Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous AbstractBiodegradation of BTEX vapors in a silicone membrane bioreactor system    Next AbstractControlled release of insect sex pheromones from paraffin wax and emulsions »

J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol


Title:Comparison of microporous and nonporous membrane bioreactor systems for the treatment of BTEX in vapor streams
Author(s):Attaway H; Gooding CH; Schmidt MG;
Address:"Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425-0504, USA"
Journal Title:J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol
Year:2002
Volume:28
Issue:5
Page Number:245 - 251
DOI: 10.1038/sj/jim/7000235
ISSN/ISBN:1367-5435 (Print) 1367-5435 (Linking)
Abstract:"Increased regulatory constraints on industrial releases of atmospheric volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have resulted in an interest in using biofilters, bioscrubbers and air/liquid membranes for treatment of vapor phase waste streams. In this report, we describe the comparison of the use of two fundamentally different types of membrane module systems that allow the rapid diffusion of vapor phase aromatics and oxygen to an active biofilm for subsequent biodegradation. One system used a commercial membrane module containing microporous polypropylene fibers while the other used a nonporous silicone tubing membrane module for the delivery of substrate (a mixture of benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes [BTEX]) and electron acceptor (O(2)). Tests of the systems under similar conditions with BTEX in the vapor feed stream showed significant performance advantages for the silicone membrane system. The average surface-area-based BTEX removal rate for the microporous membrane system over 500 h of operation was 7.88 microg h(-1) cm(-2) while the rate for the silicone membrane system was 23.87 microg h(-1) cm(-2). The percentages of BTEX removal were also consistently better in the silicone membrane system versus the microporous system. Part of the performance problem associated with the microporous membrane system appeared to be internal water condensation and possible plugging of the pores with biomass over time that could not be resolved with vapor phase backflushing"
Keywords:"Air Pollutants/*chemistry Biodegradation, Environmental Biomass *Bioreactors Diffusion Gases/*chemistry Hydrocarbons, Aromatic/*chemistry *Micropore Filters Oxygen/chemistry Porosity Volatilization Waste Management/*instrumentation/*methods;"
Notes:"MedlineAttaway, H Gooding, C H Schmidt, M G eng Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Germany 2002/05/03 J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2002 May; 28(5):245-51. doi: 10.1038/sj/jim/7000235"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 22-11-2024