Experience from Start-up and Operation ... Plants, and Testing of a New Deammonification IFAS Configuration
Transcription
Experience from Start-up and Operation ... Plants, and Testing of a New Deammonification IFAS Configuration
Experience from Start-up and Operation of Deammonification MBBR Plants, and Testing of a New Deammonification IFAS Configuration R. Lemaire1, M. Christensson2, H. Zhao3, M. Le Noir2, C. Voon4 1 Veolia Water Technical Department, 1 rue Giovanni Battista Pirelli, 94417 St-Maurice, France AnoxKaldnes AB, Klosterängsvägen 11A, 226 47 Lund, Sweden 3 Kruger Inc., 4001 Weston Parkway, Cary, NC 27513, USA 4 Veolia Water Solutions and Technologies Australia, Bay Centre, 65 Pirrama Road, Pyrmont NSW 2009 2 Abstract A single-stage deammonification process utilizing biofilms on moving carriers in a mixed reactor (ANITA™ Mox) is studied. Partial nitritation and autotrophic N-removal occur simultaneously within the biofilm, where aerobic and anoxic zones result from oxygen mass transfer limitation. Ammonium Oxidizing Bacteria (AOB) oxidize NH4 to NO2 in the aerobic zone of the biofilm (i.e. external biofilm) while Anammox bacteria (AnAOB) located in the anoxic zone of the biofilm (i.e. internal biofilm) consume NO2 produced by AOB together with the excess NH 4. The process has been implemented at full-scale as a Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) to treat reject water from dewatering of digested sludge. Startup of these installations was accelerated using a seeding strategy whereby 3-15% of carriers with established AOB/AnAOB biofilm were mixed with new carriers. Nremoval rates up to 1.2 kgN/m3react.d have been observed in the full-scale process. The achievable rate is influenced by substrate transport inside the biofilm, which depends on factors such as biofilm density, thickness, temperature, and substrate concentrations. One possible strategy to increase the N-removal is to enhance substrate transport. Using Integrated Fixed-Film Activate Sludge (IFAS) to separate the nitritation and anammox reactions spatially, instead of adjacent in the same biofilm, allows the AOB to grow in suspended phase to better utilize DO, while allowing the biofilm to specialize in AnAOB reaction to achieve higher rates. A lower bulk DO can be used in this mode. Results from full-scale ANITA Mox MBBR treating sidestream effluent are presented together with preliminary ANITA Mox IFAS results from a 50m3 full-scale prototype showing an increase in Nremoval rate of up to 3 times that usually achieved in pure MBBR configuration. Keywords: Anammox, ANITA Mox, IFAS, MBBR, Nitrogen removal, Sidestream treatment INTRODUCTION Energy consumption is often a large component in the total operation costs of a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). In the quest for self-sufficient or even energy-positive WWTPs, anaerobic digestion of primary and secondary sludge is a key element. It is, therefore, important to separate particulate organic matter from incoming raw wastewater, which can then be partially transformed into biogas through anaerobic digestion and converted into energy by combined heat and power (CHP) units. Every action taken towards improving the anaerobic digestion performance - such as sludge thickening and pre-treatment by mechanical disintegration or thermal hydrolysis, better digester operation (mixing and continuous feeding), co-digestion of biowastes and other cosubstrates - will bring the WWTP a step closer to self-sufficiency (Chudoba et al., 2010). Such improvements on the anaerobic transformation of organic matter from primary and secondary sludge to biogas can result in higher nitrogen levels in the sidestream reject water that is recycled to the inlet of the WWTP and can constitute up to 20-30% of the total N load. In order to address both WWTP treatment efficiency (i.e. quality of treated effluent) and energy savings, this increased nitrogen load has to be removed without further increasing the energy consumption of the plant. Costly expansion of the aeration capacity and reactor volume together with increased consumption of external carbon source should also to be avoided. Dedicated sidestream treatment can be a long-term solution to this situation, especially when considering energy- and cost-effective autotrophic N-removal processes using anammox bacteria. Due to the slow growth rate of anammox bacteria, long sludge ages have to be maintained, meaning that most of the current autotrophic N-removal processes are biofilm systems, with or without support material, operated as 2-stage systems, such as combined SHARON / Anammox-granular process (Abma et al., 2007) or 1-stage systems, also referred to as the “Deammonification” process, such as granular Sequencing Batch Reactors (SBR) (Wett, 2007; Vlaeminck et al., 2008; VazquezPadin et al., 2009) or Moving-Bed Biofilm Reactors (MBBR) (Rosenwinkel and Cornelius, 2005; Cema, 2009). Difficulty controlling the coupling between the predominant nitritation activity of flocular sludge and the predominant anammox activity of the granular sludge have been reported with 1-stage granular deammonification systems (Wett, 2010; Vlaeminck, 2008). Granule flotation has also been reported in highly-loaded anammox granular systems, causing wash-out of anammox granules and the deterioration of the process performance (Chen, 2010). Issues related to high levels of TSS in the reject water have also been reported with granular systems causing the loss of N-removal activity and the need to re-seed the system (Lindell and Heinonen, 2013). Alternatively, MBBR is seen as a robust biofilm technology to perform 1-stage deammonification where ammonium oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and anammox bacteria are maintained in a biofilm on suspended MBBR carriers with no risk of biomass wash-out (Cema, 2009). MBBR systems are less sensitive to incoming TSS, since solids tend wash through the non-clogging sieves (flow-through system) while carriers with anammox biomass are retained in the MBBR. In this paper, we present full-scale results for the MBBR deammonification process called ANITA Mox implemented in 4 plants in Europe (Sjölunda, Växjö – Sweden; Holbæk, Grindsted – Denmark) with three more in start-up/design/construction in the US (James River WWTP in Newport News, VA, South Durham WPCF in Durham, NC and Eagan WRP in Chicago, IL) for sidestream treatment. Detailed performances and design parameters of the operating full-scale plants together with the strategy developed for a quick start-up and overall energy efficiency through advanced aeration control strategy are presented. Results of a new IFAS ANITA Mox process recently tested at Sjölunda WWTP in Malmö, Sweden are also presented. Presentation of the ANITA Mox process ANITA Mox is a 1-stage MBBR deammonification process. Partial nitrification to nitrite and autotrophic N-removal (i.e. anammox) occur simultaneously within the biofilm. Aerobic and anoxic zones reside adjacent to each other due to oxygen mass transfer limitation under limited bulk DO concentration. The biological processes taking place inside the biofilm are illustrated in Figure 1. AOB oxidize NH4 to NO2 in the aerobic zone of the biofilm (i.e. outer part) while anammox bacteria located in the anoxic zone of the biofilm (i.e. inner part) consume NO2 produced by AOB together with the residual NH4. NH4+ Liquid N2 Nitritation AOB NO2 Anammox Biofilm Carrier - O2 Aerobic Anoxic Figure 1. Schematic of 1-stage nitritation/anammox biological processes occurring inside a carrier’s biofilm. The use of large-surface-area AnoxKaldnes carrier material, shown in Figure 2, allows for compact design and simple process operation with very high biomass retention ability through the use of non-clogging sieves. Figure 2. BiofilmChip™ M (1200 m2/m3), K3 (500 m2/m3) and Anox™ K5 (800 m2/m3) colonised ANITA Mox biofilm carriers. Real-time DO control strategy. An aeration control system has been developed and implemented on ANITA Mox MBBR reactors. The strategy avoids unwanted oxidation of NO2 into NO3 by nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB) in the aerobic zone of the biofilm maximizing the amount of nitrite available for the anammox bacteria. The DO setpoint is automatically adjusted based on online inlet and outlet concentrations of NH4 and NO3 to control the NO3 production below 11% of NH4 removed (i.e. stoichiometric NO3 production by anammox) while keeping high NH4 oxidation performance in the reactor. This real-time DO control strategy reduces the need of mechanical mixer in the MBBR due to the continuous aeration pattern. Strategy to Reduce Start-up time. The very slow growth of anammox bacteria and sensitivity towards high concentrations of oxygen, nitrite/free nitrous acid and free ammonia during the startup phase result in prolonged biological startup when growing the organisms from scratch. To shorten the start-up phase, new ANITA Mox processes are seeded with a small fraction of colonized carriers, which reduce the time required for the development of a mature deammonification biofilm on the new carriers. The concept of seeding has proven to significantly decrease the start-up time from around a year to 2-3 months, depending of the amount of seeding (Lemaire et al., 2011) and are in contradiction with recent studies by Schneider et al. (2009) reporting that seeding with fully functional deammonification biofilm was not an efficient start-up strategy for MBBR deammonification systems. To meet the request for seeding carriers, the ANITA Mox full-scale plant built in 2010 at Sjölunda WWTP is used as a nursery for anammox bacteria growing on suspended carriers, referred to as the “BioFarm”. The ANITA Mox unit that is in design at the South Durham WPCF (NC, USA) will also serve as a “BioFarm” to seed future ANITA Mox plants in the North America region. Description of Sjölunda WWTP facilities Sjölunda WWTP (550,000 PE) has a total capacity of 40 tBOD7/d and a Qmax of 4.4 m3/s on the biological treatment system. The current configuration of the WWTP (Figure 3) is as follows: pretreatment followed by primary settlers (particulate BOD removal), high rate activated sludge (BOD removal) with clarifiers, revamped trickling filters (nitrification), MBBR (post denitrification) and DAF. Thickened primary sludge and biological sludge are mixed and sent to 6 anaerobic digesters (16,000m3, 20d HRT, 35°C). Digested sludge is dewatered continuously by 3 centrifuges operated 50% of the time. Approximately 50% of the reject water flow is treated by an existing SBR (1920m3) operated in nitritation mode only while the remaining 50% (i.e. around 300 kgN/d) is now treated by the ANITA Mox system (200m3). Pre-treatment High rate AS Bio-Sludge Thickener Nitrifying Trickling Filters DAF Post DN MBBR Anaerobic Digesters Gravity Thickener Centrifuges Nitritation SBR 40% reject water flow ANITATM Mox MBBR Figure 3. Layout of Sjölunda WWTP in Malmö, Sweden. Adapted from Mases et al. (2010). Description of Sundet WWTP facilities Sundet WWTP in Växjö (Sweden) is designed for 80,000 PE, including industrial wastewater of approximately 1200 kgBOD/d. The current configuration of the WWTP (Figure 4) is as follows: pre-treatment followed by 6 parallel lines including a primary settling with chemical addition, an activated sludge treatment for BOD and N-removal with clarifiers and a tertiary sand filtration unit. The treated wastewater is then discharged to the lake Norra Bergunda. Thickened primary and biological sludge, as well as sludge from other smaller WWTPs, are digested to two mesophilic digesters, before being dewatered in centrifuges. The reject water is now treated in an ANITA Mox reactor before being sent back to the inlet of the WWTP. The ANITA Mox is designed to treat 320 kgN/d and will be upgraded in the future to treat up to 430 kgN/d when food residuals will be codigested, sanitized and digested a second time in a newly built digester. Inlet Grit and grease removal Primary settling Biological treatment Gas holder Sludge thickening Digester Clarifier Tertiary filtration Lake CHP unit Centrifuges Landspreading ANITA Mox Figure 4. Layout of Sundet WWTP in Växjö, Sweden. Description of Holbaek WWTP facilities Holbæk WWTP is designed for 60,000 PE (3,670 kgBOD/d) treating the wastewater from several neighboring municipalities. About 90-95% of the total inlet of the plant is municipal waste water with a 5-10% fraction from industries. Preliminary treatment consists of screens and sand-grease removal before the primary sedimentation tanks. Biological treatment takes place in a group of 6 Sequencing Batch Reactors (SBRs). Sludge is treated in an anaerobic digester. Iron sulfate is used for P removal. The treated water is discharged to the sea with the following effluent limits: BOD 15 mg/l; TN 4 mg/l summer and 6 mg/l in winter; and TP 1 mg/l. Digested sludge is dewatered through a filter press, producing reject water in batches. A 50 m 3 equalization tank allows the ANITA Mox reactor to receive a relatively constant rate of 10 m 3/h with a designed capacity of 120 kgN/day (i.e. including both reject water and leachate). The process was built reusing an existing 600 m3 tank which allows for some spare volume and a design at 2021 C. The lower-than-normal temperature is due to the need of treating leachate from a nearby landfill. Description of Grindsted WWTP facilities Grindsted WWTP is designed for 70,000 PE (4,200 kgBOD/d). Water-intensive industries, such as slaughterhouses, which are connected to the municipal sewer account for close to 2/3 of the WWTP BOD and TN load. The incoming wastewater is screened for sand and grease removal while the BOD and N are removed biologically in a BIODENITRO process. Phosphorous is removed by coprecipitation in the BIODENITRO tank. The treated water is discharged to a nearby watercourse with the following effluent limits: BOD 10 mg/l; TN 8 mg/l and TP 1.5 mg/l. The origin of the solids sent to a BioPasteur® digester with a 247 kW CHP unit is 45% primary and secondary WWTP sludge, 35% organic household waste and 20% organic industrial waste. Reject water from the downstream screw press is then treated in a 140m3 ANITA Mox reactor design for 100 kgN/d. MATERIALS AND METHODS Design parameters of Full-scale ANITA Mox plants The reject water composition and sludge dewatering operation at Sjölunda, Sundet, Holbaek and Grinsted WWTP are detailed in Table 1 while the main design and operating parameters of the fullscale ANITA Mox reactors are presented in Table 2. Table 1. Reject Water characteristics at Sjölunda, Sundet, Holbaek and Grindsted WWTP. Characteristics Units Sjölunda Sundet Holbæk Type of sludge digested -- primary + secondary primary + secondary + food waste primary + secondary Total flow – mean NH4 – mean (# sample) TKN – mean (# sample) CODs – mean (# sample) BOD7 – mean (# sample) HCO3- – mean (# sample) TSS – mean (# sample) m3/d mgN/L mgN/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mgSS/L 650 906 (420) 1041 (48) 288 (81) 185 (69) 4,570 (57) 859 (132) 160 851 (92) 914 (92) --4,650 (16) 513 (92) 125 833 (72) ------ Grindsted primary + secondary + food waste + industrialwaste 125 1221 (30) ------ Table 2. Design and operating parameters of full-scale ANITA Mox MBBRs Parameters Effluent Sjölunda WWTP Municipal reject water Municipal reject water Volume 4 x 50m3 (=200m3) Design N-load 200 kgN/d Carrier type Temperature K3 / K5 / BioChipM 22-34°C (no control) 0.5-1.5 mgO2/L Advanced DO control strategy Continuous aeration (Coarse bubbles) August 2010 DO Aeration Start-up Sundet WWTP 300m3 (existing tank) 320 kgN/d (1st phase) 430 kgN/d (2nd phase) Anox K5 26-34°C (no control) 0.5-1.5 mgO2/L Advanced DO control strategy Continuous aeration (Fine bubbles) December 2011 Holbæk WWTP Mix reject water / landfill leachate 600m3 (existing tank) Grindsted WWTP Co-digestion reject water 140m3 (new tank) 120 kgN/d 100 kgN/d Anox K3 15-30°C (no control) 0.5-1.5 mgO2/L Advanced DO control strategy Continuous aeration (Coarse bubbles) May 2012 Anox K5 25-35°C (no control) 0.5-1.5 mgO2/L Advanced DO control strategy Continuous aeration (Coarse bubbles) July 2013 ANITA Mox at Sjölunda WWTP. This full-scale unit was made of 4 parallel 50m3 and 6m deep reactors in order to test different carrier filling degree (from 40-50%) and different types of AnoxKaldnes carrier media (Table 2). This plant is also used as “BioFarm” to provide some seeded carriers to shorten the start-up phase of other full-scale ANITA Mox plant. NH4, NO3 (WTW), temperature and pH (Endress+Hausser) are measured on-line in the reject water feed and inside each reactor. Airflow and DO (Endress+Hausser) are also measured and controlled in each reactor. ANITA Mox at Sundet WWTP. This second full-scale plant consists of a single 300m3 covered reactor. It is a refurbished 3m deep SBR, using the existing fine-bubble aeration system (Table 2). To meet future N-load increases, the reactor design was made very flexible with possibilities to upgrade the treatment capacity by increasing the carriers filling degree to match the increase reject water load expected in the future (addition of co-waste in the digester). The plant is using the Anox K5 carrier with a protected surface of 800 m2/m3 as shown in Figure 2. NH4, NO3 (WTW), temperature and pH (Endress+Hausser) are measured on-line in the MBBR together with NH4 (WTW) in the incoming reject water. Airflow and DO (Endress+Hausser) are also measured and controlled in the reactor. ANITA Mox at Holbæk WWTP. An existing 600m3 reactor was converted into an ANITA Mox MBBR to treat a mixture of municipal sludge digestion centrate and leachate from a nearby landfill. The design load is 120 kgN/d with a minimum temperature as low as 15°C due to the low temperature of leachate in winter time and the relatively long HRT in the 600m3 MBBR. ANITA Mox at Grinsted WWTP. A new 140m3 MBBR ANITA Mox reactor using AnoxK5 carriers was built to treat the reject water from the co-digestion unit. NH4 level is rather high with value up to 1.8 gN-NH4/L depending on the type of co-waste fed to the digester. TSS level is also quite high at time (up to 4-5 g/L) but most incoming TSS are passing through the MBBR with limited impact on the process performance and sent back to the head of the plant. ANITA Mox at James River WWTP. This system is currently under start-up. It consists of one 400m3 reactor filled with Anox K5 media to treat 285 m3/d of centrate. Design influent ammonia is 890 mg/L at 30°C design temperature. ANITA Mox at South Durham WWTP. This system is in design with an anticipated start-up in 2015. It will consist of a two parallel 318 m3 reactors filled with Anox K5 media to treat 300 m3/d of centrate. Design influent ammonia is 1,000 mg/L at 24°C design temperature. ANITA Mox at Eagan WRP. This system is in construction with an estimated start-up in mid-2014. It will consist of 4 parallel MBBR ANITA Mox (retrofit into 4 existing DAF tanks) to treat 940 kgN/d of centrate. Analytical Method Chemical analysis. Mixed liquor samples were filtered at 1.6 µm before analysis for NH4, NO3, NO2 and soluble COD (Dr Lange kits, Hach Lange). TSS were analyzed according to the standard methods (APHA, 1995). Off gas analysis. To evaluate the N2O emissions from the ANITA Mox process, continuous off-gas measurements have been performed during normal operation conditions at Sjölunda WWTP. Offgas was pumped continuously at 30L/h to a non-dispersive infrared analyser (VA-3000, Horiba) to determine the N2O gas fractions (in ppmv). The flux of N2O emitted (gN-N2O/d) was calculated considering that the outlet air flow rate (Nm3/h) was equal to the inlet air supply given by the mass flow controller. The quantify N2O emitted from the MBBR was expressed in % of gN-N2Oemitted per gNremoved. Four periods between 1 to 6 days long in 2011 without any major operational disturbances or problems with the online off-gas were chosen to evaluate the N2O emissions from the ANITA Mox process. Energy efficiency. Energy consumption was measured on the 50 m3 MBBR equipped with Biofilm Chip M at Sjölunda WWTP with continuous aeration and therefore no need for mechanical mixing. The total energy consumption of the ANITA Mox was therefore only based on the energy consumption of the blower. Three different time periods were chosen during which NH4 and NO3 level in the influent and effluent, aeration intensity and blower power consumption were continuously monitored. The same method was applied on the ANITA Mox at Sundet WWTP once a specific air flow meter was installed on the air supply to the MBBR tank. Specific anammox batch tests. Maximum anammox capacity was measured in 3L reactors with N2 sparging (2 L/h) to provide mixing and maintain anoxic condition. Temperature was kept at 30°C with a thermostat bath. A known number of carriers (typical 100 pieces) were added to a synthetic medium containing NH4-N (25 mg/L), NO2-N (25 mg/L), PO4-P (2.5 mg/L), NaHCO3 (2 g/L) and trace metal solution (2 ml/L). Samples were taken every 5-10 minutes and maximum N-removal capacity was determined by plotting nitrogen concentration per surface area vs time. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Performances of the ANITA Mox process at Sjölunda WWTP Due to limitations of seeding media available and in order to optimize the start-up procedure, the 4 ANITA Mox reactors (i.e. MBBR1, MBBR2, MBBR3 and MBBR4) were started up at different time. Table 3 summarizes the start-up conditions of MBBR1, which was started first, and MBBR4 which was the last one to be started. MBBR1 was seeded with 0.9m3 of colonized carriers coming from a 2m3 Pilot-Plant (Lemaire et al. 2011). MBBR4 was initially started-up in Feb11 while outside T°C were well below 0°C resulting in some issues with freezing pipes during stoppages due to site maintenance of centrifuges. MBBR4 was re-started in Dec11 after 84% of the reactor media (i.e. 21m3) were taken away to start up the new ANITA Mox unit at Sundet WWTP (Table 3). Table 3. Operation conditions during start-up of MBBR1 and MBBR4 at Sjölunda WWTP MBBR1 MBBR4 Type of media used BiofilmChip M Anox K5 Total filling degree 40% 50% 0.9m3 from ANITA Mox 4m3 of remaining K5 carriers Seeding media used Pilot Plant after 21m3 were taking out Seeding % of total carrier surface 3% 16% Start-up time August 2010 December 2011 Outdoors T°C during start-up 18°C - 20°C -10°C - 5°C Long-term performances of MBBR1, the first ANITA Mox full-scale reactor started up at Sjölunda WWTP are presented in Christensson et al. (2013). NH4 level in the effluent was always below 100150 mgN-NH4/L and the ratio NO3-prod. : NH4-rem. was in the range of 8-15% which is close to the stoichiometric ratio (i.e. 11%) if nitrate was only produced by anammox bacteria with no further oxidation of nitrite into nitrate by NOB and no reduction of nitrate by heterotrophic denitrifiers. The real-time DO control strategy developed for the ANITA Mox process was very successful in limiting the activity of NOB in the system and therefore assuring that most of the nitrite produced by the AOB is actually used by the anammox bacteria. The nitrite concentration in the outlet was always very low (i.e. <5 mgN/L) although transitory accumulations of nitrite up to 120 mgN-NO2/L were observed during the start-up period with no real incidence on the MBBR performances. The fact that nitrite was barely present in the MBBR indicates that the system was likely NO2 limited and that anammox activity was limited by the supply of NO2 from the AOB. After only 4 months operation and with only 3% of seeding material, NH4-removal rate reached 1.2 kgN/m3react.d with 90% NH4-removal efficiency. In spite of variation in N-load the NH4-removal stayed high, typically >90%, for the entire operation period while TN removal averaged 80%. These performances were obtained (i) without any pre-treatment of the reject water, (ii) without any chemical addition of methanol, acid or base solution, (iii) with no need of mechanical mixers in the MBBR (i.e. continuous aeration strategy sufficient for mixing carriers) and (iv) without any heating system even during the cold winter months in Sweden. In addition to serve as a “BioFarm” nursery for rapid start-up of new ANITA Mox plant, the four 50m3 MBBR unit at Sjölunda WWTP are also used to test different operating strategies, different type of carriers, and build-up some solid in-depth expertise for 1-stage MBBR deammonification process. Long term operation of the ANITA Mox process at Sjölunda WWTP has proven to be a robust and stable process towards variations in loads of reject water supply, variations in suspended solids, power failure and pumping issues often encountered at treatment plants while still maintaining high N-removal performances. 1200 200 1100 180 700 140 120 600 100 500 80 400 60 (a) 200 NO3 out, NO2 out (mgN/L) 800 300 NH4-load & removal rates (kgN/m3.d) 160 NH4-N in NH4-N out NO3-N out NO2-N out 900 40 100 20 0 1,4 1,3 1,2 1,1 1 0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 0 0 31 29 27 25 NH4-N load NH4-N rem T°C T°C NH4 in/out (mgN/L) 1000 23 21 19 (b) 17 15 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 Days Figure 5. MBBR4 performances after second start-up: NH4, NO3 and NO2 measured in inlet and outlet (a); NH4 loading and removal rates and T°C in MBBR4 (b). Figure 5 shows inlet and outlet concentrations, as well as N-loading and removal rate after the second start-up of MBBR4 on Day 308 when 21m3 of Anox K5 carriers (i.e. corresponding to 84% of the total media amount in the reactor) were taken out in order to seed the ANITA Mox reactor at Sundet WWTP for fast start-up (Table 3). Only 4m3 of media remained in the MBBR4 reactor (i.e. 16% seeding), and another 21m3 of virgin Anox K5 carriers were added to quickly reach again maximum removal performances. This new start-up explains the relatively high NH4 level in the outlet (i.e. up to 300-400 mg/L) during the first 70 days after virgin media were added (Figure 5a). After only 70 days and with only 16% initial seeded carriers remaining, NH4-removal rate in MBBR4 reached back 1 kgN/m3react.d. Energy Efficiency During the 3 periods where energy consumption was measured, MBBR1 was removing between 48 and 60 kgN-NH4/d depending on the influent concentration (corresponding to between 43 and 56 kg TN/d). The blower was operating continuously ensuring a DO in the reactors that varied between 0.5 and 1.5 mgO2/L. The average power consumption for the 3 different periods of the 50m3 ANITA Mox MBBR at Sjölunda WWTP varies between 1.45-1.75 kWh/kgN-NH4 removed. This number is expected to vary depending on the size and the geometry of the ANITA Mox reactor. The MBBRs used in this ANITA Mox installation were rather small (50m3 each) with a high wall/volume surface ratio and therefore lower energy consumption can be expected for larger MBBRs with sufficient water depth (i.e. >5m) to have good oxygen transfer rate. This energy consumption represents only around 50-60% of the energy consumption of the nitritation SBR treating the same reject water at Sjölunda WWTP, which is reported to be around 2.9 kWh/kgNNH4 removed (Gustavsson, 2010). Likewise, the energy consumption of this ANITA Mox plant is much lower than what has been previously reported from other 1-stage MBBR-type Anammox processes: 2.3 kWh/kgN-removed at Himmerfjärden WWTP in Sweden, and 5.6 kWh/kgNremoved at Hattingen WWTP in Germany, both operating as DeAmmon processes with intermittent aeration (Gustavsson, 2010). This relatively low energy consumption in Sjölunda WWTP demonstrates the efficiency of the aeration control strategy which adapts in real-time the aeration intensity to the real process need. N2O Emission The N2O was measured in the off-gas of the MBBRs at Sjölunda WWTP during 4 separate periods under typical operating conditions. The N2O emissions measured in the off-gas fluctuated between 0-200 ppmv with the average N2O emissions during the 4 measuring periods being in the interval of 40-110 ppmv which equals to 0.2-0.9% of N-removed (Table 4). The lowest N2O emissions (i.e. 0.2%) were obtained when the average DO level in the water phase was about 0.5 mgO2/L higher than during the other periods and the NH4 level in the MBBR was lower than usual (<50 mgN/L). Table 4. Average N2O emissions from the ANITA Mox process in Sjölunda. Duration Data points N-N2O prod. Mean N2O level Period (2011) (h) (No.) (% N-removed) (ppmv) 25-27/04 55 345 0.9 113 17-23/06 137 855 0.7 104 27-28/06 20 127 0.2 37 08-13/07 127 780 0.8 108 The N2O emissions from the ANITA Mox process (0.2-0.9% of N-removed) are in the low range of what has been previously reported for different full-scale sidestream anammox processes. Kampschreur et al. 2008 measured an overall N2O emission of 2.3% of N-removed in a 2-stage nitritation (SHARON) / anammox (air-lift granular). However, Kampschreur et al. 2009 reported lower N2O emission (1.7% of N-removed) in a 1-stage airlift granular reactor treating industrial effluent. Joss et al. (2009) reported lower N2O emission in 1-stage granular SBR with continuous aeration strategy (0.4% of N-removed) than with intermittent aeration (0.6% of N-removed). Finally, Weissenbacher et al. (2010) measured N2O emission of 1.5% of N-removed in the DEMON granular SBR in Strass, Austria. When comparing the ANITA Mox N2O emissions with that from the sidestream nitrifying SBR treating the same reject water at Sjölunda WWTP (i.e. up to 4.1% of N-NH4 oxidized, Gustavsson et al. 2011), the GHG footprint is clearly in favor of the ANITA Mox. Performances of the ANITA Mox process at Sundet WWTP The ANITA Mox process was started up at Sundet WWTP by seeding with 21m 3 of Anox K5 carriers from Sjölunda BioFarm (i.e. MBBR4) in December 2011. The seeding media represented 13% of total carrier in the reactor. Since the process was started up during the coldest winter months, the temperature was kept around 28°C by batch wise heating of water when needed during the first month of operation. To promote growth of anammox bacteria the reactor was fed with an amount of reject water corresponding to an N-load slightly higher than the initial N-removal capacity of the seeding media. The influent flow was continuously increased to promote the growth of deammonification biofilm on the virgin media and the total amount of reject water was treated in the ANITA Mox process after only 2 months of operation. Results of the ANITA Mox plant operation since start-up are presented in Figure 6 and 7. Influent NH4 level varied between 800-1100 mgN-NH4/L while effluent NH4 level was always below 200 mgN-NH4/L (most of the time <100 mgN-NH4/L) with an average NH4 removal of 88% (Figure 6a and 7). Nitrate level in the MBBR outlet was below 100 mgN-NO3/L corresponding to a NO3-prod. : NH4-rem. ratio in the range of 8-10% (Figure 6a and 6c). Since this value is lower than the stoichiometric ratio of 11%, it is likely that some of the nitrate produced by anammox bacteria was removed through heterotrophic denitrification. The reject water of Sundet WWTP contains very little carbon source but the hydraulic retention time (HRT) in the reactor was longer than the design value (i.e. 48h HRT compared to 24h expected initially) due a daily reject water flowrate of 150200 m3/d (Figure 6b) which was much lower than the 330 m3/d expected during the design phase. The observed heterotrophic denitrification was probably due to some endogenous denitrification in the system due to the very long HRT and the high T°C. Nitrite peaks over 10 mgN-NO2/L were never observed even during start-up period and the average concentration was 2.6 mgN-NO2/L (Figure 6a). These results are very similar to those from Sjölunda WWTP, confirming that nitrite production is the limiting factor for the process. Since start-up, the applied N-load and N-removal rate increased gradually to reach 0.55 kgN/m3.d and 0.5 kgN-NH4/m3.d respectively (Figure 6b). The N-loading rate applied at Sundet WWTP was limited by the supply of reject water on site and not by the process performance itself with only a maximum of 200 kgN/d available for the ANITA Mox instead of 320 kgN/d initially expected by the site operator. N-loading and N-removal rate at Sundet WWTP are expected to increase as soon as the amount of sludge and external organic waste digested on site will increase and reach its design capacity. 200 1200 NH4-N in NH4-N out 1100 NO2-N out (a) 1000 NH4 in/out (mgN/L) NO3-N out 180 160 900 140 800 120 700 100 600 500 80 400 60 300 NO3 out, NO2 out (mgN/L) 1300 40 200 20 100 0 0 NH4-N load Reject Water Flow (m3/d) 0,5 (b) 500 0,4 400 0,3 300 0,2 200 0,1 100 0 %NH4rem, %TNrem, ratio NO3/NH4 600 0 0,9 38 0,8 36 0,7 34 0,6 32 0,5 30 0,4 TN removal % NH4-N removal % ratio NO3-prod/NH4-rem T°C 0,3 0,2 T°C NH4 load & NH4 removal rate (kgN/m3.d) NH4-N rem Reject water flow (m3/d) 0,6 28 (c) 0,1 26 24 22 0 20 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 570 600 630 Days Figure 6. Operation results of Sundet ANITA Mox plant: NH4, NO3 and NO2 measured in inlet and outlet (a); NH4 loading and removal rates and reject water daily flow in the MBBR (b); TN and NH4 removal efficiency, ratio NO3-prod. : NH4-rem. and T°C in the MBBR (c). 0,6 y = 0,88x R² = 0,97 NH4 removed (kgNH4-N/m3.d) 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 0 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 NH4 load (kgNH4-N/m3.d) 3 Figure 7. NH4 load and removal rate (kgN/m .d) in Sundet WWTP ANITA Mox since start-up. Energy Efficiency Air blower supplying oxygen for the ANITA Mox reactor is also used to supply air to the plant grit chamber making it very difficult to estimate the exact amount of air supplied to the ANITA Mox reactor and its resulting energy consumption. A dedicated air flow meter measuring the exact airflow sent to the MBBR tank was installed by the site operator mid-June 2013 making it possible to estimate the specific energy consumption of the sidestream unit. With an average air flow of 245 Nm3/h since mid-June 2013, the energy consumption was estimated at 1.1 kWh/kgN-removed over that period. This is lower than the energy requirement measured in the 50m3 MBBR at Sjölunda WWTP (1.45-1.75 kWh/kgN-NH4 removed) confirming the high surface wall/volume ratio effect in smaller unit. The use of fine bubble diffusers explained this relatively low energy requirement for Sundet ANITA Mox plant together with the advanced aeration control strategy implemented. Performances of the ANITA Mox process at Holbaek WWTP At Holbæk WWTP an existing storage tank was available for reject water treatment. In addition, treatment of leachate from a nearby landfill was required and this could be achieved by converting the storage tank into an ANITA Mox. With given design load (120 kg N/d) and existing volume (600 m3), there was no need using any carrier with very high protective surface area, why the AnoxKaldnes K3 carrier (500 m2/m3) was chosen with a filling degree of 32%. Due to addition of leachate water, temperature was expected to be lower and this was taken into consideration in the design. The ANITA Mox process was started up in May 2012 by adding 20 m3 seeded K3 carrier from the BioFarm at Sjölunda WWTP to 177m3 virgin K3 carrier, corresponding to 10% seeding. During the first 10 weeks the nitrogen loading and removal increased steadily until a removal rate of above 1 g N/m2, d (0.17 kg N/m2,d), Figure 8, was reached. At this stage reject water supply started to be limited and also unstable due to issues with dewatering equipment. Shortly after this, temperature in the reactor started to decrease and also failure of the on-line aeration equipment occurred, leading to over-aeration with increased nitrate production up to as high as 120 mg NO3N/l. Getting aeration control back in operation again quickly optimised the aeration conditions and decreased the nitrate produced to ammonia removed to values below the stoichiometric ratio (11%) if nitrate were only produced by anammox bacteria, reaching values as low as 4-5%, indicating reduction of nitrate by heterotrophic bacteria. 200 1000 180 900 (a) 800 700 NH4-N in (mg/l) NH4-N out (mg/l) NO3-N out (mg/l) NO2-N out (mg/l) 600 500 400 NH4 load & removal (kgN/m³.d) 140 120 100 80 60 300 200 40 100 20 0 0 N-load (kgN/m3d) N-removed (kgN/m3d) T°C 35 0,2 30 0,15 25 0,1 20 (b) 0,05 0 % NH4 & N-rem, % NO3-prod/NH4-rem 160 T°C NH4in and NH4out (mgN/L) 1100 NO2out and NO3out (mgN/L) Due to winter conditions in Denmark, low temperature in combination with low loading and long retention time dropped the temperature in the reactor well below 20°C for around 100 days of operation, sometimes reaching as low as 15°C. In spite of this low temperature, ammonia removal and nitrogen removal efficiency could be kept around 80% and 75%, respectively. During spring and summer, temperature increased and the ANITA Mox continued to treat all available reject water and additional leachate water to a high nitrogen removal efficiency (>90%). 15 10 90 80 70 60 50 % N-removal 40 % NH4-removal 30 % NO3-N prod/NH4-N rem 20 (c) 10 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Days Figure 8. Operation results of Holbaek ANITA Mox plant: NH4, NO3 and NO2 measured in inlet and outlet (a); NH4 loading and removal rates and T°C (b); TN and NH4 removal efficiency, ratio NO3-prod. : NH4-rem. (c). Full-scale demonstration of IFAS ANITA Mox The relatively high rate of N-removal in a MBBR biofilm comprised of aerobic/anammox bacteria is explained by synergistic interaction between AnAOB and AOB bacteria in the biofilm. This synergy is constrained by transport limitations and substrate availability inside the biofilm, which depend on different environmental factors such as morphology, biofilm density and thickness, temperature, substrate concentrations and shear stress. In order to improve the ANITA Mox MBBR performance, substrate transport must be enhanced. Several studies investigated the effect of combining suspended cultures and fixed biomass into one Integrated Fixed-Film Activate Sludge (IFAS) for municipal (Al-Sharekh and Hamoda, 2001; Ødegaard et al., 2000) and industrial (Wessman et al., 2004) wastewater treatment. Paul et al., (2006) have reported that a clear spatial distribution of microbial population between floccular biomass (heterotrophs) and fixed biomass (nitrifiers) leads to higher COD and N-removal performances. Figure 9 depicts a conceptual model of MBBR and IFAS modes. The IFAS concept was applied to ANITA Mox at lab scale (Zhao et al, 2013), yielding nitrogen removal rates 3-4 times higher than the MBBR reactor operating in parallel on the same wastewater. The study also showed a relationship between MLSS concentration and removal rate, as well as a distinct difference in biological population composition between suspended and attached phases. Figure 9. Conceptual model of distribution of bacterial populations involved in N-removal and biofilm structure in pure MBBR versus IFAS ANITA Mox configurations (from Veuillet et al. 2013). A full-scale IFAS demonstration system was started in the MBBR ANITA Mox plant at Sjölunda WWTP. One of the four MBBR tanks filled at 50% with K5 carriers was converted to an IFAS reactor by installing a conical clarifier for sludge retention (Feb 2013, Day 960). The clarifier had to be fitted inside of the existing MBBR due to space constraint on site (Figure 10). The clarifier has a surface area of 5.0 m2 and a total volume of 7m3. Compared to typical operation for MBBR ANITA Mox, the IFAS reactor was operated at lower DO (0.2-0.6mgO2/L versus 1.0-1.3mgO2/L) and at higher MLSS level (2-4g/L versus 0.02-0.2g/L). Figure 10 - Retrofit of Existing MBBR ANITATMMox to IFAS Configuration Preliminary results IFAS prototype. Figure 11 presents the results obtained before and after the installation of the clarifier for operation as IFAS. The clarifier was installed on Day 960 and a stable sludge separation performance was achieved after Day 985. During the stable period, average ammonia removal efficiency was 95% and average TN removal efficiency was 85% while the ratio NO3-N prod/NH4-N rem was around 10% (Figure 11c). NH4in NH4out NO3out NO2out 140 120 100 80 60 40 (a) 20 NO3 out, NO2 out (mgN/L) NH4 in, NH4 out (mgN/L) NH4 load & removal (kgN/m3.d) %NH4 and %TN removal 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 NH4-load 3 NH4-removal 2,5 2 1,5 1 (b) 0,5 0 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 MBBR Transition IFAS %TN-removal %NH4-removal %NO3-prod : NH4-rem (c) 930 950 970 990 1010 1030 1050 1070 1090 1110 1130 1150 Days Figure 11. ANITA Mox performance before and after switching to IFAS configuration: NH4, NO3 and NO2 measured in inlet and outlet (a); NH4-N loading and removal rates (b); NH4-N and TN removal efficiencies and % of NO3-N produced (c). NH4-N loading and removal rates increased sharply after switching to IFAS mode reaching 2.2kgN/m3.d (Figure 11b) before dropping back to 1.2kgN/m3.d due to a shortage of reject water and foaming in the reactor with the built-in clarifier, which led to difficulty controlling the MLSS concentration. After modifying the operation, NH4-N loading and removal rates reached 2.2kgN/m3.d on Day 1030 and then gradually increased to reach around 3kgN/m3.d. Despite of the MLSS variation in the IFAS tank mostly due to fluctuating influent TSS concentration (Figure 12), nitritation in the suspended sludge was enhanced at bulk DO concentration between 0.2 to 0.5mg/L. Compared to the pure MBBR operation, higher nitrite was observed (4 to 8mgNO2-N/L) with the IFAS configuration. As indicated by the low ratio of NO3-N prod/ NH4-N rem measured in the reactor (<10%), the low DO condition applied in the IFAS reactor was sufficient to repress the NOB growth in the suspended sludge even with the higher nitrite level. Due to the improvements on both nitritation and anammox activities with the IFAS mode and optimal microbial population distribution between biofilm and suspended sludge, the NH4 removal rate increased by 200-300% compared to the pure MBBR configuration. MLSS (mg/L) TSSin (mg/L) SVI (mL/g) 180 160 140 120 100 80 SVI (mL/g) TSSin & MLSS (mg/L) 200 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 60 40 20 930 950 970 990 1010 1030 1050 Days 1070 1090 1110 1130 0 1150 Figure 12. IFAS ANITA Mox suspended sludge concentration, SVI and TSS level in the incoming reject water. This IFAS full-scale prototype also provided very useful design parameters with regard to the clarifier in term of SVI, sludge concentration factor, TSS level in treated effluent, and influence of incoming TSS (Figure 12). The goal of the clarifier in the IFAS ANITA Mox process for sidestream treatment is only to increase the MLSS in the MBBR tank and provide better nitritation performances through advanced control of the SRT and bulk DO in the tank. The clarifier is not used to retain anammox bacteria in the system. Sludge settling performance in the clarifier effluent is not a critical parameter for the clarifier design, since this stream is sent back to the head of the plant. The choice between pure MBBR and IFAS configuration for sidestream treatment is site-specific and depends on the existing tank volume available for reuse as a deammonification process. The IFAS reactor is more compact than MBBR making it suitable when space is an important factor. The need for a downstream clarifier and RAS pumping must be factored into the evaluation when considering IFAS for sidestream treatment together with the TSS level fluctuation in the effluent to be treated. For mainstream deammonification, the IFAS solution has the advantage of being more readily retrofitted in existing activated sludge systems. Mainstream IFAS ANITA Mox is currently being tested at pilot scale at three WWTPs with different configurations and climates (i.e. after primary settler + HRAS in Sweden, after UASB + HRAS in Middle East, after CEPT + HRAS in France). IFAS ANITA Mox is also currently tested in several parallel 8L units at different COD/N ratio (from 0.5 to 2) to investigate the maximum COD/N ratio that can be applied on IFAS ANITA Mox and the impact on the overall performance and design. CONCLUSIONS • • With 4 full-scale systems in operation and others in progress, the ANITA Mox MBBR process is a robust deammonification technology to address the issue of increasing N-load coming from advanced sludge treatment processes while while aiding efforts towards energy efficiency. After 4 months operation, the first full-scale ANITA Mox MBBR plant at Sjölunda WWTP attained N-removal of 1.2 kgN-NH4/m3reactor.d with 90% NH4 removal efficiency with no need of pre-treatment or chemicals. • • • • • • The combination of carriers with very large protected surface area and carrier retention sieves provides a robust and simple method to retain anammox biomass in the system independently of the flow or TSS variations observed with sidestream reject water. Energy consumption of the ANITA Mox MBBR process measured at Sjölunda WWTP averaged around 1.5 kWh/kgNH4-N removed in a 50m3 MBBRs equipped with medium bubble aeration. The energy consumption measured at the 300m3 ANITA Mox plant at Sundet WWTP averaged 1.1 kWh/kgN-removed with fine bubble diffusers. This low energy consumption is achieved in part with an advanced aeration control strategy, which optimizes the aeration intensity in real-time. The average N2O emissions from the ANITA Mox MBBR process (i.e. 0.2 – 0.9% of Nremoved) is in the low range of what has been previously reported for different full-scale sidestream anammox processes. Results from the new full-scale IFAS ANITA Mox operation demonstrate so far a 200-300% improvement in N-removal rate compare to pure MBBR configuration with good sludge settling properties. In IFAS mode ANITA Mox, low DO (0.2 to 0.6 mg/L) and SRT control are capable of repressing NOB in IFAS system and the easy physical separation between AOB-rich suspended sludge and anammox-rich biofilm carriers through the use of non-clogging sieve is a clear advantage to secure the retention of anammox in the system. IFAS ANITA Mox opens new attractive solutions for Mainstream N-removal application due to the potential for retrofit of IFAS process into activated sludge systems with existing clarifiers. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge all the personnel at Sjölunda WWTP (Malmö, Sweden) and Sundet WWTP (Växjö, Sweden) for their kind assistance with the ANITA Mox operation. REFERENCES APHA (1995). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 19th edn, American Public Health Association, Washington DC, USA. Abma W., Schultz C., Mulder J., van der Star W., Strous M., Tokutomi T. and van Loosdrecht M. (2007). Fullscale granular sludge Anammox process. Wat. Sci. Tech., 55(8/9), 27-33. Al-Sharekh, H.A., Hamoda M.F. (2001). Removal of organics from WW using a novel biological hybrid system. Wat. Sci. Tech., 43(1), 321-326. Cema G. (2009). Comparative study on different Anammox systems. PhD Thesis, KTH Stockholm. Chen J., Ji Q., Zheng P., Chen T., Wang C. and Mahmood Q. (2010). Floatation and control of granular sludge in a high-rate anammox reactor. Wat. Res., 44(11), 3321-3338. Christensson M., Ekström S., Andersson Chan A., Le Vaillant E. and Lemaire R. (2013). Experience from start-ups of the first ANITA Mox plants. Water Sci. Tech., 67(12), 26772684. Chudoba P., Sardet C., Palko G. and Guibelin E. (2010). Main factors influencing anaerobic digestion of sludge and energy efficiency at several large WWTP in central Europe. 2nd European Conference on Sludge Management, Budapest, Hungary, Sept 2010. Gustavsson D. (2010). Biological sludge liquor treatment at municipal wastewater treatment plants – a review. Vatten, 66(3), 179-192. Gustavsson D. and Jansen J. la C. (2011). Dynamics of nitrogen oxides emission from a full-scale sludge liquor treatment plant with nitritation. Wat. Sci. Tech., 63(12), 2838-2845. Joss A., Salzgeber D., Eugster J., König R., Rottermann K., Burger S., Fabijan P., Leumann S., Mohn J. and Siegrist H. (2009). Full-scale nitrogen removal from digester liquid with partial nitritation and anammox in one SBR. Environ. Sci. Technol., 43, 5301-5306 Kampschreur M., van der Star W., Wielders H., Mulder J., Jetten M. and van Loosdrecht M. (2008). Dynamics of nitric oxide and nitrous oxide emission during full-scale reject water treatment. Water Res., 42(3), 812-826. Kampschreur M., Temminck H., Kleerebezem R., Jetten M. and van Loosdrecht M. (2009). Nitrous oxide emissions during wastewater treatment. Water Res. 43(17), 4093-4103. Lemaire R., Liviano I., Ekström S., Roselius C., Chauzy J., Thornberg D., Thirsing S. and Deleris S. (2011). 1-stage Deammonification MBBR process for reject water sidestream treatment: investigation of start-up strategy and carriers design. WEF Nutrient Recovery and Management conference, Miami, Jan 2011. Lindell P. and Heinonen M. (2013). Critical parameters of the Demon process start-up and practical implementation. IWA Holistic Sludge Management conference, Västerås, Sweden, May 2013. Mases M., Dimitrova I., Nyberg U., Gruvberg C. and Anderson B. (2010). Experiences from MBBR Post-Denitrification Process in Long-term Operation at 2 WWTPs. IWA/WEF Biofilm reactor technology conference, Portland, Oregon, USA, Aug 2010. degaard H., Gisvold B., Strickland J. (2000). The influence of carrier size and shape in the moving bed biofilm process. Water Sci. Tech., 41(4-5), 383-391. Paul E., Wolff D.B., Ochoa J., Ribeiro da Costa R.H. (2006). Recycled and virgin plastic carriers in hybrid reactors for wastewater treatment. Wat. Environ. Res., 79(7), 765–774. Rosenwinkel K. and Cornelius A. (2005). Deammonification in the Moving-Bed process for the treatment of wastewater with high ammonia content. Chem. Eng. Tech., 28(1). Schneider Y., Beier M. and Rosenwinkel K. (2009). Impact of seeding on the start-up of the deammonification process with different sludge systems. IWA conference on Nutrient Removal. Krakow, Poland, Sept 2009. Vazquez-Padin J., Pozo M., Jarpa M., Figueroa M., Franco A., Mosqueral-Corral A., Campos J.L. and Mendez R. (2009). Treatment of anaerobic sludge digesters effluent by the Canon process in an air pulsing SBR. J. of Haz. Mat., 166, 336-341. Vlaeminck S., Cloetens L., Carballa M., Boon N. and Verstraete W. (2008). Granular biomass capable of partial nitritation and anammox. Wat. Sci. Tech., 58(5), 1113-1120. Veuillet F., Lacroix S., Bausseron A., Gonidec E., Ochoa J., Christensson M. and Lemaire R. (2013). IFAS ANITA™Mox process – A new perspective for advanced N-removal. 9th IWA conference on Biofilm Reactors, Paris, France, May 2013. Weissenbacher N., Takacs I., Murthy S., Fuerhacker M. and Wett B. (2010). Gaseous nitrogen and carbon emissions from a fullscale deammonification plant. Water Env. Res., 82(2), 169-175. Wessman F., Tuegen E.Y., Zheng Q., He G., Welander T., Rusten B. (2004). Increasing the capacity for treatment of chemical plant wastewater by replacing existing suspended carrier media with Kaldnes Moving BedTM media at a plant in Singapore. Wat. Sci. Tech., 49(1112), 199-205. Wett B. (2007). Development and implementation of a robust Deammonification process. Wat. Sci. Tech., 56(7), 81-88. Wett B., Hell M., Nyhuis G., Puempel T., Takacs I. and Murthy S. (2010). Syntrophy of aerobic and anaerobic ammonia oxidisers. Wat. Sci. Tech., 61(8), 1915-1922. Zhao H., Lemaire R., Christensson M., Thesing G., Veuillet F., Ochoa J., Lamarre D., Gadbois A. (2013). Single-stage Deammonification Process Performance – MBBR Versus IFAS Configurations. WEF/IWA Nutrient Removal and Recovery conference, Vancouver, July 2013.