminated soil experiments combining bio-

    Fig. 8. Generalized batch curve.

    Fig. 9. DMTBIODYN process configuration.

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    10/14

    processing and soil washing resulted in finallevels below target values.

    In Sweden a full scale installation (55 m3 ofthe DMT-BIODYN process has been estab-lished to treat a contaminated gas plant area.The first trials at this scale have been success-fully completed (SINDER et al., 1999).

    3.3.2 The FORTEC Process

    In The Netherlands the FORTEC process(fast organic removal technology) treatingcontaminated sediments combines severalseparation technologies with bioreactor treat-ment (TEN BRUMMELEN et al., 1997). First stepin the process is the use of hydrocyclones to re-

    move the sand fractions. The efficiency of theseparation step is optimized by a multi-stagehydrocyclone configuration, separation wasachieved down to a particle size of 20 m. Af-ter the sand separation the contaminated finefraction is fed to the bioreactor section. Basedon initial experiments with aerated stirredtank bioreactors, a full scale bioreactor sectionwith a total volume of 300 m3 (several reac-tors) was constructed (RIZA-Report 97.067).

    A heavily contaminated harbor sediment

    (port of Amsterdam) was treated with theFORTEC process. After sand removal the finefraction (~20 m) was batchwise treated inthe full scale bioreactors. At this scale 85% ofthe PAH and 78% of the mineral oil were re-moved after 15 d batch processing (TEN BRUM-MELEN et al., 1997).

    3.3.3 The OMH Process

    In the USA a large scale slurry bioreactor(750 m3) was used to treat creosote contami-nated lagoon solids stabilized with fly ash (to-tal PAH was 11 g kgP1).An extensive pretreat-ment to classify the material was combinedwith areated and stirred (900 rpm) bioreactorwith a 20% solids load. Conversion for thePAH was measured at 8299% remediationfor the 3- and 4-ring PAH and 3478% for thehigher PAH (JERGER et al., 1993).

    3.3.4 The Huber Process

    At a scale of 30 m3 a batch process treatingthe fine fraction (~200 m) of a diesel con-taminated soil has been carried out in an airlift bioreactor. The oil concentration droppedfrom 12,000 to 2,000 mg kgP1 after 2 weeksresidence time (BLANK-HUBER et al., 1992).Stripping effects of the diesel contaminantwere determined at about 20% by laboratoryexperiments.

    3.4 Sequential Batch Operation(Semi-Continuous)

    To overcome some of the limitations ofbatch processing, continuous operation in aplug flow system has to be considered. As thecontaminated solids travel through thesystem, specific conditions in the successive re-actor develop. One practical way of achievinga plug flow system is a sequence of batch reac-tors (Fig. 10). In an experimental cascade ofthree stirred batch slurry reactors the contam-inated solids (oil contamination) are periodi-cally transferred to the next step (only part of

    the reactor slurry content is transferred, the socalled slug) (APITZ et al., 1994).In Fig. 11 the breakdown pattern in the

    transferred slug during its residence in each in-dividual step is depicted. It is explained thateach successive stage of the cascade maintainsa microbial consortium that is optimized toconsume organic compounds of increasingcomplexity. When compared to the batch pro-cess the biocascade was shown to be more ef-fective, both in terms of the rate and degree ofdegradation (APITZ et al., 1994).

    3.5 Continuous Operation

    In The Netherlands a continuous plug flowsystem has been achieved with the Slurry De-contamination Process (SDP) as depicted inFig. 7. This process contains four major unitoperations (KLEIJNTJENS, 1991).

    (1) The contaminated solids are mixed

    with (process) water into a slurry and

    338 14 Bioreactors

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    11/14

    3 Slurry Bioreactors 339

    sized over a vibrating screen. In thiswet sieving step, the debris is removed

    and a slurry prepared having the prop-er density (about 30 w/w%).(2) In the first reactor/separator (a tapered

    air lifted bioreactor: the DITS reactor)the sand fractions are removed bymeans of a fluidized bed. Extensive or-ganic material is removed by finescreening of light material. In addition,the agglomerates of the contaminatedfines are demolished due to the powerinput and, therefore, opened to biologi-cal breakdown (also inoculation with

    the active biomass takes place).

    (3) In a second reactor stage the contami-nated fine fraction is subsequently

    treated.The second stage consists of acascade of interconnected bioreactors(ISB cascade).

    (4) A dewatering stage completes the pro-cess, the water released is partly recir-culated as process water to mix thefresh solids into a slurry.

    Fig. 12 shows the configuration of the DITS bio-reactor (LUYBEN and KLEIJNTJENS, 1988). Inthe tapered bioreactor system energy is intro-duced at the bottom by the simultaneous injec-tion of compressed air and slurry which was re-

    Fig. 10. Cascade of three sequencing batch reactors.

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    12/14

    cycled from the reactor content itself. Depict-ed are the dual injector, the settlers (used inthe recycle flow), and the tapered vessel. Thissystem has been built at a scale of 400 L,800 L,and 4 m3. It was operated for 2.5 years to testvarious solids waste streams. The integral pro-cess was operated was semi-continuously at apilot scale (3 m3 working reactor volume).

    Fig. 13 shows the experimental results for aheavily polluted sediment (harbor) over a

    steady state period of 6 weeks. Nutrients(nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium) wereadded and the temperature was kept at 30C.The steady state PAH concentration in the so-lids is depicted as a function of time.The uppersymbols show the feed concentration in theslurry mill with an average of about 350 mgkgP1 (the input data are scattered due to theheterogeneity of the feedstock). In the DITSreactor the steady state concentration droppedto values around 100 mg kgP1 (first part of themicrobial breakdown).

    In the ISB cascade the average concentra-tion dropped to values of 3040 mg kgP1.Afterdewatering the final concentration increasedsomewhat in the filter cake. The overall PAHdegradation level was about 92% for an over-all residence time of 16 d. No significant evap-oration was measured in the off-gas. In thissediment the mineral oil degradation patternshowed a similar trend (Fig. 14), however, anoverall degradation level of only 65% was es-

    tablished. Final concentrations after dewat-ering were around 3,000 mg kgP1. In this sedi-ment mineral oil seems to be less available formicrobial breakdown than the PAH. Recyclingstandards for PAH could be reached, oil levelsremained at a too high level.

    A contaminated soil treated in the slurryprocess resulted in a steady state breakdownpattern as depicted in Fig. 15. Starting at mod-erate contamination levels of 1,2001,300 mgkgP1 mineral oil, final concentrations werereached at levels~50 mg kgP1, well below the

    recycling standards.

    340 14 Bioreactors

    Fig. 11. Detail of one slug of material traveling through the sequencing batch process (3-step biocascade).Successive steps reflect the degradation of the more recalcitrant components (APISTZ et al., 1994; with per-mission).

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    13/14

    3 Slurry Bioreactors 341

    Comparing the steady state continuous re-sults (Fig. 14) with the batch results (Fig. 6b)found for the same sediment and contaminant,it clearly is demonstrated that in the continu-ous mode the conversion significantly im-proved (final concentration continuous modeisB3,000 mg kgP1 vs. 7,000 mg kgP1 in batch).This improvement due to continuity is in ac-cordance with the APITZ Observations on cas-cade breakdown (APITZ et al., 1994). Despitethe improvement Fig. 14 showed,the Dutch re-cycling standard (mineral oil p 500 mg kgP1)for this specific sediment was not reached.

    For a less contaminated solid waste (Fig. 15)the recycling standard was reached withoutdifficulty a mineral oil concentration of900 mg kgP1 gives an output concentration~50 mg kgP1. If this oil conversion is compa-red with the results from Fig. 14 (8,000 mgkgP1 input of mineral oil gives 3,000 mg kgP1

    output) it is shown that at higher concentra-tions bioavailability seriously restricts the mi-crobial breakdown. As a consequence it is of-ten difficult to achieve complete conversionand reach low end concentrations if startedwith high input concentrations.

    It should be noted that analytical difficulties(especially for oil), in the handling of wet sam-

    ples, may easily lead to incorrect figures. It hasbeen found that, besides a standard deviation

    Fig. 12.Technical impression of the DITS bioreactor.

    Fig. 13. Steady state PAH break-down pattern in the SDP (sedi-ment), slurry mill,DITSreactor, ISB reactor, presscake.

  • 8/10/2019 14 Bioreactors

    14/14

    of 20% within one laboratory, ring investiga-tions between various laboratories showed avariation of more than 75% (WARBOUT and

    OUBOTER, 1988). Bearing in mind these varia-

    tions, analytical results should be regardedcarefully.This holds the more when samples ofprocessed solids are compared to recycle

    standards.

    342 14 Bioreactors

    Fig. 14. Steady state mineral

    oil breakdown pattern in theSDP (sediment), slurrymill,DITS reactor, ISBreactor, press cake.

    Fig. 15. Steady state mineraloil breakdown pattern in theSDP (soil), slurry mill,DITS reactor, cascade, press cake.