Comparison of MBR and MBBR followed by UV or electrochemical disinfection for decentralized greywater treatment.

Greywater is an attractive source for water reuse at the household or building level, particularly for non-potable applications. Two greywater treatment approaches are membrane bioreactors (MBR) and moving bed biofilm reactors (MBBR), yet, their performance has not been compared so far within their respective treatment flowsheets, including post-disinfection. Two lab-scale treatment trains were operated on synthetic greywater: a) MBR with either polymeric (chlorinated polyethylene, C-PE, 165 days) or ceramic (silicon carbide, SiC, 199 days) membranes coupled with UV disinfection; and b) single-stage (66 days) or two-stage (124 days) MBBR coupled with an electrochemical cell (EC) for in-situ disinfectant generation. Water quality was constantly monitored, and Escherichia coli log removals were assessed through spike tests. Under low-flux operation of the MBR (<8 L·m - 2·h - 1), the SiC membranes delayed the onset of membrane fouling and needed less frequent cleaning compared to C-PE membranes. Both treatment systems met most water quality requirements for unrestricted greywater reuse, at a 10-fold lower reactor volume for the MBR than the MBBR. However, neither the MBR nor the two-staged MBBR allowed adequate nitrogen removal, and the MBBR did not consistently meet effluent chemical oxygen demand and turbidity requirements. Both EC and UV provided non-detectable E. coli concentrations in the effluent. Although the EC provided residual disinfection, scaling and fouling decreased its energetic and disinfection performance over time, making it less efficient than UV disinfection. Several outlines to improve the performance of both treatment trains and disinfection processes are proposed, thus, allowing a fit-for-use approach that leverages the advantages of the respective treatment trains. Results from this investigation will assist in elucidating the most efficient, robust, and low-maintenance technology and configurations for small-scale greywater treatment for reuse.

Engineering microbial technologies for environmental sustainability: choices to make.

Microbial technologies have provided solutions to key challenges in our daily lives for over a century. In the debate about the ongoing climate change and the need for planetary sustainability, microbial ecology and microbial technologies are rarely considered. Nonetheless, they can bring forward vital solutions to decrease and even prevent long-term effects of climate change. The key to the success of microbial technologies is an effective, target-oriented microbiome management. Here, we highlight how microbial technologies can play a key role in both natural, i.e. soils and aquatic ecosystems, and semi-natural or even entirely human-made, engineered ecosystems, e.g. (waste) water treatment and bodily systems. First, we set forward fundamental guidelines for effective soil microbial resource management, especially with respect to nutrient loss and greenhouse gas abatement. Next, we focus on closing the water circle, integrating resource recovery. We also address the essential interaction of the human and animal host with their respective microbiomes. Finally, we set forward some key future potentials, such as microbial protein and the need to overcome microphobia for microbial products and services. Overall, we conclude that by relying on the wisdom of the past, we can tackle the challenges of our current era through microbial technologies.