Desalination 221 (2008) 559–565

Landfill leachate treatment by means of anaerobic

membrane bioreactor

Jolanta Bohdziewicza, Ewa Neczajb*, Anna Kwarciakb

a
Institute of Water and Wastewater Engineering, Silesian Technical University,
Konarskiego 18, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland
b
Institute of Environmental Engineering, Czestochowa University of Technology,
Brzeznicka 60a, 42-200 Czestochowa, Poland
Tel. +48343250917; Fax +48343721304; email: enecz@is.pcz.czest.pl
Received 20 December 2006; accepted 3 January 2007

Abstract
The study was undertaken to examine feasibility of biological treating of landfill leachate in anaerobic submerged
membrane bioreactor. The aim of the work was to estimate the optimal concentration of leachate in the reactor influent
and process parameters on the base of anaerobic digestion efficiency. The treatment efficiency under different
feeding condition of leachate dilution in the range of 5–75% (v/v) with a synthetic wastewater was studied.
A higher COD removal over 95% was maintained with leachate addition of 10% and 20% (v/v). Gradual decrease
in organic removals was observed as leachate percentage increase. At leachate addition of 25% the COD removal
reached value of 80%. For leachate concentration in influent above 30% (v/v) significant decrease of anaerobic
treatment efficiency due to inhibition of microbiological activity was observed.
The influence of various hydraulic retention time (HRT) and organic loading rate (OLR) on pollutants removal
efficiency and biogas production was also investigated. MBR reactor was operated at HRT in the range of 7–1 days
and OLR in the range 0.7–4.9 kg COD/m3 d. The best anaerobic digestion efficiency (COD removal 90%) was
observed for HRT of 2 days and OLR of 2.5 kg COD/m3 d.
Keywords: Anaerobic treatment; Landfill leachate; Membrane bioreactor

1. Introduction long term problems caused by landfills are related

The method of sanitary landfill for the disposal to the generation of leachate which can cause
of municipal solid wastes continues to be widely considerable environmental problem. The com-
used in most of European countries. The major position of landfill leachate varies from site to
site depending on solid waste composition, oper-
ation and hydrology of landfill, climate and the
*Corresponding author. age of the landfill. In general, leachate is highly
Presented at the conference on Desalination and the Environment. Sponsored by the European Desalination Society
and Center for Research and Technology Hellas (CERTH), Sani Resort, Halkidiki, Greece, April 22–25, 2007.

0011-9164/08/$– See front matter © 2008 Published by Elsevier B.V.

doi:10.1016/j.desal.2007.01.117
560 J. Bohdziewicz et al. / Desalination 221 (2008) 559–565

contaminated with organic contaminants, with In this study, anaerobic submerged membrane
ammonia, halogenated hydrocarbons, heavy metals bioreactor was employed for landfill leachate
and inorganic salts [1–3]. treatment. The aim of the work was to estimate
High loading of landfill leachate, divergent the optimal concentration of leachate in the reactor
composition and different volume of leachate in influent on the base of anaerobic digestion effi-
particular seasons of the year make the treatment ciency. The influence of various hydraulic reten-
of such wastewater very complicated. tion times and organic loading rate on pollutants
Processes for landfill leachate treatment used removal efficiency and biogas production was
today are often combined techniques; usually com- also investigated. Due to poor quality of MBR
binations of physical, chemical and biological effluent the RO process and stripping has been
methods are used. Among the biological methods employed to post-treatment.
used for leachate treatment aerobic, anaerobic and
anoxic processes are the major ones [4–7]. While
air stripping, adsorption and membrane filtration 2. Materials and methods
belong to the major physical methods applied 2.1. Membrane bioreactor
to leachate treatment. Among the membrane The 29 L capacity laboratory scale submerged
processes, reverse osmosis has been one of the membrane reactor with the capillary ultrafiltration
most widely used methods for the last 20 years. module (Zenon) was used in this study (Fig. 1).
There is growing interest in combining mem- A nominal pore size of membranes was 0.1 µm
branes with biological wastewater treatment — and effective filtration area was 0.46 m2.
membrane bioreactor (MBR) — where membranes The reactor was filled up with granular sludge
are the main solid–liquid devices [8]. There are from industrial wastewater treatment plant and
two types of MBR reactors according to the increasing percentage of leachate. Biological treat-
locations of membrane units i.e. submerged and ment of leachate under anaerobic conditions was
external reactors. In the recent years submerged conducted using anaerobic granular sludge at the
membrane reactors have attracted great attention concentration of 10 g/L. Experiments were per-
due to more compact system and energy saving. formed under temperature of 35°C.
The submerged membrane bioreactor is an
improvement on the conventional activated sludge
process, where the traditional secondary clarifier
is replaced by membrane unit of treated wastewa-
ter from the mixed solution in the bioreactor [9].
Membrane bioreactor process has been one of
the alternatives for both municipal and industrial
wastewater treatment. MBRs use ultrafiltration
and/or microfiltration membranes for the comple-
tion retention of sludge. This leads to increase
microorganism’s concentration in the reactor and
improvement process efficiency with lower sludge
production. The industrial application of mem-
brane bioreactors include i.e. oil wastewater treat-
ment, nitrogen removal from food processing
wastewater and complex compounds from phar- Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of experimental system
maceutical wastewaters. (MB-membrane bioreactor, B-membrane module).
 J. Bohdziewicz et al. / Desalination 221 (2008) 559–565 561

synthetic wastewater was prepared according to

PN-72/C-04550. It was also calculated a methane
specific yield according to the following formula:
Vb
Y= [dm3g −1COD removed ] (1)
a
where
Vb, biogas production per day (dm3/d)
a, COD removal per day (g/d).
The specific values of COD for influent and
Fig. 2. Laboratory scale membrane test unit. bioreactor effluent were measured at 2- to 4-day
intervals. Redox potential, pH and collected
biogas were monitored daily.
2.2. Reverse osmosis unit The leachate employed was obtained from the
The effluent from anaerobic bioreactor was Sobuczyna municipal landfill located close to the
post-treatment using reverse osmosis. The RO pro- urban area of the city Czestochowa in the south-
cess was carried out on laboratory scale membrane ern Poland. The Sobuczyna landfill was started
test unit illustrated in Fig. 2. The specification in 1987 and was still in use during the time of this
of the RO membranes is given in Table 1. study. The landfill is a traditional landfill receiving
both household wastes and industrial wastes.
This is an old landfill and leachates from this tip
2.3. Analytical methods and leachates present relatively low COD values and low ratio
Standards methods [10] were used for mea- of BOD/COD compared with COD values from
surement of total solids (TS), volatile solids (VS), young landfills.
volatile fatty acids (VFA), ammonia nitrogen
(NH4+), chloride, total alkalinity and pH. Chemical
3. Results and discussion
oxidation demand was analyzed colorimetrically
using tests and photometer of the HACH firm 3.1. Landfill leachate characterization
(DR 4000). The percentage of methane and Table 2 shows the average values of the com-
carbon dioxide were analyzed by a gas chromato- position of these leachates during experimental
graph (Shimadzu). Chemical composition of period. COD values were low, due to the age of
landfill. Ammonia nitrogen content was high and
was directly related to basic pH.
Table 1
Specification of RO unit
Table 2
Parameter Membrane “Osmonics” Composition of Sobuczyna landfill leachate
Inc. type SEPA CF — HP,
RO-DS3SE Parameter Unit Min–max
3
Pressure, MPA Max 4.0 COD mg/dm 2800–5000
pH, range 1–11 pH – 8.0–8.9
Temperature, °C (max) 90 Alkalinity mg/dm3 4600–7900
Sodium rejection, (%) C = 0.2% NaCl RNaCl = 98.9 Chloride mg/dm3 Cl− 1950–3650
Membrane material Polyamide Ammonia mg/dm3 NH+4 750.4–840.0
562 J. Bohdziewicz et al. / Desalination 221 (2008) 559–565

3.2. Anaerobic leachate treatment

In the first step of the experiment the membrane
bioreactor was seeded with anaerobic granules
and fed with high loaded synthetic wastewater in
order to allow bacterial community to acclimatize.
MBR reactor was operated at organic loading rate
(OLR) of 1.0 kg COD/m3 d, and hydraulic reten-
tion time (HRT) of 7 days. After four weeks accli-
matization process the COD removal efficiency
achieved value of 95% (Fig. 3). Concentration
of organic compounds in effluent measured as
chemical oxygen demands has been stabilized Fig. 4. Relationship between COD removal and
on the level of 385 mgO2/dm3 while daily biogas leachate concentration in MBR influent.
production achieved value of 12 L.
After acclimatization process the maximum maintained with leachate addition of 10% and
percentage of leachate that can be biologically 20% (v/v). For leachate addition of 30% (v/v)
treated without inhibition of microbiological anaerobic treatment efficiency dropped to the level
activity. The digestion efficiency under differ- of 78.8%. At leachate addition higher then 30%
ent feeding condition of leachate dilution in the organic removal gradual decreased and achieved
range of 5–75% (v/v) with a synthetic waste- value of 45% for leachate concentration of
water was studied. The main results are shown 75% (v/v).
in Fig. 4. Gradual decrease in biogas production was
Gradual decrease in organic removals was observed as leachate percentage increase. Specific
observed as leachate percentage increase in MBR methane yield calculated for conducted experi-
influent. A higher COD removal over 90% was ments varied in the range of 0.45–0.35. The
effluent redox potential changed from −466 mV
to −417 mV. There was no significant variation of
pH (7.8–8.4) and alkalinity during fermentation
process. The membrane effluent was free of
suspended solids. During all experiments the
VFA/alkalinity ratio, which shows fermentation
properly was estimated. It is assumed the maxi-
mum value above which process inhibition is
observed is on the level of 0.3. The highest value
of VFA/alkalinity ratio (0.27) was observed in
the experiment with leachate content in influent
of 75% (v/v) while for others fermentation
processes the ratio achieved constant level, in
the range of 0.16–0.25.
The leachate percentage content of 20% (v/v)
Fig. 3. Variations of COD in MBR effluent during adap- was selected as the most appropriate in MBR
tation process. influent and was used for the rest of the study.
 J. Bohdziewicz et al. / Desalination 221 (2008) 559–565 563

4. Effects of organic loading and hydraulic

retention time on the MBR system
HRT was a very important parameter in the
submerged membrane bioreactor due to influence
on treatment efficiency as well as size of biore-
actor and engineering design [11,12]. In this study
the MBR system was operated with mixture of
leachate and synthetic wastewater under HRTs
of 7, 5, 3, 2, 1.5 with increase of OLR from
0.7 kg/m3 × d to 4.9 kg/m3 × d respectively. The
COD removal efficiency under HRT of 7 days
and OLR of 0.7 kg/m3 × d achieved value of 76%. Fig. 5. Relationship between COD removal efficiency,
daily biogas production and hydraulic retention time.
For the shorter hydraulic retention time (5 d) the
treatment efficiency was 2% higher and effluent
COD value was around 1089 mgO2/dm3. More- under HRT of 2 d. Due to increase of redox poten-
over a daily biogas production was 36% higher tial in the reactor up to −340 mV a decrease of
than that under the highest HRT of 7 d. There daily biogas production was observed. Biogas
was no significant variation of redox potential production during fermentation process is deter-
and pH in the reactor mined by proper redox potential in the range of
During fermentation process under HRT of −350 to −450 mV; for the higher redox value i.e.
3 days gradual increase of treatment efficiency −250 to −300 mV metanogenesis is completely
was still observed. Effluent COD reduced to the inhibited.
level of 940 mgO2/dm3 and a daily biogas pro- Shortening HRT to 1 day and increase of
duction was two times higher than that under the organic loading rate to 4.9 kg/m3 × d worsened the
HRT of 3 d (13,470 cm3). Increase of biogas organic removal efficiency to the level of 30%
yield to value of approximately 0.35 dm3biogas/ lower as compare to the process under HRT of
gCODremover × d and redox potential in MBR 1.5 d. The concentration of volatile fatty acids
reactor was also observed.
Shortening HRT to 2 days caused increase of
OLR to 2.5 kg/m3 × d. Under such conditions treat-
ment efficiency was n the level of 90% and efflu-
ent COD decrease to value of 417 mgO2/dm3.
Moreover a daily biogas production was 2 times
higher than that under the HRT of 2 d. Gradual
decrease of redox potential in membrane reactor
was still observed (370 mV).
At HRT of 1.5 d and OLR of 3.3 kg/m3 × d
the organic removal efficiency was 13% lower as
compared to treatment process under HRT of 2 d.
It was found worse effluent quality (CODeffluent
1380 mgO2/dm3) and lower biogas production.
The concentration of volatile fatty acids in the Fig. 6. COD and ammonia removal efficiency during
reactor was 50% higher than in anaerobic process RO post-treatment process.
564 J. Bohdziewicz et al. / Desalination 221 (2008) 559–565

Table 3
Efficiency of landfill leachate treatment in MBR and RO processes

Parameter Unit Raw Permeate from Permeate from Permisaible

wastewater MBR reactor RO unit standardsa
COD mg/dm3 5000 417 12 125
pH – 8.03 8.18 8.9 6.5–9
Ammonia mg/dm3 381.5 206 29.8 10

a
Regulation of the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources and Forestry, dated 8 July 2003, on the classi-
fication of water and conditions the sewage discharged to waters and soil should satisfy, Journal of Law No.168, item 1763.

achieved value of 1560 mg/dm3 CH3COOH, that is the MBR effluent and results of that experiment
close critical level for fermentation process. Also are presented on Fig. 6.
critical value for redox potential was observed Comparison of treatment efficiency of anaer-
in the bioreactor (−320 mV). obic co-treatment in MBR reactor and RO post-
Very important parameter monitored during treatment process were shown in Table 3.
cotreatment of leachate and synthetic wastewater Although the treatment efficiency in RO
was biogas yield. At the longer HRT of 7 d and process was very high permeate cannot be dis-
5 d, the biogas yield was on the same level charged into natural water because of high con-
(0.3 dm3biogas/gCODremover × d) whereas the centration of ammonia (29.8 mg/dm3). That is
highest value achieved at HRT of 2 d why in last step of this study the stripping pro-
(0.45 dm3biogas/gCODremover × d). Relationship cess has been applied. Permeate from RO has
between COD removal efficiency, daily biogas been aerated for 12 h at pH 12. The efficiency
production and hydraulic retention time was pre- of striping process achieved value of 76%
sented on Fig. 5. with effluent ammonia concentration of 7.1 mg
N-NH+4/dm3.
4.1. Post-treatment in RO process
Because of poor quality of effluent from 5. Conclusion
MBR reactor (COD-417 mgO2/dm3, ammonia - In this study biological treating of landfill
206 mg/dm3 NH4+), the reverse osmosis has leachate in anaerobic submerged membrane
been employed as a post-treatment technique. In bioreactor was examined. The most important
order to determine transport properties of used results are:
membranes they have been tested with distillated • It was possible to acclimatize a bacterial popu-
water determining a relationship between the vol- lation for the treatment of landfill leachate in
ume water flux and transmembrane pressure from laboratory scale MBR reactor .The leachate
1.0 MPa to 3.0 MPa. It was found that volume percentage content of 20% (v/v) is the most
water flux increased with increasing pressure. Per- appropriate in MBR influent.
meate flux achieved value of 8.960 × 10−6 m3/m2 s • The most favorable COD removal of leachate
at transmembrane pressure of 2 MPa and cross and synthetic wastewater mixture was 90%
flow velocity of 2 m/s. Under such conditions the at organic loadings of 2.5 kg/m3 d and at an
post-treatment process has been carried out for HRT of 2 d.
 J. Bohdziewicz et al. / Desalination 221 (2008) 559–565 565

• Due to poor quality, permeate from MBR (UASB) reactors, Water Res., 34 (14) (2000)
reactor can not to be discharged into natural 3640–3656.
water without additional treatment process. [5] H. Timur and I. Ozturk, Anaerobic sequencing
batch reactor treatment of landfill leachate, Water
RO and stripping processes are suitable for
Res., 33 (15) (1999) 3225–3230.
post-treatment of membrane bioreactor effluent. [6] A. Uygur and F. Kargi, Biological nutrient removal
from pre-treated landfill leachate in a sequencing
batch reactor, J. Environ. Manag., 71 (2004) 9–14.
Acknowledgement [7] J. Im, H. Woo, M. Choi, K. Han and C. Kim,
The study was supported by the Polish Ministry Simultaneous organic and nitrogen removal from
of Science and Higher Education (grant no. municipal landfill leachate using anaerobic-aerobic
system, Water Res., 35 (2001) 2403–2410.
T09D01425).
[8] T. Stephenson, S. Judd, B. Jefferson and K. Brindle,
Membrane Bioreactors for Wastewater Treatment,
IWA Publishing, London, 2000.
References
[9] M.C. Gao, Y. Min, H.Y. Li, Q.X. Yang and
[1] J.M. Lema, R. Mendez and R. Blazquez, Charac- Y. Zhang, Comparison between a submerged mem-
teristics of landfill leachates and alternatives for brane bioreactor and a conventional activated sludge
their treatment: a review, Water Air Soil Pollut., system on treating ammonia-bearing inorganic
40 (1998) 223–250. wastewater, J. Biotechnol., 108 (2004) 265–269.
[2] S. Park, K.S. Choi, K.S. Joe, W.H. Kim and [10] APHA, Standard methods for the examination of
H.S. Kim, Variations of landfill leachate properties water and wastewater, 17th edn., American Public
in conjunction with the treatment process, Environ. Health Association, Washington, DC, 1992.
Technol., 22 (2001) 639–645. [11] N. Ren, Z. Chen, X. Wang, D. Hu and A. Wang,
[3] M. El-Fadel, E. Bou-Zeid, W. Chahine and Optimized operational parameters of a pilot scale
B. Alayli, Temporal variation of leachate quality membrane bioreactor for high-strength organic
from pre-sorted and baled municipal solid waste wastewater treatment, Int. Biodet. Biodegrad.,
with high organic and moisture content, Waste 56 (2005) 216–223.
Manag., 22 (2002) 269–282. [12] S. Yoon, H. Kim and I. Yeom, The optimum opera-
[4] K.J. Kennedy and E.M. Lentz, Treatment of land- tional conditions of membrane bioreactor (MBR):
fill leachate using sequencing batch and con- cost estimation of aeration and sludge treatment,
tinuous flow upflow anaerobic sludge blanket Water Res., 38 (2004) 37–46.